[Pages S84-S88]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                     EXECUTIVE CALENDAR--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume executive session and consideration of the nomination of Matthew 
H. Solomson, of Maryland, to be a Judge of the United States Court of 
Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.
  The Senator from New Mexico.


                                  Iran

  Mr. UDALL. Mr. President, I begin by saying that my prayers are with 
our Armed Forces and their families. They stand watch despite the 
threat of danger, and they rely on their leaders to make wise 
decisions. I am grateful that there were no casualties during last 
night's missile attack.
  For well over a year, I have been sounding the alarm that this 
President could bring us to war with Iran through mistake, misjudgment, 
or miscalculation. I have urged this body to assert our constitutional 
authority and pass our bipartisan bill to prevent a war with Iran.
  In 2018 and 2019, I introduced the Prevention of Unconstitutional War 
with Iran Act. In June of last year, my amendment to prevent 
unauthorized war earned bipartisan majority support in the Senate, and 
it passed in the House of Representatives. It may not have become law, 
but the Constitution has not changed. Now, on the brink of war with 
Iran, it is long past time for Congress to step up to its 
constitutional responsibilities and stop the march to an unauthorized 
war.
  Americans oppose another war in the Middle East. Despite the 
President's claim to the contrary, war with Iran would certainly not 
``go very quickly.'' That is what the President has said--``go very 
quickly.'' Any war with Iran would be prolonged, bloody, and costly. 
Yet, even if you support a war with Iran, we all swore an oath to 
uphold the Constitution, and Congress--and Congress alone--has the 
authority, under article I of the Constitution, to declare war.
  Any country would consider the President's strike on one of Iran's 
highest ranking military commanders--someone whom many consider to be 
the second most powerful person in Iran's Government--to be an act of 
war. Now, predictably, Iran has

[[Page S85]]

responded. So Congress must no longer hide from its constitutional 
responsibility.
  If Congress does not stop the military conflict with Iran, this 
President will continue to take a wrecking ball through the Middle 
East, making one impulsive decision after another while having no long-
term plan or strategic goal in sight. The President's speech made it 
clear he has no strategy to defuse the situation or to achieve a 
diplomatic result. He will continue the provocative warpath we are on.
  While we may now be in a period of relative calm, the position we are 
in is untenable, and it is because the President abandoned diplomacy 
and created this crisis. The administration did not consult Congress 
before carrying out the strike, which is something that, typically, an 
administration would do before carrying out a strike like this; it 
would have a true consultation with the top leaders in the Congress. 
The administration did not consult our allies or try to form a 
coalition around what is clearly a highly provocative action that has 
ramifications for international security.
  This is kind of a reminder of the run-up to Iraq. What did that look 
like, the run-up to the Iraq war? Sketchy evidence, bad intelligence, 
outright misrepresentations, and a call for vengeance against Saddam 
Hussein are what got us into the war in Iraq. This is where we are 
today in our conflict with Iran. The administration's vague assertions 
of an imminent threat, without its having concrete evidence, and its 
ever-changing story are too reminiscent of the origins of the war in 
Iraq. The echoes of Iraq are chilling.
  Congress, step up. Do your constitutional duty. Rein in this reckless 
course we are on.
  Let me say this, not just to those of us in this body who are 
speaking up but also to the thousands across the country who are 
marching against a rush to war: To speak out against a war with Iran is 
a patriotic activity, a patriotic duty. It is the right action to take, 
and it is the right thing to do. We are speaking up to stop this Nation 
from repeating the grave mistakes of the Iraq war. We are speaking up 
because we love this country, because we do not want to see another 
military family mourn a loved one who loses his life in a war that does 
not need to be fought and that we have the power to stop and to avoid.
  President Trump set this disastrous course in motion in May of 2018 
when he unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear agreement. This was 
a deal the international community stood firmly behind. It reminded 
everyone--European countries, Russia, and China--that we were all a 
part of this deal. That agreement took the single greatest threat to 
the U.S. and international security--that being Iran--off the table. It 
prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons. According to the 
International Atomic Energy Agency and President Trump's military and 
national security experts, Iran was complying with the agreement when 
the President withdrew.
  The nuclear agreement did not solve all of the problems with Iran, 
but it is clear that the diplomatic effort reduced tensions with a 
longstanding adversary and reduced the threat of hostilities. Yet, 
instead of working to build on this progress, the President 
precipitously withdrew from the agreement and began his maximum 
pressure campaign to force Iran to capitulate to a long list of 
impossible demands. The President promised he would get us a ``better 
deal.'' That is what he said--get us a ``better deal.'' He has not. 
There is no better deal in sight.
  I call on the President and his administration to use all of their 
diplomatic tools to deescalate this threatening situation--a situation 
that risks American lives. I call on them to work with our allies to 
find a path back to the nuclear limits the international community 
agreed to, to develop channels for productive communication and 
diplomacy, and to work toward stabilizing an unstable Middle East.
  Leader McConnell and the Republican leadership must bring this debate 
to the Senate floor. Senator Kaine's recently filed War Powers 
Resolution is one step in that direction. Senator Paul and I have 
called upon all Senators to support our Prevention of Unconstitutional 
War with Iran Act. We must keep up this fight and block funds for any 
war with Iran in the absence of congressional authorization, and we 
must repeal the outdated authorizations of force that are being 
abused--the one from 2001 and the one from 2002.
  I strongly support our oath to defend our Nation and the Constitution 
from any enemies, foreign and domestic, including against a President 
who would take us to war without his having constitutional authority. 
If we do not act now to preserve our constitutional structure and to 
assert our constitutional authority, we fail the men and women in 
uniform whose lives we put at risk; we fail our oath to defend and 
protect the Constitution; and we fail the American people, who sent us 
here to represent them on the most consequential decision our country 
can make.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Blackburn). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I would like to take a few moments 
today to talk about the current situation with regard to Iran.
  First, the decision to take out Qasem Soleimani. Let's remember who 
he was. He was leader of the Quds Force and the Islamic Revolutionary 
Guard Corps--both of these groups, by the way, having been designated 
as terrorist organizations.
  He was responsible for providing the Shia militias in Iraq with 
explosively formed penetrators. What does that mean? These were the 
extremely deadly improvised explosive devices--so-called roadside 
bombs--that were responsible for killing over 600 American soldiers and 
injuring many more, at least a couple thousand.
  Some of those maimed or killed were from my home State of Ohio. My 
heart goes out to their families for their sacrifice.
  I got a chance to see some of these brave Americans in visits to the 
Landstuhl military hospital in Germany and the Walter Reed Hospital 
here in Washington, DC. We must never forget their courage and the 
sacrifices they and their families have made.
  Over the past 2 months alone, Soleimani helped direct more than 11 
attacks against our forces in Iraq. In fact, he was found recently to 
be plotting more. When he was killed, he was plotting additional and 
imminent attacks with the commander of the Shia militia--the same 
commander who directed both the rocket strikes that killed the American 
contractor and wounded four American service personnel in Erbil and the 
demonstration and assault against the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
  Thankfully, that commander was taken off the battlefield as well.
  For reasons I have outlined, the killing of Qasem Soleimani was both 
legitimate and justified. His history of fomenting terror and murdering 
innocents goes back decades, and the world is a better place without 
him.
  Some of my Democratic colleagues have been critical of the 
President's actions against Iran, to include the killing of Soleimani. 
Some argue that our actions have been unwarranted and belligerent. In 
fact, given the facts, I believe President Trump has shown restraint in 
the face of continued Iranian aggression over these past 18 months.
  By authorizing the killing of the leader of terrorist organizations 
that were actively plotting more violence against our brave men and 
women, I believe President Trump reset the concept of deterrence and 
fulfilled his duties as President.
  As GEN David Petraeus said after the Soleimani action, ``This was a 
significant effort to re-establish deterrence.'' I would call that 
peace through strength.
  Last evening's Iranian missile attacks against our forces and air 
bases at Erbil and Al-Asad was a continuation of the reckless and 
provocative approach. Thanks to the professionalism and capability of 
our Armed Forces, despite over a dozen Iranian missiles aimed their 
way, there were, fortunately, no American or allied troop or Iraqi 
casualties--amazing--

[[Page S86]]

and there was only minimal damage to our bases. For that, of course, we 
are very thankful.
  I listened to President Trump this morning, and I agree that the 
maximum pressure campaign against Iran must continue, and it should 
include additional sanctions.
  There is a way forward for Iran to rejoin the international community 
rather than continue to be a pariah and the top sponsor of state 
terrorism in the world. President Trump has said on many occasions he 
is willing to negotiate with Iran if they cease their belligerent 
actions in the region and come to the table.
  We do not desire war with Iran, but we cannot and will not stand idly 
by as they continue to attack Americans, continue to kill our forces in 
the Middle East.
  I have been in meetings with top administration officials today and 
yesterday, and I look forward to continued discussions on their 
strategy moving forward.
  I will continue to pray for the safety of our men and women in 
uniform who are forward deployed, who put their lives in danger for all 
of us and do so for the sake of peace and stability.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I first want to say how relieved I am 
by reports that no lives were lost in last night's missile strikes in 
Iraq and how grateful I am for all those serving in the region and 
around the world.
  The fact remains, however, that this is a volatile and frightening 
moment for our country. In a matter of days, the President of the 
United States has, without any authorization or notice, taken steps 
that have sent tensions soaring with Iran, threatened the fight against 
ISIS, jeopardized relationships with key allies, risked the safety of 
U.S. servicemembers and civilians, and brought us perilously close to 
war.
  I have heard from so many people in my home State of Washington, and 
I know my colleagues have as well, about just how scary and uncertain 
this feels and the many questions it raises.
  While there is no question Qasem Soleimani was a sworn enemy of the 
United States, people want to know whether the President's initial 
order was truly necessary to our safety and why right now in this time 
of already heightened tensions in the Middle East. They want to know 
elected officials here in the Nation's capital are prioritizing their 
safety and our country's safety. Most of all, they want to know what 
comes next and what can be done to prevent things from getting worse.
  Like so many Americans, I have watched these events unfold with 
increasing concern. As the daughter of a World War II veteran and 
Purple Heart recipient, I make decisions about the safety and security 
of our Nation with deep concern for our brave servicemembers and their 
families, a personal understanding of the sacrifices they make for all 
of us and our Nation, and an unwavering commitment to ensuring they 
have the support they need while they serve and when they come home.
  To that end, while I firmly believe we must do everything possible to 
keep America safe and go after terrorists wherever they are, I also 
believe that, except in the most dire of circumstances, we should do 
everything possible to exhaust all of our diplomatic avenues and 
coordinate with our allies and our partners before taking military 
action all on our own.
  I believe we should not enter a conflict without a very strong 
understanding of what we are trying to accomplish and what it will cost 
and that while America has every right to defend itself, striking 
another country preemptively, without the strongest evidence of 
immediate danger, is a dramatic step with significant long-term 
implications that should not be done without a full debate and 
congressional support.
  Madam President, based on what we know now, the administration's 
actions in Iraq failed on each of these counts. It has not made us 
safer, and our allies feel blindsided, especially because this strike 
puts them at risk too.
  There is no clear goal or clear-eyed understanding of the risks we 
have assumed. There was absolutely zero debate in this Congress and--
unless you happened to be on the golf course with the President--
absolutely no notification that he planned to massively escalate 
tensions with a foreign power overnight.
  While, unfortunately, this is exactly the type of scenario many of us 
feared would arise from this President, I can't say it is surprising. 
President Trump's repeated reckless actions in the region, beginning 
with his decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, have 
jeopardized critical objectives, leaving us without any clear strategy 
for restoring peace or protecting our troops and allies. We cannot 
assume Iran is done retaliating, and we must assume ISIS or other 
terrorists will take full advantage of the increased instability in the 
region.
  In the face of challenges as serious as these, none of us in 
Congress, regardless of party, should be willing to just stand by and 
accept that our Nation's foreign policy and safety could be up-ended by 
an impulsive late-night tweet. I certainly won't. Instead, I will 
continue to demand that the President provide us his legal 
justification for his order, commit to coming before Congress in 
advance of any further escalating steps as this now plays out, and 
explain how he will manage the consequences of his decision, with the 
goal of protecting Americans, our allies, and our interests.
  I will continue to advocate for strategies that lead us toward safety 
and security rather than fan the flames. In the coming weeks, I look 
forward to voting in support of my colleague from Virginia, Senator 
Kaine's War Powers Resolution, and I am very glad to be a cosponsor. 
This resolution would reassert congressional authority, block President 
Trump's ability to start a war with Iran, and allow us to hear whatever 
case he may have before taking a vote on whether this is really the 
path we want our Nation to go down.
  I hope every one of our colleagues listens to the people across this 
country who do not want to find themselves in an avoidable war and who 
sent us here to act as an independent branch of government, not a 
rubberstamp for an increasingly volatile administration. I hope they 
join us and support this resolution.
  Madam President, finally, I will say that I voted against the war in 
Iraq because I felt the administration was asking us to send our brave 
men and women into harm's way without clear plans or goals. Today, this 
President isn't even asking. The goals and plans are even less clear, 
and the path ahead of us is very uncertain.
  Congress has the power to ensure a debate, press this administration 
for a strategy, and check their power if they do not present a 
compelling one. It is well past time we used it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                             Anti-Semitism

  Mr. COTTON. Madam President, this holiday season, the ancient 
darkness of anti-Semitism cast a shadow over New York City during 
Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights. The New York Police Department 
recorded at least nine separate attacks against Jews--more than one 
attack for each day of Hanukkah. New attacks are reported seemingly on 
a daily basis.
  In Crown Heights, the site of deadly anti-Semitic riots incited by Al 
Sharpton in 1991, a group of men beat up an Orthodox Jew and attacked 
another with a chair.
  In Williamsburg, another group terrorized an elderly Jewish man on 
the street. ``Jew, Hitler burned you,'' one of the criminals reportedly 
said. ``I'll shoot you.''
  Just outside the city, in Rockland County, a man with a machete 
stormed a celebration in a rabbi's home and injured five worshippers, 
leaving two in critical condition. The family of one victim, Josef 
Neumann, says he may never wake up from his coma.

[[Page S87]]

  These heinous attacks are part of a growing storm of anti-Semitism 
that has made Jewish Americans fearful to worship and walk the streets 
in their own communities. They come in the wake of the deadly rampage 
at the kosher market in Jersey City that left four innocent people 
dead, including a police detective, and of course they come in the wake 
of the deadliest anti-Semitic attack in our Nation's history: the 
massacre of 11 Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh by a 
White supremacist.
  According to the FBI, our country suffered a 37-percent increase in 
anti-Semitic crimes between 2014 and 2018. According to the New York 
Police Department, the city suffered a 26-percent increase in anti-
Semitic crimes in the past year alone. That increase is alarming 
enough. So is the fact that most hate crimes reported in New York are 
crimes against Jews. While some of the increase is due to better 
reporting, much of it is not.
  Jewish Americans bear witness to this harsh reality. Anti-Semitism is 
an ancient hatred, and today it appears in new disguises. It festers on 
internet message boards and social media. It festers in so-called 
Washington think tanks like the Quincy Institute, an isolationist, 
blame-America-first money pit for so-called ``scholars'' who have 
written that American foreign policy could be fixed if only it were rid 
of the malign influence of Jewish money. It festers even on elite 
college campuses, which incubate the radical boycott, divestment, and 
sanctions movement--a movement to wage economic warfare against the 
Jewish State. These forms of anti-Semitism may be less bloody than 
street crime in New York, but they channel the same ancient hatred, the 
same conspiratorial and obsessive focus on the Jewish people.
  Anti-Semitic attacks are a symptom of a larger breakdown of public 
order in our major cities caused by politicians who are letting 
dangerous criminals roam our streets.
  While Jews were being attacked in New York City, a law went into 
effect eliminating pretrial detention and bail for most crimes, 
including serious crimes like stalking, arson, robbery, and even 
manslaughter and negligent homicide. This law was a gift to criminals 
just in time for the holidays. In some cases, it came with an actual 
gift. New York City's criminal justice system gives goodies like 
taxpayer-funded movie tickets to criminal suspects just for showing up 
to court--movie tickets for criminals. I wish I were joking, but the 
joke is on the law-abiding citizens of this Nation.
  These soft-on-crime politicians are doing their best to make crime 
pay in New York. Releasing criminals is the logical next step for the 
criminal-leniency movement.
  Thanks to the new bail law, an estimated 3,800 criminal suspects were 
released from New York jails before New Year's Day. Many of those 
suspects were arrested for new offenses within hours--within hours--of 
their release.
  Case in point: On the sixth day of Hanukkah, December 27, Tiffany 
Harris was arrested for attacking three Jewish women in Crown Heights. 
She shouted ``F-you Jews'' as she slapped them in a rage. Despite the 
violent nature of her crime, Harris was amazingly released without bail 
the very next day, December 28, the seventh day of Hanukkah. On the 
eighth day of Hanukkah, Harris was arrested yet again for assault. She 
was released for a second time the day after that and is in custody now 
only because she was arrested for now a third time for failing to 
comply with a court order.
  I can only imagine how demoralizing it must be for New York's police 
officers to arrest a violent criminal, only to risk their safety 
arresting them the next day for harming somebody else and the next day 
and the next day. How terrifying it must be for the witnesses of those 
crimes to contemplate giving evidence while the criminals they 
witnessed stalk the streets the very next day. And how enraging it must 
be for New York's Jews to suffer constant anti-Semitic attacks and know 
that the perpetrators will slide through a revolving door from the 
lockup back into their communities to spread more of their virulent, 
anti-Semitic hatred.
  Soft-on-crime politicians claim that cash bail and strong policing 
punish the poor, but is there a worse punishment for poor communities 
than flooding them with dangerous criminals, making them unlivable for 
many law-abiding Americans who call those neighborhoods home? Guess 
what. Those dangerous criminals aren't going back to live in fancy 
penthouses in the Upper East Side. They aren't living behind gated 
communities in Bethesda and Arlington. They are living in the very 
communities that most need policing. That is why the consequences of 
criminal leniency never fall on the rich elites who praise it the most. 
Instead, the consequences fall on the less fortunate and on the brave 
officers who are duty-bound to uphold the law, even as they receive 
less and less support from the political class.
  The real solution to disorder in our cities is the same as it always 
has been: more and better policing. New York's finest and police 
officers all across the country have broken crime waves in the past 
using steely resolve and superior force. They can do it again, if only 
we give them the freedom and support they need.
  Thankfully, most Americans know whose side we are on in the fight 
against crime. We stand with cops, not criminals. We stand for the 
Jewish people against the ancient hatred that stalks them even to this 
day.
  America liberated Nazi death camps in World War II, and we have 
served as a haven for persecuted Jews for longer than that. We must not 
allow the bigotry so common in Europe and the Middle East to spread 
here to our free shores. We must not allow our city streets to be 
plunged into the lawlessness of the not so distant past.


                                  Iran

  Madam President, I want to commend our brave troopers and our 
intelligence officers and the President for the daring strike last week 
on Qasem Soleimani. Qasem Soleimani had the blood of thousands of 
Americans on his hands, and he was plotting to kill more Americans just 
like his terrorist proxies had killed in Iraq on December 27. He even 
was picked up, when he landed at Baghdad International Airport, by a 
terrorist culpable for the bombing of our Embassy in Kuwait in 1983.
  You would think that everyone would celebrate the death of a 
terrorist monster, but, no, you would be wrong. You would be wrong. Our 
Democratic friends have been criticizing and complaining ever since 
Qasem Soleimani died Thursday night.
  Two particularly surprising complaints I have heard are that the 
Democrats weren't notified in advance and that Qasem Soleimani's plot 
wasn't imminent. Let's think about those criticisms.
  The Speaker of the House and the minority leader weren't notified in 
advance of a target of opportunity against a terrorist mastermind. I am 
sorry, but what did you expect? Is the President or Secretary of 
Defense or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff supposed to call hours 
in advance when they don't even know if the target will show up where 
our intelligence expects?
  Were they supposed to call when the missile was in the air? Give me a 
break. Give me a break.
  I will share what the majority leader told us yesterday about the 
raid on Osama bin Laden. Do you think he got notified in advance? No. 
Did he expect to be notified in advance? No. He said the Secretary of 
Defense called him after the strike to give him a brief summary of what 
had happened, and the majority leader, in 2011, simply said: 
``Congratulations.'' He put out a public statement to the exact same 
effect. Where is that sense of patriotism and pride from the Speaker of 
the House and from the minority leader today with the elimination of 
Qasem Soleimani?
  Second, this critique that, well, Qasem Soleimani wasn't plotting an 
imminent attack--I mean, we are talking about how many terrorists can 
dance on the head of a pin here. Qasem Soleimani had been killing 
Americans for 30 years. He was flying around the Middle East to meet 
with his terrorist proxies in Syria and Lebanon and Iraq to plan how to 
kill more Americans.
  We just had a briefing downstairs with the Director of the CIA and 
the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff in which they said: Yes, the plot was 
imminent. Intelligence is never ironclad, though. It can rarely say a 
strike is going to happen at this

[[Page S88]]

time on this day at this target. That is apparently the standard the 
Democrats want to hold the President to--not weeks, not even days, not 
even a period of days against a hard target that presented an 
opportunity, as Qasem Soleimani did last Thursday night.
  Let me say this: Imminence is ultimately a question of judgment that 
has to be made by the people we have elected to make those decisions 
for our country. It is not a question of intelligence. Our intelligence 
officers have great skills and capabilities. They can tell us the best 
intelligence they have that suggests the timing of such attacks. But it 
is ultimately the people's elected representatives who make those 
judgments.
  I will just submit that if you are a soldier sitting in Iraq with 
Qasem Soleimani flying around trying to decide when to kill you, the 
question of imminence probably looks a lot different than if you are a 
comfortable Senator sitting behind guarded doors with armed security 
details protecting your every movement.
  I will simply say yet again that Qasem Soleimani got exactly what he 
deserved. All those Americans he killed and their families also got 
what they deserved: justice. America and the world are a safer place 
because Qasem Soleimani is no longer a part of this world.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. SMITH. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  Under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Solomson 
nomination?
  The yeas and nays were previously ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) and the Senator from Georgia (Mr. 
Perdue).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Alexander) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. 
Warren) is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote or change their vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 8, as follows:

                       [Rollcall Vote No. 6 Ex.]

                                YEAS--89

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Loeffler
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Paul
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--8

     Booker
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Klobuchar
     Markey
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Alexander
     Perdue
     Warren
  The nomination was confirmed.

                          ____________________