Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that 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 with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 513, S. 4212.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Blackburn amendment to the committee-reported substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; that the committee- reported substitute amendment, as amended, be considered and agreed to; that 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. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 523, S. 3606.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be 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. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, December 9; 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 following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Johnson nomination; further, that at 5:30 p.m., the Senate vote on confirmation of the Johnson nomination as under the order of December 4; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Monday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

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

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I rise in support of the joint resolutions of disapproval that the Senate is considering today on the sales of certain offensive weapons to the Netanyahu government. To be clear, I do not support an arms embargo on Israel, but I do believe that the United States should pause the delivery of offensive weapons until the Netanyahu government meets the requirements of U.S. law and policy with respect to the delivery of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza and the use of American weapons there. This is not about abandoning support for Israel; this is about making sure Americans' support for Israel complies with American laws and policies and values. We would not be on this floor considering these resolutions if that was happening today, and these votes will be the one opportunity that Members of the Senate have to send that message. I urge my colleagues to support them. Following the Hamas attacks of October 7, I have, as probably every Senator has, supported Israel's right to defend itself--in fact, argued that they have a duty to defend themselves--and end Hamas's control of Gaza, and I am steadfast in that support to this moment. There must be no more October 7ths. At the same time, U.S. taxpayer-funded assistance should not come in the form of a blank check, even to our closest allies. We need to ensure that U.S. interests, values, and priorities will be respected by foreign governments that receive U.S. assistance. That is why our security assistance to many countries includes various conditions to encourage progress on human rights. In some cases, as in the case of Ukraine, we have limited the use of certain systems to align with U.S. national security interests. In other cases, including even some NATO allies, we have prevented the transfer of certain advance weapons systems when our policies goals do not align. The one minimum standard that we must apply to all recipients of American security assistance is compliance with American laws, and it is compliance with that minimum standard that we are talking about here today--nothing more, nothing less. The Netanyahu government should not be exempt from that universal requirement of American law. The United States has provided billions and billions of dollars of American taxpayer-financed bombs and other offensive weapons systems, but we have seen Prime Minister Netanyahu repeatedly violate the terms of American security assistance, disregard U.S. priorities, and ignore our requests, only to be rewarded by more bombs and more money. That pattern undermines the credibility of the United States around the world and creates an unacceptable double standard that our adversaries are exploiting. Two of the conditions that every recipient of U.S. security assistance must meet are, one, they must facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance into war zones where those U.S. weapons are being used--war zones like Ukraine and war zones like Gaza--and, two, they must use American-supplied weapons in accordance with international humanitarian law, which was well developed after World War II and what Senator Graham spoke to. The Netanyahu government is violating both of these requirements in Gaza, and by refusing to take action, the President and the United States are complicit in those violations of American laws and American values. Let's look at the unacceptable restrictions being placed by the Netanyahu government on the delivery of humanitarian aid to desperately needy civilians in Gaza right now. It has been well documented that there was some improvement in the delivery of humanitarian supplies in Gaza last April, around the time that the Biden administration had to submit the NSM-20 report to Congress, but since then, aid levels have been on a downhill slide and then a precipitous drop. The cumulative impact of severe restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid has worsened an already catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza. Senator Sanders spoke to the conditions there. In fact, that is why President Biden directly called on Prime Minister Netanyahu to increase aid to Gaza on many occasions--most recently in an early October call--and that is why, on October 13, Secretaries Austin and Blinken expressly reminded Israeli Government officials, in a letter that I have here, of their obligations under U.S. and international law. They specifically cited section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act and National Security Memorandum 20 to facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance. Here is what our two Secretaries wrote in that letter: We are particularly concerned that recent actions by the Israeli Government--including halting commercial imports, denying or impeding nearly 90% of humanitarian movements between northern and southern Gaza in September-- And then they go on to list a number of other things-- are contributing to an accelerated deterioration in Gaza's conditions. Then Secretaries Austin and Blinken laid out a series of key measures against which they said the United States was going to measure the Netanyahu government's compliance. They mentioned enabling a minimum of 350 trucks per day to enter Gaza. They mentioned instituting adequate humanitarian pauses across Gaza to enable humanitarian activities. They mentioned reinstating a minimum of 50 to 100 commercial trucks per day. They had a long list of items. So what do eight very respected international NGOs that conduct humanitarian relief in Gaza and monitor it have to say about whether those conditions were met? Well, they have compiled a scorecard. I have got it right here. And what they say on the specific items I mentioned was that the Netanyahu government failed. In fact, the overall report card concludes ``Israel Fails to Comply With U.S. Humanitarian Access Demands in Gaza.'' In fact, they determined that not only did the Netanyahu government fail ``to meet the U.S. criteria that would indicate support to the humanitarian response, but concurrently took actions that dramatically worsened the situation on the ground, particularly in Northern Gaza.'' They said that the situation is even more dire today than a month ago. In other words, because of those actions that were taken, the situation was worse than when Secretaries Austin and Blinken sent their letter. Indeed, an independent Washington Post analysis found that ``Israel has largely failed to comply with the three main demands of the U.S. letter.'' In that November 12 Washington Post article, they also pointed out the following: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to publicly disavow the plan, which calls for the military to take control of the north by starving out the civilian population and treating everyone who remains as combatants. The story goes on to say: The Israeli Defense Force says it has been given no such orders and is focused on dismantling Hamas, but the ongoing military operation in the north appears to have much in common with the strategy. It is called the ``General's Plan.'' A leading Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, editorialized with the following headline: Netanyahu's Ethnic Cleansing in Gaza Is on Display for All to See. That is a view that has also been echoed by many Israeli human rights organizations, and I commend them on all the work that they do every day. And I find it extraordinary that so many of our colleagues come to this floor to talk about human rights abuses across the world. They cite Human Rights Watch. They cite Amnesty International. But when it comes to those organizations writing reports about human rights violations conducted by the Netanyahu government--oh, no--they run away from that. So let's look at what others have said in terms of monitoring the situation right now in Gaza. On November 1, the principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee, the leaders of 15 U.N. and humanitarian organizations--including World Food Programme Executive Director Cindy McCain and UNICEF Director Catherine Russell, two American leaders of those organizations--said: The situation unfolding in North Gaza is apocalyptic. And they say: The entire Palestinian population in North Gaza is at imminent risk of dying from disease, famine and violence. Humanitarians are not safe to do their work and are blocked by Israeli forces and by insecurity from reaching people in need. They say: Rescue teams have been deliberately attacked and thwarted in their attempts to pull people buried under the rubble of their homes. Yet we keep sending more bombs. In that statement, the U.N. and humanitarian leaders also issued this call: Member States must use their leverage to ensure respect for international law. That includes withholding arms transfers where there is a clear risk that such arms will be used in violation of international law. So let's look at the use of American weapons. In its May 10 NSM-20 report to Congress, the Biden administration concluded: [I]t is reasonable to assess that defense articles covered under NSM-20 have been used by Israeli security forces since October 7 in instances inconsistent with its [International Humanitarian Law] obligations or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm. And in that report--and I urge my colleagues to look at it--the administration identified a sampling of cases of civilian harm incidents where U.S. weapons were used. And they said there are some ongoing investigations and we are still waiting for answers from the Netanyahu government. Well, just a few weeks ago, there was a report that we now have 500 cases of civilian harm where U.S. weapons were used under review. And if you look at the most recent letter from Secretaries Blinken and Austin, you will see that they reference, at the bottom of their report, the following--and I want to read this because their letter says: Lastly, it is crucial that our governments establish a new channel to raise and discuss incidents of civilian harm. Our previous engagements have not achieved the necessary outcomes. We request the initial virtual meeting for this channel to be held by the end of October. This is more than a year into the war, and here you have the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State saying they are not getting enough information from the Netanyahu government to be able to make decisions about whether or not U.S. weapons have been used in violation of international humanitarian law. Yet, despite not getting that information, the administration has continued to send those taxpayer-financed offensive weapons. And it is very clear that the Netanyahu government continues to conduct operations in Gaza in a way that results in large numbers of civilian casualties, and I think our colleagues know that the fact that Hamas violates international law and does despicable tactics by operating from amongst civilians does not absolve Israel or any other country involved in that kind of situation of the duty to avoid civilian harm and avoid the destruction of civilian infrastructure. Since President Biden's recent call with Prime Minister Netanyahu last month, we have seen continued high rates of civilian deaths, and human rights organizations continue to document cases of weapons being used in violation of international humanitarian law. Now, Madam President, that October 13 letter not only warned the Netanyahu government about unacceptable restrictions on humanitarian aid in Gaza and not only warned them about illegal use of American weapons; they also raised two other issues. One, they said that Israel is required by international law to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross access to Palestinian prisoners who were detained without any charges. Yet, despite them sending the letter, no change there. And that means over 3,000 Palestinian prisoners who have been imprisoned without charge under administrative detention are not--the ICRC does not have access to them. They also warned in their letter about pending legislation before the Knesset that would cripple UNRWA. And here is what Secretaries Austin and Blinken said. They warn that enactment ``of such restrictions would devastate the Gaza humanitarian response at this critical moment and deny vital educational and social services to tens of thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which could have implications under relevant U.S. law and policy.'' Within days of the U.S. Government sending that letter, two bills were passed by the Knesset to ban UNRWA. So what we see, Madam President, is a continuing pattern. President Biden makes certain demands that are routinely ignored without consequence. In fact, they are rewarded. And this is an ineffective use of American leverage to accomplish our policy goals and ensure that American law is abided by. I want to just mention a couple others, and Senator Sanders referenced them. But we know that Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly obstructed President Biden's plan for a ceasefire and the return of hostages. Both in Washington and Israel, I have met with families of hostages who are experiencing unthinkable pain. I just met with the father of a soldier who is being held right now in Gaza as a hostage. They have stressed that Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly obstructed President Biden's plan to bring home their loved ones. In fact, in his farewell address just 2 weeks ago, former Israeli Defense Minister Gallant noted that one of the key disagreements leading to his firing by Netanyahu was over ``our moral obligation and responsibility to bring our kidnapped sons and daughters back home as quickly as possible, with as many alive as possible, to their families.'' He went on to say: Based on my role, experience, and the military achievements of the past year, with a clear-eyed view of reality, I state that this is achievable but involves painful compromises that Israel can bear, and the IDF can deal with. There is and will not be any atonement for abandoning the captives. This is former Defense Minister Gallant, fired by Netanyahu. I heard Senator Graham speak a lot about the ``day after'' plan. Well, President Biden has proposed a ``day after'' plan. It is to have a reformed Palestinian Authority form the nucleus of governance in Gaza. And, indeed, the Netanyahu government, led by Smotrich, not only opposes President Biden's plan, but they have worked to systematically weaken the P.A. by withholding tax revenues that it collects on behalf of the Palestinian people. What is more, Prime Minister Netanyahu publicly rebuked President Biden's call to create a path to a two-state solution, even bragging that he had long blocked that outcome--something I heard Senator Graham refer to as something that was needed. So the Netanyahu government has refused to comply with other requests, as well, trying to change the rules of engagement on the West Bank in order to prevent the killing of innocent civilians, including the deaths of some American citizens. And contrary to longstanding policy in American Government, from Republicans and Democrats alike, about not having expanded settlements in the West Bank, something Secretary Blinken agreed was inconsistent with international law, we have seen a record number of settlements expanded by the Netanyahu government--in fact, one when Secretary Blinken was there in Israel. So, Madam President, the issue here is not whether or not the United States is supporting Israel. The issue is whether or not, as we provide that support, we have a two-way street. A partnership should be a two- way street, not a one-way blank check. And, at a minimum, the Netanyahu government should comply with American law, as we have talked about today. And when they are not, we have an obligation to the American people and American taxpayers to make sure that we withhold that support until Netanyahu comes into compliance. That is what we are saying here: Just meet the requirements of American law. And all of us have an obligation to American taxpayers to make sure that we are not complicit in violating American law and American values. So, Madam President, that is why I encourage my colleagues to support these joint resolutions to send that message. This is the one opportunity we have to do so. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Jackie DeCarlo, chief executive officer of Manna Food Center, in recognition of her remarkable service to our community in Maryland. For over a decade, Jackie has been a tireless advocate in the fight against food insecurity, dedicating her career to serving the Montgomery County community and improving the lives of countless residents. Jackie's journey of service began long before her tenure at Manna. She grew up in Atlanta, GA, where she started her career as an elementary school teacher, instilling compassion and a sense of purpose in her students. Seeking new challenges, Jackie moved to Maryland with her wife Kristen Moe, bringing her passion for advocacy and her educational expertise to tackle the pressing issue of food insecurity in our region. Manna Food Center, founded in 1983, has been at the forefront of eliminating hunger in Montgomery County, MD. Under Jackie's leadership, the organization expanded its reach, providing essential food assistance to over 30,000 residents annually. Jackie played a pivotal role in relocating Manna's headquarters from Gaithersburg to Silver Spring, a strategic move aimed at addressing the growing needs of underserved communities in the eastern portion of the county, helped found the White House-recognized Montgomery County Farm to Food Bank and Small Business Vouchers Programs, among many others, and shepherded Manna and tens of thousands of our neighbors through the dangerous twists and turns of the COVID-19 pandemic. And during her time at the helm of Manna, Jackie has been invited to attend the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health and to address the Senate Spouses Organization at the Naval Observatory. Her commitment to the mission of Manna is a testament to her leadership and dedication to social justice. Jackie is also an active member of other local organizations, including Leadership Montgomery and Nonprofit Montgomery, where she continues to build partnerships and champion systemic change. Her influence extends beyond the nonprofit space; she has worked to create a more equitable and compassionate community, and indeed, the ripple effects of her endeavors will carry on for generations. As Jackie departs Manna and embarks on this new chapter, spending more time with her family and exploring new ways to engage with the public, her legacy of service will endure. Her work at Manna Food Center and her broader community involvement have left an indelible mark on Montgomery County, and we are forever grateful she has shared her buoyant spirit and visionary leadership with us. I ask my colleagues to join me in sending Jackie and Kris our deepest gratitude and best wishes.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I rise today to honor and reflect on the remarkable life of Mattie Stepanek, a beloved member of our Rockville, MD, community, on the 20th anniversary of his passing. Despite his brief 14 years on this earth, Mattie's extraordinary achievements and tenacious spirit have left an enduring legacy that continues to inspire and uplift us all. Mattie was born with a rare form of muscular dystrophy, a debilitating disease that presented tremendous challenges throughout his life. Yet Mattie faced these challenges with courage, grace, and an unyielding determination to spread a message of hope, peace, and love. His poignant poetry and heartfelt words touched the hearts of millions. His message transcended barriers and brought people together through a shared vision of a more compassionate world. Mattie's literary talents were evident at a young age. He authored several best-selling books of poetry in which the essence of his dreams and aspirations were captured in verses that resonated deeply with readers of all ages and backgrounds. Mattie was wise beyond his years, and his words are a powerful reminder of the beauty and strength that can emerge from even the most difficult circumstances. Mattie was a fervent advocate for peace. He envisioned a world where kindness and understanding would prevail. He worked tirelessly to promote his vision. Mattie once said ``Unity is strength . . . when there is teamwork and collaboration, wonderful things can be achieved.'' His efforts to establish a National Peace Day have gained significant momentum and respect for his mission. Mattie's dream of a day devoted to peace should serve as both an inspiration and a call to action. As we honor Mattie's life and legacy, I also want to recognize the incredible dedication of his mother Jeni Stepanek and the support of our community members, including Susan Farag. I commend their unrelenting commitment to honoring Mattie's legacy. Although Mattie Stepanek's life was tragically cut short, it was filled with profound meaning and impact. His story is a testament of the power of resilience, love, and the human spirit. As we mark the 20th anniversary of his passing, let us reaffirm our commitment to his vision of a world where peace and kindness flourish.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, let me start by thanking my friend and the senior Senator from the great State of Maryland for putting together a process that does ensure that we recommend the very best to our colleagues. I join him in expressing my strong support for the confirmation of Adam Abelson of Maryland to serve as a U.S. district court judge for the District of Maryland. I was honored to recommend his confirmation to the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with Senator Cardin, and very pleased to see the Senate Judiciary Committee support that nomination. Judge Abelson's nomination was put forward by President Biden after Chief Judge James Bredar announced his decision to take senior status in May. Chief Judge Bredar served Marylanders on the district court with distinction for over 14 years, and I want to thank him for his excellent public service and unwavering commitment to the rule of law. Judge Bredar left the Maryland District Court in the very capable hands of now-Chief Judge Russell, and we wish him all the best as he continues his leadership. For Judge Abelson, this moment is the next step in a remarkable career shaped by dedication to his community, upholding equal justice under the law, and making a positive impact on the world. His experience is both wide and deep. While in law school, he traveled abroad to promote human rights as a research fellow for Human Rights Watch, where he advocated for victims of the Pinochet regime in Chile and promoted freedom of the press in Argentina and Venezuela. As a fellow at the Department of Justice, he helped to prosecute the perpetrators of genocide in Bosnia and Rwanda. He then clerked for Judge Andre Davis on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and for Judge Catherine Blake on the District Court for the District of Maryland--two judges known and respected for their stellar and distinguished service. Following his clerkships, as Senator Cardin indicated, he was in private practice. He was at the firm of Zuckerman Spaeder, where he rose to the rank of partner and became what some call a legal omnivore, meaning he covered a vast array of territory in the legal realm-- working with plaintiffs and defendants in class actions, white-collar criminal cases, investigations--in every step of the trial process. He covered a range of topics, including antitrust, legal ethics, consumer protection, family law, and even one memorable case regarding horseshoe crabs. His diversity of experience is a testament to Judge Abelson's work ethic, which has allowed him to master one highly complex area of the law after another. His colleagues say he was gifted with ``a special ability to explain complex legal matters in a way that is readily accessible'' to everyone. And he fought to ensure that ``neither lawyers nor judges lose sight of the humanity of every individual, without regard to their resources.'' In addition to his early work fighting for human rights abroad, Adam has devoted himself to the same principles here at home through pro bono work. Again, his colleagues say he ``regularly leapt at the chance to take on matters in furtherance of public good.'' I do want to mention one important case: his work in Wit v. United Behavioral Health, which was a class-action lawsuit in which he took on a massive health insurance company on behalf of 100,000 patients with mental health and substance abuse disorders. These patients were being denied coverage and being forced to shoulder huge out-of-pocket costs for essential care. Adam Abelson helped win them relief, and former Congressman Patrick Kennedy called it the ``Brown v. Board of Education for the mental health movement'' case. It is no surprise that, as Senator Cardin said, the American Bar Association unanimously ruled that Judge Abelson is ``well qualified'' for the position to which he was nominated. He has also been a devoted and outstanding member of the legal community, taking on responsibilities with the Maryland chapter of the Federal Bar Association and also having chaired the American Bar Association's Working Group on Building Public Trust in the American Justice System. He has also been an indispensable citizen in the great city of Baltimore. He served on the board of the Job Opportunities Task Force, which works to eliminate educational and employment barriers for low- wage workers with job training, advocacy, and research. He is an active member of his synagogue, Beth El Congregation. I want to end just by mentioning some of his family members to whom he would readily say he owes his good fortune in being nominated for this position. His grandmother Lois was a public school guidance counselor who counseled at-risk youth, taught adult education classes, and was involved in other community and civic activities--all into her nineties. In his application, Judge Abelson remembers that his grandmother helped put him on the path to public service. When she delivered meals for senior citizens in public housing, she took Adam and her other grandchildren along. She died 10 years ago, but it is clear that her tenacious work ethic and her devotion to justice live on in her grandson. Like Senator Cardin, I also want to acknowledge his immediate family members--his wife Laura Ginsberg Abelson, who is a former Federal public defender, an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland Law School, and a fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. It was Laura who grew up in Baltimore, and we have her to thank many years ago for poaching Adam from Ohio. They decided to raise their family in Baltimore City. Their sons Asher and Max are both currently attending Baltimore City public schools, and both Mom and Dad are very active in their children's educations. We know our democracy depends on a strong, independent judiciary, and our judiciary depends on people like Judge Abelson--leaders with nimble minds and deep-rooted convictions. He has served with distinction as a magistrate judge, and he will make Maryland and America proud as a district judge. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote to confirm him. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act, a bill that includes an amended version of the Kids Online Safety Act and the Children and Teens Online Privacy Protection Act. I commend the bill's sponsors, Commerce Chair Cantwell, Leader Schumer, and members like Senator Wyden and the many outside advocates for children, civil rights, and privacy who have helped improve the bill to the version we are voting on today. I also appreciate the parents and students who have shared their experiences with me, particularly those who have turned great pain into advocacy to protect children. While the internet is an invaluable tool for connecting people, disseminating information, and fostering an exchange of ideas, it can also be exploited to spread misinformation, harvest personal data, and prey on society's most vulnerable. The complex landscape can be especially difficult to navigate for young people, who deserve the freedom to access information and express themselves online but can also be subject to bullying, targeting, and privacy violations. I had concerns about the Kids Online Safety Act as originally introduced, particularly provisions that could have permitted political censorship of content and falsely categorized basic information as dangerous or harmful. The bill before us today focuses instead on design elements to protect children online, including restricting features that encourage compulsive use, ensuring more transparency about how platforms use personalized recommendation systems and allow users to opt out of those systems, and providing optional tools that can help parents manage their child's online experience while protecting young people's access to information. I became a cosponsor of the Kids Online Safety Act after these changes were included, strengthening the legislation while, in turn, preventing unintended consequences. Congress will also have an obligation to ensure that the Federal Trade Commission implements this bill as intended, with clear guidance to platforms on how to comply with the law without restricting First Amendment-protected content or limiting privacy protections. I believe this legislation is a balanced approach to the serious challenge of protecting young people online, but will carefully monitor its implementation and effects to ensure it remains targeted to prevent harm.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Maryland resident John R. Allen as he retires from Federal service after 20 years in the Marine Corps and 20 years at the Peace Corps. Mr. Allen served as the Chief of the Global Crime Response and Analysis Unit for the Peace Corps, a U.S. Government Agency that sends American Volunteers to serve alongside host communities in roughly 60 countries around the world. John was a key adviser to multiple Directors of the Peace Corps on all areas of the Agency's global safety and security program. Throughout his 20 years with the Agency, he traveled extensively representing Peace Corps and directly supporting Volunteers in Africa and Latin America. Mr. Allen joined the Peace Corps after retiring from the Marine Corps, where he served honorably at home and abroad as a senior noncommissioned officer. He has remained active in the veterans community as the leadership liaison for the Peace Corps' Veterans Employee Resource Group. He was also an active member of the Interagency Veterans Advisory Council (IVAC), comprised of Active-Duty and veteran representatives of approximately 100 departments and Agencies, which proudly supports the recruitment, acclimation, retention, and promotion of veterans, Reservists, National Guard personnel, and military spouses in the Federal civilian workforce. Collectively, IVAC advocates for the interests of over 500,000 veteran civilian employees. Mr. Allen has a BA in psychology from the University of South Carolina and an MS in management from Troy University. He completed the Key Executive Leadership Program at American University and is currently working on his dissertation for the doctor in ministry degree at Denver Seminary. John resides in Urbana, MD, with his wife Susan. They are the proud parents to two adult sons, a daughter-in-law, and two rambunctious grandboys Miles John and Austin David. I am honored to represent such an exemplary civil servant and military veteran. Please join me in congratulating John R. Allen for his Federal service, his contributions to the Peace Corps and the Marine Corps, and the larger U.S. veteran and national service community and in wishing him well as he transitions into his new position at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

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

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship, to talk about why it was such a big mistake to invite Prime Minister Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress and why I will not attend his speech tomorrow. I do not take this decision lightly, and I want to explain my reasons. At the outset, I want to underscore the importance of the longtime partnership between the people of the United States and the people of Israel. After the horrors of the Holocaust, the United States led the effort at the United Nations to advocate for the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people. And then, in May 1948, the United States, under the leadership of President Harry Truman, became the first country to recognize the State of Israel. And that support--this solidarity--has held firm for 76 years, through many conflicts. That was especially true in the immediate aftermath of the vicious Hamas terror attack on October 7. Ten days later, President Biden traveled to Jerusalem to embrace the people of Israel and let them know that we, the United States, stand with them after that brutal massacre that killed over 1,200 people and seized over 250 hostages. Those bonds between the people of Israel and the people of the United States remain strong today. But the actions and words of Prime Minister Netanyahu and his ultra-right extremist coalition, both before and since the October 7 attacks, have weakened the ties between the United States and the Government of Israel. All of us who care about our partnership, both in America and in Israel, should understand the enormous damage that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his current extremist government coalition are doing to our relationship and to Israel's standing in the world. So it sends a terrible message to bring him here now to address a joint session of Congress. While we warmly welcomed President Herzog's speech to Congress just over a year ago, Prime Minister Netanyahu remains the leader of the most extreme rightwing government coalition in the history of Israel. It is the coalition he personally assembled in a desperate bid to regain power and to prevent a possible prison sentence. To do that, he formed a government with certain individuals who had previously been on the dangerous, most extreme fringes of Israeli politics and considered totally unfit to govern. They include the likes of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, both unabashed racists and religious bigots. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak referred to them ``as the racist messianic fanatics with whom Netanyahu has cast his lot.'' That is former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. In fact, they are the ideological successors to the extremist Meir Kahane, who wanted to ban relations between Jews and non-Jews and expel all Palestinians. Kahane was banned by the Israeli Supreme Court from participating in Israeli politics decades ago, and his party was placed on the U.S. Terror Watchlist. But in 2023, Prime Minister Netanyahu gave those ideological descendants of Meir Kahane--Ben-Gvir and Smotrich--key powerful government positions. These are the individuals who now control Prime Minister Netanyahu's political fate, who threatened to withdraw their support and bring down his government if he fails to do their bidding. And, in many ways, they are now calling the shots when it comes to the policy decisions of the Government of Israel--in Israel, in the West Bank, and in Gaza. They have also made it abundantly clear that, when it comes to the war in Gaza, they do not prioritize the safe return of all the hostages, including American citizens taken by Hamas. President Biden has prioritized the safe return of all the hostages. Prime Minister Netanyahu has not. He continues to put his own political survival first, above the interests of the people of Israel and those American citizens. I renew my call for an immediate cease-fire and the return of all the hostages. Just last Friday, 4 days ago, during a visit to Israel, I met with Israeli families, including American citizens, whose loved ones had been brutally murdered by Hamas on October 7. Some of them lost parents; others lost siblings or children. All of them--all of them-- have faced tremendous personal trauma and suffering. So I was shocked to learn that none of the family members that I met with had heard from Prime Minister Netanyahu or any member of his government since that horrific Hamas attack. That is hard to fathom. Neither the Prime Minister nor any member of his government had reached out to them to offer a helping hand. So I say to Prime Minister Netanyahu: Before you come speak to Members of Congress, go meet with the families I saw whose loved ones were murdered on October 7. I also met, in Tel Aviv, this past Friday, with families whose loved ones were kidnapped by Hamas on October 7, including American citizens. Some of them had their loved ones returned safely as a part of the agreement reached last November. Others said they have been told that their loved ones have died. Most held out hope that their loved ones were still alive. All of those that I met with expressed deep, deep disappointment in the fact that Prime Minister Netanyahu has not prioritized the safe and swift return of the remaining hostages. Recent polls indicate that large swaths of the Israeli people--over 70 percent--want Prime Minister Netanyahu to resign now or when the war ends, and that is certainly what I heard from many Israelis during my visit to Israel last week. They saw the Prime Minister's invitation to address a joint session of Congress as a political stunt to help him in his efforts to escape legal and political accountability for his actions and inactions, including the massive intelligence failure that allowed the October 7 attack to have such devastating consequences. That sentiment that I heard expressed directly was captured by a headline in the Jerusalem Post on the same day I met with those families. That headline reads: Protesters call on Netanyahu to delay flight to US until hostage deal is closed. The protesters stated that Prime Minister Netanyahu ``is running away from the hostage families, running away from a deal, running away from decisions about the day after.'' I agree with those families. What I heard directly from many Israelis was also described by a piece written by a well-known and well-regarded Israeli writer and journalist by the name of Amir Tibon. Amir Tibon's family survived October 7 by hiding for hours--hours--huddled in darkness inside a safe room of their family home until his father arrived at the kibbutz and heroically saved them. Here is what Amir wrote in the Haaretz newspaper back on June 2: There is nothing ``pro-Israel'' about this invitation. It is not ``pro-Israel'' to side with Netanyahu's party against the brave families of the hostages, who are fighting to secure a deal for their release. ``It is not `pro-Israel,' '' he wrote, ``to help Netanyahu address Congress while knowing that since October 7th he has not found the time to speak with any of the Israeli communities invaded by Hamas under his watch.'' Or take this June 26 op-ed in the New York Times, entitled ``We Are Israelis Calling on Congress to Disinvite Netanyahu.'' It is written by five individuals, and I think it is worth the Senate knowing their backgrounds. They are David Harel, the president of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities; Tamir Pardo, the former director of Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence services; Talia Sasson, former director of the Special Tasks Department in Israel's State Attorney's Office; Ehud Barak, former Israeli Prime Minister; Aaron Ciechanover, Nobel Prize winner in chemistry; and David Grossman, renowned novelist and essayist. Here is what they say: Mr. Netanyahu's appearance in Washington will not represent the State of Israel and its citizens, and it will reward his scandalous and destructive conduct toward our country. They go on to say: Giving Mr. Netanyahu this stage in Washington will all but dismiss the rage and pain of his people, as expressed in the demonstrations throughout the country. American lawmakers should not let that happen. They should ask Mr. Netanyahu to stay home. Well, Mr. Netanyahu is not staying home--he is coming here--but I will respect those voices and stay away from the joint session and urge my colleagues to do the same. I will also not attend Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech for another reason--because his actions and those of his extremist coalition represent a terrible betrayal of our shared values and our shared interests. Successive Democratic and Republican administrations have underscored that our bilateral relationship--our special relationship-- is based on shared values. But make no mistake, Prime Minister Netanyahu and his ultra-rightwing government do not share those values. As others who have followed and written about the United States-Israel relationship for decades have noted, he has done more than anyone to damage the special relationship between the United States and Israel. The damage is being done, and the evidence is abundant. I am going to spend a little time discussing these matters because I just returned from a trip to the UAE, to Saudi Arabia, to Israel, and to the West Bank, and I want to share with my colleagues in the Senate some of my findings. I am not going to focus today on the war in Gaza. I have said many times, including on this Senate floor, that Israel not only has the right but it has the duty to defend itself in the aftermath of the Hamas massacres and the seizure of hostages on October 7. I have also repeatedly said that how wars are conducted matters. They must be conducted according to the rules of war and ensure the required precautions are taken to protect the lives of innocent civilians. They must also be conducted in a way that allows innocent civilians to receive desperately needed humanitarian assistance and medical care. As of today, more than 39,000 Palestinians have been killed, over half of them women and children. For those who doubt those numbers, you are right: Credible accounts like estimates from Johns Hopkins University in my State of Maryland and The Lancet medical journal project the overall death toll is likely much higher. Ten months into this war, the humanitarian situation remains catastrophic. Access to basic humanitarian needs--water, food, medicine, shelter, and basic sanitation--is punishingly scarce. Open sewers are running through the streets, and polio was recently detected in the wastewater in Gaza. There is a real risk of the outbreak of cholera. Gaza is a wasteland as anybody can see from the photographs. We must end this war, and we must bring all the hostages safely home. And in order to prevent any more October 7s, we must both end the military threat from Hamas and create hope for a better future for the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people who have nothing to do with Hamas. I was deeply moved by the humanity and strength of the Israeli families whom I met with just last Friday who lost loved ones on October 7. They--they--stress the importance of distinguishing between the Hamas terrorists and the vast majority of the Palestinian people in both Gaza and the West Bank who have nothing to do with Hamas; and in the midst of their ongoing, profound grief, they were determined to find a way forward to achieve peace, security, and dignity for all people, to find some light at the end of this very, very dark tunnel. In fact, the families I met with believe strongly that peace and long- term security for their families and for all Israelis and Palestinians can only be achieved by securing and ensuring dignity, freedom, justice, and self-determination for all. I was inspired by their humanity. I have been similarly inspired by Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank who are determined to live in peace despite the terrible personal losses they have suffered. I wish every American--every American--had the opportunity to hear directly from these Israelis and these Palestinians. The United States and most of the world recognize that, in order to ensure the long-term security of Israelis and Palestinians, both peoples must enjoy equal measures of dignity and the right of self- determination. That is why it has long been the policy of the United States, both under Democratic and Republican administrations, to support a two-state solution that establishes a viable Palestinian State alongside the State of Israel, with clear security guarantees for all. That is the plan President Biden has laid out to light a little flicker of hope for long-term peace at this very dark time. President Biden has coupled his call for a two-state solution with his push for the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia and other Arab States that have yet to recognize the State of Israel. Those actions would also further strengthen Israel's security and provide greater stability throughout the region. But how was President Biden's call for a two-state solution--even one accompanied by a normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia--greeted by Prime Minister Netanyahu? What did the Prime Minister say in response? He slapped it down; dismissed it entirely. That was Prime Minister Netanyahu's reaction to the plan presented by the American President, Joe Biden, who not only visited Jerusalem in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas attacks but immediately deployed U.S. carrier groups to the region to deter potential escalation by Hezbollah and others; the President of the United States who organized a $14 billion supplemental military assistance package to Israel despite concerns about the conduct of the war; the President of the United States who has deployed the U.S. Navy to defend shipping lanes in the Red Sea from Houthis' attacks; the President of the United States who, on April 13, deployed American air defenses and engaged partners in the region to help Israel successfully intercept Iranian missiles and drones. Prime Minister Netanyahu and his rightwing coalition continue to rebuff calls from President Biden and the U.N. Security Council for a two-state solution. It is very important to understand what--what--is driving Prime Minister Netanyahu's opposition to the creation of a Palestinian State because it is not because it would create an unacceptable security risk; he knows full well those issues have been addressed on the West Bank through a demilitarized state. American and Israeli military experts, including organizations called Commanders for Israel's Security, have demonstrated that over and over again. No, Prime Minister Netanyahu's opposition is much more fundamental than that. It is because he and his extremist allies, like Smotrich and Ben- Gvir, want the land of the West Bank to be fully incorporated into the State of Israel. They want to complete their messianic vision of a Greater Israel that includes all of the West Bank. Indeed, that goal is plainly written out for all to see in their coalition government platform. Take a look at it. By their telling, God gave the West Bank to Israel, and the Palestinians are interlopers there. In fact, Smotrich has said: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people. As former Israeli Prime Minister Olmert has pointed out, the Israeli right's messianic vision is driving opposition to its two-state solution and inciting violence against Palestinians on the West Bank. And make no mistake about it, the Netanyahu government is working every day to implement this vision of a Greater Israel by enabling violent settlers on the West Bank to push Palestinians off their land, to steal their grazing areas, to destroy their olive groves, and to establish illegal outposts. This is all happening in plain sight. I invite my colleagues to go and see it for themselves. We are all witnessing ongoing settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, including Palestinian Americans. The consequences of this violence are dire. Last week, I also visited Ramallah, and I met with Palestinian- American families whose 17-year-old sons, in separate incidents, were murdered on the West Bank--each of them shot in the back of the head. The United States has not been able to obtain from Israeli authorities information on the status of any investigations, if there are any, into the killings of these American citizens. During my trip, I also met in Jerusalem with our U.S. Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority. He is a three- star general. His name is General Fenzel, and he has helped document the alarming rise in extremist settler violence and land seizures. He has repeatedly warned that these actions will further inflame an already explosive situation on the West Bank. Earlier this month, Israel's top IDF official in the West Bank, Major General Yehuda Fuchs, in his retirement statement, echoed these warnings about unchecked extremist settler violence--this very recently retired Israeli major general--saying: Unfortunately, in recent months, nationalist crime has reared its ugly head, and under the auspices of war and the desire for revenge, it has sown chaos and fear among the Palestinian residents who did not pose any threat. The Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, summarized the retiring general's full remarks in their headline, which read: In His Retirement Speech, Israel's Top Officer in West Bank Revealed the Hidden Truth. General Fuchs' statement is a powerful admission that, while international attention has been focused in the war in Gaza, the extremist Netanyahu government, led by Smotrich--who, by the way, in March 2023, said that Israel should erase the Palestinian village of Hawara--has accelerated its use of settlers and other mechanisms to assault Palestinians in the West Bank and seize their lands. Indeed, according to Israeli human rights groups, the Netanyahu government has poured gasoline on the fire by approving the largest land seizure in the West Bank in over three decades, allowing the proliferation of settlements and connecting illegal outposts with essential infrastructure. In June of last year, I raised some of these issues in a meeting in Jerusalem with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Specifically, Senators Merkley, Lujan, and I raised the issue of Palestinians in the South Hebron Hills, who we had met with, who had been attacked by armed settlers, pushed off their lands, and denied access to their water wells. Prime Minister Netanyahu at the time suggested he was unaware of these incidents, even though they had been already widespread and reported. He said he would look into the situation and get back to us. He never did. I want to applaud the Biden administration for issuing an Executive order to address the actions by these extremist settlers that, under the cover of the Netanyahu government, clearly are undermining peace and stability in the West Bank. I once again call upon the administration to take urgent action to expand the scope of those sanctions to cover all entities and individuals who are directly or indirectly orchestrating these attacks, seizing Palestinian lands, and breeding a culture of impunity, including Smotrich. Time is of the essence to prevent the situation from spiraling even further out of control. These seizures of Palestinian lands in what is called Area C of the West Bank has been accompanied by a calculated campaign by this Netanyahu government to undermine the Palestinian Authority's ability to administer those areas over which it exercises greater control, the areas known as A and B. The Netanyahu government, with Smotrich wielding his power as minister of finance, is financially squeezing the Palestinian Authority by withholding ever-increasing amounts of their own funds. These are funds that Israel collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority in the form of customs duties. It belongs to the Palestinians, and it is needed to pay for all of the individuals involved in the Palestinian civil administration on the West Bank, from teachers to healthcare workers to police to the Palestinian Authority's security forces that, by the way, the United States helps to train and whose salaries have now been cut dramatically. These actions, plus the steep rise in the number of security checkpoints in the West Bank and the big drop in the number of work permits for Palestinians in the West Bank to work in Israel, have significantly constrained movement and are strangling the economy in the West Bank and contributing to an even more volatile situation. Secretary Treasurer Yellen has spoken to these issues. The Netanyahu government knows full well that Smotrich seeks to use this power to deliberately collapse the Palestinian Authority. He has expressly stated that goal. He makes no secret about it. In his retirement speech, General Fuchs also warned about how reckless that would be, stating that ``the ability of the Central Command to fulfill its missions also depends on the existence of a functioning and strong Palestinian Authority, with effective security mechanisms that maintain law and order.'' You know, the great irony here--the great irony--is that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his allies are targeting the Palestinian Authority which has, for over 30 years now, recognized Israel's right to exist and, with some American assistance, cooperates with Israel in providing security in parts of the West Bank. Indeed, that cooperation has been so close that the PA has often been seen by many Palestinians as collaborating with Israel to maintain the occupation on the West Bank. Look, there is no doubt that the Palestinian Authority has many shortcomings and needs to implement significant reforms to improve governance, to root out cronyism, and to end the current prisoner payment system. During my visit, I met with the newly appointed Palestinian Prime Minister and the newly appointed Minister of Justice, as well as the reappointed Ministry of Interior. And under pressure from the United States and many of their Arab neighbors, they have started to make some modest but important steps, including progress on a plan to end the current prisoner payment system. Still, as you know, the PA continues to suffer from very low levels of public support. It has not held a presidential or national legislative election since 2006, and it has been unable to demonstrate real progress on Palestinian aspirations to end the occupation of the West Bank. But importantly--importantly--through all this, it has never abandoned its recognition of Israel's right to exist. And in stark contrast to Hamas, the PA seeks to accomplish its goals through nonviolent means. That is why the United States has said that the PA, with a lot of support from the United States, the EU, and the Arab States, should form the nucleus of the governance structure in Gaza when the war ends there. But Prime Minister Netanyahu has systematically undermined the Palestinian Authority, despite its longtime recognition of Israel's right to exist. And he took, at the same time, steps prior to October 7 that had the effect of helping Hamas sustain control in Gaza, despite the fact that Hamas, of course, has been dedicated to the destruction of Israel. This has been well-documented. We don't have to go over this again on the Senate floor. But Prime Minister Netanyahu told his fellow Likud Party members years ago that he facilitated Qatar's payments of financial support to Hamas in order to foil a two-state solution. According to Haaretz, he said: Anyone who wants to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state needs to support strengthening Hamas. This is part of our strategy, to divide the Palestinians between those in Gaza and those in Judea and Samaria. He believed that so long as Hamas was a going concern, he could slow momentum toward a two-state solution. Yet now Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to claim that implementing a plan for a two-state solution with the Palestinian Authority would be a ``reward'' or ``gift'' for Hamas. This is a con game. Everybody knows that Hamas's aim has been to destroy Israel in order to establish an Islamic State in its place. Indeed, the split between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority has been over the PA's recognition of Israel's right to exist and its commitment to peaceful means to achieve a two-state solution versus Hamas's goal of one state and its use of violence to pursue those goals. So Prime Minister Netanyahu has it exactly backward. A real two-state solution, especially coupled with a normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia, as President Biden has proposed, would be a strategic defeat for Hamas; it would be a victory for Israel's long-term security; and it would be an important signal to the overwhelming majority of Palestinians who have nothing to do with Hamas and who have pursued a peaceful but still unfulfilled path toward self-determination. It is true that a two-state solution would not only be a defeat for Hamas, it would also be a defeat for Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and Netanyahu--all of those who pursue maximalist one-state positions. It would be a defeat for all those who seek to claim all the land between the river and the sea for themselves. Let's be clear: Prime Minister Netanyahu may use different language and tactics, but he has shown that his goal is no different than the extremist allies he brought into his coalition. In fact, he recently boasted about his strong opposition to former Prime Minister Rabin's decision to enter into the Oslo Accords, which were designed to lead to a two-state solution. We should remember that Prime Minister Rabin was assassinated by a rightwing Israeli who saw peace as a threat because he wanted Israel to have all of the land and opposed Rabin's decision. Given Prime Minister Netanyahu's misplaced belief that he was successfully managing Hamas prior to October 7, it is no wonder he doesn't want to meet face-to-face with the Israeli families who lost loved ones, whom I spoke to on Friday. Instead, he wants to come to the United States to convince Israelis that the United States stands with him personally and supports his words and actions. He repeatedly tells his fellow Israelis that he knows best how to handle America in an attempt to boost his very low popularity ratings in Israel. But the reality is that the actions, words, and policies of Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extremist partners have weakened the U.S.- Israel relationship, and we in the U.S. Congress should not be complicit in his ongoing political deception. Let me just say that much of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech here will likely focus on the very real dangers posed by Iran and its proxies to Israel and others in the region. President Biden and the United States understand full well Iran's malevolent role in the region. We have been working for years to contain Iranian proxy militias in Iraq. President Biden deployed our naval vessels to secure shipping lanes in the Red Sea as the Houthis have launched attacks since the start of the war in Gaza. President Biden has deployed aircraft carriers in the early days of the war to deter escalation by Hezbollah. The Biden administration is, right now, working around the clock to get Hezbollah to redeploy its forces north of the Litani River. And the United States, along with our partners in the region, provided Israel with substantial help in intercepting Iranian missiles and drones on April 13. We understand the existential threat that Iran poses to Israel. President Biden has made clear--and I agree--that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Anyone who understands the region also understands that certain groups, like the Houthis and Hamas, while they welcome the support they receive from Iran--or anyone else for that matter--they are not the puppets of Iran. They are not controlled by Iran. That is the view of U.S. intelligence and other officials. They are indigenous movements that Iran has supported with weapons because of their mutual antagonism toward Israel. But those two groups would be carrying out attacks with or without Iranian encouragement. They benefit from Iran's supply of weapons. We also understand that Iran supports these groups by opportunistically exploiting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But to say that Iran exploits those wounds is not to say they are not real. One way to help bind those wounds, rather than allowing Iran to exacerbate them, is to work with those who have long recognized Israel's right to exist and seek peaceful coexistence, like the Palestinian Authority, and to address the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people to self-determination. That is why President Biden and Egypt and Jordan and Saudi Arabia and the UAE and others in the Arab world work to establish a framework that ensures the long-term security of Israel by also addressing those aspirations. During my recent visit to Saudi Arabia, I met with Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and senior members of his government. They are interested in reaching a bilateral agreement with the United States on security and other measures. Once the war in Gaza ends, they are also willing to support reconstruction efforts and work toward advancing a normalization agreement with Israel, so long as Israel is willing to implement an irreversible plan to achieve a two-state solution. That would significantly enhance security for Israel in the region. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Netanyahu has consistently rejected that approach in favor of the rightwing extremists in his coalition who want Israel to have all the land from the river to the sea. We need leaders who are willing to make tough decisions for peace and security, not those who always put their own political ambitions first. As former Israeli Prime Minister Barak has stated, instead of urging Israelis to overcome their fears, Netanyahu is exploiting them, playing into the hands of his extreme rightwing allies. As Majority Leader Schumer has said on this Senate floor, there are many obstacles to peace in the Middle East. One of them is Mr. Netanyahu. In my recent visit to Israel, I met with many Israelis who believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his dangerous, extremist partners are leading Israel down a very dangerous path, one that is weakening the bonds between the United States and the Government of Israel and will lead to Israel's further isolation. I agree with their assessment. I will not be party to a spectacle that will inevitably be used to create the illusion that Prime Minister Netanyahu is the protector of the U.S.-Israel relationship. He is not. As many hostages' families have said, it would be better for him to stay at home and prioritize the release of their loved ones. Those who really care about the relationship will work to ensure that it is based on our shared values, and, as the points I made today reveal, that is not happening right now. The Prime Minister and his extremist partners are undermining those shared values. So, Mr. President, while I will continue to fight for a strong U.S.- Israel relationship based on shared values, I will not attend the joint session with Prime Minister Netanyahu tomorrow. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I rise today to honor Brigadier General (Ret.) Norvell Vandervall Coots, MD, MSS, FAAD, a distinguished healthcare and military leader who passed away on June 12, 2024. Dr. Coots dedicated his life to serving our Nation and improving the health and well-being of countless lives. Dr. Coots retired from the U.S. Army in 2016, culminating his distinguished 36-year military career as commanding general of Regional Health Command Europe, concurrent with his post as command surgeon for the U.S. Army Europe and 7th Army. Throughout his service, Dr. Coots held numerous key positions, including deputy commanding general of the U.S. Army Medical Command, Assistant Surgeon General for Force Projection at the Pentagon, and Surgeon General for the U.S. forces in Afghanistan. He also served as the final commander of the historic Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, DC. Dr. Coots' extensive military accomplishments earned him international recognition in the form of both the U.S. Army's Distinguished Service Medal and the French Legion of Honor, among many others. Dr. Coots served as the president and CEO of Holy Cross Health in Montgomery County, MD, for 7 years. Under his guidance, Holy Cross Health became a regional leader in comprehensive cancer care. Dr. Coots also established the Trinity Health Military and Veterans Healthcare Program, addressing the unique needs of military servicemembers, veterans, and their families. Notably, the National Medical Association acknowledged Dr. Coots' dedication and achievement by awarding him the Scroll of Merit. Following his appointment to Maryland's COVID-19 Task Force, Dr. Coots served as chair of the board of the National Institutes of Health's Clinical Center Hospital. In this role, he was instrumental in overseeing operations and fortifying a culture of safety and high- quality clinical care. His leadership was pivotal in strengthening the practices of oversight and compliance, ensuring that the NIH Clinical Center maintained its high standard of excellence. In addition to leadership roles as chairman of the Board for Maryland Physicians Care, with the American Academy of Dermatology, and on the American Hospital Association Board of Trustees, Dr. Coots received recognition from the Pearl S. Buck Society for his contributions to the development of a healthcare program for orphans in Korea. He also founded Project Moldova, a charity organization for vocational training for children in Moldovan orphanages and boarding schools. Personally, Van was a trusted and treasured member of my United States Uniformed Service Academy Advisory Board, helping to select and shepherd the next generation of military leaders. His vision and passion for mentoring poignantly built on his own legacy of excellence in public service, and generations across our Nation and around the world will feel the ripple effects of his good works. I extend my deepest condolences and gratitude to Dr. Coots' family, including his wife Claudia and their children Maximilian and Catalina and to his colleagues. His legacy of service, leadership, and excellence will continue to inspire us all.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I rise today to honor COL Estee Pinchasin, outgoing commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Baltimore District. Since her commissioning as a second lieutenant in 1998, Colonel Pinchasin has diligently served our country through a remarkable tenure with the corps. Appointed to the role of commander on July 16, 2021, Colonel Pinchasin took on this responsibility with enthusiasm and dedication. Throughout her time as commander, Colonel Pinchasin has demonstrated effective leadership and command of approximately 1,200 employees, while overseeing critical engineering and construction programs for the mid-Atlantic region. Colonel Pinchasin has been responsible for roughly 7,000 miles of coastline, including the Susquehanna River, Potomac River, and Chesapeake Bay watersheds. Delivering on critical solutions to support disaster resiliency, construction of Federal facilities, and environmental restoration, Colonel Pinchasin has emphasized partnership and coordination with local organizations to meet the goals of the Corps of Engineers. After the fall of Kabul in 2021, Colonel Pinchasin successfully implemented multiple operational logistical hubs, which allowed for the rapid processing of evacuees from Afghanistan. Stemming from her previous experience as corps officer in charge in Kandahar, Colonel Pinchasin understood the importance of ensuring a comfortable and warm welcome for refugees. Her deep-seated values of respect and collaboration have led to more than a dozen awards and decorations throughout her career so far, including the NATO and Meritorious Service Medals. In recent months, we have seen the tremendous results of Colonel Pinchasin's leadership. In the aftermath of Maryland's Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in late March 2024, her work through the Unified Command made it possible for the corps to have an impact in Baltimore that has been nothing short of exemplary. Her steadfast leadership and operational expertise were instrumental in the execution of recovery operations, which were critical to clearing debris and restoring access to the Fort McHenry Channel. Her effective use of mobilized resources facilitated a swift and efficient response that provided the Unified Command with the technical expertise needed to ensure success. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Colonel Pinchasin for her outstanding leadership and service as commander of the Baltimore District, and I wish her continued success in her subsequent posts.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the tremendous life of the late Dr. Sidney Z. Lawrence of Bethesda, MD. Dr. Lawrence was born in Paterson, NJ, where he attended local schools and went on to St. Lawrence University before receiving his M.D. in the Netherlands. He spent 21 years in the U.S. Army, where he rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel and served as a skilled surgeon, providing critical care to servicemembers around the world. In 1986, he spent 6 months in Honduras where he helped to establish a clinic to provide care to women requiring vascular surgery and performed over 400 operations at that facility. In 1990, during the first Gulf War, he was a member of a medical unit serving in Saudi Arabia that provided care to injured combatants. When he returned home, Dr. Lawrence's last posting was at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. After retiring from the Army, he spent 14 years as an emergency room doctor. With an indefatigable dedication to his patients and the practice of medicine, Dr. Lawrence then worked in the field of occupational health until he was 78 years old. Dr. Lawrence was interred at Arlington National Cemetery on May 16, 2024, with full military honors. I extend my deepest condolences to his wife of 59 years, Louise Lawrence-Israels; their three daughters Judith, Naomi, and Jordana; their six grandchildren; and their great- grandson. I trust that all members of the U.S. Senate join me in expressing our deep appreciation to Dr. Lawrence for his devoted military service helping those in uniform and their families along with the many Marylanders he cared for throughout his medical career. He will be deeply missed, but his legacy will live on in the hearts and minds of all those he touched and through his many good works.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

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

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I also come to the floor today to talk about the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge. And thanks to modern technology, as I was driving in, I got to listen to the remarks of my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Maryland Ben Cardin. I want to start by thanking him for his leadership in the Federal delegation. And I am going to cover some of the same points he made in his remarks, and I think it bears repeating, both because of the magnitude of this crisis, the national scale of this crisis, but also because it showed Baltimore and Maryland and America at its best in coming together in the aftermath of a tragedy to help those we lost and to begin the rebuilding process. For 47 years, the Francis Scott Key Bridge has been the backdrop of millions of Marylanders' lives. They get up in the morning. They go to work. It is an indelible part of the Baltimore City skyline, and it is part of the daily commute for over 34,000 people. Six weeks ago, when the Key Bridge collapsed in the early morning hours of March 26, everyone immediately recognized the magnitude of this disaster. In Baltimore, in Maryland, across the country, across the world, people witnessed those images of the ship hitting one of the piers on the bridge and the bridge coming down. Six hard-working Marylanders lost their lives in that bridge collapse. There were eight of them on the bridge at the time, construction workers working late hours--hard jobs. We have been able to find six of those whom we lost. We are still looking for the bodies of one--excuse me. Eight people were on the bridge. Fortunately, two survived. We lost six, and we are still looking for one. Our priority from the very beginning has been, first of all, to find all the victims and to comfort their families. Right after the bridge came down, Coast Guard divers were out in the water every day, and they remain there now until we find the last of those we lost. We are incredibly grateful for the first responders who immediately jumped into action, including a Maryland Transportation Authority officer on site who worked to quickly stop the traffic from going onto the bridge, further preventing further tragedy loss of life. In fact, there have been interviews conducted of the last person across the bridge, and we are grateful that he was able to escape and that no others lost their lives that day. That was because of the heads-up efforts of a Maryland Transportation Authority officer. So to the MTA officers and to all the other first responders on the scene this morning, we express our gratitude for preventing more loss of life and for helping rescue the two individuals who survived the crash and all the other work they did that day and since. While first responders and salvage workers press ahead with recovery efforts, the impact of the bridge collapse continues to reverberate across Baltimore, across Maryland, in fact, across the country. The Key Bridge is a gateway to trade in Maryland and the great Port of Baltimore. When the bridge collapsed into the Patapsco River, its hulking debris blocked the access needed for daily container ships, barges, and recreational vessels to access port facilities and Baltimore's Inner Harbor. There are about 1,800 annual ship visits to the Port of Baltimore, so you get a sense of just how busy it is. In fact, it is the busiest in the Nation in handling automobiles, light trucks, farm and construction machinery, imported forest products, and aluminum and sugar. These goods come in through Baltimore and from that great hub are transported elsewhere across this great land. At full capacity, the Port of Baltimore generates 20,000 direct jobs, including 2,400 union longshoremen who load and unload that cargo every day. The port also supports another 24,000 in induced jobs supported by local purchases and 7,200 indirect jobs. So the impact in terms of jobs and employment of the Port of Baltimore is vast, not just in the city and not just in Maryland but well beyond. Fortunately, for Maryland, when the bridge collapsed, we had strong partners coming to our assistance, including the strong partners in the White House. On the day of the disaster, President Biden immediately went straight to work. He reached out directly to Senator Cardin, to myself, to Governor Moore, to Mayor Scott, and our State and local partners, not only to express sympathy in the aftermath of this tragedy but to let us know that he had already ordered the full mobilization of the disaster response arm of the Federal Government, resulting in the unified command led by the Coast Guard. And they came together immediately to help manage the disaster response and begin the recovery effort. As Senator Cardin indicated, it was a team. While the Coast Guard was the quarterback, we also had the partners from the State and Governor Moore. Our great Governor quickly mobilized Maryland assets. Mayor Brandon Scott, the mayor of Baltimore, mobilized the city assets, as did the county executives from surrounding counties like County Executive Pittman in Anne Arundel County and Johnny Olszewski, the county executive in Baltimore County. And so within hours of the bridge collapse, you had all levels of government stepping up and working together, working to help the families who lost loved ones, making sure that they have the help they need in the aftermath of their terrible loss and personal tragedy and coming together to help the workers who lost their jobs because the Port of Baltimore's business ground to almost a halt in those first hours and, of course, to the small businesses that were sidelined because of the hit to the Port of Baltimore. In fact, less than 2 weeks after the collapse of the bridge, the Governor and the Maryland General Assembly stepped up and passed the PORT Act, which provided direct economic support through small business grants and the Port of Baltimore Worker Retention Program and the Worker Support Program to help those workers who lost their jobs and were not immediately eligible for unemployment benefits. That bill also created scholarship programs for the families of those who died on the job. And then President Biden and the entire administration have been part of this relief effort and response effort from day one. As Senator Cardin indicated, the Small Business Administration provided Economic Injury Disaster Loan relief and opened three business recovery centers to help business owners in completing their applications. And through the Department of Labor, the Federal Government delivered over $3.5 million in emergency dislocated worker grant funding to workers who had such financial loss. These efforts were essential to soften the blow to workers and to businesses harmed by the bridge collapse. But as Senator Cardin indicated, from the very start, everyone understood that the best way to help those workers who were out of a job because of the collapse and to help those small businesses and to help the surrounding State and economy was to open the channel to the Port of Baltimore. And almost immediately, the Biden administration--Secretary Buttigieg-- initiated the process to provide $60 million from the Emergency Relief Program to help those efforts. And the State of Maryland and the city used some of those efforts to start clearing debris from the bridge that fell to clear the channel. They used other parts of those funds to deal with traffic mitigation and relief because the trucks that carried hazardous material that used to go over the bridge could not go through the Baltimore tunnel. They had to go around the Baltimore Beltway. So those funds were very helpful in that effort. But, again, the main focus was on clearing that channel so we could reopen it for shipping purposes. The good news is, because of the work of the Army Corps of Engineers, in particular, they dug a series of channels of increasing depths, and not that long ago we were able to clear a 35-foot channel which helped restore about 75 percent of the shipping into and out of the Port of Baltimore. There are now 549 transits, ship transits, coming into and out of the Port of Baltimore on a regular basis. So these are ships that are being loaded now by about 200 international longshoremen, which gives you a sense of how people are getting back to work. And the goal is, by the end of this month, to clear the full 50-foot channel-- which is the main channel in and out of the Port of Baltimore--for the container ships. At that point in time, we hope to have the Port of Baltimore fully up and running. This, as Senator Cardin said, as the President of the United States said, as we all know, is a national tragedy. Yes, the bridge is in Baltimore, but it is a key connector on the east coast for commerce, both trucking and getting equipment and material in and out of the Port of Baltimore as well as others. That is why the President of the United States called upon the Federal Government to support funding the full costs of replacing the Key Bridge. In addition to the initial $60 million that came out of the Emergency Relief Program--thank you to Secretary Buttigieg who almost immediately enrolled the State of Maryland and found us eligible to be included in that program for the purpose of rebuilding the Key Bridge. Just like all the other projects that are part of that program from around the country, the Federal Government supports 90 percent of those costs. Therefore, in order to make sure we make good on the pledge for 100 percent support because of this national tragedy, the entire Maryland delegation has been united in introducing the legislation that would make good on the President's commitment for 100 percent funding. I want to thank Senator Cardin. I see he has now returned to the floor. Again, I appreciate all your efforts leading a Federal ``Team Maryland'' here, and I am proud to join you and our partners in the House, including Congressman Mfume, who represents this congressional district, in introducing that legislation on a bipartisan basis, the Baltimore BRIDGE Relief Act, to ensure that we cover 100 percent of the costs federally. As Senator Cardin, very importantly, pointed out, that legislation does make clear that any funds that are recovered through third parties, whether insurance or through lawsuits, will be returned to that Federal fund. I want to assure our colleagues of that. Let me just end, really, where Senator Cardin concluded his remarks, in two parts: first of all, by thanking our colleagues--Democratic colleagues, Republican colleagues--who reached out in the aftermath of this terrible catastrophe to say they stood with us and would help us as we restore the port and rebuild the Key Bridge and then again a thank-you to the people of Baltimore and the people of Maryland who demonstrated their amazing resilience during this terrible chapter and continue to do so every day, people who came together and volunteered to bring sandwiches to the folks at the Coast Guard, people who volunteered their services in an array of other ways just to help the cause, to help at that moment of tragedy, and to begin the process of healing and rebuilding. It has been a team effort. I want to thank our Governor. I want to thank the mayor of Baltimore. We have come together as a State, and America has come together, not just in sympathy but to demonstrate support. I just ask, along with Senator Cardin and our colleagues, to make sure that we move on this legislation just as quickly as possible. This is why Senator Cardin and I have offered it as an amendment to the FAA legislation that is in front of this body right now. That is an expression of the urgency with which we take this challenge, and we just ask our colleagues to join us in recognizing that urgency so that we can do it together. When we saw the terrible collapse of the bridge in Minneapolis many, many years ago, the Congress rallied together very quickly to say that the U.S. Government would stand with the people of Minnesota in that hour of need and tragedy, and we ask our colleagues the same. I know that spirit is there in this body. We just hope that spirit now will be accompanied by the legislation to get the job done. The President has asked us to do it. This is a moment for us to come together on a bipartisan--indeed, a nonpartisan basis and get this done and show that even in the toughest of times, our country does rally together to help those who have been injured, those who have been hurt. Out of this disaster will come a triumph as we rebuild the bridge and we resume full business at the Port of Baltimore and, finally, we continue to help those families who lost loved ones in this tragedy. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, as our Nation and our allies face a host of challenges across the globe, it is critical that we deploy the necessary resources to protect freedom, support democracy, and address humanitarian crises abroad. For Ukraine, especially, this assistance could not come at a more crucial time. While Putin continues to wage his war of aggression against the Ukrainian people and on democracy itself, Ukraine is running dangerously low on artillery and air defense munitions, as well as other vital supplies. This aid is critical not only to support the Ukrainian people in their fight against Putin, but also to defend freedom and democracy worldwide. Our allies and adversaries alike are watching closely to see if the United States and our partners will keep our promises to the people of Ukraine in their hour of need or whether we will retreat. In particular, we know that President Xi has one eye on the war in Ukraine and the other eye on Taiwan. As Taiwan prepares to inaugurate its newly elected President next month, the PRC has ratcheted up diplomatic and military pressure against Taipei. We have also recently seen increasingly provocative maneuvers by China's coast guard against the Philippines' vessels in the South China Sea. These actions underscore the need for increased security cooperation between the U.S. and our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific. That is why I am glad this bill provides additional funding for security assistance to our partners there. This bill also includes important provisions to protect our security here at home by investing more in the Nonprofit Security Grant Program--NSGP--which helps protect various community institutions that are at risk of hate crimes, including synagogues, mosques, and certain other houses of worship. The alarming rise of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and anti-Arab incidents since the October 7 attacks underscores the vital need for more resources to help protect our communities from bigotry and hate. As we confront these challenges across the country, I believe it is critical that all Americans feel safe in their houses of worship. This legislation makes that possible with investments to install essential security measures. Additionally, it boosts screenings and inspections at border points of entry to better protect American families from the threat posed by the deadly flow of fentanyl into our Nation, a drug that has caused pain and loss for far too many. In addition to these provisions, this legislation includes over $9 billion in humanitarian aid that will reach people in desperate need around the world, from Gaza to Sudan and elsewhere. Last week, we marked the solemn anniversary of the start of the civil war in Sudan, where more than 25 million people currently need humanitarian assistance. This aid will also support innocent civilians in Gaza, where four out of five of the hungriest people anywhere in the world currently reside. I am glad to support this funding that will provide necessities like food, water, shelter, and medical care to the world's most vulnerable people. That being said, I am deeply disappointed that this bill prohibits any of the available funds from going to UNRWA, which provides vital services to Palestinian refugees in many countries and is the main humanitarian aid distribution entity in Gaza. According to USAID Administrator Samantha Power, famine is already occurring in Gaza. Amid such a crisis, it is unconscionable to cut off funding, without a mechanism to reinstate it, for the primary distributor of urgently needed aid to starving people. To rectify this, I put forward an amendment to provide a process to restore that funding following the ongoing investigation and appropriate remedial actions. While we did not have an opportunity to vote on that amendment, I will continue to seek to reverse the current ban--which Republicans demanded be included in the recent government funding bill--on U.S. funding for UNRWA through March 2025. I will also press the Biden administration to encourage other countries to continue to support UNRWA and use our support for international organizations in a way that advances that goal. The underlying bill does include substantial assistance that is desperately needed at this time in Gaza and around the world and is better than our alternative at this point--which is to provide nothing. Within this legislation, I also support the funding for defensive weapons systems, like the Iron Dome, to protect Israel from Hamas, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah, and other threats in the region. The October 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel was horrific; we must prevent any such future horrors and secure the release of all remaining hostages. I fully support Israel's right--indeed, its duty--to defend itself. But while this war is just, it must be fought justly. I do not support a blank check for offensive weapons for the Netanyahu government's current campaign in Gaza. I will continue to press for a cease-fire and the return of all the hostages but, in the meantime, we cannot turn a blind eye to what President Biden has described as ``indiscriminate'' bombing or to the failure of the Netanyahu government to meet its obligations to facilitate, and not arbitrarily restrict, the delivery of assistance to address the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. Given these concerns, had this been an up or down vote strictly on military assistance for Israel, I would have insisted on amendments to ensure that no funds for offensive weapons would flow to the Netanyahu government until it cooperates fully in the delivery of humanitarian assistance to starving people in Gaza; agrees not to launch an invasion into Rafah, where over 1.3 million Palestinians were told to seek safety; and allows an independent investigation into the deaths of all humanitarian aid workers killed in Gaza. For now, I will continue to press the administration to pause any further transfers of offensive military aid until the Netanyahu government meets President Biden's demands and will use the congressional review process to reinforce that position. A partnership should not be a one-way street. I appreciate that President Biden issued National Security Memorandum 20, based on the amendment that I, together with 18 of my colleagues, proposed when the supplemental was first considered in the Senate months ago. That amendment, and the ensuing NSM-20, are designed to better ensure that American taxpayer dollars are used in a manner consistent with our values and our interests. Specifically, NSM-20 requires recipients of U.S. security assistance to use our support in accordance with international law and to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance in conflict areas where they are using U.S.- supplied weapons. It also requires the Biden administration to submit to Congress by May 8 a written report on whether recipients of U.S. security assistance have been complying with those obligations. The administration's report will be a test of whether they are willing to apply those standards to allies as well as adversaries and take any actions necessary to ensure accountability. This sweeping national security bill has many provisions that raise concerns, but on balance, it provides the resources that are vital to support the people of Ukraine and advance important American priorities around the world. That is why, despite certain reservations, I support this legislation.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, our intelligence community relies on a range of tools to protect Americans from threats originating from abroad. One of them is section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--FISA--which is used to gather information related to foreign individuals located outside of the United States and has produced valuable information to help uncover terrorist plots and thwart attacks. I strongly support maintaining that important capability. At the same time, I have long been concerned that, without adequate safeguards, section 702 can be abused in a way that violates Americans' Fourth Amendment rights and unnecessarily intrudes on their privacy, including for ``backdoor'' searches. That is why I have long pushed for guardrails to prevent governmental overreach and abuse. Despite the fact that surveillance under this section is supposed to be limited to certain foreign nationals abroad, a FISA Court opinion released in July 2023 stated that the FBI conducted approximately 40,000-50,000 warrantless ``backdoor'' search queries of section 702 communications data targeting U.S. persons per quarter in 2022. Moreover, over the course of 2022, government data shows that the FBI's rate of compliance with the FISA Court-approved querying standard has risen to approximately 98 percent, which means the rate of violations is 2 percent. While that may sound like an impressive compliance rate, it still amounts to 4,000 violations each year. I acknowledge and appreciate that the bill before us includes some reforms to strengthen privacy protections for Americans. It codifies newly implemented internal practices that the FBI has adopted to address many of the abuses that have arisen. However, I believe that those protections can and should be further strengthened. The major issue involves those occasions in which the FBI or other U.S. Government Agencies determine that a foreign target is communicating with an American citizen. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board--PCLOB--found that the majority of the FBI's U.S. person queries of section 702 information that are conducted yield little or no results. In 2022, the PCLOB found that the FBI accessed content following U.S. person queries only 1.58 percent of the time. In these few cases, the question arises as to whether and under what circumstances the U.S. Government should be able to review the contents of the communication of an American citizen. Senator Durbin offered an amendment, which I supported, to require the FBI to obtain a warrant prior to viewing the content of Americans' communications, subject to very important exceptions when exigent circumstances exist, when the U.S. person consents, and for certain cybersecurity imperatives. I am disappointed that this amendment was not adopted. Another way to obtain the benefits of section 702 foreign intelligence collection without weakening the Fourth Amendment and privacy protections of Americans is to ensure that those interests are adequately represented and heard before the FISA Court. In 2015, Congress established amici who can advise the court, if requested, on new and significant issues. The involvement of amici has improved the FISA Court process, but their role could be strengthened. That is why I supported the Lee-Welch amendment, which requires amici participation in additional cases that have the potential to create precedent and allows amici to raise novel or significant privacy or civil liberties issue, rather than waiting to be requested by the FISC Court. The failure to adopt this amendment misses an opportunity to strengthen advocacy for privacy and civil liberties in FISA Court proceedings. I am also deeply concerned by a provision, added at the eleventh hour in the House to greatly expand the type of providers that the U.S. Government could compel to produce information under section 702. I understand that this provision was added after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court--FISC--ruled that the government could not use section 702 to compel a data center's compliance with an order to produce communications. The decision was predicated on whether a data center qualified as an ``electronic communications service provider'' under the law. This new definition, while intended to clarify the term to account for changing technology, broadly includes ``any other service provider who has access to equipment that is being or may be used to transmit or store wire or electronic communications.'' While I accept the representations from the Attorney General and others that this language is not intended to open the door to requiring a slew of service providers to comply with government demands to intercept communications, its plain language is very broad. It would, for example, require a company that installs, maintains, or repairs Wi-Fi or other communications systems to provide communications under section 702 to the government, all while being barred from telling anyone about the surveillance they helped conduct. While I appreciate the administration's commitment to apply this new definition exclusively to cover the type of service provider at issue in the litigation before the FISC, I believe there are ways to more narrowly achieve the administration's goal without providing the open-ended authority that is currently included in the bill. That is why I support Senator Wyden's amendment to remove the new definition to give us time to tailor the language to meet the administration's purposes. I am disappointed that the Wyden amendment did not pass. The Senate should not be stampeded into passing sweeping new authorities with the assurance that it will be ``fixed'' later. We should fix it now. Another troubling new provision added in the House that should be remedied here in the Senate is the expansion of searches of the section 702 database for individuals traveling to the United States. Under current practice, in addition to standard vetting to determine national security threats, individuals seeking visas to work or travel in the U.S. for the first time can be subject to terrorism-related queries of the database. The House bill allows for searches of a potentially far broader group of travelers--including existing visa holders returning to the U.S. from abroad--and a broader variety of searches. Again, with sufficient time, I believe we could meet the goal of effectively vetting visitors to the United States without authorizing powers that could easily be abused. Section 702, while critical to our intelligence capabilities, must be reformed to protect constitutional and privacy rights. We have time to resolve these issues. The administration contends that without the immediate reauthorization of section 702 by midnight on April 19, 2024, the authority will lapse. However, we know that the Department of Justice obtained a renewed certification from the FISC, extending the authorization of active section 702 surveillance orders until April 2025. Section 404 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 makes clear that such certifications remain valid until their expiration. While I agree that we need to congressionally reauthorize this authority, I am concerned that we are short-circuiting robust, bipartisan discussions in Congress on needed reforms and to correct problems in the House-passed bill. When dealing with matters of such import, we should not be pressured by an artificial deadline into passing a flawed law. Therefore, while I support the underlying authority in section 702, I voted against this legislation tonight because more must be done to protect Americans from its possible misuse.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an extraordinary woman and leader of our time, Dr. Sheryl Brissett Chapman. After more than three decades of service as executive director of The National Center for Children and Families--NCCF--she will be stepping down at the end of March. In the course of her tenure, Dr. Brissett Chapman transformed NCCF from a small Baptist orphanage in Bethesda, MD, into a monumental force for good, serving over 53,155 vulnerable children, youth, and families in the National Capital Region. Her visionary expansion of NCCF saw the creation of 24 innovative programs, the addition of vital service locations and staff, and a $51 million growth in budget. This transformative growth has not only changed the face of NCCF but has rewritten futures, healed traumas, and built bridges to opportunities for a countless number of children, youth, and families. She and NCCF have called Maryland home during this incredible transformation. We are both extremely honored and incredibly proud that Dr. Brissett Chapman and NCCF have delivered these services from within our local community. Yet Dr. Brissett Chapman's influence extends far beyond her executive role. She is a champion in the effort to address systemic reform on a wide range of topics, including the harsh realities of poverty, juvenile justice, homelessness, domestic violence, and illuminating the path to healing from childhood trauma with unwavering dedication and empathy. Her most recent publication, ``Black Male Youth Raised in Public Systems: Engagement, Healing, Hope,'' underscores her dedication to understanding and addressing the unique challenges faced by Black male youth in public systems. This is just one example of her relentless pursuit of knowledge for empowerment and change. Even as she prepares for retirement, Dr. Brissett Chapman's commitment to education remains unwavering. Her new roles as a trustee for Montgomery College and as a senior fellow for the Institute for Mastery and Integration further attest to her ongoing dedication to improving lives through education and advocacy, guiding the next generation of leaders and advocates. Maryland will continue to have the honor of being called home to both Dr. Brissett Chapman and NCCF as each continues to transform the lives of our youth. As Dr. Brissett Chapman turns the page to a new chapter, she leaves a blueprint for compassionate, effective leadership in social welfare. Her impact and service will continue to be felt for decades to come, as her legacy continues to inspire and guide our collective efforts to serve the most vulnerable and to demonstrate what it means to be a force for change. Her legacy is one of hope. Thousands of lives in the National Capital Region and the State of Maryland have been transformed because of Dr. Brissett Chapman, and I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking her and wishing her a well-earned, enjoyable, and fulfilling retirement.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following Senate resolutions: S. Res. 601, S. Res. 602, S. Res. 603, S. Res. 604, and S. Res. 605.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.