James Risch

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 2 minutes and Senator Cardin be permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to this nomination, and I rise in support of our strong support for Israel. I understand it is important to move as quickly as we can to have an ambassador in Jerusalem. We are at an important moment in history with the events in Israel. This makes the stakes so much higher and important that we get it right. I believe it means we should take the time to get it right. This appointment that has been made is very disappointing. As my colleague just mentioned, it really ignores the fact that the underlying problem here is our policy and policies toward Iran. Certainly, we all talk about Hamas. They have done horrible things. The horrific attack on Israel, where they beheaded babies, killed innocent men and women in their beds sometimes, really, really deserves a response. But it also deserves for us to look at the underlying problem here, which is Iran. Hamas would not exist if it were not for Iran. Iran arms them, trains them, finances them, and directs them. We all know that. So how does that fit in with this particular appointment? Well, Mr. Lew did some things which were very much contrary, I believe, to what needs to be done in order for us to redo our policies toward Iran. When it came to the JCPOA--which, as we all know, there was a difference between our side of the aisle and the other side of the aisle on whether we should do the JCPOA or not--Mr. Lew was heavily involved in that. He promised us in the committee that he would not allow Iran to have access to the U.S. financial system. We know, for a fact, that after that, although he denied it, he did, in fact, attempt his very best to have Iran have access to the U.S. financial system. This is borne out by an official report of the U.S. Senate by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. They interviewed the banks that Mr. Lew attempted to twist their arms to give Iran access to the financial system. There was a very detailed investigation that was done on the facts. The facts are contained in this report. My good friends will say: Oh, but that wasn't a bipartisan report. It is an official report by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. My friends on the other side of the aisle, though, will not deny the facts that are in this report. And the facts are that Mr. Lew is involved in this, as I have described. I want to support Israel. I think everybody on this floor wants to support Israel. The last thing we need is somebody who is very contrary to our view on how Iran should be handled. Mr. Lew's response to this was: Well, everybody knew what Obama's policies were, and, therefore, everybody should have known that we would do anything to blindly support the policies. That is wrong. This is the wrong way to go about it. This is the wrong person, at the wrong time, in the wrong place. We should vote no and support Israel.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to my friend's motion to discharge this from our committee. Let me start where he left off. He is asking that we remove our troops from hostilities in Niger. Let me say this as clearly as I can: We have no troops involved in hostilities in Niger. If we did, this would be a big deal and this place would be full and we would be talking about combat operations. We do not have that. The United States is not involved in combat operations in Niger. We do conduct focused intelligence operations to protect our troops in the region as well as our partners and allies and, most importantly, to monitor threats. It is inaccurate to equate routine security assistance in counterterrorism operations and monitoring with involvement in hostilities. This incorrect assumption threatens U.S. security assistance around the globe. A swift U.S. withdrawal from Niger, as proposed in this resolution, would weaken our regional reconnaissance efforts to monitor terrorist activities, which, of course, are in the national security interests of the United States of America and all American citizens. It would also leave the door open for Russia to come in and take over our facilities. In early 2023, AFRICOM Commander Gen. Michael Langley told Congress that ``Africa is the epicenter of international terrorism,'' an understatement, at best, and something we all knew. Since then, the threat has nothing but grown against U.S. interests and partners in the Sahel. As it has grown, Iran and the Wagner Group, backed by the Kremlin, seek to exploit Sahel's weakness by aligning with military juntas. Despite the recent coup in Niger weakening the country's security, invoking U.S. restrictions on aid, Niger remains vital for Western counterterrorism in the Sahel and for observation purposes. America cannot be the policemen of the world, but that does not mean we should not have observation posts, we should not do counterintelligence and national security monitoring, and it doesn't mean that we shouldn't do intelligence operations. With all due respect to my friend, I know that this is well- intentioned, but the result would be very negative for U.S. national security. I yield the floor.

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, very briefly to respond to my good friend from Kentucky, first of all, we are not conducting drone strikes out of Niger. We have not. We are not. We will not. As far as the four troops who were killed in 2017, the good Senator knows that was well investigated; it was not during combat operations that they were killed that U.S. troops were involved in. It was a one- off that certainly was accidental. We are not engaged in hostilities or combat in Niger.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise today to acknowledge MaryBeth Clare for her significant contributions to the Mountain Home Air Force Base and Idaho's blind community through the AbilityOne Program. The AbilityOne Program, a partnership with the National Industries for the Blind--NIB--and a network of agencies, give individuals who are blind an opportunity for employment. Employment creates a sense of purpose through hard work and independence. Every individual should have the opportunity to feel this sense of fulfillment, regardless of a disability. MaryBeth Clare has been a familiar face at the AbilityOne Base Supply Center at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Mountain Home, ID, for more than 3 years. She does not let her loss of vision hinder her creativity or innovation on the sales floor. MaryBeth has made notable efforts to feature AbilityOne products in the store, increasing sales significantly during her time on the base. MaryBeth's hard work has led her to be named a NIB Winner of the 2023 Peter J. Salmon Direct Labor Employee of the Year Award. This honor is well earned. I commend MaryBeth for her hard work and service at the Mountain Home Air Force Base. You make Idaho proud.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Grizzly Bear Review and Resource Restart Act. The grizzly bear was originally listed under the Endangered Species Act, ESA, in 1975 with the worthy intent to recover the species. The ESA has succeeded and grizzly bear populations have rebounded. However, the overly-broad listing, which covers all of the lower 48 States, has led courts to block the Fish and Wildlife Service from delisting populations which by all measures are recovered and no longer require strict ESA protections. This has prevented the ESA from being what it is meant to be, a temporary assistance for wildlife recovery. It was never intended to provide a permanent designation for robust species. If enacted, the Grizzly Bear Review and Resource Restart Act will remove the unreachable recovery targets based on the erroneous first listing and allow wildlife managers to focus on areas in the lower 48 which actually host grizzly bears, not the 30 States currently listed where bears never were in the first place. Giving the opportunity to ``delist and relist'' based on scientific and historic data rather than a panicked first plan from 1975 will help mitigate human-bear interactions, protect rural communities, and emphasize and recenter the role of science in grizzly bear recovery. It will also allow funding and focus to be given where it is needed most: to grizzly bear populations and other species actually at risk.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Grizzly Bear Review and Resource Restart Act. The grizzly bear was originally listed under the Endangered Species Act, ESA, in 1975 with the worthy intent to recover the species. The ESA has succeeded and grizzly bear populations have rebounded. However, the overly-broad listing, which covers all of the lower 48 States, has led courts to block the Fish and Wildlife Service from delisting populations which by all measures are recovered and no longer require strict ESA protections. This has prevented the ESA from being what it is meant to be, a temporary assistance for wildlife recovery. It was never intended to provide a permanent designation for robust species. If enacted, the Grizzly Bear Review and Resource Restart Act will remove the unreachable recovery targets based on the erroneous first listing and allow wildlife managers to focus on areas in the lower 48 which actually host grizzly bears, not the 30 States currently listed where bears never were in the first place. Giving the opportunity to ``delist and relist'' based on scientific and historic data rather than a panicked first plan from 1975 will help mitigate human-bear interactions, protect rural communities, and emphasize and recenter the role of science in grizzly bear recovery. It will also allow funding and focus to be given where it is needed most: to grizzly bear populations and other species actually at risk.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise to speak on behalf of amendment No. 1055, and I am happy to be a cosponsor with Senators Wicker, Kennedy, Hawley, and Sinema. I am pleased we are able to come together on this. Everyone on this floor wants to see that not a penny is wasted in Ukraine or goes where it shouldn't go. We have several audits going on there right now, as all of us know. This really strengthens the audit function we are doing. These are enhancements that do not duplicate or undermine the current IG structure. The IG structure is currently run by State, USAID, and DOD. This brings them together and puts them under one head. Unfortunately, the Paul amendment, which we are going to vote on side by side next, would undermine their work. It duplicates the current oversight structure, creates permanent bureaucracy, extends to areas far outside of Ukraine, and tries to superimpose a structure designed for Afghanistan, which was a very different war than what we are involved in now. Thanks to efforts of Members of both parties, in the past year, we have enacted 39 legislative oversight provisions covering all money that has been appropriated to support Ukraine since the war began. These provisions have led to the completion of 35 oversight evaluations thus far, and another 67 more are planned or underway. To date, there has not been any substantiated evidence of illicit weapons transfer or misuse of U.S. taxpayer dollars. The special inspector general for Afghanistan that Senator Paul's amendment proposes does not make sense for Ukraine. There are no U.S. forces fighting in Ukraine. Ukraine does not have the same security and defense concerns that Afghanistan did, and the war in Ukraine is dramatically smaller than the other war. The State, DOD, and USAID have the capacity to do this. This amendment is a good amendment. I would urge you to vote for this and against the next amendment. I yield to Senator Wicker.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, today, the Senate is considering the Chile tax convention. This treaty has been approved by substantial bipartisan majorities in the Foreign Relations Committee in four separate Congresses and has been pending since 2012. It is past time to approve it and provide needed relief to U.S. investors and businesses in Chile. Without ratifications, Chilean taxes on U.S. company operations in Chile will rise up to 44 percent in 2027 when the special waiver expires. Meanwhile, our competitors with Chilean operations would only pay a 35-percent rate. That includes companies with headquarters in Japan, Canada, Australia, Britain, and, of course, China. Tax treaties help the business community by minimizing uncertainty and promoting a favorable business environment. A tax convention with Chile eliminates double taxation, provides certainty, and is a natural counterpart to our free-trade agreement with Chile. This treaty provides tools to ensure U.S. taxpayers will be treated equally and fairly in Chile. It allows them to invest and compete with the knowledge that they will not face discriminatory barriers. The treaty provides tools to help resolve tax disputes between the United States and our tax treaty partners. Without such tools, U.S. investors would have limited ability to resolve these problems on their own. It is not just businesses that will benefit from this treaty; the convention imposes reasonable limits on the amount of tax Chile can impose on U.S. persons who might live or work in Chile. Finally, this treaty will help us prevent tax fraud in Chile. The tax convention has been held up for a decade. I am pleased that we are finally moving it forward today. I urge my colleagues to approve this Chile convention. It is a treaty, of course, and requires two- thirds vote. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. I thank the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee for his work on getting bipartisan agreement on this declaration. This declaration is necessary, given the reservation amending article 23. The reservation regarding article 23 amends language addressing the scope of double tax relief in connection with income earned by a Chilean subsidiary of a U.S. company. That reservation, which was initiated by the current Treasury Department, calls into question whether article 23 provides sufficient relief for double taxation; specifically, in the case of a U.S. company owning at least 10 percent of a Chilean company, whether the U.S. would provide a credit under the treaty for income taxes paid or accrued to Chile by or on behalf of that U.S. company with respect to earnings that were also subject to U.S. tax under the global intangible low-taxed income, or GILTI, provision enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA. Although the Treasury Department did not agree to include a specific clarification in the reservation with respect to that question, the declaration in the resolution confirms that Treasury acknowledges that, in light of TCJA's substantial changes to the international provisions of our Tax Code, additional work is needed to evaluate the policy of article 23 and whether it is sufficient in addressing relief from double taxation. In other words, this declaration helps ensure that outstanding questions regarding the scope of double tax relief provided by article 23 are resolved before similar language is used in future tax treaties. Ranking Member Crapo, can you discuss why such a clarification is so important with respect to future income tax treaties to which the U.S. is a party?

Mr. RISCH. I completely agree with the ranking member of the Finance Committee. I will carefully review and consider future U.S. income tax treaties to both ensure we resolve this important issue and to make sure Treasury follows through on its commitment to further address relief from double taxation in our tax treaties. I thank Ranking Member Crapo for his leadership on this issue, and we will continue to work together to hold Treasury to its commitment.

Mr. RISCH

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

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Idaho small businesses are the backbone of our economy and our communities. These small businesses not only employ friends and neighbors, but they showcase Idaho's creativity and values. Idaho small businesses provide invaluable goods and services and are an intrinsic element of the Gem State. These small businesses deserve to be celebrated for the integral role they play in our communities. I am proud to relaunch Support Local Gems, a statewide initiative, on June 9, to encourage Idahoans to support the small businesses that make the Gem State special. As a member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to honor Love at First Bite Mercantile as one of Idaho's Small Businesses of the Month for June 2023. Love at First Bite opened its doors in Idaho Falls in 2009. Despite the recession, Juli and Mike Richards took the opportunity to make their dream a reality. By 2012, they had doubled in size and, in 2019, were able to expand again. Love at First Bite began when Juli and her daughter combined their chocolate and cupcake businesses but has since grown to offer a wide variety of products. In addition to gourmet food items, Love at First Bite is known for their line of specialty oils and vinegars, specialty drinks, home decor, beauty products, and jewelry. The Richards are active members of the community and regularly contribute their sweet treats to community fundraisers and school events. Each summer, Love at First Bite donates products to local libraries as a tasty incentive for youth reading programs. Congratulations to Juli and Mike Richards and all of the employees at Love at First Bite Mercantile for being selected as an Idaho Small Business of the Month for June 2023. You are an outstanding example of what it means to be one of Idaho's Local Gems. You make our great State proud, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Idaho small businesses are the backbone of our economy and our communities. These small businesses not only employ friends and neighbors, but they showcase Idaho's creativity and values. Our small businesses provide invaluable goods and services and are an intrinsic part of the Gem State. These small businesses deserve to be celebrated for the integral role they play in our communities. I am proud to relaunch Support Local Gems, a statewide initiative, on June 9, to encourage Idahoans to support the small businesses that make the Gem State special. As a member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to honor McKee's Feed, Garden & Pet Centers as one of Idaho's Small Businesses of the Month for June 2023. Bill McKee opened McKee's Feed, Garden & Pet Center in 1976. At both the Pocatello and Chubbuck locations, McKee's staff is dedicated to assisting customers with their pet, livestock, and gardening needs. Well known throughout Bannock County, McKee's Petting Zoo has served the local community free of charge for years. Bill McKee started the petting zoo to offer children and families the opportunity to interact with and learn about animals without spending a lot of money. In addition to year-round learning opportunities, McKee's Petting Zoo provides homes for displaced animals. McKee's continuously supports local schools and Boy Scouts, Relay for Life, educational programs and field trips, and live nativities every winter. McKee's partners with the Humane Society and various rest homes and veterans' facilities to provide ``pet therapy'' to residents. Congratulations to the McKees and all of the employees at McKee's Feed, Garden & Pet Centers for being selected as an Idaho Small Business of the Month for June 2023. You are an outstanding example of what it means to be one of Idaho's Local Gems. You make the Gem State proud, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Idaho small businesses are the backbone of our economy and our communities. These small businesses not only employ friends and neighbors, but they showcase Idaho's creativity and values. Idaho small businesses provide invaluable goods and services and are an important part of the Gem State. These small businesses deserve to be celebrated for the integral role they play in our communities. I am proud to relaunch Support Local Gems, a statewide initiative, on June 9, to encourage Idahoans to support the small businesses that make the Gem State special. As a member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to honor Perrine Man Press as one of Idaho's Small Businesses of the Month for June 2023. Cory and Kenji Paulson started Perrine Man Press out of their home in 2017 and opened a physical storefront on Twin Falls' Maine Avenue in the fall of 2020. The Paulsons grew up in southern Idaho and have always been inspired by Idaho's beautiful landscape and way of life, which Kenji hand draws on their product designs. Their signature design, the ``Perrine Man'' highlights their hometown's iconic landmark: the Perrine Bridge. Perrine Man Press' mission is more than simply selling good tees, but about ensuring every customer knows they are ``made for more.'' Perrine Man Press is committed to reminding everyone they are incredibly valuable and giving back to great causes. Congratulations to Cory and Kenji Paulson and all of the employees at Perrine Man Press for being selected as an Idaho Small Business of the Month for June 2023. You are an outstanding example of what it means to be one of Idaho's Local Gems. You make our great State proud, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Idaho small businesses are the backbone of our great State's economy. These small businesses deserve to be celebrated for their great work in preserving the values unique to our communities. I am proud to relaunch Support Local Gems, a statewide initiative, on June 9, to encourage Idahoans to support the small businesses that make the Gem State special. As a member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to honor Fancy Pants in Boise as one of Idaho's Small Businesses of the Month for June 2023. Fancy Pants was established in 2006 in the heart of downtown Boise. Owners Courtney Holden and Jaime Petrilli created a space unlike any other boutique. Their vision was a shop featuring the best pieces your favorite brands have to offer, accompanied with styling advice and shopping assistance. From the original 1,200-square-foot store to a now double in size and space on the corner of 9th and Idaho, Fancy Pants has built an expansive and loyal customer base for 17 years. Courtney and Jaime carefully curate inventory tailored to fit the diversity of their clients' needs and lifestyles, including pieces by A.L.C., Alice + Olivia, Veronica Beard, Vince, and Rag and Bone. Fancy Pants is a key member of the small business community of downtown Boise and a proud supporter of local causes including the Women's and Children's Alliance of Boise, Dress for Success, and the Boise Festival of Trees. At the heart of their mission, Courtney and Jaime strive to make everyone feel confident and comfortable. When you are at their store, you will discover hand-selected pieces along with knowledgeable, friendly employees to help you find that perfect pair of jeans. From casual to fancy or trendy to classic, there is something for every occasion. Congratulations to Courtney Holden, Jaime Petrilli, and all of the employees at Fancy Pants for being selected as an Idaho Small Business of the Month for June 2023. You are an outstanding example of what it means to be one of Idaho's Local Gems. You make our great State proud, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, Idaho small businesses are the backbone of our economy and our communities. These small businesses not only employ friends and neighbors, but they showcase Idaho's creativity and values. Idaho small businesses provide invaluable goods and services and are an important part of the Gem State. These small businesses deserve to be celebrated for the integral role they play in our communities. I am proud to relaunch Support Local Gems, a statewide initiative, on June 9, to encourage Idahoans to support the small businesses that make the Gem State special. As a member and former chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to honor The Only Store located in Nezperce as one of Idaho's Small Businesses of the Month for June 2023. Sandi Herker Berry began her grocery store career in 1985, when The Only Store was known as the Nezperce Cash & Carry. A decade later, in 1996, Sandi bought the store from owner Jim Schmidt and recently renamed it The Only Store. Sandi loves the grocery business, including the long hours, restocking shelves, the cleaning, the problem-solving, the creativity, and, most notably, freight day. Sandi credits her six employees and the Nezperce community for her success. To that end, she is committed to supporting her small town through the Nezperce School District, the Lewis County Fair, donating a portion of her earnings to emergency medical services, purchasing school clothes for underprivileged children, and delivering groceries to elderly members of the community. Congratulations to Sandi Herker Berry and all of the employees at The Only Store for being selected as an Idaho Small Business of the Month for June 2023. You are an outstanding example of what it means to be one of Idaho's Local Gems. You make our great State proud, and I look forward to your continued growth and success.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, thank you very much and thank you to Senator Kaine. I will start with this. There are a lot of things he said that I agree with, and, particularly, that part about him not getting very far with his looks and instead using persistence. I think he is absolutely correct in that regard. Senator Kaine has been a true, committed, good-faith warrior on this issue, as has Senator Young, and some of the things that were said out here are absolutely accurate and deserve to be underscored and things that I agree with. First of all, I really appreciate Senator Kaine pointing out the fact that the deliberations on this particular repeal of the AUMF to get the rule off of the books regarding war has taken a whole lot longer and a lot more deliberation than the actual passage of it to get into the war. It is easy to stand here and say that people were wrong who did this 20 years ago. I don't know how many are left. There is only a handful, maybe half a dozen, who were on this floor at the time they voted for it. In their defense, of course, they had information that was very different than the information that we have today, which is unfortunate, because, as you have pointed out, there has been a lot of harm done as a result of this. So we should start with that, and that is that one of the most important things we do here in Congress is deliberating whether or not to send our sons and daughters into harm's way in war. There is nothing more somber than that, and to those who actually fought in this war, the view that America has toward them of appreciation for their taking up the arms when we asked them to do so cannot be overstated. It is a tremendous sacrifice that they have made, and we owe them a lot. Having said that, I come back to what Senator Kaine has said for a long time. If that vote were held today, I think it would be unanimous that we not pull the trigger as was done 20 years ago. But that was then and this is now, and the information is very different. So to the men and women in uniform, their service was honorable. Less than 1 percent of Americans raise their hands to answer the Nation's call when this happens, and we have to commend them for that. While I support the repeal of the 1991 Gulf war authorization, I don't support the repeal of this 2002 AUMF at this time. This needs to be repealed; there is no question about it. It should be replaced by something, and that is one of the real problems here, because the debate to do that has been ongoing for as long as I have been here, and we have been unable to land on the same point to get it done. Again, we mostly agree, but there is handful of disagreements on it. So with that, I cannot vote for it at this time. Part of the problem--well, there are two problems here: One is the fluidity in Iraq at this time, and the second one Senator Young properly and clearly outlined what the ambitions of Iran are. The fluidity in Iraq and the ambitions of Iran are the two reasons why I am opposed to repealing at this time. Iraq itself is a less-than-perfect security partner. All of us on Foreign Relations have dealt with that issue over and over again, as we have had ups and downs there. They are a less-than-perfect partner. I have serious concerns about the influence of the Iranian-aligned militias, which I know my friends do also. These are real problems. Across multiple administrations--both Republican and Democrat administrations--the 2002 AUMF has been used to address threats emanating from Iraq. Specifically, multiple administrations have relied on its authority to address the threat from Iran-backed militias, and Iran is clearly the problem here. I have been in the room when these decisions were made. I have participated in those decisions, and the 2002 AUMF was a factor in those decisions. Should the statutory authority fall away, we are only left with the President's constitutional article II powers to protect Americans. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle and some on my side of the aisle are quick to point out that the President's constitutional authorities are used as an excuse to support repeal, what we are doing here. But those constitutional authorities are unfettered and really unrestrained as far as the President is concerned. So by repealing this, instead of reasserting congressional authority, we are actually ceding solely to the President, the executive branch, which no one in this room wants to do. Further repeal signals finality and an end to hostilities but, the Iranian-backed militias continue to attack us. Iran has long sought to eject the United States from Iraq, but Iran and its proxies have attacked American troops and diplomats over 80 times just since President Biden took office and with only a few U.S. responses. It is clear that Iran doubts American resolve. I stand here today to say to Iran: Have no doubts. We do have resolve. Just last week, we lost yet another American in Syria at the hands of an Iranian-supported militia. It is objectionable that the administration didn't notify Congress of this attack until after we completed debate on relevant amendments and had adjourned for the week. I know my colleagues who are on the other side of this issue probably have the same bad feelings about that that I do. This was not right, to withhold this information from us. The Biden administration talks about defending our interests and deterring Iran. The administration launched a strike in retaliation for killing that American last Thursday, but in response the Iran-backed militias simply conducted an even larger attack against us. The truth is the administration is failing and has failed in its attempts to deter Iran, and today we are in not a very good position in that regard. That is why this repeal sends an additional dangerous message at a poor time and further weakens U.S. engagement in the region. It is clear the region sees the Biden administration sitting on the sidelines. This repeal will only add fuel to the narrative that the United States is disengaging from the region, which we hear all the time. We should remember that great power competition is global, not just in Asia and the Pacific, though, of course, those issues have raised their ugly head in recent years. I also remain unconvinced that the administration has conducted any meaningful consultations with Iraq, Israel, or other partners on the repeal of this authority and how those reactions may affect U.S. burdens and commitments in the region. Consultation with our partners is always important. Finally, turning to detention authority, for years the 2002 AUMF has been cited as authority for detention for known captured terrorists. Last week, I put forward an amendment that would require the Secretary of Defense to certify that repeal of this authority would not harm detention authority or the U.S. litigation positions against detained terrorists. If a court were to find that the 2001 AUMF did not provide legal authority for detention, which has not been settled at this point, supplemental legal authorities like the 2002 AUMF would be absolutely critical. I sincerely would like to support this repeal--I really would. And I hope to be here when we do get to repeal at some point down the line, but now is not the time for it. The realities on the ground convince me I cannot support repeal at this time. We have got to deal with the world as it is, and, as a result of that, I am compelled to vote no. Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you for all those who have worked on this.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, very briefly, first of all, I want to compliment Senator Hawley for pursuing this route. There isn't a person in this room, there isn't a person in America who doesn't want to see that every dollar spent for the taxpayers is looked after. In this particular instance, I am going to oppose this simply because there are already 64 ongoing or planned audits and reports on U.S. assistance to Ukraine. This piece of legislation would require a quarterly schedule, and that actually reduces the number. For instance, USAID direct budgetary support comes every 2 months. So this is being looked after, unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, where we are talking about enormous amounts of money--not that this isn't a large amount, but those were enormous, and the work in auditing was not very good. In this case, it is very good. We have been looking at it in the Intelligence Committee, and we have been looking at it in the Foreign Relations Committee and have found zero siphoning of U.S. dollars. So this really is an expenditure that is not necessary because it is being looked after already. I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, fellow Senators, I rise today to present this amendment as part of the process, as we process this repeal of the 2002 AUMF matter before the Senate right now. This particular exercise that we are doing, the amendment process is frequently fraught with political messaging. I am happy that so far the amendments that we have been processing have not been that sort of amendment and that is that it was intended to be a political message. This one is not. Prior ones are not. The ones that are pending really are not. And the reason for that is what we are doing here in discussing the 2002 AUMF repeal is taken seriously by every single Member of this body--Republican, Democrat, everyone is acting in good faith as they process this. This is one of the most important things each of us do as a U.S. Senator, that being the question of committing our young men and women to actual kinetic force on the field. When this was put in place, it was considered deeply and seriously by this body, and as we look to repeal it, the same is true. And I think everyone is headed toward the same objective and that is to see that this is done properly. That is the purpose of this amendment to the actual repeal that is in front of us. This amendment would conditionally repeal on a certification from the Secretary of Defense that detention authorities and the litigation position of the United States with respect to detention would not be weakened. And this is offered in good faith. It is offered because yesterday, just as an example--yesterday we had a hearing with the Secretary of State. And I asked him three questions about this, about whether they actually use it, whether it was important, and whether repealing it would weaken our position on detention and on litigation regarding detention, and the Secretary of State said that it would. So the purpose of this is to clear up what I think is a flaw here. It certainly isn't intended by anyone. I think everyone would want us to have as strong a position as we possibly could when we are in detention or litigation. So this simply requires us to replace the language with some other language, and then we would get the certification or a determination by the lawyers. So I offer it in good faith. I think it is an absolutely correct thing to do if indeed the body is going to move to actually repeal the 2002 AUMF. Again, I want to congratulate every Member of this body for working on this very important issue in good faith. I think this moves the issue further to a better position. I yield the floor.

Mr. RISCH. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the amendment.

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I would like to call up Risch first-degree No. 1, also known as amendment No. 43.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, regrettably I am necessarily absent on passage of H.J. Res. 26 as I am attending the funeral of a former Governor. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted in support of the resolution.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, I rise today to honor a great Idahoan and the new Federal Engineer of the Year, Chad Kidd. Over the past decade, Mr. Kidd has served as an electrical engineer for the Bureau of Reclamation. Throughout his time he has displayed a consistent record of outstanding design, installation, commissioning, and professional engineering support for Reclamation's hydro generation program. Mr. Kidd is also a stalwart leader in electrical safety for power plants in the Columbia-Pacific Northwest Region. Most notably, Mr. Kidd developed and delivered electrical awareness and safety training across the region years before a formal Reclamation electrical training program even existed. Mr. Kidd has won numerous awards and accolades to commemorate his phenomenal work and is a six-time recipient of the STAR Award. In addition to his many engineering accomplishments, Mr. Kidd has also displayed himself as a great community leader. He has spent hundreds of hours volunteering for the Boy Scouts of America, Meals on Wheels, Declo High School, and other organizations providing his labor and expertise to help those around him. Idahoans like Mr. Kidd make our State proud. I am thankful for his work in our great State and congratulate him on this high achievement.

Mr. RISCH

Mr. RISCH. Madam President, Senator Crapo and I rise today to honor the service of the retiring director of the Idaho Department of Agriculture, Mrs. Celia Gould. Celia was appointed the director of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture in January 2007 as the first woman to ever serve in the position. She provided unmatched leadership and integrity throughout her tenure and exemplified what it is to be a public servant. As a third-generation rancher herself, she utilized firsthand knowledge and made thoughtful decisions, which further solidified the incredible success of Idaho agriculture. Before spending 16 years as Idaho's director of agriculture, Celia served 16 years in the Idaho House of Representatives. There is truly no one else who knows the State quite like she does, and we will miss her dearly. Senator Crapo and I are happy to join the rest of the State in wishing her the very best in her well-deserved retirement.