John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to, and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks from the Senator from Maryland, Mr. Van Hollen.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading and, in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Strange). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran) and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as the subway attack in London last week proves all too well, when terrorism goes underground, it doesn't disappear. Every day there are individuals operating in the world's shadows in places like the Parsons Green station in Fulham. They mean to do our allies and us great harm, and they are not going away. As President Trump said last week, in this era in which attacks like that in London are the new normal, we have to be proactive. We can't take our security for granted. We can't naively assume that when it comes to threats like that and others even bigger, our country is out of the woods. One way to be proactive and to keep our country safe is to reauthorize section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Earlier this month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats sent a letter to congressional leadership calling for this reauthorization. It is easy to see why. Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows the intelligence community to collect vital information about international terrorists, cyber actors, and other important foreign intelligence targets. Information collected under one particular section--section 702--produces particularly important foreign intelligence that helps prevent terrorist attacks and malign state actors as well. It does so by focusing on non-U.S. persons, which is important, because, as it is called, it is foreign intelligence surveillance. It focuses on non-U.S. persons located outside of the United States who are foreign intelligence targets. But that is not all. Just as importantly, section 702 also includes a comprehensive oversight regime to make sure the privacy of U.S. persons is protected under the Constitution. That is done by not only oversight here in the Senate and in the House through the intelligence committees but also by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which monitors compliance with the law. There has been some criticism of this provision, but I must say that the overwhelming support for the section 702 reauthorization is quite remarkable in this polarized environment in which we live. Even the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board gave the program a ringing endorsement. But the criticism that has been made is actually based on very few actual facts and often reflects a misunderstanding, both of the purpose of FISA and the controls that constrain government action. Just to be clear, section 702 does not allow intelligence personnel to evade the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It may not be used to intentionally target a citizen of the United States. That citizen could be in New York or New Delhi. It simply doesn't matter. He or she is off limits. Section 702 also does not allow for bulk collection or the unlimited dissemination of intelligence that is obtained. Rather, the government's capabilities are specifically circumscribed. Finally, section 702 does not ignore the possibility that intelligence personnel will inadvertently obtain information about U.S. persons, but that statute requires intricate procedures to minimize this type of incidental collection to make sure that American citizens are not swept up in foreign intelligence surveillance targets. Because of these safeguards, section 702 achieves a careful balance, preserving privacy and civil liberties while giving our intelligence personnel the flashlights they need to find terrorists and other adversaries operating in the dark. This careful balance is why scholars at the U.S. Naval Academy, commenting on section 702, summarized that ``there is simply no good case for not reauthorizing when it comes up for renewal.'' I say to my colleagues that the time for renewal is fast approaching. That is why today I join the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence in recommending the speedy enactment of legislation reauthorizing title VII before it sunsets later this year. Section 702 is only one piece of our dense security puzzle. It complements many other pieces of legislation that were designed to handle our incredibly diverse array of threats, and I just want to mention one other. We need to strengthen the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, also known as CFIUS. Yesterday we passed the National Defense Authorization Act which contains an important CFIUS provision. I would like to thank the senior Senator from Arizona, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, as well as the ranking member, the senior Senator from Rhode Island, for including it in the National Defense Authorization Act, which we approved yesterday. This provision is critically important, as it could help strengthen the process by which we screen investment by foreign companies to ensure that our military superiority and our technological edge is not whittled away by foreign governments that might use our technology against us or to undermine our industrial base here in the United States. As my colleagues know, many national security threats don't make the headlines. Some of them emerge gradually. They develop quietly when countries like China begin acquiring American technology in every way possible, knowledgeable of our laws, and with a conscious strategy to try to evade and circumvent those protections in order to grab our technological edge and undermine our industrial base. It has been reported that the Chinese Government has already made investments in robotics and artificial intelligence, pouring some $30 billion into early-stage U.S. technologies over a 6-year period. When the Chinese are able to get their hands on our cutting-edge technology, just imagine the boost for their long-term military capabilities. But here is the problem. CFIUS needs to be modernized and brought up to date in order to plug these holes that currently exist in the protective regime. Secretary Mattis, the Secretary of Defense, said that CFIUS ``needs to be updated to deal with today's situation.'' I agree. My provision included in the NDAA would begin that process. It requires the Secretary to find and propose ways to make the current CFIUS process work more effectively. The NDAA also sets the stage for more comprehensive reform that I will be discussing in the coming days and weeks. I want to thank the senior Senator from Idaho, the chairman of the Banking Committee, for taking this important issue up in the Senate Banking Committee just this last Thursday. As chairman, his leadership on the committee has been indispensable, and CFIUS reform is just the latest example. The bipartisan legislation I am spearheading is called the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act. It will modernize the CFIUS process to prepare our country to meet the 21st century threats, and I plan to introduce it soon. This bill would ensure, first, that the government scrutinizes closely those nations that are the biggest threats to our national security; second, that CFIUS obtains more authority to look at investment deals that, as of today, don't fall under its purview, just as certain joint ventures based overseas and minority-position investments in companies do not currently fall within its purview; and, third, it would give CFIUS the means to assess rapidly developing technologies our export control regime has not yet figured out how to handle. Colleagues, I hope you will join me in supporting this important reform package, and I look forward to further debate on this topic. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Strange).

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea''.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the men and women of our military defend us on a daily basis without a doubt, but now, today, is our time to do the same for them. One thing I cannot defend is how we continue to tie our own hands when it comes to funding the U.S. military. This week we are considering, of course, the Defense Authorization Act that will help ensure that our military has the resources it needs to achieve the mission of today and rise to the challenges of tomorrow, but there is a fundamental problem with the way we equip the men and women we task with defending us. It is called sequestration. The sequester was called for by the Budget Control Act, which puts annual caps on defense and nondefense discretionary spending, and enforces those caps with a kind of budget cleaver. In other words, any spending that exceeds the caps automatically gets axed. That sounds like a good idea in the abstract. Who doesn't want to treat our addiction to spending? Who doesn't want to put the Federal Government on a diet? I certainly do, but I am not willing to sacrifice our national security and the No. 1 priority of the Federal Government when it comes to providing for our mutual defense. In the words of the junior Senator from Arkansas, himself a veteran, he said: ``Rather than attack America's spending problem at its root, the law only clipped a few stray leaves off the branches.'' If we are going to be serious about reducing our deficit, we must address our budget priorities by looking at and addressing all government spending, not just the 30 percent or so that is discretionary. The reason we are not serious about dealing with our looming deficits and debt is not because of defense spending, it is because of mandatory entitlement spending, which is the political third rail of our government, and politicians are so afraid to deal with that mandatory spending that we cut defense spending into the muscle, to the bone, and it leads to the sort of dangers the Senator from Arizona talked about, in terms of a lack of readiness and training. The caps in sequester, mind you, do not represent any defense policy; instead, they were driven by our failure to get serious about the real budget threat: explosive growth in government-funded entitlement programs. Appropriated necessary funding for our Armed Forces should not be held hostage because of our inability to tighten our belts in other areas where the real runaway growth has occurred. It is past time to annually pass appropriations to fund the Department of Defense. It is past time to objectively assess and fund the actual and ever- changing defense needs of our country. What are the results of the Budget Control Act? Well, we are not really saving money, but we are wasting time. We repeatedly raise the Budget Control Act's budget caps at the last minute, meaning they really don't keep spending down. Meanwhile, our military's ability to plan and forecast is severely hampered. When you can't plan, you are not ready, and it is no exaggeration to say that we now find ourselves in a true state of a readiness crisis. Our military, already under great stress and stretched thin around the world, has suffered from 15 years of continued operations, budgetary restrictions, and deferred investment. According to General Walters, the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, more than half of the Marines' fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft were unable to fly at the end of 2016--more than half of the Marines' fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft were unable to fly at the end of 2016. That is outrageous. The Navy fleet currently stands at 277 of the 350-ship requirement. The Air Force had 134 fighter squadrons in 1991, when we drove Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait. Now it has only 55--in 2017, 55, and in 1991, 134, and we have 1,500 fewer fighter pilots than we need. Heather Wilson, Secretary of the Air Force, put it earlier this week, when she said, ``We have been doing too much with too little for too long.'' We need to hear these words, and we need to remember how they spell out in the real world--how they affect our sailors, our pilots, and our troops on the ground. This summer, the Nation mourned 42 servicemembers who died in accidents related to readiness challenges. Mr. McCain, the Senator from Arizona, the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, pointed out the death of 17 sailors aboard the USS John S. McCain and USS Fitzgerald alone, plus other separate actions claimed the lives of 19 marines and 6 soldiers. Meanwhile, the world has not become a safer, more peaceful place. We keep trying to cash that peace dividend, but there is no peace. In fact, when our adversaries see us retreating from our commitment to fund, equip, and train our military, it is a provocation. They see an opportunity, whether it is Vladimir Putin in Crimea, Ukraine, or China in the South China Sea, or Kim Jong Un in North Korea, they see our retreat, in terms of our financial commitment to support and train our military, as a provocation and an invitation for them to fill the void. I am reminded of a sobering quote from the former Director of National Intelligence during a hearing last year. Former Director James Clapper said: ``In my time in the intelligence business''--and he served for 50 years in the intelligence business--``I don't recall a time when we have been confronted with a more diverse array of threats.'' In 50 years, he didn't recall us being confronted with a more diverse array of threats. On top of these threats, never before has our country been at war for such an extended period of time, and never before have we done so much with an All-Volunteer military force strained by repeated deployments while defense spending was cut nearly 15 percent over the last 8 years under the previous administration. So here is what I say. Let's pass the national defense authorization bill, which authorizes $700 billion for our Nation's defense. Let's give our troops the pay raise they deserve. Let's address our readiness problems by authorizing increases in the overall number of soldiers and marines. When doing that, let's also do away with the sequester on defense spending. Reductions to defense spending should be targeted-- think scalpel, not meat cleaver--and our focus on cutting should be where the bulk of our spending is: outside of the military on mandatory spending, growing at a rate in excess of 5 percent a year, out of control and threatening the solvency of these important safety net programs. Colleagues, while we take the fight to ISIS, while we seek to deter aggression in the Pacific and support our emergency responders here at home, including the military, we can't postpone our problems. Our challenges can't be postponed and are not disappearing. As I said a moment ago, our adversaries are watching closely and modernizing while at home our readiness wavers. Sequestration causes our aircraft to age, our soldiers to tire, and our national security to deteriorate. Trouble is not going to wait on us getting our act together. Whether our military is ready or not, here it comes. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I believe I am recognized and have the floor.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Illinois be recognized for up to 2 minutes and then, following that, that I be recognized, and then, following that, Senator Gillibrand.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea''.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey) would have voted ``yea''.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, the rain is no longer falling in Houston, but the streets are still being flooded as the Corps of Engineers lets water that threatens the integrity of dams located north of Houston out of those dams, actually reflooding some of the neighborhoods that previously have been flooded, even after the rain has stopped for a number of days now. The weight of Hurricane Harvey is still pressing down on my home State of Texas, where many are struggling for some good news and a breath of fresh air. The latest numbers that I have seen are that roughly 100,000 people have lost their homes, 70,000 are still living in shelters or in motel rooms, others are living with friends and family, and more than 700,000 people have registered for individual assistance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency--more than 700,000. With the water drained in most parts of the city and the area, mold is the next thing that pops up in buildings and houses, and then come the mosquitoes. The mosquitoes aren't just a nuisance. They are a public health hazard as well. We happen to live in an area of the United States where the particular mosquito that carries the West Nile virus and the Zika virus is present. So this represents a public health challenge as well. These are just some of the aftereffects that I heard about as I traveled the State last week. Those are the more localized problems. As we know, there are others that spread far beyond brick homes and ranches with barbed-wire fences. For example, the challenges, the coordination, and the logistical support among many actors were usually some of the biggest problems that we saw demonstrated with Hurricane Katrina. Having learned the lessons of Hurricane Katrina, I can't tell you how proud I am of the great collaboration, consultation, and support that we have gotten from the President at the Federal level and all the way down to the State and local leadership, which have stepped up and I think made all of us proud. While some say it takes a village, my experience in Texas is that it also takes an army. Indeed, Harvey's devastation has been so vast across swaths of the State that we have called in help from our Armed Forces. Members of our military have served crucial roles throughout the storm and continue to do so now that the waters have begun to recede. These include the U.S. Coast Guard, Marine Corps, Army, Navy, and Air Force. More than 12,000 Texas National Guardsmen were activated by Governor Abbott alone, and thousands more have been sent from other States to help out in the rescue and recovery effort. What did these troops do in their Humvees, helicopters, their amphibious boats, and warships? They did a lot. The Army National Guard alone delivered more than 75,000 pounds of hay to flooded ranches and stranded cattle. Other troops showed up to provide medical services and disaster relief supplies. They assisted with debris management, route clearance, and--in scenes we have all seen on TV--heroic search and rescue operations. That is not all. They provided surveillance aircraft so that imagery could be provided to FEMA of the impact area while State Guard members ensured that people who were evacuated were part of an emergency tracking system. These members of our military are responding to Hurricane Irma in Florida as well. Earlier this week, the Pentagon sent ships, aircraft, and, of course, fuel to the region to help. So our military has helped in ways that perhaps most of us don't really appreciate. They don't exist just to fight and win our wars; they respond to natural disasters like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma as well. And thank goodness they are there to do that. As the past few weeks have shown, there is always a risk of unforeseen events, and with them, our troops are being stretched awfully thin. We know the importance of making sure that this week and next, we do everything we can to demonstrate our real support for our men and women in uniform by passing the National Defense Authorization Act. That is why this is so important this week, because not only does it affect our readiness, as I said earlier, to fight and win our Nation's wars in places around the world, it is also important to our ability to respond to natural disasters like Irma and Harvey. The NDAA, in addition to natural disasters, allows us to address ongoing readiness challenges that we have inherited in the attempt once again to cash the peace dividend when there is no peace. My colleague and friend Mac Thornberry, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has spoken about just how dire this situation is. He is just one of many voices on this topic. He calls past inaction a ``funding paralysis.'' The financial straitjacket he is referring to, I might add, is one we desperately need to break out of when it comes to funding and equipping and training and preparing our military to be ready when we call them. Today, I want to emphasize several amendments I plan to file to the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act. They will help make sure that America is safer and, importantly, take steps to correct some of the foreign policy mistakes we saw under the previous administration. Let me talk about three of those amendments. The first amendment focuses on countering the world's foremost sponsor of terrorism--Iran. The amendment targets Mahan Air, that country's largest commercial airline. That airline has repeatedly played a role in exporting terrorism to other places around the world. Mahan is a government-controlled airline parading as a commercial enterprise. You can go online right now and purchase a ticket to fly to nearly 40 international airports on Mahan Airline, including ones in countries with which we have a visa waiver agreement. Yet Mahan Air supports the efforts of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard to ferry weapons and personnel to Syria and Iraq and supports Hezbollah as well. In order to operate, it bypasses normal security procedures, omits information from flight manifests, and falsifies documents for maintenance purposes. In so doing, it undercuts the interests of the United States and, of course, our ally in the region, Israel. Today, Mahan Air is working to add more international airports to its flight patterns, including several in Europe. Given its links to terrorist activity, we have to consider the potential security risks to Americans who fly in and out of airports where Mahan operates. My amendment would require the Department of Homeland Security to compile and make public a list of airports where Mahan Air operates and would require the Department of Homeland Security to assess what added security measures should be imposed on those flights. I hope my colleagues would agree that this is a commonsense proposal, and I hope they will join me in supporting it. The second amendment I want to talk about involves a different kind of flight risk. This one is domestic instead of international. It addresses the development and the deployment of wind turbines and other structures surrounding our military installations, particularly where our pilots train and fly. Some of them are being built along flight routes in Wichita Falls, Corpus Christi, and elsewhere, both in Texas and in other States, such as New York. Currently, base commanders have no say and have no real opportunity to indicate the risks these wind farms, which are in close proximity to military training, pose to pilot training and other operations. Commanders are really in the best position to understand the nature of the training that needs to be done and to offer suggestions about how risks can be mitigated, if not eliminated entirely. My amendment would preserve the voices of the base commanders in the evaluation process. It would require those base commanders impacted by a proposed wind turbine project to weigh in explicitly regarding possible risks, including risks to our ability to train and make ready our pilots but also problems with radar and other ways that it is not only a danger to our military men and women but also to civilian aircraft as well. Clearly, base commanders have expertise and knowledge that must be considered during the proposed construction projects in close proximity to their installations. Their voices are vital. I hope our colleagues will join me in supporting this amendment and ensuring that our base commanders are always heard when it comes to security risks and threats to readiness. Finally, the third amendment I want to talk about is one that would grant tax-free status to U.S. troops deployed in the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. Last year, with the House Homeland Security Committee, I had the chance to visit an international peacekeeping force comprised largely of American troops deployed to the Sinai. I can tell you from having spoken to them, our troops there play a strategic role in maintaining the peace in that critical region. Their work is often difficult, and it is always dangerous. The North Camp is located just 15 miles from the Gaza Strip. Troops there face mortars, rockets, and explosive attacks, and a number have been wounded during patrols. By granting our troops on the Sinai tax-free status, we can put them on equal footing with other American troops who are deployed in war zones like Afghanistan and Iraq and other similarly dangerous hot spots around the globe. All of them enjoy the same tax benefit when stationed in those combat zones, and what we would like to do is establish equal footing and parity for these Americans troops engaged in international peacekeeping missions there in the Sinai. Extending this measure of our appreciation will also serve to bolster morale, you can believe me. Colleagues, I hope you will join me in supporting these Sinai peacekeeping servicemembers, who put their lives on the line to keep the peace, by passing this measure. I hope that after an open amendment process, we will be able to get other commonsense amendments added to this legislation before we pass it next week. I know that Senator McCain, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, always says we have never failed to pass a national defense authorization bill, and we shouldn't start this week or next. I hope we will pass the bill. I am glad to offer these three amendments and would welcome support from all of our colleagues. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as we saw yesterday, Mother Nature once again has crippled part of our Nation. Hurricane Irma made landfall on Sunday, hitting the Lower Keys of Florida and then moving up the State's western coastline. Like Hurricane Harvey in my home State of Texas, the devastation in places like Marco Island and Orange County means tough days and long nights ahead for the residents there. My prayers, like those of so many others, go out to those who have been impacted by this devastating storm, including those who evacuated safely but will soon travel back to Florida, finding that everything they had is gone as a result of the storm. As Irma continues to affect Florida and the southeastern United States, we stand ready to support the people in those States just like so many did for us in Texas with Hurricane Harvey. Remembering September 11 Mr. President, on another separate note, as we all have seen and recall, today is the solemn anniversary of a day that has had an even more profound impact on our country than the recent storms. September 11 will always be remembered as the day that never quite goes away, the day that remains a reminder of what can be taken from us in the blink of an eye. I have always said that it is etched in my memory like only one other event in my lifetime, and that was in 1963 with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I remember where I was and what I was doing at that time when I first heard about it. Of course, I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I learned of the terrible events of 9/11. I was on the telephone talking to a colleague of mine when my wife said: You need to see what is happening on the television. I turned on the TV just in time to see the second plane hit the towers in Manhattan. Yes, it was 16 years ago that 19 Islamic terrorists snuck into our country in defiance of our laws and attended flight schools in defiance of all propriety. Sixteen years ago today, they hijacked four commercial planes full of innocent passengers and, at 8:46 a.m. on Tuesday morning, flew the first one directly into one of the tallest buildings in our largest city in the United States. Seventeen minutes later--the event, which my wife directed my attention to on the TV set--the second plane hit, and shortly thereafter, flight 77 slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon, and Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. Thanks to the heroic actions of passengers on Flight 93, that plane could have very well headed here to Washington and crashed into the Capitol, taking who knows how many lives along with it. As it was, 3,000 people were killed that day, and afterward almost 300 million U.S. citizens saw the world anew through fresh eyes. The terrorists must have thought they could bring our Nation down, topple it as they did the twin towers, but they badly miscalculated. They were wrong. An America shocked was an America strengthened. America is sometimes called the slumbering giant which, once awakened, is a fearsome thing to behold, and that is exactly what happened after 9/11. After we all took many deep breaths and thanked God for what was left, we stood up and we fought back, united. We primarily did that through our military--the core of our national defense--those who took the fight to al-Qaida in places like Afghanistan but also all the rest who surrounded and supported our Armed Forces and intelligence personnel every step of the way. Sixteen years later, we continue to confront new terrorist threats and adjust to new geopolitical realities. I recall the statement of the former Director of National Intelligence, who said, after 50 years in the intelligence community, he had never seen a more diverse array of threats confronting America than he did at that time, and nothing has changed in that respect, which is why today America must maintain a sense of vigilance, a sense of purpose, and a sense of moral clarity regarding evil in all of its novel forms. We must also ask if we are still standing behind our Armed Forces the way we committed to do following the terrible events of 9/11. We must make sure our military servicemembers have everything they need because to do otherwise is to shirk our duty and to forget how our national security is ultimately achieved. One way we uphold that responsibility is through the National Defense Authorization Act. If passed, this would mark the 55th year it is signed into law. Later today, we will vote to take up this legislation, and I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting that vote. The Defense authorization bill ensures that crucial Department of Defense programs are continued and establishes how our military funds will be spent. The version of the bill which has been reported out of committee helps reverse the readiness crisis created by the previous administration. In the words of my friend, our colleague from Texas, Mac Thornberry, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, ``We have too few planes that can fly, too few ships that can sail and too few soldiers who can deploy.'' That sums up the situation exactly. The Defense authorization bill exemplifies our commitment to reverse this downward trend. I don't know why it is that America tries to cash the peace dividend at every turn when we have no peace, but that is what has happened. Although the hole the previous administration placed us in is deep, this bill authorizes the funds necessary to begin restoring readiness, rebuilding capacity, and modernizing military infrastructure. I was recently at Sheppard Air Force Base in Wichita Falls, TX, the base which trains half of all Air Force pilots in the country. They told me one of the biggest problems they have is recruiting and retaining pilots for the U.S. Air Force. While people will accept lower wages for military service because they believe in serving the country, if, because of cuts in funding for the Air Force and for the military, they simply can't fly like they need to in order to be ready for the next fight, many of them get discouraged and are tempted to go to work in the private sector where they can earn more money. So we need to make sure our troops--all of our Armed Forces--have the readiness capability, and we need to fund that appropriately. This bill will authorize appropriations for personnel and equipment, including aircraft made in my home State--the Osprey, made in Amarillo, TX, and the F-35 made in Fort Worth. Finally, the Senate version will also authorize critical funding to increase maritime capacity as well. Back in the 1980s, the Navy had about 600 ships; today, we have 277, less than half. It is crucial that we procure ships, aircraft, and munitions, continue to develop our new military technology on our existing platforms and in the evolving cyber domain, and reduce our shortfall in end strength--that we do all of those things. These steps will provide our servicemembers with the training and equipment necessary to defeat ISIS, al-Qaida, and terrorist and state actors that threaten the United States and our way of life. Perhaps even more significant, in terms of the threat to the United States and world peace, sending a message to Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation that America is no longer in retreat, but America can be relied upon as a strong partner, and America's leadership role in world affairs will be reestablished, will send a very important message of deterrence to the bullies, the tyrants, and the authoritarians around the world; to China, another major threat to international security and peace that is being so aggressive in not only developing arms that allow it to project power to different parts of the Pacific and beyond but threatens maritime transit and safe travel through places like the Strait of Malacca, where so much international trade and national security travel occur. Our colleagues in the House have passed their version of the Defense authorization, and now it is our job to get it done. By passing a strong defense bill and authorizing the sort of resources our military needs in order for America to maintain its leadership role in the world and provide a credible threat to deter aggression on the part of our adversaries, we will leave our Nation and the world a safer place and better off. It is one small way today that we can honor the memory of those we lost 16 years ago. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Flake), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Strange). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).