Kirsten Gillibrand

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I have 10 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing. Subcommittee on Airland The Subcommittee on Airland of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights The Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Outdoor Tourism, Recreation & Ecotourism The Subcommittee on Outdoor Tourism, Recreation & Ecotourism of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise for the ninth time to once again call for this entire body to have the opportunity to consider and to cast their votes for the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This commonsense reform would ensure that people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. I have been calling for a full floor vote on this bill since May 24. That was 22 days ago. Since then, an estimated 1,232 servicemembers will have been raped or sexually assaulted. Two in three of those survivors will not even report it because they know they are more likely to face retaliation than to receive justice. Tonight, I want to share the story of just one of these countless survivors of sexual assault in our military who bravely shared her story with me. A husband and a wife both served in the Marine Corps when the wife was assaulted by another marine. Her commander concluded that she deserved ill treatment for wearing running shorts and makeup. Her husband said that when he read the opinions of the command-appointed investigator, he found that he compared rape to prostitution or marrying a rich man. The wife said of the retaliation after she reported the assault that ``[t]he humiliation of the retaliation was worse than the assault because it was sanctioned from those same leaders I once would have risked my life for.'' I ask my colleagues--I ask my colleagues to imagine living through the worst day of your life and knowing that nothing would happen to your assailant. Imagine knowing that there was a bill that could change this system that failed you, knowing that Senators from both sides of the aisle have come together to advocate for it, knowing that if it were allowed to be voted on, it would pass. Now imagine the vote getting denied night after night after night, watching the government that you volunteered to serve and defend continue to fail you. We have to do better. We can start by bringing this legislation to the floor. I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate, equally divided in the usual form, and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I respect the chairman and his need to carefully review this legislation, but we have been reviewing the legislation for 8 years, and we have been having hearings on this legislation and the issue of sexual assault in the military for 8 years. We have been passing legislation through the committee for 8 years, but this vote has been denied every time. In fact, when don't ask, don't tell repeal was being filibustered by the Armed Services Committee chairman and other Members of that committee, we ultimately took that vote to the Senate floor. It was an up-or-down vote to repeal don't ask, don't tell. In this case, the committee has been considering this thoroughly and carefully for 8 years. And even if the chairman believes that he hasn't fully vetted it or reviewed it or had the careful consideration, many of the Members of the committee have. We have been diligently looking at this issue for 8 straight years. It is time to bring this to the floor. I am confident that if we bring this to the floor, we will be able to reform how we deal with these cases; we will be able to change the system for the better; and that we will be able to finally begin to overcome the scourge of sexual violence in the military. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise for the eighth time to call for this entire body to have the opportunity to vote on and consider the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This commonsense reform would ensure that people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. I ask for this vote because I want to ensure that this important reform, which is backed by a bipartisan filibuster-proof majority of the Senators, becomes law. If we leave this debate and this reform to the national defense authorization committee review, I have no doubts that that will not happen. We all know how a bill becomes a law. It passes the Senate and the House, and is signed by the President. And we all know how this process can be subverted. We have seen popular provisions that have passed both the House and the Senate be minimized, watered down, or removed in conference altogether. And I have certainly seen good proposals killed behind closed doors of the NDAA markup. In 2019, I introduced a much smaller reform called Safe to Report. That provision was designed to improve reporting rates by allowing survivors of sexual assault to report the assault without fear of retaliation in the form of misconduct charges for related minor offenses, things like underage drinking or breaking a curfew. That commonsense reform, which could have allowed more survivors to come forward, passed in both the House and the Senate, but it was removed in conference. We had to reintroduce the very same bill the following year in order for it to be included and become law in the next year, the fiscal year 2021 NDAA. If a program focused solely on helping to make it easier for survivors to report their assault was removed in conference, I have little reason to believe that this once-in-a-generation reform will survive. Given the lack of progress we have made on sexual assault in the military and the entrenched problems with the military justice system, we cannot allow this widely supported reform to be left to the whims of those working behind closed doors in conference--a process with a rich history of subverting reforms on behalf of the Department of Defense. Let us have this vote in the Senate, and let us send it to the House to become law. Every day we delay this vote is another day we deny justice to the survivors of sexual assault. We deny justice to servicemembers who have been affected by serious crimes. We deny justice to the men and women who do so much for this country. We owe it to them to not wait another minute longer. As if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate, equally divided in the usual form, and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, there are several reasons why I disagree strongly with the chairman. First of all, this is not a complex reform. In fact, only one thing changes: After the military police conclude their investigation, instead of the case file being handed over to the commander's JAG, the case file is handed over to the prosecutor, who might eventually have gotten that case anyway. The prosecutor reviews the case file and decides whether or not to prosecute. If he decides not to prosecute, he will send it back to the commander. Only 3 percent of commanders have this job; 97 percent of commanders' jobs will not be affected by this change. And then they will get to do what they typically do, which is to review the case; perhaps, ask for nonjudicial punishment for related crimes; perhaps, do a special court-martial. That sits with the commander. The second reason why I disagree with the chairman is that if you remove only one crime from the commander, you will essentially create an entirely different system just for survivors of sexual assault, who are more often to be women who report those crimes. Even though males suffer more from sexual assault, they just don't report them, and that, therefore, will become a special court for women servicemembers. And experts have said that it will further marginalize them, it will further diminish them, it will further alienate them. It will be a special court for women, or a ``pink court.'' Third, this reform has already taken place in the countries of our allies. The UK did it over 10 years ago for defendants' rights. Israel did it over 40 years ago. Canada, Netherlands, Australia, Germany--all have taken serious crimes out of the chain of command. And in each of those instances, they have said it has not reduced good order discipline, and it has not had any impact on command and control. And so the truth is that this is a change whose impact will be to give survivors of sexual assault and any survivor of a serious crime the confidence that the military justice system is unbiased and highly trained. The other reason why this change is so necessary to be a bright line at all serious crimes is defendants' rights. And I can tell you that we now have data developed in 2017 from Protect Our Defenders, a report that says that it is up to 2.5 times more likely for Black and Brown servicemembers to be punished than White servicemembers. That is a shocking statistic--a shocking statistic. So I believe that if you create a bright line at serious crimes, you will not only improve the system for survivors of sexual assault but for all litigants--plaintiffs and defendants--and you will protect the civil liberties and civil rights of Black and Brown servicemembers from a defendant's rights perspective. The committee has had 8 years to debate, discuss, have hearings, and pass legislation. We have passed nearly 250 bills on this topic. They have lost their sole jurisdiction over this issue. They have failed to improve sexual assaults in the military, and it is now time for an up- or-down vote, which has 66 cosponsors in this body. It is now time for an up-or-down vote on our bill. It should no longer be the purview of the NDAA and the Armed Services Committee because they have been unwilling to have a vote on this for over 5 years and unwilling to take a serious look at how to fix these injustices within our military. Our military servicemembers deserve a military justice system worthy of the sacrifices they make every day. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise for the seventh time to call for this entire body to have the opportunity to consider and cast their votes for the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This commonsense reform would ensure that people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault or other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. In the 8 years that I spent advocating for this reform, with many other Senators, I have heard some criticism from those who would rather not see change to our military justice system. I wanted to take this time to briefly respond to a few of those criticisms. First, I have heard that the bill will add bureaucracy to the process. The fact is, this bill actually cuts redtape. Instead of needing to find time on a commander's busy schedule for a military prosecutor to brief them on the case, the prosecutor's recommendations, instead, become the prosecutor's decision. Under this law, prosecutors who understand complex military justice concepts like unlawful command influence and evidentiary standards make the decision, rather than a commander whose time is better spent focusing on warfighting than on learning the evidentiary rules. I have to wonder if these critics have actually read the bill, since it specifically requires the services to use existing resources that we have already provided to accomplish this reform. Second, detractors worry that this law will result in fewer prosecutions. The opposite is true. Under the current system, only about one-third of survivors are willing to even come forward to report a crime. When 64 percent of victims are retaliated against for coming forward and less than 1 percent of victims actually sees a conviction, who can blame them? When we put complex cases in the hands of impartial, professional prosecutors, both victims and the accused will have more faith and more confidence in the system. The more confidence survivors have in the system, the more they are likely to come forward. And the more survivors who come forward, the more offenders we can prosecute. Third, those who would rather push off this reform to maintain the status quo sometimes say that there is a lack of data to support the policy and worry that it would somehow collapse good order and discipline. There is no lack of data on justice systems to pull from. Our major Western allies have implemented systems like this, and in country after country, this type of reform, just like other military justice reforms, has improved good order and discipline. In Israel, for example, this system brought survivors out of the shadows and gave them confidence to report. From 2012 to 2017, the Israeli military saw a 91-percent increase in willingness to report crimes. During that same period, the U.S. military saw an increase of only 33 percent. Despite the success of the #MeToo movement, we are still lagging so far behind in fostering a military climate where victims feel safe to come forward. Year after year, detractors have had the same dogmatic response: Commanders will be unable to maintain good order and discipline if we make this change. Well, I have talked to commanders who have seen the need for change, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same. They can start with my cosponsor, Senator Joni Ernst. If commanders feel this authority is essential to their ability to lead, then they have a lot more to learn about leadership. Last, we have the argument that is developing that, if we do make this change, to just make it a little bit. Let's just do it for one crime. Let's just do it for the crime of sexual assault. Well, we have an editorial today that was published in The Hill. The headline is, ``Military justice reform, `pink court' and unit cohesion.'' These were four military experts who wrote this editorial, and I will read a quote from it. President Biden, Secretary Austin and members of the House and Senate may be tempted to settle on a compromise under which only sex offenses would be subject to prosecution decision making by lawyers rather than non-lawyer commanders. After all, they may believe, it's those offenses that have given rise to this entire controversy, so let's just fix that. That may be the way the process unfolds from here, but it would be a mistake--and a tragic one, given the difficulty of getting Congress to focus on military justice in a sustained way. It would take years for the military justice system to recover if Congress takes the wrong path at the current fork in the legislative road. It goes on to talk about two reasons this would be harmed. The first lies with the fact that there is bias in the system and that this bias cannot be eradicated by just taking out one crime, that it should be for all serious crimes. I will read from the text again. Second, even though men as well as women in uniform are victims of sexual assault, public concern has chiefly focused on the women. It is concern over them and their willingness to come forward without fear of retaliation that has given the reform issue such potency. As a practical matter, if a parallel system is created for the disposition of sex offenses, that system will be understood as having been created chiefly for the benefit of women in uniform. Congress will, in effect, have created ``pink courts''--courts for women. Creating ``pink courts'' will destroy unit cohesion. It is difficult to imagine a surer way of turning back the clock on all the progress our country has made in integrating women in uniform, including opening occupational specialties, admission to the service academies, qualification as pilots of warplanes and commanders of naval ships and Coast Guard cutters, and promotion to flag and general officer ranks. Congress should transfer the charging power for all felony- level offenses by military personnel to uniformed prosecutors independent of the chain of command. Limiting the transfer to sex offenses makes no sense. One argument that was not included in here is that, if you do limit it to just one crime, you don't address the issue of defendants' rights. Now, with so much data we have available about racial biases in prosecution and conviction and punishment, it is right that we care about both plaintiffs' rights and defendants' rights and reform the entire system. These unfounded arguments are nothing more than delay tactics. Every day we delay this vote, we deny justice to our servicemembers--the people who do so much for us and so much for this country. There is no reason to wait any longer. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Committee on Armed Services be discharged from the further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate, equally divided in the usual form; and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GILLIBRAND

Mr. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I have 7 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 11:45 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 10, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

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

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise for the sixth time to call for this entire body to have the opportunity to consider and cast their votes on the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This commonsense reform would ensure that people in the military who are subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes have the opportunity to get the justice that they deserve. Under the current system, fewer than 1 in 10 sexual assault cases that are considered for command action are sent to trial, and under the current culture, nearly 2 in 3 sexual assault survivors experience some form of retaliation for reporting that crime. That means a survivor of sexual assault is far more likely to face consequences than an assailant. When a 2016 Pentagon survey showed that 58 percent of survivors perceived retaliation for reporting their assaults, commanders said it was unacceptable, and Congress demanded action; but instead of working to change the system or the culture, the response was to make retaliation a specific crime, despite the fact that it already was a chargeable offense under title 10, section 1034 of the United States Code. It was nothing more than window dressing. We know that is true because, in 2018, when the same survey came out again, the perceived retaliation rate went up to 64 percent. The DOD estimates that 20,500 servicemembers are sexually assaulted each year. So you may wonder: How many documented prosecutions for retaliation did we see in the most recent year? The answer: One. Only one person has been charged for retaliation in the last year, and there have been zero convictions reported. To me, that seems more of a joke. Under our bill, the ability to charge and prosecute retaliation would move outside the chain of command, giving survivors more confidence to come forward in knowing the prosecutors would be free to protect them. Under the status quo and under the chairman's proposal, the ability to prosecute remains in the wrong hands. It is time to remove retaliation and other serious crimes from the purview of the chain of command. It is time to professionalize the military justice system to remove bias, protect our servicemembers, and deliver justice. The numbers speak for themselves, and every single number represents a person--a survivor, a family member. We owe it to our survivors-- those who have gone through the horrific experience of being assaulted only to experience retaliation from their fellow brothers and sisters in arms--to change this system. The Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act will make the changes that they need. Every day we delay a vote on this legislation is another day we deny justice to our servicemembers--the people who do so much for and give so much to our country. There is no reason to make them wait any longer. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate, equally divided in the usual form; and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GILLIBRAND

Mr. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I have 13 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Indian Affairs The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing a nomination. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship The Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Veterans' Affairs The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Subcommittee on Strategic Forces The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 4:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Economic Policy The Subcommittee on Economic Policy of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, June 9, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to ask that the Senate be given the chance to consider and vote on the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. Before I discuss the bill, I would like to first acknowledge that we have just returned from Memorial Day recess and to recognize the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice to protect our country and to protect our freedom. They got on a plane or they got on a ship; they went to countries they may never have been to before; they fought for our country; and they didn't come home. We ask so much of our servicemembers and their families, and we owe it to them to take action when they are in danger. That is why I want to talk about this bill right now. Sexual assault in the military is an epidemic. Year after year, reports of sexual assault have gone up, but conviction rates and prosecution rates have actually come down. This stems from a fundamental problem which has to be addressed: There is bias in our military justice system. Right now, if you are a victim of sexual assault or another serious crime, the decision to prosecute goes to a commander, not to a trained military prosecutor. And while our commanders are exceptional leaders and exceptional warfighters, they are not legal experts, nor should they be asked to be. Nor can commanders be truly independent when considering charges against a subordinate or charges made by a subordinate. This bill removes the decision of whether to prosecute sexual assaults or any other serious crime out of the chain of command and gives it to trained military prosecutors, where it belongs. This would establish something fundamental to our justice system: blind justice. It is a simple change. It is a change that is supported by legal experts, by JAGs, by commanders, by generals, by admirals, by veterans. Opponents of this bill--and their numbers are dwindling--claim that this one change would somehow undermine good order and discipline. Well, I will tell you, I have heard that one before. It is the same weak argument they have made time and time again. Many people stood on this floor and said that we could not repeal don't ask, don't tell because it undermined good order and discipline. When we wanted to integrate the military and have Black servicemembers serve, we were told we couldn't possibly do that; it would undermine good order and discipline. We made the case that LGBTQ members should be able to serve openly, that trans members should be able to serve openly. We were told: You can't possibly do that; it would undermine good order and discipline. When we asked for women to be able to serve in combat, something they had been doing for a very long time but not necessarily getting credit for it, we were told: You can't possibly do that; it will undermine good order and discipline. But each of those times Congress rose to the occasion and did the right thing and did the thing that was necessary to make our military stronger, and each time our military became stronger. Further undermining this argument is the fact that this system, or versions very similar to it, are being used today by our allies that we fight side by side, allies like the UK or Israel or Germany or Netherlands or Australia or Canada. They did not see a degradation of good order and discipline. They told us so. Finally, in addition to the opposition to this bill being a weak argument, the support for this bill is strong, and that support continues to grow. How many bills have you heard of in this Congress, or the last, or the last, or the last that have 66 cosponsors? Widely bipartisan. How many bills have Liz Warren and Ted Cruz on them or Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer in support of? It doesn't happen very often. But this is something that I and many Senators in this Chamber have been working on for 8 years, holding hearings on for 8 years, making amendments in the NDAA for 8 years, making the case that this change is needed for 8 years. And through all that work and through all that advocacy, we now have 66 cosponsors--a majority of the Senate, a majority of the Armed Services Committee. This bill deserves a vote. This bill deserves to have the Senate vote on it now. It is time to pass this law, and it is time to do our jobs. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate, equally divided, in the usual form and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, while the chairman does agree that the serious crime of sexual assault should be taken out of the chain of command, our bill requests and requires that all serious crimes be taken out of the chain of command because of the existence of bias. And we have two data points that prove that bias. One is the poor results we have seen for survivors of sexual assaults over the last 10 years that data has been collected, and the second data point we have, which has been developed over the last 3 years, is the existence of racial bias. Protect Our Defenders did a serious report in 2017, and it determined that across all services, looking at all punishments, Black and Brown servicemembers were punished approximately two times more often than White servicemembers, looking at both nonjudicial and court-martials. And that show of bias means that the military justice system isn't working for many people. It is not working for plaintiffs, and it is not working for defendants. And, in fact, when our allies looked at this same issue, particularly defendants' rights over the last 40 years, they determined that bias in the system was incompatible with their views of justice, and they decided that for defendants' rights, specifically, all serious crimes should be decided by trained military prosecutors. So this solution is one we have been debating in the committee for 8 years, and, in fact, we have used compromises and smaller steps and small-ball measures over the last 8 years to address this problem. Unfortunately, despite putting in place approximately 250 new measures over the last 8 years, the rate of conviction and the rate of prosecution is still going down, but the rate of sexual assault has stayed persistent at approximately 20,000 incidents a year. So while I appreciate that my colleague is coming to the conclusion that one serious crime should be taken out of the chain of command, military experts disagree that a line should be drawn around only one crime because they believe that that will result in unfair systems of justice--two systems of justice and one that does not meet the needs of bias that we see in the current system. Second, we have many combat veterans on this legislation. Joni Ernst is one of our lead sponsors, who is the only female Republican combat veteran and who has also experienced sexual assault. Mark Kelly is on our bill. Tammy Duckworth is on our bill. Gary Peters is on our bill. Josh Hawley is on our bill. And we also have many of our attorneys general on this bill, people who have looked at the law from a perspective of civil rights and civil liberties, such as Richard Blumenthal. This matters, and I believe that we have given the committee 8 years to solve this problem. Third, when we have given the opportunity to the committee to solve this problem and pass meaningful--meaningful--reforms, if the DOD disagreed with those reforms, despite passing in the House and in the Senate, they have seen fit to make sure those reforms have been taken out in conference. One such example was legislation we passed in 2019 creating a ``safe to report'' provision, which would have allowed survivors of sexual assault to come forward to report the crime but not be prosecuted for related smaller crimes, such as drinking or being off base. That language passed the Senate. It passed the House. And, miraculously, because the DOD didn't approve, it was taken out in conference. In 2020, the Senators who worked on that provision, Senator Ernst and I, made very clear that we did not appreciate staff members taking out work and provisions that had been considered and voted on by Senators as part of their responsibility. And we were able to pass it the second time. So, unfortunately, Mr. President, I don't have faith that if we allow the committee to look at this bill and pass it in the Senate and the House, that it will not be watered down or taken out in conference without the consent of all the Senators who voted for it. Therefore, I urge this body to allow for an up-or-down vote on this Senate floor. That is a privilege that was given ``don't ask, don't tell'' repeal because of similar filibusters by members of the Armed Services Committee. When we voted on ``don't ask, don't tell,'' it was an up-or-down Senate vote. This deserves the same opportunity. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise today to once again ask that every Senator have a chance to consider and cast their vote on the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This bill would ensure that when crimes are committed in our military, justice is delivered. This commonsense reform, which has bipartisan, filibuster-proof support, moves the decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, and professional military prosecutors, while leaving misdemeanors and uniquely military crimes within the chain of command. In other words, it takes the same approach to criminal justice that the military takes in most other areas of operation. It puts highly technical work in the hands of trained specialists. This is not a new concept. I first introduced a similar form of this legislation in 2013. This is not a new idea that requires hypothetical thinking. This system or a version of it is already being used by our allies around the world to positive effect. Australia has moved charging decisions for serious crimes from the chain of command to the director of military prosecutions, as has Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland. In France, charging decisions are made by lawyers, not by commanders. Germany tries military cases in civilian courts with civilian authorities. In Italy, charging decisions are made by judge advocates, who are fully independent of the chain of command. The Netherlands assigns charging decisions to public prosecutors with broad experience in military cases. Norway uses military prosecuting authority for criminal offenses by military personnel. The UK moved serious crimes out of the chain of command in 2009 as part of an effort to provide an independent and impartial tribunal to the accused. In Israel, charging decisions are made by judge advocates whose sole commander is the military advocate general, a general officer. I will note that the Israeli system is almost identical to the procedures set forth in our bill. Israel has not seen a decrease in good order and discipline and, in fact, has seen increased reporting and faith in their military justice system. These countries took serious crimes out of the chain of command because they believed that defendants have a right to civil liberties. They recognized that servicemembers deserve a trial not led by a commander, who often has no legal experience or education, but by trained criminal lawyers. When they made these changes, they did not see a diminution in command control or the ability to maintain good order and discipline within their ranks. In fact, when we stop asking commanders to act as judge and jury in complex cases, they will have more time to focus on rebuilding the trust and cohesion among their ranks that we know is critical to military readiness. We pride ourselves on having the best military in the world. To maintain it, we need to do more to make it safe for everyone to serve. Our allies have already done this. Every day we don't act is a day we fall further behind on this front. This is a tried and tested system. It has delivered change for our allies that the incremental reforms put in place by the Armed Services Committee have not delivered to our servicemembers. This reform has been tested; requested by survivors, veterans, and commanders; backed by experts in military justice; and supported by 65 Senators. There is no reason to delay a vote on the floor any further. I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate equally divided in the usual form; and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I would like to actually give some information to the chairman about what these other nations' leaders have actually said about this issue. Major General Blaise Cathcart, advocate general of the Canadian Armed Forces, wrote: The 1999 changes to the military justice system were battle tested in the theater of active operations and, in my view, were a key contributor to combat effectiveness of the Canadian armed forces. The current military justice system contributed substantially to the fielding and sustainment of a disciplined and efficient force with high morale. Air Commander Paul Cronan, director general of the Australian Defense Force Legal Service: At this point, it's appropriate to reflect on the effect of the reforms made to the Australian military justice system in 2003 and 2006. These reforms have undoubtedly had a significant and positive impact on the efficacy, impartiality, and perceived fairness of Australia's military justice system. This is a fact confirmed by a number of subsequent independent reviews of the effectiveness of the 2003 and 2006 reforms. As a result of their independent review, they concluded that the reforms had been effective, and that as a result of these reforms, ``The military justice system is delivering and should continue to deliver impartial, rigorous, and fair outcomes. Enhanced transparency and enhanced oversight is substantially more independent from the chain of command, and is effective in maintaining a high standard of discipline both domestically and in the operational theater.'' In the UK, Commander Andrei Spence, Commodore Naval Legal Service, Royal Navy, UK: Probably the most pressing question that you need answering from me, and if I may preempt it slightly at the risk of being too forthcoming, is what's the effect on command of our changes? How do they view it? Do they feel disempowered, disenfranchised? I have to say that the simple answer to that is no. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to enter this testimony into the Record

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise to once again call for this entire body to have the opportunity to consider the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act, which would ensure people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. I rise on behalf of the supporters of this bill, including a bipartisan, filibuster-proof group of 65 Senators, major veterans service organizations, and the veterans they represent. Every day we delay a vote on this bill is another day that their voices are being silenced. Our legislation makes the commonsense reform that our veterans and our servicemembers have asked for. It takes a decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes out of the chain of command and moves it to independent, trained, military prosecutors. This will create a system that is free of bias and capable of fairly trying these complex crimes. This legislation, as I mentioned, is supported by the Nation's major veterans service organizations. These organizations recognize that this reform would build a military justice system worthy of the service of our members--a system that delivers justice, consequences, and convictions. This bill is supported by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. Their CEO, Jeremy Butler said: The status quo with our military chain of command's response to military sexual assault is not working and this continuing threat to our military requires this commonsense solution to protect our servicemembers. It is supported by the American Legion, which recognizes that this legislation will ``improv[e] the system by which the Department of Defense investigates and prosecutes reported cases of military sexual trauma so that it is on par with the civilian system.'' It is supported by Protect Our Defenders. Retired Col. Don Christensen, the president of Protect Our Defenders said: Every year, generals come before Congress and tell Congress that sexual assault is a cancer in the force. This is a readiness issue. This is a force protection issue. This is an issue that drives out thousands of good men and women every year who want to serve. This [reform] will finally see the justice that our members deserve and the prevention they deserve. It is supported by the Vietnam Veterans of America. In a letter of support for this legislation, national president John Rowan wrote: After decades of hearing that the military will not tolerate military sexual assaults and that it has zero tolerance of such, the numbers continue to climb. Vietnam Veterans of America believes it is time to make real change to the process if real action is to be taken in its attention to the victims and the violence. Fear of reporting the crime of sexual assault is a barrier in addressing the justice these victims deserve. Their legal counsel and defense counsel should be no less than a civilian receives in our court system. This bill is supported by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, which accounts for more than 1.5 million veterans as members. It is supported by Common Defense. It is supported by SWAN, the Service Women's Action Network. It is supported by the Veterans Recovery Project. It is supported by the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. These are veterans. These are our constituents, our fellow Americans, and these are people who have put their lives on the line for this country and seen firsthand the way the current military justice system fails our servicemembers. They know better than anyone else what change needs to be made, and they are asking to pass this bill. Do not silence their voices. Let this vote come to the floor.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours of debate equally divided in the usual form; and that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I yield back all time, and I support this amendment.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise tonight to once again call for this entire body to have the opportunity to consider the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. This would ensure that people in the military who have been subjected to sexual assault and other serious crimes get the justice they deserve. I first introduced this legislation in 2013. Since then, the committee has had 8 years to consider it, to ask questions, to pursue changes, and to implement alternative solutions, and we have. In fact, over the period of 15 years, the committee enacted nearly 250 legislative provisions designed to address the scourge of sexual assault in the military. We have modified data reporting requirements. We have added questions to surveys. We have required annual reports on the status of sex offense investigations. We have required developments of strategies to hold leadership accountable. We have chartered special panels, commissions, and advisory committees to address this problem, and we have enacted their recommendations. We have made scores of small adjustments, and they have just not moved the needle. The most recent annual report from the Department of Defense proves it. Reports of sexual assault have increased virtually every single year and remain at record highs, while prosecution and conviction rates have declined. The current system is not working. We need real reform, and we have the legislation to do it. In 2014, I asked for a vote on this bill, and it earned majority support--55 votes--but it was filibustered. In 2015, again I earned majority support, but it was filibustered. I asked for a vote in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, and I was denied every single time. I am again asking on behalf of servicemembers who do so much for this country, who will sacrifice themselves and their lives for this Nation, and on behalf of the bipartisan, filibuster-proof majority of Senators who support this legislation and want to enact this reform, and this vote is being denied again. How long must our servicemembers wait for real reform? How long must they wait for a criminal justice system that is worthy of their sacrifice? There is no persuasive argument for the need to allow more time to consider this legislation in committee. The committee has had nearly a decade to consider it. Most Members of this body have had years to consider it, and those who have had the least time to consider it, our newest Members, have already seen the need for reform. Nine out of ten new Senators, Republicans and Democrats alike, including the two new members of the Armed Services Committee, have already cosponsored this bill. This bill is now supported by 64 bipartisan Senators who deserve to have the opportunity to cast a vote for this important bill. We don't have to take the time for another incremental step. It is time to bring this vote to the floor. I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate equally divided in the usual form; and that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I continue to advocate for the ability of this body to vote up or down on this bill. This is an important moment in our Nation's history. This is a generational change whose time has come. Previously, when such important reforms were needed, such as the don't ask, don't tell repeal, they were brought directly to the floor. It is time to bring this to the floor. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. GILLIBRAND

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise today to address the need to reform our military justice system. Just this month, the Department of Defense released its annual report on sexual assault in the military. That report and more than a decade of data on sexual assault in the military show a clear and disturbing trend. Reports of sexual assault have increased virtually every single year and remain at record highs, while prosecution and conviction rates have declined, including a shocking 10 percent point decline in the prosecution rate from last year. By every measure that you can imagine, we are moving in the wrong direction. Congress has given the military more than $1 billion--$500 million in fiscal year 2019 alone--enacted hundreds of provisions, and chartered special panels, Commissions, and advisory committees to address this problem. Not one of these steps has reduced the prevalence rate of sexual assaults within the ranks. We are still getting reports like the one we got from Fort Hood, which found that the world's largest Army base was ``a permissive environment for sexual assault and sexual harassment.'' We are right where we started. Nothing has changed. I have heard from too many survivors who have barely come forward in search of justice, only to have their cases outright declined by the chain of command and then face more harassment and retaliation for reporting their assailant. We owe it to our servicemembers to do more to prevent these crimes and properly prosecute them when they occur. Our bill, the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act, would ensure that, when these crimes are committed, justice is delivered. It does so by taking the same approach to these cases that the military takes in almost every other area of operation. It puts highly technical work in the hands of trained specialists. This bipartisan and commonsense reform moves the decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, and professional military prosecutors while leaving misdemeanors and uniquely military crimes within the chain of command. In other words, it will let prosecutors prosecute and commanders command. By moving this work off of the commander's plate, it will empower command to focus on mission-critical activities and on rebuilding the trust among their ranks that we know is critical to military readiness. This bill is not political. It is about doing the right thing for our servicemembers who do so much for this Nation. The Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act has bipartisan, filibuster-proof support. It is supported by 63 Senators, including 42 Democrats, 2 Independents, and 19 Republicans, and the majority of the Senate Armed Services Committee. If we brought this bill to the floor today, it would pass. We have the legislation, and we have the votes. Now we just need the will to act. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in working to pass this bill as quickly as possible. As this week's Department of Defense report makes clear, our servicemembers do not have time to wait. I yield the floor to Senator Grassley.