Bob Menendez

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, it is a fear that one should have as to who gets the microphone last, but nonetheless, no need to fear. I think that statement about better looking is a Pinocchio on your part, in any event. But I will stop before I get called out of order. Madam President, it is with great urgency that I come to the floor to urge support for the confirmation of Julien Xavier Neals to be a U.S. district court judge in New Jersey. My distinguished colleague, who knows Mr. Neals extraordinarily well, can speak to all the elements of him as a human being, as a lawyer, and as someone who was a judge at one level and, in fact, can be and will be an extraordinary district court judge. We are known in New Jersey as having one of the busiest courts in the entire country. As of last year, more than 46,000 cases were pending before it, many of them among the most complex and challenging cases in the Nation. Yet multiple judicial vacancies on the court have led the Judicial Conference of the United States to declare a judicial emergency. The court is short-staffed by a third, leaving each of our seated judges with a mind-boggling caseload of 2,700 pending cases. That is a caseload more than three times higher than the national average. Fortunately, this week, the Senate has an opportunity to begin alleviating this judicial emergency by confirming Julien Neals to the U.S. District Court in New Jersey. Mr. Neals is an outstanding nominee who has devoted his entire career to the practice of law in my home State of New Jersey. Throughout his three decades in the legal profession, he has served in many diverse roles. Every step of the way, he has impressed those around him with his integrity, sound judgment, and commitment to equal justice and fair administration of the law. He clerked on the Superior Court of New Jersey, practiced civil rights, employment discrimination, and intellectual property law as an associate and partner of a Secaucus-based firm. He served the city of Newark during my distinguished colleague Senator Booker's time as the mayor of that great city of Newark and since 2015 has worked as counsel for Bergen County, the most populous county in all of New Jersey. As you heard, my colleague still speaks glowingly of Mr. Neals' achievements during his time as chief judge of the Newark Municipal Court, how he improved the efficiency and the culture of the institution, created the first community court in the State of New Jersey, and in less than 2 years presided over more than 6,000 cases, while supervising 11 full-time judges. There is no doubt in my mind that Mr. Neals will be an asset to the U.S. District Court in New Jersey as it emerges from this pandemic and works to reduce its backlog of pending cases. He is qualified, and he was qualified to serve on the Federal bench back in 2015 when President Obama first nominated him to the U.S. District Court in New Jersey. Unfortunately, the politics of the time didn't get him a vote, and he is even more qualified today. Mr. Neals already commands enormous respect in our legal community. From serving on the Supreme Court of New Jersey's Committee on Character and Fitness to serving as chairman for the Volunteer Lawyers for Justice, he personifies the meaning of public service. His tremendous breadth of experience, even temperament, and sound judgment make him a superb candidate to serve on the Federal bench. Clearly our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee here in the Senate came to the same conclusion when they reported him out of committee by a large bipartisan margin. New Jerseyans have waited too long for the Senate to fill this vacancy, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to confirm Mr. Julien Neals without further delay. I am thrilled to join my colleague from New Jersey in advocating for him and especially thankful to the junior Senator from New Jersey for advancing his name so that justice can be realized in the State of New Jersey. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to waive all existing time and move towards the vote.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I like calling the Presiding Officer ``Mr. President.'' Let me appreciate the Presiding Officer's support about what I am going to speak today to address one of the most significant foreign policy challenges of our time, which is the U.S.-China relationship; a challenge that the Senate, I believe, is ready to meet with bold, bipartisan action. Just weeks ago, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee made history when we passed the Strategic Competition Act of 2021 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 21 to 1. This historic, bipartisan legislation is clear-eyed about the challenges we face, and it is designed to meet this consequential moment in U.S.-China relations. Over the past few years, China has accelerated its rise to power and sharpened its efforts to undermine the liberal international order that brought the American people and our allies so much prosperity and stability in the 20th century. We invited China to be engaged in the international order. We invited them into the World Trade Organization. We invited them into an international forum. We opened markets with them, all with the expectation that China, by being ultimately invited into the international order, would be part of the international order. Unfortunately, instead of playing by the rules, China, under Xi Jinping, has sought to undermine them. Today, China is challenging the United States across every dimension of power--political, diplomatic, economic, innovation, military, even cultural--and advancing an alternative and deeply disturbing model for global governance based on old-fashioned military antagonism, predatory economic practices, and digital authoritarianism. The breathtaking scope, scale, and urgency of these challenges demands a policy and strategy that is genuinely competitive. Because of China's actions, the national security and economic future of the United States depends on framing our relationship with China today through the lens of strategic competition. This is not about a zero-sum relationship or resurrecting a cold war mentality. This is about recognizing that in the 21st century, our strategic competition will revolve around the geo-economics of the future and America's ability to successfully compete in new and emerging technologies and other hotly contested domains. This is about securing a regional and international order for the 21st century built on progressive values, one that encourages healthy and fair economic competition, promotes global security and stability, and strengthens human rights around the world. So how do we achieve this vision? Ranking Member Risch and I incorporated input from almost every member of the committee to build the Strategic Competition Act. I believe the Presiding Officer had amendments as well, which mobilizes all of our strategic, economic, and diplomatic tools to clearly confront the challenges China possesses to our national and economic security. So I am eager to see the Strategic Competition Act move on the floor, alongside the other pieces of this package, recognizing, as I have for years, that America's ability to compete with China begins at home, replenishing the sources of our national strength. That is why the investments in the Endless Frontier Act provisions and the other domestic measures drafted by various committees are equally important. But even if we did all of those things alone, it would not meet our challenge with China because, first and foremost, China is a foreign policy challenge. That is why the Strategic Competition Act reaffirms our alliances and partnerships. It prioritizes building functional, problem-solving regional architecture in our Indo-Pacific strategy. Every witness we had before the committee, as we prepared for this legislation, said, You have to get your Indo-Pacific strategy right in order to be able to meet the challenge of China under Xi Jinping. It promotes U.S. leadership within international organizations. It counters malign efforts by the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party to influence those institutions, and it grounds our foreign policy in American values by authorizing a broad range of human rights and civil society measures to address abuses in Xinjiang with ethnic Uighurs and to demonstrate our commitment to the people of Hong Kong, Tibet, and China's civil society. It counters China's predatory economic practices by addressing their rampant intellectual property theft and unfair state subsidies. It helps other countries work together to counter China's corrupt practices. China goes throughout the world holding itself out as being generous to nations in Africa and Latin America and elsewhere, but what it ends up being is a debt trap of diplomacy where these countries become hostage to China--not only economically, but then, in a transactional basis, China says, Well, you can't recognize Taiwan anymore; or China says, You have to vote with us at the U.N. Human Rights Commission and a whole host of other international forums. And it bolsters U.S. economic statecraft, those economics tools we can deploy to advance our foreign policy goals like investing in supply chain security, infrastructure development, digital connectivity, and cyber security. Now, I do want to take a couple of minutes today to directly address an emerging line of criticism I have heard that this bill is somehow seeking to ignite a new cold war with China. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reality is that for more than 40 years, the United States has sought to draw China into the international community as a responsible stakeholder. But any clear and accurate assessment of China's behavior and, particularly, its behavior in recen years under the hypernationalist leadership of Xi Jinping suggests that simply continuing down that path would only result in disaster for the United States, for China, and for the entire world. Let's just review some of China's actions. China is committing genocide in Xinjiang against the Uighur people through forced labor. China has dismissed, out of hand, the ruling of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea with regards to its excessive maritime claims in the South China Sea, which it is militarily building up on and trying to intercede in the rightful passage of nations in the South China Sea. China has walked away from the commitments it made to respect intellectual property rights. China has chosen to betray its legally binding obligations and its own commitments to the people of Hong Kong, crushing ``one country, two systems'' and the vibrant democracy, economic activity, and autonomy of the people of Hong Kong. China refuses to respect the religious, cultural, and linguistic autonomy of the Tibetan people and is seeking to subvert the religious succession of His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. China is using its Belt and Road Initiative to exploit lesser developed economies to its own advantage. China threatens the efforts of the international community to deal with climate change by building more coal-fired power plants at a rate that outpaces the rest of the world. So we must empower Americans, our partners, and our allies to protect against these egregious efforts to undermine human rights, security, and our environment. We simply cannot turn a blind eye to China's actions or wish it into becoming a better international actor. Now, I realize that in discussing the Strategic Competition Act, I laid out a laundry list of big, structural policy issues with China that we will need to confront as a nation, but it is essential that the United States meets this moment if we hope to build a more perfect world, one that reflects our cherished commitment to free societies, free markets, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, and the dignity of all humankind. At the end of the day, that is what this Strategic Competition Act is all about. So I look forward to a robust debate and discussion with my colleagues over the next week or two about how to restructure and rework U.S. policy towards China so that we can be, after far too long, genuinely competitive. Together, we have to ensure the United States reclaims our place as a leader of nations and a force for good in a chaotic and increasingly complex world. Middle East Mr. President, now, on another note, I know we have great challenges in the world. We are having a great challenge in the Middle East. I would just simply say that I am not a fan of having resolutions brought to the floor of the Senate without the appropriate consideration of the committee of jurisdiction--in this case, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--so that informed, deliberate debate and consensus agreements come together in the best pursuit of foreign policy. It is easy to get caught up in the passions of the moment. It is much more difficult to think about what is the right policy and procedure and action the United States should take in any given part of the world. So I know there is a bunch of resolutions that are being flown around--none of which have gone to the committee--some that have merit in each and every dimension but also have challenges. They fall short of what I think would need to be done, and I would urge colleagues to, particularly at this moment, have restraint, and I would urge the ability for the committee to be able to consider what is the appropriate course of action, whether it be at this time or any other time, as our Nation faces global challenges. I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I think I will get done before, but, in case, I ask unanimous consent to be able to finish my statement before the vote.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for the nomination of Ambassador Samantha Power to be our next Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Ambassador Power's qualifications for this position are beyond dispute. Her lifelong commitment to protecting human rights and preventing global atrocities, combined with the foreign policy experience she gained during the Obama administration, make her impeccably qualified for this role. I want to highlight, in particular, her leadership on the international effort to end genocide. Our struggle against these horrific crimes is ongoing and unrelenting. Like Ambassador Power, I was proud to see the Biden administration formally recognize the Armenian genocide, a recognition by the U.S. Government that was long overdue. Ambassador Power's intellect, energy, and focus will be an enormous asset to USAID in the Administration's efforts to end poverty around the world, help victims of conflict, improve food security, and build the kind of resilience that ultimately benefits the security and prosperity of the American people. This work is not easy, but it is exactly the sort of work that President Biden described in his inaugural address when he spoke of the United States as ``a strong and trusted partner for peace, progress, and security.'' It is also the work we must do to confront the immense crises we face around the world. Many of the conflicts Ambassador Power contended with during her time at the United Nations continue today. New conflicts, as we know, are brewing in Ethiopia, Haiti, and Burma, and creating hundreds of thousands of innocent victims and refugees. Climate change is increasing food insecurity, intensifying natural resource scarcity, and beginning to drive mass migration. And, of course, the COVID-19 pandemic is an ever-evolving threat, and its proliferation around the world will continue to endanger our public health here at home. As long as there is a COVID-19 virus anywhere, it can be everywhere. We cannot hermetically seal off our Nation. That is why this particular role of USAID is going to be increasingly important. As we reengage with our partners in the world to meet these challenges, Ambassador Power will play a critical role. I am confident her experience, tenacity, and drive to build a better, more prosperous, peaceful world are exactly what USAID and our country need at this moment. I urge all of my colleagues to support Ambassador Power's successful confirmation. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the United States Climate Leadership on International Mitigation, Adaptation, and Technology Enhancement Act of 2021--the U.S. CLIMATE Act. Mr. President, climate change represents a clear and present threat to the stability, security and prosperity of nations around the world, including the United States. The cost of climate-induced disasters becomes more indisputable and devastating with every passing year. Barring swift and ambitious action, the situation will only worsen. We've all seen the devastating impacts of climate change. For years, unprecedented tropical storms have destroyed communities in Mozambique, Central America, and the United States, including communities in my home state of New Jersey. This past February, incredibly abnormal and brutal winter weather, exacerbated by climatic disruption to the Arctic's polar vortex, killed eleven people and left thousands in Texas without power and water. Less than a year prior, deadly wildfires, exacerbated by climate change engulfed California, killing 31 people, and Australia, killing 34 people, and forced thousands to flee their homes and lose their livelihoods. And yet, while hurricanes and storm surges are horrific, climate change is also increasing the intensity, length and geographic expanse of droughts around the world contributing to food insecurity, natural resource scarcity and desertification. Likewise, intensifying effects of climate change pose an existential threat to hundreds of millions of people and exacerbate global forced migration. Nations like Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia are incredibly vulnerable to mass displacement due to rising sea levels. Island nations like Tuvalu, Seychelles, the Republic of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati are already managing internal migration due to climate change induced sea-level rise. Without ambitious action to both keep global leverage temperatures well below an increase of two degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels it is forecasted that the entirety of certain nations may become uninhabitable within my grandchildren's lifetime. It is a moral imperative for the Senators in this body, and humanity, to act to ensure that is not the world we leave for the generations that will come after us. Today's generations are the first people to personally and regularly experience the effects of climate change on the natural world and its impact on humanity . . . and we are also the last generations that can, and must, act to prevent the worst forecasts from becoming reality. Changing climate and weather patterns intensification of global food insecurity and resource scarcity especially threaten the lives and security of the world's most vulnerable populations. For months, heavy rainfall and warmer temperatures have triggered a locust plague in East Africa that has lasted more than an entire year. This historic locust plague--triggered by conditions exacerbated by climate change--has threatened agricultural and pastoral livelihoods and worsened already acute food insecurity in the region. At the same time, similar extreme weather patterns are expected to expand and shift the ranges of life- threatening diseases like malaria, West Nile Virus, cholera, and others. Beyond the palpable destruction and devastation of climate- induced crises, climate change is a ``threat multiplier,'' a term coined by the CNA Corporation's Military Advisory Board in 2007 to express the way in which climate change exacerbates instability; conflict and subsequent displacement; terrorism; and other vital security matters. Clearly, climate change does not begin nor end at any nation's borders. No one is immune to the effects of climate change--which is why we must not only work with the rest of the world to combat this crisis, but lead the charge. It is simply not enough to enact robust domestic policies--this is a global problem that requires internationally collaborative solutions. What's more, our leadership and renewed international engagement can generate opportunities for Americans. By committing to international agreements and adhering to emerging international production norms, we are opening the global markets for the innovation, ingenuity, and leadership of the American private sector. I commend the Biden administration's commitment to returning the United States to the global stage, thereby granting us the capacity to reengage and lead the international community in tackling the greatest threat of our time. President Biden's Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad has designated climate action as a core tenant of U.S. diplomacy and national security planning. He has appointed former Secretary of State John Kerry as Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, ensuring that climate considerations have a strong advocate where important decisions are being made. And, under the leadership of President Biden, the United States has officially rejoined the Paris Agreement. The time for debate and discussion on why and how we must tackle this crisis is over. The science is clear: we must achieve net zero emissions by 2050 in order to ensure a safe and prosperous future for ourselves and our posterity. Now is the time for action and implementation of crucial efforts to save our planet. Congress can and must do more to support the restoration of the United States' climate diplomacy and leadership. That is why I am introducing the United States Climate Leadership in International Mitigation, Adaptation, and Technological Enhancement Act, or the U.S. CLIMATE Act, of 2021, a comprehensive piece of legislation to bolster President Biden's bold commitment to U.S. climate leadership by providing resources, programs and policy to support and expedite the realization of United States action that will be essential to regaining the international community's trust and partnership with the U.S. in the global climate fight. It represents a bold course of action that Congress should take to support forward-looking leadership in the White House in their commitment to preventing the worst-case scenarios of climate change from becoming reality. Title I of the bill establishes climate change as a cross-cutting imperative at the State Department. It also calls for the integration of climate models and forecasting into national security planning across all federal agencies and features directives on protecting our security and environmental interests in the Arctic. Title II declares support for U.S. cooperation and engagement in international agreements. This includes directives on re-entry into the Paris Agreements; ratification of the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocols; compliance with environmental initiatives of the International Civil Aviation Organization; and the establishment of new international efforts to mitigate transportation sector and greenhouse gas emissions. Title III integrates climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts into a range of tools and initiatives at USAID, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of State, the DFC, and the United Nations. Title IV incorporates a clean energy mandate into the United States' diplomatic and development efforts, thereby protecting our own energy security interests and promoting responsible global energy production. Title V of the bill addresses the United States' bilateral and multilateral engagement on climate change, encouraging U.S. cooperation with China, India, the European Union and other key partners. Title VI of the U.S. CLIMATE Act integrates our colleague from Hawai'i, Senator Hirono's Women and Climate Change Act, which acknowledges and addresses the disproportionate effects of climate change on women and girls around the world. The science is clear: we are running out of time to stave off the most devastating effects of climate change that will directly impact our children and our children's children. After four years of being absent from the conversation, it is time for the United States to not only return to the table, but lead the charge to protect our shared home. We cannot solve this crisis alone--this is not an American problem, this is a global crisis that can only be combatted with coordinated, international action. The U.S. CLIMATE Act of 2021 provides the essential resources, programs, and support for the United States to lead the world forward in the existential fight to save our planet. Mr. President I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the legislation be printed in the Record following my remarks, I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. So ordered.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, the Committee on Foreign Relations has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 117th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Risch, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I come to the floor in honor of an historic occasion: the 200th anniversary of Greece's independence. I am delighted to join the Greek-American community in New Jersey and across the United States in celebrating this bicentennial. The bonds of friendship between the United States and Greece are unbreakable, and as I stand here, in the center of American democracy, I am reminded of the strength of the shared democratic values on which our long partnership is based. Greece has made incredible contributions to the world, not least of which is developing the ideals of democracy and rule of law that inspired our Founding Fathers to establish our American system of government. The very architecture of the Capitol building is a tribute to the foundational role Greece played in the shaping of our democracy and society. The democratic ideals developed in ancient Greece continue to motivate Americans and people around the world today. The people of the United States in turn worked to support the people of Greece as they began their own struggle for independence 200 years ago. American Philhellene Committees, comprised of ordinary Americans, sprung up to support the Greek fight for freedom through fundraising and humanitarian assistance. Members of Congress, including Daniel Webster applauded ``the struggle of an interesting and gallant people . . . contending against fearful odds . . . for the common privilege of human nature.'' In a letter to Greek scholar Adamantios Koraes, whose work formed the intellectual basis for the Greek independence struggle, Thomas Jefferson demonstrated his support by writing that ``no people sympathise more feelingly than ours with the sufferings of your countrymen, none offer more sincere and ardent prayers to heaven for their success.'' Several American Philhellenes traveled to Greece to assist the Greek people more directly. Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe, who later became a prominent voice in America's fight to end slavery, served with the Greek army as a surgeon and a soldier. Jonathan Peckham Miller, another future noted abolitionist, also served in the Greek army. George Jarvis fought alongside the Greek people, as well as working to provide food, medicine, and clothing to those who needed it with the support of the American Philhellene Committees. The bonds between the peoples and governments of Greece and the United States have lasted throughout our countries' long history and are stronger than ever today. Greece is an invaluable partner to the United States as a NATO member, as an EU member, and in promoting peace and stability in the Balkans and the Eastern Mediterranean region. Greece's unwavering commitment to democracy and the rule of law makes it a truly reliable ally in the region and an increasingly critical one as we face the challenges of the 21st century. I am proud that Congress demonstrated its support for further boosting U.S.-Greece cooperation and U.S. support for the Greece- Cyprus-Israel trilateral, with the passage of the Eastern Mediterranean Security and Energy Partnership Act a little over a year ago. Ensuring full implementation of this act is one of my priorities as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. The past few years have seen critical developments in U.S.-Greece relations. I am grateful to the leadership of officials in both countries whose work has helped U.S.-Greece ties reach their strongest level ever, including Ambassador Geoff Pyatt, and I look forward to building on their fantastic efforts in the months and years to come. This 200th anniversary of Greece's independence truly is a time to celebrate: a time to celebrate Greece's hard-won freedom; a time to celebrate the bonds between our peoples, and especially the many contributions Greek Americans have made to this country; and a time to celebrate our countries' shared history and democratic values, which will be the basis of our countries' cooperation for years to come. This week, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously approved a resolution congratulating the people of Greece on the 200th anniversary of their independence. I am grateful to Senator Barrasso for joining me in leading this resolution and to my many Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have cosponsored this resolution. With the passage of this resolution every year, Congress-- and, through us, the American people--send a clear message of support for the Greek people and our countries' enduring partnership. Greece's 200th independence anniversary serves not only as a reminder of our countries' long friendship, but also as a time for us to look to build on that history and strengthen our partnership for generations to come. The Eastern Mediterranean region and the world face unprecedented challenges, and growing the U.S.-Greece relationship is more critical than ever for our shared security and stability. I look forward to working with the people of Greece and the Greek-American community to make the vision of an even stronger U.S.-Greece relationship a reality.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Further parliamentary inquiry: Is there a limit on time divided by side or is the floor open regardless?

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I come to the floor today to discuss yesterday's report from the Intelligence Committee, a public report, which confirmed what we all suspected last year: that the Russian Federation favored Donald Trump's reelection and sought to influence the outcome by amplifying attacks on Joe Biden and his family. While the scale of interference appears to be less than what we saw in 2016, the receptiveness of Trump's inner circle appears to have been about the same. They were open for business. I am not here to relitigate the 2016 or 2020 elections; I am here to raise my concern with the fact that, for two election cycles in a row now, the Republican Party's nominee for President sought to normalize foreign interference in our elections. And I want to be clear. It is wrong, it is hostile, it is undemocratic, and it must stop if you want the American people to have the confidence in the legitimacy and the credibility of our elections going forward. This is not about party; this is about the durability of our democracy. Everyone in this body has an important role to play in rejecting foreign interference and restoring trust in our election process. While the contents of the report came as no surprise, its findings were nonetheless breathtaking. Our intelligence community is highly confident--the highest assessment they have on any given issue--in its assessment that Vladimir Putin was involved in the operation whereby Andrii Derkach and Konstantin Kilimnik successfully manipulated President Trump's inner circle, including his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani. Thankfully, the American people had better sense than Mr. Giuliani and rejected the Kremlin-backed lies about Joe Biden and his family. That, however, does not diminish the fact that the Russian Government undertook this effort and the former President welcomed it. The Russian interference detailed in this report occurred at the very same time the Trump administration sought to publicly downplay the role played by Russia. This report was mandated by Congress and for good reason. Americans deserve to know exactly who is interfering in our democracy and how. As I said before, everyone has a role to play, including the American people. We have to encourage Americans to practice better cyber security and to scrutinize the information they see on the web. Carefully examining social media posts before sharing them must become the new hallmark of a patriotic, active, and informed citizenry. And our social media companies must do a better job stopping the proliferation of foreign disinformation on their platforms. The health of our democracy depends on this vigilance. The Kremlin will continue to attack our elections and seek to sow divisions among us. We have a responsibility to resist this interference and not make their job any easier. We live in a media environment where Donald Trump and his Republican allies continue to this day to promote unhinged conspiracy theories that the election was stolen. The intelligence report confirms this is not true. Some Republican officials have promoted wild conspiracy theories that China supported Democratic campaigns. The intelligence report confirms this was not true. Former President Trump and his allies still assert that Venezuela manipulated voting machines. A companion report by the Department of Justice and Homeland Security confirmed this is not true. We must come to terms with the fact that while Russia has aggressively promoted disinformation in our country, the most pernicious engine of lies in the United States is cast by the former President himself. Knowing the facts sets a foundation for action, and I look forward to engaging with this administration on measures to respond to our intelligence community's findings. There should be sanctions required in response to this interference, and the administration should move quickly to impose them. I welcome the approach thus far by the Biden administration as it crafts a Russia policy that calls out Kremlin aggression when it happens and takes strong measures in response. The sanctions imposed in response to the Navalny assassination attempt demonstrate that such reckless and dangerous behavior will not be tolerated. And our efforts to hold the Kremlin accountable will include close coordination with our European allies. The package of sanctions announced on March 2 shows how committed the Biden administration is to confronting Kremlin aggression. This type of rigor in the development of sanctions packages is a welcome reminder of how our government should work. The Navalny sanctions were a good first step, and I look forward to soon seeing the results of the administration's review of Russia policy. In my view, we need a strategy that accomplishes four main goals. One, limiting the Kremlin's ability to interfere in our democracy as well as those of our allies and partners. This includes a comprehensive plan to counter Russian-generated propaganda and corruption around the world. Two, standing up for our friends in Ukraine who are literally on the frontlines battling Kremlin aggression. They need our diplomatic support in Europe. They need our security assistance to defend themselves. They need our encouragement to reform democratic institutions. I hope that President Biden will soon speak with President Zelensky to send these important messages. Three, we have a responsibility to engage with the Russian Government when it is in our national security interests. I supported the extension of the New START agreement and urge the administration to continue to advance arms control policies that advance stability and our national security. Finally, our Russia policy must extend a hand to the Russian people, many of whom have courageously turned out by the thousands in opposition to Putin and his government. Their struggle for democracy is theirs, not ours, but we must make clear that our disagreements are not with them but with Vladimir Putin and his corrupt, autocratic regime. Defending our elections isn't just about strong cyber measures, protecting the ballot box, and promoting better practices on social media. It is about having a foreign policy that clearly communicates our values and interests, one that leaves no room for debate over the openness of any American President to foreign interference. It is about a foreign policy that recognizes how the Kremlin's efforts to weaken democracy in Ukraine or in other European countries ultimately threatens democracy here in the United States. It is about a foreign policy that works with allies and partners, not one that denigrates them at every turn. The intelligence community is getting better at detecting and guarding against interference, but we must remain vigilant. Russia and other foreign actors will continue to attack our democratic process. Their tactics may evolve, but their intentions remain the same, and we need to stay one step ahead of them. The Biden administration is off to a good start in defending our democracy. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, I look forward to working together to advance policies that reflect America's time-honored democratic values both at him and abroad.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I take no pleasure in coming to the floor today. We in the Senate take pride in our decorum and our sense of comity with each other, so much so that we often twist ourselves into pretzels to avoid saying anything that might be interpreted as a criticism of another Senator. Yet there comes a time when these verbal gymnastics simply won't do. You are either going to speak the truth or fail to do justice to the values you hold dear. What one of our colleagues said last week about the events of January 6 was felt by many to be racist and hurtful--a stain on the office he is so fortunate to hold. Look, I get that no one likes to be called racist, but sometimes there is just no other way to describe the use of bigoted tropes that for generations have threatened Black lives by stoking White fear of African Americans and Black men in particular. On a radio show, our colleague explained that he never feared for his safety during the January 6 insurrection of the U.S. Capitol. But make no mistake, under different circumstances, he would have been afraid. He said: Now, had the tables been turned--now, Joe, this will get me in trouble--had the tables been turned and President Trump won the election and those were tens of thousands of Black Lives Matter and antifa protesters, I might have been a little concerned. Is that not racism? I don't think the Senator is ignorant of the fact that for centuries in this country, White supremacy has thrived on using fear to justify oppression, discrimination, and violence against people of color. I do, however, think my colleague may be ignorant of the pain caused by his comments and unaware of how they compound the trauma that so many still feel in the wake of the events of January 6. Because I do not think I can do justice to that pain, I want to share with you an email I received this weekend. It is from one of the most devoted public servants I have ever had the pleasure of working with, an African-American member of my staff. His name is Keith Roachford. He has devoted nearly three and one-half decades to serving the people of New Jersey in Congress and his community as a faithful churchgoer and Boy Scout leader. It reads: Senator, I would not normally send you an email like this but I am at a loss of how to express the outrage and hurt I am feeling from the comments made by Senator Johnson that he would have been more afraid on January 6th if the insurrectionists would have been from Black Lives Matter. I am blessed to be on your staff and have had the opportunity to serve as a staff member in the NJ delegation for 34 years, but this is the most painful thing I have ever heard being said by a US Senator. I could not imagine that the horrible and painful events from [January] 6th could be replicated in a statement from a sitting member of the Senate. However, Johnson's comment is worse than the image of the insurrectionists walking through the Capitol building with the confederate flag. He is perpetrating the racist trope that the country should fear black people. I have experienced what it is like to have a taxi cab pass you by in order to pick up white passengers who are further down the block of where you are standing. Nothing can describe the feeling when you have entered a store and having store clerks watch your every step while shopping. Sandy-- That is his wife-- and I have had the conversations with our sons when they were young about how to enter a store; not look suspicious; keep your hands out of your pockets until you make your purchase; or how to respond and talk to police officers in any interaction. I have had the difficult conversation of explaining to a young black scouter in our scout troop why a white campground store clerk accused him of not paying for an item because he was black. [This] type of hate speech is [not] new. The hardest part of what he said is that in 2021, a United States Senator would so freely express this type of hate out loud. I am so grateful for our officers who endured so many injuries on [January] 6th, and I pray that they will recover physically and mentally. They are going through so much right now, I feel guilty that my email to you might sound shallow because of the pain they are trying to overcome. I understand that the Senate works best when both sides can find common ground, but how do [you] really reach common ground when [such views can be held]? Again, I am sorry for reaching out late on Saturday evening, but I needed to share this with you. Keith. To read these pained words both broke my heart and boiled my blood. Thousands of people of color serve in the U.S. Capitol workforce. They are legislative staffers like Keith and Capitol Police officers and maintenance workers, cafeteria staff, and so much more. I should not have to stand here and remind anyone that many of them feared for their lives on January 6. But not Senator Johnson. He felt no fear. He wasn't afraid because, and I quote: I knew those are people that love this country, that truly respect law enforcement, would never do anything to break the law, so I wasn't concerned. People who love this country do not desecrate our most sacred democratic institutions and display symbols of racial hatred like the Confederate flag in the halls of Congress. People who respect law enforcement do not assault Capitol Police officers, beat them within inches of death, and hurl ugly epithets at officers of color. And people who would never do anything to break the law would not try to overturn the rule of law, plot to kill elected officials, and stop the peaceful transfer of power as instructed by the Constitution of the United States. Now, I know what some rightwing media pundits and some of my Republican colleagues will say. They say it every time they are asked to accept some responsibility for perpetuating the lies told by President Trump that inspired the violent events of January 6. They say: What about Black Lives Matter? They say: Well, what about it? Well, I say: Well, what about it? The violent picture they paint of this movement could not be more divorced from reality. At this point, several reputable studies have confirmed that the protests launched in the wake of George Floyd's chilling murder were overwhelmingly peaceful. I repeat: The Black Lives Matter movement is overwhelmingly peaceful. I know many people don't care about facts these days, but it is the truth. One study out of Harvard University analyzed 7,305 Black Lives Matter protests. The conclusion? Allow me to quote Professor Erica Chenoweth. She said: Only 3.7 percent of the protests involved property damage or [some form of] vandalism. Some portion of these involved neither police nor protesters, but people engaging in vandalism or looting alongside the protests. In short, our data suggest that 96.3 percent of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7 percent of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police. Likewise, the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project--an organization I might add is partially funded by the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations--examined 7,750 different Black Lives Matter demonstrations across the Nation last summer. They found just 3 percent of those protests associated with any violence or property destruction whatsoever. They also concluded that police departments ``disproportionately used force while intervening in demonstrations associated with the [Black Lives Matter] movement relative to other types of demonstrations.'' Indeed, on January 6, as we waited for hours for backup from the National Guard and other law enforcement agencies to come to the aid of Congress, I know that I am not the only one who could not help but think of the violent, government-sanctioned crackdowns that met Black Lives Matter protesters last summer. The bottom line is that these lies casting Black Lives Matter as violent have already done real damage. They have convinced millions of Americans that they should fear those who march under the banner of this movement for justice, when really it is the resurgence of violent White supremacy that should be Americans' real cause for alarm. Indeed, last October, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report confirming that White supremacists pose the most lethal domestic terror threat to the American people. Research from the Center for Strategic and International Studies finds that White supremacists and their sympathizers carried out two-thirds of terrorist plots and attacks in 2020. In the weeks since January 6, we have learned that far-right extremist groups that regularly preach White supremacy, such as the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, played a major role in plotting and executing the attack on the U.S. Capitol. Every Member of this body owes their life to the sacrifices made that afternoon by Capitol Police officers, including officers of color. At least 100 officers were physically injured in the January 6 attack. One officer, a veteran and fellow New Jerseyan named Brian Sicknick, later succumbed to the injuries he sustained. Two others subsequently committed suicide. Hundreds of officers now carry with them invisible scars from the trauma they endured that day--scars that may not fade for years or even decades. For one of our colleagues to cast those who attacked the Capitol as harmless patriots while stroking fear of Black Americans is like rubbing salt in an open wound. Everybody in this body should know that when you perpetuate such racist tropes, you contribute to a culture that gives people permission to treat Black Americans as suspicious and their lives as expendable. We in the Senate are supposed to hold ourselves to a higher standard. We are supposed to advance America's long march toward a more perfect Union, not coddle and cater to those who would take us backwards, and we are supposed to stand up for the truth. That is what brought me to the floor today. I hope Members of this body on both sides of the aisle will join me in making sure that we do not debase the institution and the people we are called to serve--all the people--for whom so much pain has existed for years and exists still today. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. MENENDEZ

Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.