Jack Reed

Mr. REED

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today joined by my colleague Senator Whitehouse to honor the life and legacy of Brother Michael Reis, a man who made it his mission in life to never, ever give up on any kid. Brother Michael found his vocation joining the De La Salle Christian Brothers in the 1970s, and I was privileged to be a product of a Christian Brothers High School. Like the founder of his order Saint John Baptist de La Salle, Brother Michael dedicated his life to educating and lifting up children at risk of being consigned to the margins of society in life. He began his career in New York as a math teacher but was soon drawn into the world of social work. He moved from the classroom to a residential facility for justice-involved youth. Fortunately, his journey brought him to Rhode Island, where he first worked as a chaplain at the Adult Correctional Institute. In 1974, he cofounded Ocean Tides, a residential program that provides a challenging, safe, and healthy learning environment for young men who have experienced severe educational difficulties in regular school settings and, indeed, have had other complicated social problems. Over the years, I have met many students who have been transformed by their experiences at Ocean Tides. I have had the privilege of hosting them in my Senate office and here at the Capitol. Their poise, leadership, and thoughtfulness gave me confidence in our shared future and also exemplified the remarkable contribution that Brother Michael made to our community and to these young men. He literally transformed their lives, lives that were, in many cases, headed to a very difficult, dangerous, and destructive end and now are lives that are poised for success, for contributions to the community, for a vindication of his faith in all men and women. In 1983, Brother Michael expanded his focus to support at-risk youth and their families by founding Tides Family Services, which promotes family preservation and keeping youth within their communities through individual, family, and group counseling, home visitations, educational and court advocacy, as well as the networking of social services. With a mere startup fund of $15,000, Brother Michael built an organization that employs over 140 dedicated staff and serves 500 youths a day. And when I say ``serve,'' I mean it. I have talked to these counselors. They will literally pick up young men from their homes and drive them to school so they get there and then get them back. They will counsel them. They will encourage them. They will support them. They will give them confidence in themselves so that they can succeed. It is a remarkable organization reflecting the spirit of Brother Michael, the dedication of Brother Michael, and his commitment to making sure that no child, as they say, is left behind. I was proud to secure Federal resources to support the work that Tides is doing and the families it serves. Strong families are the foundation for everything else--economic security, educational attainment, civic participation, and healthy communities. These are investments that change lives and strengthen our society. Brother Michael lived the mission of the De La Salle Christian Brothers. For over 40 years, he worked across systems, finding innovative ways to reach and support our most challenged youth and bring along partners to support this cause. His vision, tenacity, and great love of our community built two organizations that to this day are places of hope and healing for struggling youth and families. We are forever in his debt. Brother Michael left us on Sunday, September 24, 2023, but his work lives on in the lives he changed, in the institutions he built, and most importantly, in the example he left for all of us. With that, Mr. President, I would like to yield to my colleague from Rhode Island, Senator Whitehouse.

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the humanitarian crisis happening right now in the Nagorno-Karabakh region in South Caucasus. It is a tragedy unfolding before our eyes, with reports from the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees stating that over 65,000 ethnic Armenians fled to Armenia from Nagorno-Karabakh since September 23. I expect the number of refugees will continue to rise rapidly in the coming days. They need immediate humanitarian aid: food, water, shelter, and clothing. Sadly, this is not the first time in history that the Armenian people have faced this kind of violence, aggression, and worse. The Nagorno-Karabakh region has a long and complicated history. Armenia and Azerbaijan were both a part of the Soviet Union. As the USSR collapsed, conflict broke out and Armenia and Azerbaijan fought a bloody war in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It left tens of thousands of people dead, millions of civilians displaced, and the legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh in flux but under the rule of a de facto Government of the Republic of Artsakh. Violence largely stopped in 1994. However, deep tensions remain. I may be one of the few Members of this body or either Chamber of Congress who visited the region following the first Nagorno-Karabakh war. During my visit in 1997, I met with local leaders and civilians impacted by the conflict and saw firsthand the impact of the fighting. Today, we are witnessing a new tragic chapter for the people of this region as the Government of Azerbaijan is moving to not only control the territory but to drive out the ethnic Armenian population from the region in the process. I have serious concerns that this may not be the end; that the aggressors may once again subject this region to a campaign of ethnic cleansing and cultural genocide on the ethnic Armenians who remain in Nagorno-Karabakh or decide they have future territorial aspirations in the region. After years of uneasy peace, the Government of Azerbaijan began a 44- day war in 2020, seizing much of the territory around Nagorno-Karabakh. This left Nagorno-Karabakh further isolated. Russian peacekeepers, under the terms of an agreement they helped broker, were supposed to secure the Lachin corridor, which is the only humanitarian supply line between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. The Azeris asserted control over the corridor in December 2022, set up a military checkpoint, stopped the flow of commercial goods, food, and medicine, and ultimately prevented the flow of humanitarian aid to the region, setting the stage for the final set of hostilities that we saw on September 19 and the complete defeat and surrender of local security forces of Nagorno-Karabakh. I say this because it is important to recognize the actions of the Azerbaijan Government were deliberate and calculated and I believe meant to achieve the outcome we are seeing today: tens of thousands of ethnic Armenians fleeing Nagorno-Karabakh for their lives. I know the Azeris have very different feelings of the conflict and the outcome, but the United States cannot sit by and tolerate atrocities by either side in armed conflict. That cannot be the way to move forward because it does nothing to resolve differences and will never allow people and families to have any sort of reconciliation and closure after decades of conflict. In light of Azerbaijan's renewed aggression, the U.S. Government must respond. I was relieved to see the State Department and USAID announce $11.5 million for the humanitarian response that is needed in Armenia. I fear, however, this is only a small portion of the actual need so I urge additional funds be readied to support the refugees quickly. We need to do more. It is very clear the Azeris have not met the conditions for waiver of section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act. Therefore, I have called for the immediate cessation of all U.S. security assistance to Azerbaijan. My colleague Senator Whitehouse and I have pressed the State Department and the Treasury Department to use its existing authority to issue Global Magnitsky Sanctions on those responsible for the human rights abuses against the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. Given the change in the situation on the ground, I believe that the administration needs to exert more pressure and, indeed, take a more active role in ensuring that the government of Azerbaijan understands that there are consequences for its actions and that the United States is watching. The region is at an inflection point. After decades of conflict, I understand the skepticism of both sides grounded in centuries of mistrust, but the process for a durable peace has to begin somewhere. The governments in Baku and Yerevan must take this window seriously and avoid divisive and hateful rhetoric that only fans the flames of mistrust and conflict. Without it, I worry only future bloodshed will follow. I will continue my longstanding support for the Armenian people from Nagorno-Karabakh, and I call on my Senate colleagues to urge the administration to do the same. We cannot sit idly by while a nation defines the world, claims territory that is in dispute, and has a systematic policy which appears to be emerging of ethnic cleansing. We must stand up against this, and I urge all my colleagues to urge the administration to take a strong and vigorous stand against what is, I think, deplorable, despicable conduct by the government of Azerbaijan. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Madam President, I have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Madam President, many of us in this Chamber, on both sides of the aisle, work hard to govern responsibly, and we are deeply frustrated by those who are deliberately attempting to shut down the Federal Government. A fringe element of extremist House Republicans has pushed Congress to the brink of another costly, wasteful shutdown. A government shutdown of any duration would harm hard-working Americans and our economy. Shutdowns cost taxpayers billions of dollars per week. They cost businesses money. They could even cause a downgrade to the Nation's credit rating, and they force an unnecessary disruption of many vital services. Federal workers in all 50 States who perform essential work, like food inspectors, TSA agents, or park rangers, would stop getting paychecks. A Federal shutdown can halt projects and cause Federal lending to cease. Clinical trials and research at the NIH could be forced to stop. Effective programs like the Women, Infants, and Children Nutrition Program would be left in a vulnerable state. As for national defense, a government shutdown would be extremely damaging; and in the midst of the blockade of key military promotions, it would be another Republican-inflicted wound. A shutdown could halt our munitions production lines as it did in the 2013 shutdown. This would be very shortsighted--very shortsighted--at a time when we are focused on ramping up munitions production for Ukraine and with an eye on future needs in the Indo-Pacific. There are several other areas where a shutdown would be harmful. I urge my colleagues to consider the impacts of a shutdown on our military men and women, their families, and our defense civilians. Hundreds of thousands of troops could see delays in their paychecks, and many civilians could lose their contracts. If the shutdown extends, the Defense Department will have to reduce its recruiting, training, and family movement activities. A shutdown would also include delaying needed investments in military infrastructure, including barracks and childcare centers. Dozens of new projects would not go forward. This would prevent the Defense Department from effectively modernizing and investing in new programs. There could be no new starts in acquisition programs or military construction projects. Hundreds of new start efforts in procurement and R&D would be prohibited during a government shutdown. As such, the Department could be forced into funding legacy systems that are outdated and inefficient. That is simply congressionally mandated waste. As Gen. C.Q. Brown, the incoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said about a shutdown, ``All the money in the world cannot buy more time; time is irrecoverable, and when you are working to keep pace against well-resourced and focused competitors, time matters.'' We could easily avoid this outcome by passing a short-term patch while we continue working toward a broader funding agreement. I commend the leaders of the Senate Appropriations Committee--Senator Murray and Senator Collins--who hammered out the bipartisan continuing resolution before us, and also the leadership on both sides of the aisle. They have successfully reported out all 12 funding bills-- Senator Collins and Senator Murray--by wide bipartisan votes so that our appropriations process is working on a bipartisan basis and working on a reasonable and responsible basis. In fact, seven of these appropriations bills were voted out unanimously. They are well-crafted and free from policy poison pills. They fit within the bipartisan agreement among the chair, the vice chair, and the leaders on overall funding levels. More importantly, those bills meet the funding level that Speaker McCarthy demanded as the price of preventing the default of the U.S. Government just this summer. We should pass these bills, and we could pass them but for the objections of some Republican Senators who are working in concert with the House to obstruct the appropriations process from moving forward on a bipartisan basis. Their wanton nihilism is damaging our country. But we have before us a continuing resolution, or a CR, which, barring any dilatory tactics, should clear the Senate by a wide margin. I want to emphasize that this CR is nothing more than a patch. For a few more weeks, it keeps the government open; it keeps the aviation system operational and funded; it keeps the Flood Insurance Program authorized; it ensures that we will continue to take care of disaster victims throughout the country; and it will ensure that the Ukrainian people have the resources they need to win their fight for freedom. This is not extravagance; it is the bare minimum. The question is, What will House Republicans do? After creating a default crisis that brought the entire economy to the brink of disaster in June, they have accomplished virtually nothing. For months, House Republicans have only been able to pass a single funding bill. The rest of their highly partisan bills have been bottled up in committee or blocked from passing on the floor by Republicans themselves. In the midst of their palace intrigue, House conservatives seem to be trying to one-up each other with one drastic, unpopular, and irresponsible cut after the other. It seems to be a competition over whose unworkable proposal can inflict more pain. Perhaps they mistakenly believe that their extreme ideas are popular or that they will somehow hurt the President. But who suffers if title I education funding for low-income schools is cut by 80 percent? Who is harmed when 1.3 million low-income individuals are kicked out of the SNAP program and when food assistance for seniors and kids is cut by 14 percent? How do we address the lack of affordable housing when the HOME Investment Partnership is slashed by $1 billion? How does Ukraine win when Congress withholds critical funding? And let me pause here to underscore the significance of funding for Ukraine. The assistance package the President is seeking for Ukraine will provide much needed military assistance as well as aid to displaced Ukrainians whose cities and towns continue to face indiscriminate bombardment by Putin's forces. We know, if Putin is successful in seizing Ukraine, he will not stop there. Unless the United States and the international community continue to stand with Ukraine, Putin will continue to look for opportunities to inflict violence and violate the sovereignty and security of our allies and partners around the world. And if Putin succeeds because we have failed to help, our other adversaries and competitors will be emboldened too. Indeed, if Putin succeeds, he will not stop with Ukraine. He will threaten NATO countries. The bottom line, frankly, is the probability that American military personnel will be engaged in combat goes up. Frankly, one of our major missions should be to ensure, through our efforts, that that probability constantly goes down. We do not want to sacrifice American military personnel needlessly. Congress should send a strong message to Putin that we stand with the Ukrainians as they bravely fight for their homeland. This is the second manufactured crisis that House Republicans have created this year. First, they threatened to default on our Nation's debt. So President Biden sat down with the Speaker and negotiated an agreement that set spending levels for this year. Now House Republicans are walking away from that agreement and threatening to shut down the government. It won't work. The American people can see this charade, and if there is a shutdown, they will know who is responsible. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services 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. REED

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

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 351, submitted earlier today.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 352, submitted earlier today.

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

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 238.

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; that the Tester amendment at the desk to the preamble be considered and agreed to; that the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. REED

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

Mr. REED

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

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, September 20; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 4366; that the cloture motion with respect to the motion to suspend rule XVI ripen at 12:15 p.m.; further, that the Senate recess from 5 p.m. until 6:15 p.m. to allow for the all-Senators briefing.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. I ask for the yeas and nays, please.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, it is my privilege to honor a request from the former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Sam Nunn. I request unanimous consent that the following statement by former Senator Sam Nunn regarding the passing of Mr. Frank Sullivan, who was staff director of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Committee on Appropriations, be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that Mr. Sullivan's obituary be printed following Senator Nunn's statement.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise this morning to discuss the promotions of our military leaders. During the past month, I had the opportunity, as many of my colleagues did, to visit our troops overseas and around the country. As always, I was moved by their selflessness and courage, and I was impressed by the knowledge and skill of our military leaders. We ask much of our servicemembers and their families, and they deserve our gratitude and support. So although I was proud to spend time with our troops and their families this past month, I was appalled by the hardship and disrespect many of them are experiencing. While Congress had a month of recess, hundreds of military officers were denied their promotions, hundreds of military families were played as political pawns, and our national security was undermined--all because one Senator disagrees with a legal healthcare policy. For more than 6 months, the senior Senator from Alabama has blocked every senior military promotion--now totaling nearly 300 officers--in his bid to extort the Pentagon to overturn its reproductive healthcare policy. The Senator claims that he is not harming military readiness, but he is dangerously wrong. The Secretary of Defense and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have condemned his hold and described the damage he is inflicting on U.S. military leadership. Seven retired Secretaries of Defense--both Republican and Democratic--have condemned the Senator's actions and urged him to drop his hold. Just yesterday, the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force rebuked the Alabama Senator and the damage he is causing to our military readiness. As they wrote, the Senator ``has prevented the Defense Department from placing almost 300 of our most experienced and battle-tested leaders into critical posts around the world.'' Many of our most important officers are being blocked. Indeed, if you look at the photo behind me, you will see what visitors to the Pentagon encounter. Instead of a consistent group of leaders, there are notable absences. And eventually, if the Senator persists, this whole board will be full of blank spaces. We will have no effective military leadership. Three of these faces, as you noticed, are blank because of the Senator's hold. For the first time in history, the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps are without top leaders. He is blocking the confirmation of Gen. Eric Smith, the next Commandant of the Marine Corps, and GEN Randy George, the next Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army. Next week we will hold confirmation hearings for ADM Lisa Franchetti--the first female officer to be the Chief of Naval Operations--and Gen. David Allvin, the next Chief of Staff of the Air Force. The Senator has indicated he will block both of these nominations. At the end of September, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Milley, is legally required to retire. The Joint Chiefs consists of eight officers: the Chairman, the Vice Chairman, and the Service Chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau. If the Senator does not come to his senses before General Milley retires, fully half of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--our Nation's most vital military leaders--will be empty. I am concerned that the Senator does not appreciate the gravity of this situation. These positions cannot simply be filled by other officers. They can only be temporarily covered by their Vice Chiefs, who must also continue to cover their own jobs, and at this level, those jobs are 24/7. Having two 24/7 jobs is quite demanding. These are extraordinary, challenging times, and the jobs of our Vice Chiefs are just as important and challenging as those of Chief of Staff or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Senator is flirting with disaster to force these officers to fill two enormous jobs simultaneously. Dozens of key commanders are also being held. The Senator is blocking the nomination of the commander of Cyber Command, who also serves as the Director of the National Security Agency. We all know how much cyber has become an integral and perhaps decisive part of our military strategy. And to leave that position blank is to leave ourselves vulnerable to the cyber operations of multiple adversaries and criminal gangs and to leave us in a void when it comes to improving and looking forward for years ahead with vision to what we must do to be not only competitive but to be dominant in the cyber space. He is blocking the nomination of the next commander of the Navy's 7th Fleet, the largest of the Navy's forward-deployed fleets, which has responsibility for the Indo-Pacific. And, again, I hear so many times my colleagues from both sides of the aisle, but particularly from the other side, arguing about how we have to do more to protect Taiwan; we have to do more to resist Chinese incursions. One thing you don't want to do is have an ad hoc arrangement in command of this fleet, and that is exactly what we have. He is blocking the nomination of the next commander of the Navy's 5th Fleet, responsible for our naval forces in the Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf, and Arabian Sea--critical, critical points. And particularly, again, with my colleagues railing with good cause against the Iranians, if we do not have competent, consistent, confirmed leadership in that area of the world, then we are running the risk of giving an advantage to the Iranians and a disadvantage to the United States and its allies. He is blocking the nomination of the next U.S. Military Representative to NATO, who is the senior uniformed representative to NATO, during a time when NATO continues to provide critical support to Ukraine in its war against Russia and as NATO itself is expanding to counter the threats posed by Russia. When I traveled to Europe last month, I met with the leaders of the Security Assistance Group-Ukraine, or SAG-U, a newly established command dedicated to coordinating, tracking, and expediting security assistance to Ukraine. During my visit, I saw firsthand the tremendous job our forces are doing to train and equip the Ukrainians. However, I was disappointed to learn that the deputy commander of the SAG-U is being blocked from promotion by the Senator from Alabama. Not having a confirmed deputy for SAG-U during this highly complex and consequential situation is simply unacceptable. We are trying to assist the Ukrainians in defending their freedom but, more importantly, to send a signal throughout the entire world that autocracies will be defeated by democracies. And if that message is not successful, then you will see problems not just in Europe, which will become increasingly more dominated by Putin, but you will see it across the globe. In China, particularly, their lesson will be, if you just last long enough and let the divisions within the United States take hold, you will succeed. Of the 852 general and flag officers in our military, we expect that 650 of them will need to pass through the Senate for promotion or reassignment by the end of this year. An additional 110 officers will be forced to perform two jobs simultaneously or will be assigned to a temporary position as a result of the Senator's holds. Thus, nearly 90 percent of our general and flag officers--our most senior military leaders--will be affected by the Senator from Alabama's holds. He has achieved what America's enemies could only dream of: instability in the ranks of our military leadership. The U.S. military is one of the finest meritocracies in the world. Our servicemembers swear an oath to the Constitution rather than a party or leader, and they can be confident that with hard work, skill, and character, they will be successful in their military careers. Rising to the top of this meritocracy--to the rank of general or admiral--demands remarkable talent and leadership and a dedication to the military ethos of ``service above self.'' America's senior officers place faith in Congress to do its job to approve their promotions, based on merit, in a timely manner. For the Senator from Alabama to deny these officers their hard-won, merit-based promotions for his own political gain is simply disgraceful. After 6 months, it seems that neither reason nor any factor will sway him. Indeed, some of my colleagues, I believe, on the other side have offered him compromises and off-ramps, but he has rejected each one. The Senate Armed Services Committee even considered legislation to repeal the Department's policy. That legislation was rejected by the committee. Right here on the floor, the Senator had the opportunity to vote on an amendment to the NDAA that would have repealed the policy. He rejected that choice. Instead, he continues to change his demands. At this point, one has to wonder if the Senator actually wants to achieve his demands or if he just wants to stay in the spotlight. Indeed, as he recently admitted to a rightwing podcaster, ``I don't care if they promote anybody to be honest with you.'' In the same way that military officers are expected to hold each other to account, my Republican colleagues must challenge their colleague to do what they know is right. They must say publicly what they admit in private: His behavior is damaging to our national security. Many Senate Republicans know what it means to serve in uniform. I have traveled to combat zones around the world with them, and I know they understand what our servicemembers need from Congress to achieve the missions we ask of them. It is now time for Republicans to do what is right and necessary and end this blockade. Specifically, the Senator claims that the Pentagon's reproductive healthcare policy is illegal. He is wrong. The Department of Justice examined the Pentagon's policy and found it to be entirely legal, consistent with 40 years of precedent through both Republican and Democratic administrations. No lawsuits have been filed against the Department because no lawyer seriously believes the policy is illegal. Further, the Secretary of Defense and every uniformed, apolitical member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have endorsed the policy as appropriate and necessary, particularly in regard to readiness. Every institution in this country that is responsible for overseeing the Pentagon has reviewed its policy, upheld its legality, and disproved arguments to the contrary. Finally, and most disturbing, the Senator claims that he is not harming military families. He knows that isn't true. Hundreds of military families, children, and spouses cannot move to new duty stations, enroll in new schools, or seek new jobs. Hundreds of officers are facing genuine financial stress because they have had to relocate their families or unexpectedly maintain two residences. The Armed Services Committee has heard from many of these families. Like most other American families, August is the month when many military families move, begin new schools, and join sports teams. Regrettably, because of the Senator's hold, we know of many military students who have been disenrolled from their current schools in anticipation of a move but now cannot be enrolled in new schools. We know of many children who have already missed out on the fall sports season. We know of families who paid out of pocket to move duty stations in hopes of reuniting with their servicemember whenever the Senator sees reason. We know families who are losing literally thousands of dollars a month because the officers are assuming the duties of higher positions without holding higher ranks. Every single day the Senator continues his hold, military families suffer. He is punishing those who least deserve it. Their sacrifice and service to the Nation should be rewarded, not punished. As the retired Secretaries of Defense wrote--and again, these are seven Secretaries of Defense from Republican and Democratic administrations--``We can think of few things as irresponsible and uncaring as harming the families of those who serve our Nation in uniform.'' The Senator from Alabama knows that he has lost his argument on the merits. He knows the policy he disagrees with is legal. He knows he has legislative tools available to try and change the policy, but he also knows he likely does not have the votes to prevail. And so he has targeted the men and women of the military itself and their families. He knows the damage he is causing to our military families and our national security. It appears he simply does not care. The question for the Senate--really, for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--is: How long will a single Senator be allowed to cause such damage to our military? When will my colleagues on the other side of the aisle speak out and act? Republicans must call out their colleague and end this shameful charade. Mr. President, if this continues, most of these pictures will be blank. General Brown might remain as Chief of Staff of the Air Force, but he will not be Chairman. General Milley will depart. We can't tolerate this. Again, we all have to come together for the men and women who serve and their families. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REED

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

Mr. REED

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

Mr. REED. Mr. President?

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of amendments under the previous order, that it be in order to call up the following amendments to S. 2226: Schatz No. 1078; Scott No. 944; further, that with respect to the amendments listed above, the Senate vote on the amendments in the order listed, with no further amendments or motions in order, and with 60 affirmative votes required for adoption, and that there be 2 minutes, equally divided, prior to each vote.

Mr. REED

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

Mr. REED. Go ahead.