Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on another matter, I have repeatedly warned colleagues on both sides against setting aside America's interests in pursuit of closer relations with foreign leaders who they think share their values. I made it clear to Washington Democrats that whatever kudos the Paris climate deal earned them with European greens, punishing America for producing affordable, reliable, and abundant energy was welcome news to China, the world's leading emitter of carbon, and to Russia, which would weaponize Europe's own reliance in due course. Likewise, I have urged fellow Republicans to recognize that despite whatever affinity we might be expected to hold for a Hungarian ruling party that professes traditional values, legitimizing Victor Orban's reckless obeisance to China, Russia, and Iran is not in America's interests. And I have been clear-eyed about the regimes with which the United States shares neither interests nor values, and acted accordingly. For example, the strategic case for maximum pressure and credible deterrence against Iran, the world's most active state sponsor of terror, is compelling enough on its own. Weakening sanctions in exchange for empty promises on nuclear proliferation is not in America's strategic interests; neither is responding to proxy violence with half measures. The only way to achieve measurable improvements to the security of America's interests in Iran's backyard is to change Iran's calculus. This is, of course, an opportunity for the United States and allies with common interests in the region to work more closely together in applying meaningful pressure on Tehran--an opportunity as yet unseized. But lest anyone forget, just as Tehran's export of terror threatens America's interests, its repression at home is an affront to American values. Today is the second anniversary of the beating, detention, and murder of Mahsa Amini at the hands of Iran's morality police. Tehran's thugs killed another 500 people and detained thousands more who took to the streets in protest. Today, Iranian women are continuing their protest against the regime's repressive morality laws. Many are walking the streets without head coverings, and 34 political prisoners have gone on a hunger strike. Tehran is marking the anniversary in its own way: placing Ms. Amini's surviving family under unofficial house arrest. Further east, in Kabul, another group of medieval theocrats is dragging Afghan women and girls even further backward into the familiar repression of Taliban rule. A new ``vice and virtue law'' amounts to an even more severe crackdown on education for Afghan girls, with even tighter restrictions on women's behavior in public. Like in Iran, Taliban repression is not difficult to recognize as abhorrent, and the latest developments are an outcome many of us saw coming years ago. Unfortunately, they are also a shameful reminder of a decision that damaged American interests and a sales campaign that denied observable reality. Recall that as the Taliban surged back into power in Kabul, President Biden insisted that ``human rights will be the center of our foreign policy.'' Remember how the President's National Security Advisor declared that the administration was ``absolutely resolutely committed'' to ``alleviate the burden that [Afghan] women and girls will face in the days ahead.'' I am curious how the administration would rate the effectiveness of that commitment. I wonder whether it thinks its confidence in so-called over-the-horizon counterterrorism has paid off. And when the administration's special envoy warns that its ``patience with the Taliban is running out,'' I can't help but ask why on Earth any such patience would align with America's interests in the first place, let alone our values.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I am so grateful for your overly generous assessment of my work over the years. One of the joys of being in this job as long as I have is the opportunity to work with you and to watch the way you handle so many things so skillfully. So thank you very much. I appreciate that. As you indicated, I am not going anywhere yet. I yield the floor.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I would like to begin by reminding our colleagues of a report released before the August State work period. It is a report Congress commissioned in the fiscal year 2022 NDAA, produced by a panel of experts that Congress appointed--the bipartisan Commission on the National Defense Strategy. The Commission was tasked with reviewing the Biden administration's national defense strategy and conducting an independent assessment of the threats and requirements of our common defense. Any of our colleagues who haven't yet taken a close look at this report should. But I would like to reiterate a few of its conclusions that I discussed just last month as the Appropriations Committee finalized defense spending legislation for the coming year. This ought to grab our attention, from the report: [T]he U.S. military lacks both the capabilities and the capacity required to be confident it can deter and prevail in combat. [T]he U.S. defense industrial base . . . is unable to meet the equipment, technology, and munitions needs of the United States and its allies and partners. [T]he U.S. public are largely unaware of the dangers the United States faces or the costs (financial and otherwise) required to adequately prepare. The report doesn't flinch in assessing the full scale of the threats posed by major adversaries: Russian victory in Ukraine would make Moscow ``an emboldened and likely stronger power, requiring NATO to build and deploy additional forces, potentially at the expense of other locations where these resources could be applied. China is outpacing the United States and has largely negated the U.S. military advantage in the Western Pacific through two decades of focused military investment. And, perhaps most alarmingly, the growing partnership and collaboration between our adversaries ``increases the likelihood that a conflict with one would expand to multiple fronts, causing simultaneous demands on U.S. and ally resources. It is a sobering assessment with some urgent recommendations to go along with it. The question now is what we are willing to do about it. Congress has a constitutional duty to provide for the common defense. We have a responsibility to align resources with our requirements and our strategy to provide funding adequate to ensure American military superiority. Unfortunately, this is work Congress must do without help from this administration. And as one Commissioner, Roger Zakheim, has observed, President Biden's 2022 NDS mentioned neither ``budget,'' ``funding,'' nor ``dollar.'' But after a week back in Washington, Congress is no closer to delivering full-year top-line defense spending than we were back on August 1. The critical increases Vice Chair Collins secured over the President's anemic budget request are no closer to becoming law, neither is the National Defense Authorization Act, which the Democratic leader has yet to schedule for floor time. So it is one thing to request expert analysis; it would be quite another to do the urgent work that analysis rightly prescribes.

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, when I announced back in February that I would be wrapping up my time as Republican leader, I assured our colleagues that I wouldn't be bowing out of worthwhile fights anytime soon, and, of course, I meant that. But it is never too early to tell the folks you work with that you appreciate them. There is no such thing as saying ``thank you'' too often. So this is as good a time as any to brag a bit about the team I have been so fortunate to have in my Capitol office. Today, I would like to focus on a number of my talented communications staff, beginning with the longest serving member of our team, senior research adviser David Hauptmann. David himself has joked once or twice that he came with the furniture in the Leader's office, but I would rather not give up the credit for making such a great personnel decision myself. In a line of work where turnover and burnout aren't uncommon, David's longevity is truly remarkable. But, like me, he relishes a worthy fight. We have seen plenty of them over the years together, and there always seems to be another one just around the corner. By my count, David has been on hand for the last six Supreme Court nomination fights. Time and again, with tenacious focus, he has sifted through archives, combed media coverage, and lent deep institutional knowledge that equips my entire team for success. More than once, his research quite literally changed the course of confirmations. But as much as I would like to believe this principled public servant has stuck around all this time out of personal loyalty, it is clear to anyone who knows David that what animates his work the most is a deep devotion to the Senate as an institution. Every last-minute project, every weekend session spent away from his lovely wife Allison--all in defense of what makes the Senate the Senate. I know he agrees it has been worth every second. So, David, thank you so much.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, that is just half of the office's all- star research team. In any organization that has been around for a while, bringing in fresh ideas is essential, and Matt Burton has brought an invaluable new perspective as research director over the past year. As is so often the case with recovering House staffers, I like to think Matt wasted no time at all becoming a Senate guy through and through, and behind his mild manner are killer political instincts and an unbeatable attention to the smallest details. These are, of course, essential qualities in a team I literally lean on for everything from equipping the conference with background research on the issues of the day, to vetting the records of pending nominations, to catching factual errors in drafts of my remarks. Simply put, nothing--nothing--gets past Matt Burton. So this speech is a rare occasion when Matt hasn't seen and scoured an advance copy. We are in uncharted territory, and I hope he will forgive me for breaking protocol just this once. Matt, it has been great having you on the team. Thank you for having my back.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, of course, the excellent work of our researchers and the whole team gets a major leg up thanks to the talents of my digital director, Ryan Flynn. For as long as digital media have played a major role in politics, I have been fortunate to have a maven on the team making sure we could compete in a fast-changing online landscape. Each one has brought a unique perspective and incredible talents. Ryan has met this high bar and pushed it even higher. He has excelled at a job that requires him to wear multiple hats. In a single day, he is in the trenches of online messaging campaigns and racing around the Capitol in real life to capture and preserve important moments for posterity. Aside from a small handful of senior-most advisers, Ryan is often the only one in the room with me in the highest profile meetings with foreign heads of state and other notables, and he just takes it all in stride. I am grateful that Ryan's wife Clare allows us to occupy so much of his time. I know the team is particularly grateful for Ryan's ability to lighten even the most demanding situations--sometimes with sincere encouragement, sometimes with a practical joke. Ryan, thank you for all the hard work. Or as you say yourself, ``Thanks for playing.''

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now, this entire operation I have just described is rowing in the same direction thanks to the staff director of the Senate Republican communications center, Scott Sloofman. Scott is actually a two-timer on my staff. The first time around, he hitched a ride back to Washington after steering my campaign's research operation through a vigorous reelection fight in 2014. It was clear from the beginning that he had a knack for politics like few people I have ever met. As it turns out, ``Sloof'' felt so at home in the trenches of campaign life that we had to let him go out and win a few other races before he was ready to settle into life here in the Senate. When he came back, we wanted to make him feel at home so we lined up a couple of high-stakes Supreme Court confirmation battles and budget reconciliation fights. Through it all, Sloof has displayed unflappable political instincts. And as the coordinator of a multipronged communications team, he has never been afraid to bet big on the right message. Time and again, his willingness to question assumptions, challenge conventional wisdom, and play devil's advocate have made his colleagues and me sharper and better prepared to take on tough challenges. So, Sloof, I am glad to have you in my corner. Thank you so much.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now, the fine work of the communications center only makes it here to the floor because we have talented wordsmiths like my deputy speech writer, Catherine Francois, on the job. From her seat in the same noisy bullpen where the rest of the team wrestles with the news cycle, Catherine is engaged in a relentless process of air traffic control: digesting the latest news and research, helping me organize my thoughts on a given topic, running interference with fact checks and formatting, and getting the best possible draft on paper by the time the Senate opens every day, before doing it all over again the next day. It is a workflow that could make anyone's head spin, but Catherine's grace amid the chaos is all the more impressive when you consider that my team managed to poach her from the comparatively steady, contemplative world of policy analysis and think tanks. So the comms center may have been quite a culture shock, but the habits of a true policy wonk die hard. Catherine has lent us an invaluable knack for hunting down fresh sources, interesting data, and underdiscussed angles on the issues of the day and then helping me package them in a compelling way for delivery from this podium. And I am so grateful for her contributions. Catherine, thank you very much.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now on my chief speech writer, Dylan Vorbach. I admit that when Dylan's long-time predecessor, Andy Quinn, told me he was leaving, I worried what I would do without him. After all, the rapport you build with a speech writer is built on a lot of trust. I shouldn't have worried. Dylan stepped right into the senior role and quickly became an invaluable partner in my preparations for all sorts of speaking engagements, especially on the topic of American leadership, which is what I have focused on so heavily. Dylan is a consummate professional: loyal, reliable, and steady. He is a high-capacity, low-drama individual--an ideal combination for a job where everything can change on you in an instant. When we engage in daily partisan warfare, Dylan's pen is as sharp as they come. But Dylan carries a unique piece of his own portfolio as well. This institution is special, and the Senate leaders have a responsibility to the institution on certain occasions to speak not only for ourselves but also for our colleagues: a funeral for a beloved colleague, a tribute to a retiring doorkeeper, a heroic Congressional Gold Medal recipient, or the Senate spouses who really keep all of us grounded. In each and every moment, Dylan strikes the perfect grace note. He makes us look better than we are, and that serves us all very, very well. I am not quite sure how a young man raised in New England has managed to become an honorary son of the South, but ever since Dylan came to us from our former colleague Luther Strange, he has hung onto an extra talent for channeling the best parts of our country. But Dylan's talents extend far beyond putting words on a page. Somehow, his idea of unwinding on the weekend is a multiday baking project or an off-road bike race. I am just grateful he hasn't broken any of his typing fingers. So, Dylan, thank you so much.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now, some of my staff can do their work from the relative peace and quiet of the office, but the last two folks I would like to thank today are dug in on the frontlines. First, my deputy press secretary, Jerry Calengor. As some of our colleagues may recall, I have had good luck in the past hiring sharp communicators from the State of Minnesota. It must be something in one of those lakes. Serious pride in his roots, along with a wicked sense of humor, helped him hit the ground running in the busy bullpen where much of this team spends their days. He wasted no time becoming an essential member of the research team, particularly when it came to carefully vetting nominations. But it didn't take long to recognize Jerry's aptitude for dealing with the press more directly, and I am proud of the way Jerry has grown as a trusted adviser I turn to as I prepare for interviews, including our weekly stakeout. Appropriately, he still keeps an old hockey helmet at his desk for days when the incoming barrage from the press corps is especially thick. Jerry is fortunate that his wife Grace tolerates this rough-and- tumble day job. As I understand it, she was willing to road-trip back from their wedding so he could be in the office for a busy Monday. On top of it all, Jerry is responsible for taking a last careful look at just about every public statement and press release I make, and then making sure people actually see them. I am grateful to have his good judgment and eagle eye double-check our work. So, Jerry, thank you.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, finally, to folks around the Senate--or Twitter, as I understand--this last one needs no introduction: my trusted press secretary, Doug Andres. Doug is, without a doubt, the most skilled navigator of the Capitol Hill press corps a Senator could hope for. I hired him specifically for his reputation as an unmatched flack. Over his years in the Speaker's office, he had already tilted successfully with the House and executive branch press corps, and I had a feeling he would do the same here in the Senate. Boy, was I right. It may have something to do with his disarming, deadpan wit. It certainly helps that Doug is the kind of guy everyone wants to be friends with outside of work. Whatever the reason, Doug has got an uncanny nose for news. He is consistently able to predict stories that are still miles off and around the bend. Frankly, I shudder to think how many headaches he could create for the rest of us if he wanted to switch sides. For now, there is only one thing I ever worry could distract Doug from his duties as my early warning system with the press, and that is his growing role as ringleader of a group of prominent figures who actually share his name. We had a Doug running for President earlier this year, and another one is the Second Gentleman. But there is no doubt that the heart and soul of the ``Doug Caucus'' is right here in the Senate, and I know my entire team sleeps safer with Doug on the job. So, Doug, thank you for everything. Mr. President, I will need another few speeches to adequately thank the whole team around me in the leader's office for all of their outstanding work--work that is not nearly finished. It is a great problem to have, and I will have much more to say soon.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now, Ryan is not the only one with the tough job of making me look good. That task also rests in the capable hands of my broadcast media adviser, Kaily Grabemann. Kaily is simply the best in the business at what she does. Whether it is a quick radio call-in from the road or a big prime-time interview in the studio, Kaily makes sure I am armed and ready, including the occasional visual touch-ups she likes to refer to as ``glam.'' As our colleagues know, I am not always a frequent flyer on the cable news networks. But with Kaily's help, I keep a close eye on who is. And in that regard, I am hardly the only beneficiary of her media savvy. For years now, colleagues across the Republican conference have come to rely on Kaily as a clearinghouse for media advisability, helping Senators get on the air with important messages and helping producers get the Senators they are looking for. For the sake of their sanity, most folks in this town try to avoid spending too much time glued to the news. To my good fortune, Kaily doesn't have that luxury. There are a number of things I am sure Kaily would rather do with her evenings or Sunday mornings--like, perhaps, train for the next marathon--but I am grateful she has been so willing to keep a watchful eye out instead. Kaily, thank you so much.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, 23 years ago today, forces of evil brought their war on the United States to American soil. They filled a clear blue sky with smoke, fire, and the shattered lives of 2,977 innocent people. Before the dust had settled, the world witnessed the extraordinary heroism of first responders, the compassion of neighbors and volunteers, and the will of a proud nation not to let this savagery go unanswered. The terrorists had started this war, but America resolved to finish it. At times, that resolve has wavered. Over the years since September 11, 2001, I have counseled administrations of both parties not to shortchange, hamstring, or abandon our fight against the terrorists or let up on the adversaries who support them. I have urged colleagues in Congress not to make the job of the warfighter harder by taking essential counterterrorism authorities off the table, and I will continue to do so as our colleagues consider our recent vote on section 702 and the one we will take in less than 2 years to further extend this vital intelligence collection authority. The Biden-Harris administration pretends the War on Terrorism is over. The Vice President herself claimed last night that ``there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone . . . [for] the first time this century.'' Well, this, of course, would be news to U.S. servicemembers who conducted operations against ISIS in Iraq last week and to the sailors intercepting Houthi rockets in the Red Sea and to the families of servicemembers killed and injured in the attack on Tower 22 near Jordan's border with Syria earlier this year. Our current Commander in Chief and the Biden-Harris administration are not the first to chase the tail of shutting down terrorist detention at Guantanamo Bay. They are not the first to indulge in the idea of a pivot away from a region full of important U.S. interests. They are not the first to suggest that America gets to decide unilaterally when threats from Afghanistan end, but they were the ones who followed through with the disastrous retreat that torched American credibility and left 13 servicemembers dead. The administration pinned its hopes on the mistaken idea that because the U.S.-led coalition had made tremendous progress in keeping terrorist threats under control, we could continue to do so from over the horizon. So how is that going? Despite assurances from the Secretary of Defense that over-the-horizon operations would not suffer from a lack of human intelligence after the U.S. withdrawal, the administration hasn't conducted a single strike--not one--against ISIS- K, the terrorists responsible for the Abbey Gate bombing, among other atrocities, since 2001. Of course, that is not because the terrorists have been quiet. In fact, by one analysis this year, ISIS-K planned 21 external plots or attacks in 9 countries in the previous 12 months alone, compared to just 3 between 2018 and the spring of 2022. The ODNI annual threat assessment was forced to acknowledge that ``terrorists will maintain an interest in conducting attacks . . . against U.S. persons, allies, and interests worldwide.'' Indeed, America's retreat from Afghanistan has invited violence elsewhere, from the resurgence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, to the AQAP in Yemen, to al-Qaida affiliates across the Sahel. And then there is Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah and the Houthis and Iraqi terrorist groups, all of whom have been trained and equipped, aided and abetted, by the world's most active state sponsor of terror--Iran. Hamas's attack on October 7 is described as Israel's September 11. Relative to population, it was actually September 11 15 times over. It was the deadliest day for the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and it wouldn't have been possible without the involvement of Tehran. The chaos stemming from this genocidal assault and the violent choreography by the IRGC of attacks on Israel and U.S. interests across the region are evidence of the failure of this administration's passive, accommodating approach to Iran and its terrorist proxies. America's weakness and hesitation will not deter our adversaries. Withholding critical assistance from partners on the frontlines will not defeat them. This is true in Israel just as it is true in Ukraine. There is no doubt that allies, partners, and adversaries in Asia and elsewhere are watching a tentative America pull its punches. They are questioning our resolve and our commitment to our friends. If we are unwilling to change Iran's calculus and compel an end to attacks on American forces in Iraq and Syria or international vessels on the high seas and if we are unwilling to stand with partners like Israel or Ukraine, can we be trusted to stand up to the PRC? Twenty-three years ago, a dangerous world struck America here at home. We must not wait for today's threats to do the same.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, as students head back to school, college campuses across the country are hoping this academic year begins more calmly than the last one ended. Back in May, the tantrums of campus radicals made some elite schools so inhospitable to learning, particularly for Jewish students, that administrators were driven to cancel commencement ceremonies. Since then, Columbia University's president has resigned, along with three deans who were put on notice for anti-Semitic comments made about a panel on Jewish life on campus back in May. These are, of course, steps in the right direction for an Ivy League institution that professes--professes--a commitment to ``thoughtful, rigorous debate'' and a campus culture ``free of bigotry, intimidation, and harassment,'' but Columbia and other universities have a great deal of work still to do to earn back the trust of students, parents, and alumni alike. Other recent personnel decisions actually inspire less confidence. Remember, for example, the Columbia doctoral student who served as the unofficial spokesperson of the violent Hamasnik mob that forcefully occupied a campus building? In between her studies of Marxist poetry, she demanded that campus officials provide the trespassers with food and water. Months later, she is now scheduled to teach a required course for undergraduates on nothing less than contemporary Western civilization. So the decline in the Ivy League's academic rigor is well-documented, but it would seem that, at a bare minimum, its instructors ought to be able to distinguish between civilization and barbarism and to act accordingly. A survey conducted over the summer by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression found that 72 percent of college students agreed that, in at least rare circumstances, it could be acceptable for students to have an encampment as part of a campus protest, and more than one-third agree that it would be acceptable to deface school property. I have to wonder whether a survey of the parents of college students or, for that matter, the campus staff who clean up their misbehavior, wouldn't paint a different picture. Unfortunately, what used to be a reliable path to the middle class appears to have turned into a breeding ground for childish radicalism. Fortunately, this radicalism may begin to face limits to its own upward mobility. Earlier this year, over a dozen Federal judges described Columbia as an ``incubator of bigotry''; declared that they had ``lost confidence in Columbia as an institution of higher education''; and announced that they will not hire law clerks from Columbia Law School until it undertakes serious reforms. Predictably, this news is met with howling from liberal busybodies. In fact--get this--a State prisoner even filed an ethics complaint against a number of judges. Apparently, the left would have the signs outside America's courthouses read: ``Hate must have a home here.'' Fortunately, Chief Judge Richman of the Fifth Circuit wasn't having it. She observed in her opinion dismissing a complaint that ``judges . . . have discretion to refuse to hire law clerks who graduated from a university that does not foster what the judges believe to be important aspects of higher education, such as viewpoint diversity and tolerance and differing viewpoints.'' Indeed. Columbia would do well to heed these judges' warning, and their colleagues on the bench would do well to heed their example. Meanwhile, the Biden-Harris administration hasn't skipped a beat in ensuring that taxpayer dollars go toward subsidizing the post-modern indoctrination on display in so many American towns. Over the summer, the Supreme Court upheld a stay on the administration's SAVE plan. But the administration still won't take no for an answer, pushing forward with yet another version of student loan socialism. Last week, the scheme hit another roadblock in Federal court. Remember, the Penn-Wharton model has estimated that previous iterations of this scheme would have cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. Even left-leaning think tanks have criticized student loan socialism for the regressive nature of its beneficiaries. But the Biden-Harris administration, like the Marxists of Morningside Heights, keep coming back for more.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I need to begin today by addressing a shooting that took place along I-75 in southeastern Kentucky this past weekend. My office is in close contact with local law enforcement as their search for the perpetrator continues. Elaine and I are grateful for their swift efforts to protect the surrounding communities, and we are holding those who were injured in this senseless violence in our prayers.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent I be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today, as the Senate prepares to leave town for the August State work period, the Democratic leader has decided to squeeze in one more vote that isn't ready for prime time. To our colleagues on the Finance Committee--and to anyone paying attention in recent months--it has been clear that the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act that Chairman Wyden wrote with the House needed some serious revisions in order to earn 60 votes here in the Senate. We don't need a vote today to tell us that is still the case. Colleagues on this side of the aisle have serious unresolved concerns. They don't like how more than 90 percent of the supposed benefits of the bill, as written, come as a $30 billion expansion of cash welfare, instead of relief for working taxpayers. They are concerned about how it would weaken the work requirements tied to those benefits under current law. For a bill with the potential to so seriously impact working Americans, one might expect its proponents to engage seriously on resolving obstacles to bipartisan support. You might have expected the chairman of the Finance Committee or the Democratic leader to provide regular order, to schedule a markup, to give this bill a shot at actually passing the Senate, but, alas, you would be wrong. Of course, months without progress on this front aren't for lack of effort from Ranking Member Crapo, and I am grateful for his dedication to addressing Republican concerns. Today's vote doesn't seem to be intended to produce a legislative outcome. In fact, the Democratic leader himself admitted this week that even losing the vote would still be a political benefit for vulnerable Senate Democrats running for reelection. Well, I am not so certain the American people are impressed by message votes, and I don't think they give out points for incomplete work.

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, it has been less than 2 weeks since President Biden's name was removed from the Democratic Party's ticket. I have already spoken about how the effort to sideline Democrats' de facto nominee robbed primary voters of their role in the electoral process. Now, as the dust settles, more and more Americans are realizing this wasn't just a process foul, it was also a massive promotion for someone with a failing record in her current job. Remember, just 2 months into their term, the President asked the Vice President--gave her the task of getting to the bottom of the surging illegal immigration at the United States-Mexico border. He called her ``the most qualified person'' to lead on this issue. So why don't we take a look at how she did. In the past 3\1/2\ years, the crisis at our southern border has made history. Border Patrol agents have recorded over 9.9 million illegal encounters. We know that nearly 2 million more have literally gotten away, and the administration's catch-and-release policies have let in over 3 million without any credible means of enforcing immigration law. What rapidly became a humanitarian crisis on Vice President Harris's watch is also a national security vulnerability of alarming proportions. Since October 2021, CBP have encountered 539 individuals on the Terror Watchlist along the southern border. The failure is vast. The facts are shocking. The numbers are staggering. But for too many American families, there is only one number that matters: the one empty chair at the dinner table. For some families, that chair is empty because an illegal immigrant killed their loved one. For many more, it is empty because Chinese manufacturers and Mexican cartels have exploited the chaos at the border and made fentanyl the leading cause of death for American adults. And yet--yet--in the face of pain and suffering, the administration's point person on the border has approached this crisis with profound unseriousness. It took the Vice President months to get around to visiting the border. When asked why she hadn't made time to see the effects of the administration's open border policies firsthand, she quipped that she had not been to Europe either. Sometimes, instead of deflection, she has employed outright denial. For example, she said: We have a secure border. Another example: [E]verything . . . is going rather smoothly. Of course, years earlier, under an administration that took border security seriously, then-Senator Harris found plenty of time to elaborate on her aversion to that commonsense policy. In 2017, when a Federal judge blocked the previous administration's effort to deny Federal funding to sanctuary cities, she reacted as follows: It's fantastic, I'm jumping up and down. Put five exclamation points after what I just said. Democrats are poised to nominate someone with a long record of being dead wrong on securing American borders. So perhaps it is not surprising that their immediate allies are working overtime to absolve the Vice President of responsibility for the undeniable crisis that has unfolded on her watch. Last week, we read headlines like: ``No, Kamala Harris Is Not The `Border Czar.''' And claims that ``the Vice President's role was more limited.'' After the short hiatus of asking tough questions about President Biden's fitness for office, the legacy media are back in the business of papering over Democratic vulnerabilities, even in this case if it means blatantly gaslighting the public. But at the end of the day, the American people know what neglect looks like. Families missing loved ones know what this sort of catastrophic failure feels like, and in November, I expect they will have plenty to say about it.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on another matter, the Senate is about to leave Washington for the August State work period. When we come back, Senate Democrats will face a daunting list of judges that the Biden-Harris administration will want them to confirm. There is Adeel Mangi and his record of bumping elbows with terrorist apologists and advocates for cop killers. There is Kevin Ritz and Karla Campbell, both the nepotistic beneficiaries of corrupt bargains between the Biden-Harris administration and the judges they would replace. There is Julia Lipez, another nepotism hire, who has distinguished herself in her leniency toward a parent who killed their baby with fentanyl. There is Embry Kidd, who went soft on sex abusers and then misled the Judiciary Committee about it. There is Ryan Park, the self-described ``tip of the spear'' of progressive activism, who fought hard to let colleges discriminate illegally against Asian applicants. There is Sparkle Sooknanan, whose nomination Congressman Velazquez called ``an insult to the people of Puerto Rico.'' And then there is Mustafa Kasubhai who has advocated incorporating-- listen to this--Marxist theory into property law. So as our Democratic colleagues head out of town, I would suggest that they consider whether the radical goals of the Biden-Harris judicial project are really worth it.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the Senate is preparing to leave town for the August State work period, but there is no mistaking that our most important business here in Washington remains unfinished. Let's take a look at how the Senate has spent its summer so far. In June, the Democratic leader called up a series of show votes, spending precious floor time on what Senate Democrats seemed to have thought would be political home runs. Instead, they gave Republicans the opportunity to reiterate our support for Americans hoping to start families. In June, it was the month of fearmongering. July was the month of giving unqualified nominees lifetime promotions to the Federal bench. Take Nancy Maldonado, unfortunately now a Federal judge on the Seventh Circuit. This is the judge infamous for letting her work pile up and blaming her clerks for lack of time management. It is particularly ironic that Senate Democrats chose to procrastinate on their most urgent responsibilities by confirming a nominee with a nearly unparalleled record of judicial procrastination. Congress has real work in front of us, some of which really should be behind us by now--from the National Defense Authorization Act, to the farm bill, to annual appropriations. Our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee reported the NDAA by an overwhelming bipartisan vote over a month ago, but so far, the Democratic leader hasn't come close to putting this must-pass authorizing legislation out here on the floor. Of course, urgent national security priorities won't fund themselves, either. The Senate hasn't cleared a Defense appropriations bill or any other government funding, for that matter. Well, at least the fiscal 2025 appropriations have been written. The farm bill that is supposed to help America's growers and producers succeed doesn't even exist yet. Apparently, it is just a twinkle in Chair Stabenow's eye. The American people sent us here to do a job, and a show-vote summer can't hide the fact that Senate Democrats' majority isn't earning its keep.