Josh Hawley

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, the appropriations bills that we are now considering appropriate a total of $280 billion--$280 billion--in taxpayer money--money that will be used by Agencies ranging from the Department of Veterans Affairs to Transportation and Agriculture. This amendment does something very simple. Whatever other disagreements we may have about the spending in these bills, surely we can agree that this money ought to go to Americans and American companies and our allies. So all this amendment does is it says that none of the money we are appropriating can go to China. It can't go to Chinese companies or companies that are owned and controlled by China. That is it. It is simple: no American taxpayer dollars to the People's Republic of China. This should be an easy vote. I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1200, and I ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, 1 week ago, I came to this floor to try and pass this very resolution that condemns the violent, genocidal, anti-Semitic rhetoric and actions on our college campuses all across this country. Sadly, I was blocked by one of my Democratic colleagues. And since then, the situation at our universities has only worsened. I offer you just two examples. I could multiply these examples, sadly, but let's just take two. On Tuesday of this week, just 2 or 3 miles from where we stand now on the floor of the U.S. Senate, at the George Washington University, pro- Hamas students projected onto the side of the university library various anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, pro-genocide slogans, including ``Glory to Our Martyrs,'' in reference to the terrorists who attacked the State of Israel, and not just the State of Israel, but who committed cold-blooded murder of babies, cutting off their heads, shooting women and children in their homes, executing soldiers as they lay sleeping in their barracks. These same students projected other slogans onto the library wall: ``Free Palestine From the River to the Sea''. What does that mean? Well, it is a reference to Hamas's longstanding call for the extermination of the State of Israel. Let's just be clear. This is a reference to their call for genocide of Jews in the Middle East and everywhere they can get their hands on them. This is what is going on, on our college campuses. If you talk to the students who were there at George Washington University that night, what they will tell you is, they feared for their safety; they feared for their lives; they don't know if they are any longer welcome on campus or physically safe on campus. What did the university do in the wake of this attack? Well, the answer has become all too familiar. Virtually nothing. They issued a statement saying that the students weren't authorized to project these genocidal slogans onto the library wall, and that is about it. We have to do a heck of a lot better than that. Last night, at Cooper Union, an institution of higher education in the State of New York, Jewish students were barricaded inside their own library as a pro-Hamas group rampaged through the building shouting violent slurs at these students and then pounded on the library doors seeking to gain entrance. This morning's New York Post reads: ``Cooper Union barricades Jewish students inside library as pro-Palestinian protesters bang on [the] doors.'' The students who were there last night spoke of being herded into the library, of campus security saying they didn't think they could protect them; campus security then locking the doors to the library to try and keep the Jewish students inside and an angry mob assembling. There are photos of this. Don't take my word for it. The video is available everywhere. Go look for yourself. An angry mob of pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas students were banging on the windows--the glass windows--of the library at the Jewish students who were literally barricaded inside. These students were calling 9-1-1, calling their relatives, asking for help. Eventually, an hour or more later, campus security reportedly took them out through the back door. They couldn't walk out the front door of a library in their own school. They had to be taken out the back for fear, I guess, of their safety, perhaps also for appearances. I can't help but think, 50 years ago, 60 years ago, the President of the United States had to activate the 101st Airborne Division to make sure African-American students could go to class in this country without being physically assaulted. Is that what it has come to now on America's college campuses? Are we going to have to activate the National Guard to see that Jewish students can go to class in safety without being in fear of their lives? I would just say this: As a nation, we must speak with one voice and say that there is a right, and there is a wrong; there is good, and there is evil; and threatening to kill an entire class of people is wrong and it is evil. Speaking up, shouting in support of genocide is wrong, and it is evil. Threatening the lives of your fellow students because they are Jewish is wrong, and it is evil. Plainly, these institutions of so-called higher learning have failed these students. These students have clearly no idea what right and wrong means. You project stuff like this on a library wall while your Jewish classmates stand in fear for their lives, you don't have any idea about what right and wrong is. Clearly, these institutions have failed these students, which is why we need to speak with moral clarity now. This is a teachable moment. This is a moment for us to say that genocide is wrong, that terrorist attacks against Jews are wrong, that threats on the lives of Jewish people anywhere--the Middle East, in this country, Europe, anywhere--is wrong. This shouldn't be hard. But we have to do it so that these students and everywhere within the sound of our voice can understand what right and wrong means--can understand the moral gravity of the situation we are now confronting. That is why what we are doing today matters, and that is why I am pleased today that we are able now, finally, to pass this resolution that explicitly names the rhetoric, explicitly calls out the language of pro-violence, pro-genocide, and says that is wrong. Now, I want to be clear. Our First Amendment--of which I am a great defender--our First Amendment allows people to say the most terrible things--vile, horrible, reprehensible things. The First Amendment, as I have often said, is the right to be wrong. And these students are absolutely wrong. So they may have the right to say these things--although I must add, nobody has the right to threaten violence against other Americans or anybody within their ambit. They may have the right to say terrible things, to say that they are in favor of genocide, to say that they want to see Jewish people killed. They may have the right to say those things, but that doesn't mean that we have to agree with it. That doesn't mean that we have to say: Oh, that is morally neutral. Sure, you can say it, fine. We have no opinion. No, no, no. The answer to that kind of hateful, virulent, dangerous speech is speech with moral purpose. It is language with moral clarity. It is a moral stand that says: No, that is wrong. That is not us. That is not the United States of America. That is what we are doing right here, right now, on this floor today. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HAWLEY. I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. HAWLEY. I know of no further debate on the measure.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 418.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, it is hard to believe what we have just heard on this floor. Defense of the most vile, anti-Semitic rhetoric under the excuse that to call out specifically the specific statements, and denounce them one at a time and say this is wrong, that that is somehow a smear, what that is, is a failure of moral nerve. What it is, is a failure of moral clarity. What it is, is, frankly, sympathizing with this rhetoric. I don't know why it is so hard, but I guess we have now found out why college presidents won't come out and say this is wrong. We cite the specific words. Why is it wrong to say ``It includes violence''? Why is it wrong to condemn this? When students say the heroic resistance in Gaza should be praised, they are not referring to something in general. They are talking about the attack on Israel, the slaughter of innocent Israelis, and that is perfectly fine? Those are legitimate concerns? I mean, this is--the moral equivalency that has seeped into our college campuses and, I guess, to the floor of the U.S. Senate is unbelievable. Let there be no mistake. What has happened today is one Senator has blocked this body from condemning the attacks against Jewish people in Israel, Jewish Americans in this Nation, and pretended that there is some moral equivalency here between this and what? The State of Israel is under existential threat. We have students in this country who are specifically calling for and celebrating the killing of Jews, and we can't condemn that on the floor of the Senate? To say I am disappointed is an understatement. But I will say this: It is a revealing moment. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President.

Mr. HAWLEY. Senator, we are condemning----

Mr. HAWLEY. They are not condemned by this resolution.

Mr. HAWLEY. What is the smear? Point me to the language.

Mr. HAWLEY. Senator, what is the smear? What is the smear?

Mr. HAWLEY. What of the rhetoric that is cited specifically in the resolution--you talked about legitimate concerns. What, specifically, do you think is legitimate?

Mr. HAWLEY. Would the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, on October 7, 2023, the terrorist organization Hamas invaded the State of Israel. Terrorists killed 1,400 Israeli civilians, including women and children, people asleep in their beds. They went door to door. They shot Israelis in their homes. They shot soldiers as they were asleep, unawares in their barracks. They wounded more than 3,700 civilians. That includes 31 Americans at least. Over a dozen Americans have been taken hostage and many, many more Israelis. It is the worst attack on the Jewish people and the State of Israel in 50 years. It is truly an existential threat to the State of Israel and, really, to the safety of Jewish Americans and Jewish people all across the world. Perhaps incredibly disturbing--maybe almost as disturbing as the facts of these terrible attacks themselves--is the response of some people in this country, on our college campuses in this country, who promptly took to the streets, to the courtyards of these campuses, to the airwaves to broadcast their support for this genocide against the people of Israel. That is right. I said their support for the genocide against the people of Israel. Listen to what these students said. At Harvard University, students wrote that they ``hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible''--``entirely responsible''--``for all unfolding violence.'' Think about that. They hold the Israelis, the Jewish people, responsible for their own deaths and massacres. They hold the Jewish people responsible for their babies' heads being chopped off. They hold the Jewish people responsible for the homicidal maniacs who came to their doors and gunned them down in cold blood. They hold them responsible. Students at New York University's School of Law wrote that they believe ``Israel bears full responsibility for this tremendous loss of life''--``full responsibility.'' Students at Ohio State praised the ``heroic resistance in Gaza.'' ``Heroic''? It is now ``heroic'' to massacre Jews in cold blood. It is now ``heroic'' to try and carry out a genocide against Jewish people. Students at the University of North Carolina said: It is our moral obligation to be in solidarity no matter the pathway to liberation-- their word-- they choose to take. This includes violence. ``This includes violence.'' This is an out-and-out endorsement by American students for violence against Jewish people and the State of Israel. You know, it is not just Jews in Israel who are threatened by these outrageous remarks. Jewish Americans on our campuses have been threatened. Columbia University had to close their campus temporarily when an Israeli student was physically assaulted and Jewish American students threatened. Jewish American students have been threatened across the country in all sorts of settings, not the least on our college campuses. And, in the wake of this, campus leaders have been silent. They have refused to condemn this violent, virulent, genocidal, anti-Semitic rhetoric for what it is. Now, I want to be clear. I believe in our Constitution. The Constitution has the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects the right to free speech. As I have said on this floor before, the First Amendment is the right to be wrong. So these students can say this kind of virulent, moral idiocy if they want so long as they don't themselves encourage violence. Although, I would just say, when you say that this includes violence, that there ought to be violence, they are coming pretty darned close--pretty darned close. But let's just assume that their remarks are protected speech. That doesn't mean we have to endorse them. That doesn't mean we have to say: Oh, yes, that is fine. It is just another opinion. No, it is not just another opinion. Calling for the death of Jewish people is not just another opinion. Calling for the genocide and celebrating the genocide of Jewish babies is not just another opinion. Celebrating the assaults on Jewish people in this country is not just another opinion. The Senate should be clear and stand with moral clarity and say: This is wrong. Can you say it in this country? I guess you can, but it is wrong, and, frankly, it shouldn't be hard. It shouldn't be hard to say: ``We condemn this rhetoric. We recognize the right of Israel to exist''-- talk about basic, basic principles here--``and we recognize the right of Israel to defend itself''--things, by the way, that the President has said. It shouldn't be hard for this body to say it, but it is vital-- morally necessary--in this moment of attack, in this moment, frankly, of danger for Jewish people in Israel, around the world, and, sadly, on our college campuses. That is why I have offered this resolution, along with my cosponsors, that condemns the terrorist attacks by Hamas; that denounces this violent rhetoric here in the United States against Jewish people, Jewish Americans, and, of course, the State of Israel; and recognizes the right of Israel to defend itself. It is a pretty simple amendment, and I can't imagine what the objection to it would be. So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 418, which is at the desk. I further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

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

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, had I been present, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 176, Brendan Abell Hurson, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted ``no'' on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 324, Thomas G. Day, of Virginia, to be a Commissioner of the Postal Regulatory Commission for a term expiring October 14, 2028.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, for 50 years--50 years--the Federal Government has put into the water, into the soil, into the air of St. Louis and surrounding regions radioactive nuclear material. They have not told the people of St. Louis. They have not compensated the people of St. Louis. They have not helped the people of St. Louis-- in fact, just the opposite. For decades--decades--they told the people of St. Louis: No problem. There is no problem here. Meanwhile, children were dying of cancer, and people all over the region were contracting autoimmune diseases. Why? Because the groundwater had been poisoned, because the creeks where they played in had been poisoned. And now we know for a fact that the government has covered it up for decades. Mr. President, it is time to make this right. The amendment we are about to vote on is a very simple amendment. It is about basic justice: compensating the victims of the Federal Government's negligence for what the government itself has done. And it hasn't only happened in Missouri. It has happened around the country, which is why this amendment would reauthorize a victims fund for those who have suffered because of the government's negligence. And by ``suffered'' I mean gotten sick and had family members die--in Missouri, in States across the country. It reauthorizes it, and it makes it available to those who have been the victims of what the government has done. This is a bipartisan bill. I am proud to have worked with Senator Lujan, Senator Crapo, Senator Schmitt, and others. Now I would like to recognize the Senator from New Mexico, Senator Lujan.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I ask for 6 minutes of debate prior to the rollcall vote.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I would like to call up my amendment No. 1058 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, had I been there for the recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 114, Kalpana Kotagal, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2027; the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 141, David M. Uhlmann, of Michigan, to be an Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; and the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 21, Rachel Bloomekatz, of Ohio, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, today, there are new revelations, new evidence about the extent of the radioactive contamination that has plagued the St. Louis area since the forties. Where did this radioactive contamination come from? Simple, it came from the Federal Government. Beginning in the forties in the Manhattan Project, St. Louis was a center of development for uranium. But what did the Federal Government do when the Manhattan Project concluded? Well, we know more today after 15,000 pages of documents that had previously not been released were obtained by a parents' rights group in St. Louis and shared with news organizations. Here is what we learned. The Federal Government gave this radioactive waste, fobbed it off, onto companies in the region--who did what?--who poisoned the water, who poisoned the soil, who poisoned the air, and the government knew about it. Oh, yes, they knew about it. They knew about it for decades, and for year upon year upon year, they played down the threats. They tried to hide the evidence. They told the people of St. Louis: Oh, everything is fine. Don't be worried. Don't worry at all. It is all fine. Meanwhile, kids were playing along a creek filled with radioactive waste. Kids were going to school in buildings contaminated by the waste. Residents were coming out to houses, building homes in areas contaminated. And then the government wonders why the levels of cancer and autoimmune diseases and rare genetic disorders have spiked in the St. Louis region. Oh, we know. We know. It is because of the radioactive material from the Federal Government dumped into the St. Louis water and air and soil. Let's just review what we have learned. We now know that as early as 1949--that is right, 1949--the Federal Government paid a contractor--a private contractor--to dispose of waste. But instead, that contractor left the radioactive waste in steel drums sitting out in the open in the elements, right next to a creek called Coldwater Creek, familiar to just about everybody who lives in the St. Louis region. It is familiar because whole housing developments and neighborhoods and--oh, yeah--schools have been built along Coldwater Creek. As early as the forties, that radioactive waste begins to leech out of those steel drums into the water. And it gets worse. The same Federal Government paid another contractor to dispose of other waste. And what did they do? Rather than dispose of it, they drove it to a public landfill. And in the early seventies, they just dumped the waste right into the landfill. They dumped it right into the landfill. ``How did this happen?'' you might ask. Well, as it turns out, that is a violation of Federal law. You think? But what did the Federal Government do about it in the seventies, when they learned that this government-paid contractor had carried out this illegal act? Did they prosecute him? Did they fine him? Did they at least have a hearing and ask some questions? No, no, and no. They did nothing. So the waste seeped into the soil, spread into the soil, and all the time the people of St. Louis were told: Don't worry. Don't worry. It is all going to be fine. In 1976, government tests--government tests--revealed that the levels of radiation in the creek water were at extremely dangerous levels-- 1976. Here we sit in 2023, and we are told by the same Federal Government--the EPA, Department of Energy, Army Corps--that the cleanup of Coldwater Creek won't be done until at least 2038. Earlier this year, the school alongside Coldwater Creek, an elementary school, had to close, apparently permanently, because of radioactive contamination found inside the school. In response to that, this body took action and passed my bill to mandate Federal cleanup of the school and, if it can't be cleaned up, a new school to be built. I thank my colleagues for their unanimous support for that activity, but that is not going to be enough. No, it is clear today that further action is needed because the Federal Government has caused this harm. I want to be crystal clear about this. This is not the people of St. Louis saying that we had a weather incident, which would be bad enough. It is not a natural disaster, which would be terrible. No, no, no, this is their government using them, essentially, as human guinea pigs. This is their government dumping radioactive material into their water, into their soil, and then lying to them about it, not even for a year or 2 years but for three-quarters of a century. And it still continues today. As I stand here, the Army Corps of Engineers insists there needs to be no further testing either around the elementary school, which is now closed, or anywhere else in the St. Louis region. And, at the same time, the EPA is admitting that the radioactive contamination of the soil has spread further than they previously admitted. I mean, what is it going to take to get some basic justice for the people of St. Louis? We are talking about working people. These are people who moved to these regions of the city in search of a quiet neighborhood, a good school for their kids, an opportunity for a better future. These are parents who allowed their kids to play in the creek because wasn't it awesome to have a creek right by their neighborhood. These are parents who sent their kids to the school trusting they would get a great education. And what did they get instead? Exposure to radioactive contamination. This shouldn't happen in this country. When it does happen, the Federal Government should make it right. That is what needs to happen now. I am sick to death of hearing the excuses from this government for decades on end. I am sick of the lies that they have told to the people of St. Louis, to working people from neighborhoods all across the city, that everything is just going to be fine: Just trust us; it is all going to work out. I am tired of this administration, which has still refused to answer my repeated pleas--repeated--to mount a cleanup effort at Jana Elementary School, to clean up Coldwater Creek. All we get is finger-pointing and blame-shifting. The Department of Energy says it is the Army Corps' fault. The Army Corps says it is the Department of Energy's fault. Heck, for the recent news reports, the Department of Energy wouldn't even comment. They referred the reporter to the Department of Justice. I mean, what is next? Here is what needs to happen next. It is time for this body to act. In the past, when we have asked citizens--members of this Nation--when we asked them to bear unique burdens, when we have put them in harm's way, we have said: If you will serve your country in this way, we will stand with you. That is essentially what the people of St. Louis have been asked to do. The Manhattan Project was a national project for war. The people of St. Louis have borne the burden of it. It is time for the government to make it right. What should happen is this. The Federal Government should pay medical bills for any single resident who has contracted cancer or an autoimmune virus or genetic disorder because of exposure to radioactive contamination. The Federal Government needs to act. I will introduce legislation that will create a fund to make the people of St. Louis whole. Sadly, for some, it is too late. This has been going on for decades and too many members of our community have already been lost to cancer, to disease, to the hazards that were imposed on them by their government without their knowledge and without their consent. But that is no reason not to act now. We should act and act swiftly to provide remediation, to provide support for every member of this community who has suffered because of the actions of the Federal Government. We have done it in the past. We have done it for our veterans. We have done it for other folks who have been negatively impacted by the nuclear program dating back to the forties. We should do it now in the city and region of St. Louis. I will introduce legislation that will provide this support, that will provide this justice to the people of St. Louis. I will close by saying this. It is justice that we are talking about. This is not a handout to the people of St. Louis. They are not asking for a giveaway. They are asking for some basic fairness. When their government imposes on them disease and disaster because of nuclear contamination, the least their government can do is to make it right. And I will come to this floor as long as it takes until we make it right for the men and women and children of St. Louis. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY

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

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, it is my great privilege to say a very few words in introduction of my friend and fellow Senator, Eric Schmitt, as he prepares to give his maiden speech on this floor. We haven't worked together very long in the Senate, but we have known each other for some time, and I just want to say that if you look at Senator Schmitt's record, the people of Missouri are tremendously fortunate to have him, and he is already doing tremendous work for them. As attorney general, Eric led the way in taking on the Biden administration and holding them accountable for their abuses of power. He led the way in taking on Big Tech and holding them accountable for what they tried to do to our children, what they tried to do to our elections, and what they tried to do to our speech. And already now in the U.S. Senate, he is holding the deep state--the administrative state--accountable, standing up for ordinary, normal, everyday working Missourians who deserve to have a voice in this Chamber, who deserve to have a voice in their government. And he has been standing here fighting for them. I can't wait to continue to have the privilege to serve with him, and I can't wait to hear his remarks today. So with that, Mr. President, I yield the floor to the Senator from Missouri, Eric Schmitt.