Chuck Schumer

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, later this morning, I will join my Democratic colleagues on the floor to ask unanimous consent to pass the assault weapons ban, among other gun safety legislation. I will have more to say before the unanimous consent request, but right now the scourge of gun violence in America is a national crisis. I hope my Republican colleagues stand with us to take action that Americans demand. Military Promotions Mr. President, now, on Senator Tuberville, yesterday, 10 months of pain and uncertainty finally came to an end for hundreds--hundreds--of military nominees and their families. Senator Tuberville, after months of obstruction, stubbornness, and reckless disregard for military readiness, withdrew his blanket holds on over 400 generals and flag officers, and, in the span of just a few minutes of floor time, the Senate unanimously confirmed nearly every single one of them to their posts. Thank God, these military officers finally got the promotions they so rightfully earned, but it should not have taken so long. If there is one word that underscores why we prevailed on Senator Tuberville, it is persistence. For months, I said it would be up to our Republican colleagues to talk some sense into Senator Tuberville and get him to relent in his holds. Senators Ernst and Sullivan stepped up to the plate and deserve a lot of commendation for their courage, for their strength. And, as I predicted, the frustration and pressure on the senior Senator from Alabama eventually won out. We were persistent and persistent and persistent and held the line that military nominees should never, never become pawns to push a partisan agenda. So let this be a warning. No one--no one--should attempt blanket holds on our military ever again. After all the damage he caused, Senator Tuberville has nothing-- absolutely nothing--to show for his obstruction, except for the harm done to our military and the pain caused to military families. His reckless strategy did not succeed, and if, in the future, others try to hold up military appointments to get their way, they, too, will fail. Again, let this be a warning that no one should ever hold up military appointments again. We cannot cave to any single Member's views, no matter how strongly felt. I don't doubt that Senator Tuberville feels the issue very strongly opposite of what I feel, but when our military families are at stake, we should not use these strong feelings to hold them hostage. What the senior Senator from Alabama did through his holds was bring the Senate to a new low, and, in the end, it was all for nothing. I want to thank my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, who spoke in defense of our military families. I want to thank particularly Senator Reed, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Senator Klobuchar, the chair of the Rules Committee. I also want to thank Senator Sinema, who was instrumental in creating bipartisan support for our resolution. On the Republican side, I want to, once again, thank Senators Ernst and Sullivan for their courage in helping to break the logjam after so, so many months. Because Senators on both sides persisted and held the line, this sad chapter in the Senate is finally over. Supplemental Funding Mr. President, now, on the supplemental, the question before the Senate today is simple yet momentous: Will Senators agree to begin debate--just a debate--on legislation to defend America's national security on an issue so important it goes to the actual preservation of Western and democratic values in the world. Are we willing to hold a discussion, here on the floor, about steps necessary to safeguard democracy, stand up to autocratic brutes, and respond to our adversaries with strength, or will Senators prevent us from moving forward over extremist border policies? Because, this afternoon, the Senate will hold a vote on whether or not to move forward on a national security supplemental. At stake is America's safety, the safety of democracy, and the future of the war in Ukraine. As we have done throughout our history, the Senate should rush to the defense of democracy and stand up to autocratic brutes. And I have promised my Republican colleagues that if they agree to move forward, I will give them a vote for a border package entirely of their choosing--no conditions. This is a golden opportunity for Republicans to present whatever border policy they want, and our side will not interfere with the construction of that amendment in any way. It has been reported that Senate Republicans will make another attempt to craft a border proposal and share it with Democrats, because the last proposal was so far away from what anyone could accept on our side. Well, I have a suggestion for my Republican colleagues: Vote with us to begin debate, and then bring that proposal to the floor as an amendment. We can debate it right here, right here on the Senate floor. If Republicans vote no today and reject the opportunity to offer a border amendment, then what the heck is going on? Republicans said they want border. It is they who have injected border into the Ukraine issue, even though the two are unrelated. And now they are getting a golden opportunity to offer border at 60 votes. If that is not good enough for them, then what are they doing? Let's not forget, Mr. President, that it was the Republican leader and others on the Republican side in the House and Senate, mainly from the hard right, who demanded that border and Ukraine be tied together. Well, we are willing to give them an amendment--that is what they have asked for--and now they are spurning that offer. Why hold up Ukraine aid if they can't even present a border package that can pass the Senate? We are asking ourselves this question: Has border been nothing more than an excuse for the hard right to kill funding for Ukraine and too many other Republican Senators, who are not part of the hard right, are going along? I hope that is not true. I hope Republicans vote yes and take up our offer on a border amendment at 60 votes because we don't have much time to keep negotiating off the floor if all we will do is go around in circles, which is what has happened over the last 3 weeks, despite the good will of negotiators. Democrats have spent 3 weeks in negotiation in good faith, trying to get somewhere on the border, to no avail. We believe we should do something on border. In fact, the President's proposal, which is the base bill--which I am making the base bill--has very significant border provisions in it, particularly those talking about stopping the flow of fentanyl into this country by providing much more help at the ports of entry. We want to reach a middle ground with Republicans on border. It is important. But we cannot waste time on something like H.R. 2, which every single Democrat voted against, which could never pass the House, while the clock is ticking to get Ukraine the help it so desperately needs. Now, I understand that this is frustrating for some of our Republican colleagues. I appreciate that the hard right may feel boxed in and be feeling the pressure that they can't come up with a package that can get only 11 Democrats if all of them vote for it. But the only way anything on border gets done is with votes from both sides of the aisle. That is how the Senate works. So, again, I hope our Republican colleagues do the right thing for our country and vote in favor of debating the supplemental. I hope they take this free opportunity, this golden opportunity, to make a real, serious proposal on the border--though, in reality, they can propose whatever they want--and see if it can get the 60 votes that is always required in this type of legislation in the Senate. If they make a serious offer on the border and it gets 60 votes, then the Senate will have spoken. If they cannot get 60 votes on a border proposal, then that should not prevent us from giving Ukraine the aid they so desperately need. Let me repeat that again. If Republicans, who injected border into this whole debate, now can't come up with an amendment that can pass the Senate, they should not prevent us from giving Ukraine the aid it so desperately needs. The world is watching. The world is watching what the Senate does today. You can bet, my colleagues, Vladimir Putin is watching. Hamas is certainly watching. Iran, President Xi, North Korea--all of our adversaries are closely watching. Let us do the right thing and move forward today. AI Insight Forums Mr. President, now, today, on our AI Insight Forums, we will continue our work with our eighth and ninth bipartisan AI forums. The morning's Insight Forum will begin at 10:30 a.m. and focus on long-term risks associated with AI and how we can guard against AI doomsday scenarios. This afternoon's Insight Forum will begin at 3 p.m. and focus on one of the most critical and urgent areas of AI national security. We will discuss the opportunities AI presents to bolster our national security and the risks if we fall behind the Chinese Government. It is in the Kennedy Caucus Room. Federal Trade Commission Mr. President, finally, on the FTC investigation of Exxon, last month, I wrote a letter, along with 20 other of my colleagues, urging the FTC to investigate Exxon's $60 billion blockbuster merger with Pioneer, one of the largest mergers in the energy industry in two decades. Having the largest oil company merge with the largest oil producer in the Permian Basin is only going to do one thing: raise prices for the average consumer. Well, I have good news. The FTC heeded our warning and announced yesterday that the FTC will closely review Exxon's proposed acquisition of Pioneer. It is welcome news for the American people because if the merger were to proceed, it would result in higher gas prices for families across the country. Profits for these big oil companies would soar, fueling stock buybacks, while everyday Americans struggle to fill up their tanks. So this merger between Exxon and Pioneer has all the hallmarks of harmful anti-competitive effects, and I am glad the FTC is moving forward. I yield the floor. Recognition of the Minority Leader

Mr. SCHUMER

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

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 25 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. SCHUMER. I know that the Senator from Alabama wants to speak. Could I ask the Senator from Alabama how long he wants to speak for?

Mr. SCHUMER. Well, we want to all speak seriatim, and I thought I was going to speak before this.

Mr. SCHUMER. Would the Senator yield also to Senator Durbin after me; is that all right?

Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you. Mr. President, I just heard, unfortunately, our Senator from Wyoming object. Here are the facts: The scourge of gun violence in America is a national crisis. The American people are sick and tired of enduring one mass shooting after another. They are sick and tired of vigils and moments of silence for family, friends, classmates, coworkers. Today, Democrats move to pass the assault weapons ban to help rid our streets of these deadly weapons. I want to thank my colleagues who support this measure, particularly Senator Durbin, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, as well as Senators Murphy and Blumenthal and Warnock, who organized today's efforts with me. We already have a decade's worth of proof that a ban on military- style assault works and saves lives, plain and simple. After I led the passage of the assault weapons ban--I carried the bill in the House as a Congressman, alongside our late colleague Senator Feinstein, who carried it in the Senate. What happened? America saw a significant decrease in mass shootings and in gun deaths--a decrease. Unsurprisingly, when that ban lapsed, there was a sudden and dramatic spike in mass shootings and deaths from those shootings. We must change that. We still feel the unquenchable suffering of the families of Sandy Hook, where 11 years ago next week 26 innocent lives were cut short by an automatic weapon. I still see the pictures of those little children, and I still remember--because I speak to them fairly recently--the parents who have a hole in their hearts forever because some madman with an assault weapon was able to kill 26 of them, one after the other. We still feel the agony of places like Buffalo, where a year-and-a- half ago a gunman murdered 10 people in cold blood at a Tops grocery store. I was at that grocery store a few days later. I still feel their pain. We feel the pain of Uvalde, Las Vegas, El Paso. The list sadly goes on and on and on. And we also take action today because of tragedies like the Long Island Rail Road massacre that happened 30 years ago tomorrow in my own backyard, the innocent people who lost their lives at the Maryland train station. It was the 533 train filled with commuters heading home from work--so many injured, six killed. My heart still sinks. And I will never forget hearing that news, the river of blood in the aisles of the commuter railroad train, just horrible. By passing the assault weapons ban today, we can help save lives, get these weapons off our streets, and prevent future tragedies. So today Republicans face a choice, as they do every day. We want to say to our Republican friends: Stand with families fearing for their lives or stand with the gun lobby and block this assault weapons ban. Just look at what happened the last time both sides worked together on commonsense gun safety measures. We did something many believed to be impossible. Under the leadership of Senator Murphy, Senator Durbin, Senator Blumenthal, and so many others, we passed the first major gun safety bill in three decades. While this bill was a long-overdue step in the right direction, we have to do a lot more. Today, we have an opportunity to come together and pass another lifesaving measure. I yield to the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, the chair of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider.

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, tonight is a sad night in the history of the Senate and in our country. Republicans just blocked a very much needed proposal to send funding for Ukraine, funding for Israel, humanitarian aid for innocent civilians in Gaza, and funding for the Indo-Pacific. If there is a word for what we most need now, it is to be ``serious.'' If Republicans in the Senate do not get serious very soon about a national security package, Vladimir Putin is going to walk right through Ukraine and right through Europe. This is a historic moment for the Senate. Are we going to do something about the threats to democracy happening around the world? Are we going to hold the line against autocrats and dictators and the enemies of our way of life? We had before the Senate a proposal not only for national security but one that included significant funding for border security that President Biden requested. We also made our Republican colleagues an offer to get something done on border by allowing them to vote on an amendment on any border package they wanted--any one they wanted, and all they would need is 11 Democratic votes. Unfortunately, Republicans refused to move forward, even with the offer to vote on a border amendment that would have required only 11 Democratic votes. They couldn't come up with a solution. Nevertheless, Democrats remain committed to working very hard to find a solution to this impasse. I understand that Republican negotiators are preparing another package of border policies very soon, and I hope they come up with something serious instead of the extreme policies they presented thus far. Democrats have always supported commonsense, realistic solutions to the border. We wished Republicans would have taken us up on our offer to have a debate on the floor. Our offer to the Republicans of an amendment still stands, and we hope we can break this impasse soon. This is a serious moment that will have lasting consequences for the 21st century. If Ukraine falls, Putin will not stop there. He will be emboldened. President Xi will be emboldened. Our adversaries will keep undermining us at every turn. Western democracy will begin to enter an age of decline if we aren't willing to defend it. This Senate, this Republican Party, must get serious. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, the question before us is simple: Will Senators rise to defend Western democracy, protect our fundamental values, and support our friends abroad fighting for their lives? Are we willing to stand up to autocratic brutes and respond to our adversaries with strength, not weakness? Will we help the people of Ukraine fight against Vladimir Putin like we promised? This is a moment in history. This is a moment history will record. The answer to all these questions should be an emphatic yes. At stake is America's safety, the survival of democracy, and the future of the war in Ukraine. As we have always done in our history, the Senate should rush to the defense of democracy and stand up to autocratic brutes. You can be sure Vladimir Putin is watching closely to see if the Senate will approve more aid to Ukraine. Whether or not we approve an aid package will likely sway the outcome of the war. We must act. To show our Republican colleagues that we care about this issue deeply and are serious about moving forward in a bipartisan way, we are willing to give them an amendment here on the floor on any border proposal of their choice at 60 votes. We will not interfere with whatever policy they want to present. It is vital we move forward and to show that we are willing to work with our Republican colleagues to be reasonable. This, again, is a moment of truth for the Senate, for the country, for the fight for democracy and Western values. Again, history will record this moment. We must rise to the occasion. We must stand with Ukraine. We should all vote yes. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, December 5, be waived.

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session to be in a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, later today, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will address Senators through a secured video at our classified briefing on the war in Ukraine. This will be at least the third time President Zelenskyy has addressed Senators since the beginning of the war. The last time he spoke to us, his message was direct and unsparing: Without more aid from Congress, Ukraine does not have the means to defeat Vladimir Putin. Without more aid from Congress, Ukraine may fall. Democracy in Europe will be in peril. And those who think Vladimir Putin will stop merely at Ukraine willfully ignore the clear and unmistakable warnings of history. It is, therefore, urgent for the Senate to pass a security supplemental. Last night, I filed cloture on a motion to proceed to a vehicle the Senate can use as a supplemental package. We will have our first vote on this vehicle Wednesday in the afternoon. I urge my colleagues to think about what is at stake in this moment in history. I implore them to do what is necessary to protect America's security. If we allow Vladimir Putin to march through Europe, if we abandon Ukraine in its hour of need, it will make the world a more hostile place for democracy and Western values. It will send a message to the world that America is not up to the task of protecting democracy and Western values in this century. It will be a gift to the Chinese Communist Party, to the regime in Iran, to adversaries around the world who want nothing more than to see our demise. The Ukrainians are fighting valiantly. They haven't asked for American troops, with the concomitant casualties and pain that would cause. All they need is adequate weaponry. How can we turn them down? How can we turn them down? There is only one right answer. We must do what America has always done through her history: defend democracy, stand up to autocratic thugs like Putin, and put our adversaries on notice that America's resolve will not falter. Now, the Senate's supplemental package remains on hold because our Republican colleagues have insisted that they need an immigration proposal to pass. While immigration is important, it is a separate issue from foreign aid to Ukraine and Israel and humanitarian aid to Gaza and the Indo-Pacific. It is a difficult issue we have debated and never come to a conclusion on for decades. It is extraneous to this debate. Some of our Republican leaders say: Well, that is what the public wants. Yes, the public wants border, but it is unrelated to Ukraine. Our Republican friends are saying they will defend democracy only at a price unacceptable to Democrats, and the price is forcing Congress to accept radical immigration policies that come straight from Donald Trump. One Republican Senator said yesterday--listen to this. He said: This is not a traditional negotiation, where we expect to come up with a bipartisan compromise on the border. This is a price that has to be paid in order to get the supplemental. No compromise--why are we sitting down and talking if there is never going to be a compromise? What that Republican Senator said, Mr. President, is the textbook definition of hostage-taking. I want to be clear. First, Democrats want to deal with the problems of immigration and the border. We have been trying for years. But--I also want to be clear--if Republicans had not brought up immigration, an important but separate and partisan issue that has been debated for decades, Ukraine funding would not be in danger right now. This mess was created entirely by hard-right Republicans, and, alarmingly, Republican leadership has gotten behind them. And most of those hard-right Republicans who say we must have border don't want to vote for aid for Ukraine, in any case. If funding for Ukraine fails, it will not be a bipartisan failure. It will be a failure solely caused by the Republican Party and the Republican leadership because it was a decision of that Republican leadership, pushed by the hard right, many of whom want Ukraine to fail, to make border a precondition to supporting Ukraine. Let me say that again because the logic is perfectly clear and irrefutable. If funding for Ukraine fails, the failure will solely be on the Republican Party because it was the decision of the Republican leadership, pushed by the hard right, many of whom want Ukraine to fail, to make border a precondition to supporting Ukraine. Now, even though we warned Republicans about the dangers of injecting partisan border issues which threaten to derail aid to Ukraine, we sat down at the negotiating table in good faith. We said from the get-go we would be willing to compromise. Everyone would like to come to a compromise on border--a bipartisan compromise, a real compromise, not one side demanding everything, as that one Republican Senator said. For 3 weeks, Democrats have tried to be reasonable with our Republican colleagues to see if we can find some common ground on immigration. Some days, these negotiations look promising. We have been more than willing to show compromise. But, sadly, each time we try to meet Republicans at the middle, they have been moving the goalposts back, proposing nasty policies like indefinite detention for asylum seekers and sweeping powers to shut down our entire immigration system, which has been a hallmark of America for centuries. After Speaker Johnson said last week that only policies along the lines of H.R. 2 can make it through the House, Republican negotiators here in the Senate gave up even pretending to show compromise. That is why the negotiations broke off Friday night. Republicans pulled the goalposts way back and proposed many items plucked directly from H.R. 2 or very similar to it--the same H.R. 2 that got not a single Democratic vote here in the Senate, the same H.R. 2 that couldn't even pass on the House floor, when it is attached to Ukraine, because it needs Democratic votes to pass it because 30 Republican Congressmen won't vote for any Ukraine aid. So despite Democrats' best efforts, negotiations have been going in circles. Look, we want to find a way to solve immigration with our Republican colleagues. We know this is an important issue. We have many Members who represent border States and border communities. But if Republicans are holding up aid to Ukraine because they want us to work with them on border, the onus is on them to present to us a realistic, bipartisan proposal that can actually pass the Senate, with aid to Ukraine as well. And we need a bipartisan proposal that can get the broad support of Democrats, not just one or two while the rest of us are strongly in opposition. Again, if Republicans want to bring up immigration right now, right in the middle of trying to pass aid to Ukraine and other issues, the onus is on them to present serious bipartisan proposals that can get broad support from Democrats, not just one or two Democrats. And if Republicans are unable to produce a broadly bipartisan immigration proposal, they should not block aid to Ukraine in response. They should not be resorting to hostage-taking, as the Senator from Texas seems to be admitting. That would be madness--utter madness. It would be an insult to our Ukrainian friends, who are fighting for their lives against Russian autocracy, and it could go down as a major turning point where the West didn't live up to its responsibilities and things turned away from our democracies and our values and toward autocracy. Ronald Reagan would be rolling in his grave--rolling in his grave--if he saw his own party let Vladimir Putin roll through Europe. So, once again, I urge my Republican colleagues to think carefully about what is at stake with this week's vote. What we do now will reverberate across the world for years and decades to come, and history--history--will render harsh judgment on those who abandon democracy for Donald Trump's extreme immigration policies.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam Vice President, today is historic. Vice President Harris has just cast her 32nd tiebreaking vote--the most tiebreakers ever. I join all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, thanking the Vice President for her leadership and for making the work of the Senate possible. The record Vice President Harris sets today is significant not just because of the number but because of what she has made possible with tiebreaking votes. Without her tiebreaking votes, there would be no American Rescue Plan, no Inflation Reduction Act, and we would not have confirmed many of the excellent Federal judges now presiding on the bench. Every time duty has called, Vice President Harris has answered more than any other Vice President in our Nation's long and storied history. Today, I also want to thank the Vice President for doing all of this while juggling the immense responsibilities of her office. She has led the charge on protecting freedom of choice. She has fought for climate justice, criminal justice reform, and commonsense gun safety. Our children--our children--will live in a healthier, more secure, more prosperous nation thanks to her lifetime of service. So thank you, Vice President Harris. This is a great milestone, and yours is an even greater legacy. Let us continue working together to make life better for all Americans.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. As for a little housekeeping after that history, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized to speak, followed by Senators Hagerty and Kaine, prior to the recess; further, that all postcloture time be considered expired at 2:15 p.m.; and further, that following the confirmation vote on the AliKhan nomination, the Senate recess for the all-Senators briefing until 4:30 p.m.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I have the happy duty of asking unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nominations en bloc--it is a lot of numbers, so I will read them slowly for the sake of being transcribed--Calendar Nos. 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 110, 111, 112, 113, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 180, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 199, 200, 201, 203, 204, 205, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 248, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 289, 290, 291, 293, 294, 295, 296, 325, 326, 327, 330, 331, 332, 336, 337, 339, 340, 342, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 382, 383, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422--excepting Col. David D. Berkland, Col. Benjamin R. Jonsson, COL John W. Sannes, COL Andrew O. Saslav, CAPT Brian J. Anderson, Brig. Gen. Scott A. Cain, Brig. Gen. Paul D. Moga, and BG Lawrence G. Ferguson; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without intervening action or debate, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Now, Mr. President, today, hundreds--hundreds--of military families across the country can breathe a sigh of relief. The Senate has now unanimously confirmed hundreds of military nominations that were held up for 10 months by a single person: the Senator from Alabama. Thank God, these military officers will now get the promotions they so rightfully earned. I am happy that, after so much unnecessary delay by one Senator, we have finally moved forward and given these men and women the promotions they deserve. And we will work to confirm the rest of the nominees that were on hold very soon. While today's confirmations are good news, these holds should never have happened in the first place. Unfortunately, resolving this impasse took too long, risking our national security and throwing the lives of so many military families into discombobulation. I am glad that pointless and gravely damaging ordeal has finally, finally ended. Now, let this incident be a warning: No one--no one--should attempt this in the Senate again. The senior Senator from Alabama has nothing to show for his 10 months of delay--no law is changing in any way-- except for the damage he did to our military readiness and the pain he caused to military families. If every Senator did what Senator Tuberville tried to do and held up military confirmations because of this or that partisan issue, no matter how deeply felt, it would grind the Senate to a halt. It would be a catastrophe for our military. Holding up military nominations was an unsuccessful and risky strategy in this instance and should never, ever happen again. I want to thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who spoke out in defense of our military families. I want to thank, particularly, Senator Reed, the chair of the Armed Services Committee; Senator Klobuchar, the chair of the Rules Committee; and I really want to thank Senators Ernst and Sullivan for their courage in helping break the logjam after so, so many months. For all those who played a part in bringing this impasse to an end, thank you. Thank you. It took patience. It took resolve. But we have emerged on the right side of where we should be. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 352.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I have two 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. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, December 6; 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 proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Rayes nomination; further, that the cloture motions filed during yesterday's session ripen at 12:30 p.m.; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Wednesday's session, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. SCHUMER

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

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. I ask unanimous consent that the Lummis substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. I send a cloture motion to the desk.