June 10, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 96 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

[Pages S3276-S3279]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




RELATIVE TO THE DEATH OF DR. LLOYD JOHN OGILVIE, FORMER CHAPLAIN OF THE 
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, as in legislative session, I ask 
unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consideration of S. Res. 
240, submitted earlier today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A resolution (S. Res. 240) relative to the death of Dr. 
     Lloyd John Ogilvie, Former Chaplain of the United States 
     Senate.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the 
resolution.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no 
intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The resolution (S. Res. 240) was agreed to.
  The preamble was agreed to.
  (The resolution, with its preamble, is printed in today's Record 
under ``Submitted Resolutions.'')
  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. ROUNDS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


               Tribute to Lieutenant General Steve Basham

  Mr. ROUNDS. Madam President, I rise today to recognize Lt. Gen. Steve 
Basham, who recently departed his position as Director of Air Force 
Legislative Liaison and assumes his new duties as Deputy Commander of 
the U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces in Africa.
  As the Director of Legislative Affairs of the Air Force, Lieutenant 
General Basham worked directly with the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on all aspects of organizing, training, and equipping 
our airmen to project global combat power abroad. Throughout this time, 
then-Major General Basham prepared the Secretary and the Chief of Staff 
of the Air Force, as well as other senior Air Force leaders, for 
engagements on Capitol Hill, to include extensive testimony before 
congressional committees.

[[Page S3277]]

  A product of some of these strategic engagements was the decision to 
select Ellsworth Air Force Base as the first unit to host the B-21 
Raider bomber, a strategic decision that I personally thank the 
Secretary of the Air Force for making. I also thank Lieutenant General 
Basham for his steadfast efforts in the deliberate decision-making 
process.
  In 1989, following his graduation from Western Kentucky University, 
Lieutenant General Basham was commissioned through Air Force Officer 
Training School and achieved his flying wings. Over the course of his 
distinguished career, he has attained a command pilot rating with more 
than 3,400 flying hours in the T-37, T-38, B-1, B-2, and B-52 aircraft. 
He holds the honor of being one of the first four pilots to fly the B-2 
stealth bomber in combat.
  Throughout his career, Lieutenant General Basham has held numerous 
other positions of strategic importance, including Deputy Director of 
Requirements for the Joint Staff at the Pentagon and as the Director of 
Strategy, Plans, and Programs for Headquarters Pacific Air Forces at 
Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Hawaii.
  Of course, none of this could be done without the support of his wife 
Angie and their two daughters, Lauren and Sarah.
  On behalf of the U.S. Congress and a grateful Nation, I extend our 
deepest appreciation to Lt. Gen. Steven L. Basham and his family for 
their dedicated service to the Air Force and to our Nation. We wish 
them all the best as they move on to his next assignment and continue 
working to keep our Nation and our allies safe from potential Russian 
aggression in Europe, as well as violent extremists in Africa.
  There is no question that the Air Force, the Department of Defense, 
and the United States will continue to benefit greatly from Lieutenant 
General Basham's outstanding leadership.
  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.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.


                            Helicopter Crash

  Mr. SCHUMER. First, Madam President, on my way coming down to 
Washington, I heard that a helicopter crashed onto the roof of a 
building on Seventh Avenue in my hometown of New York City. We are 
still learning the circumstances of the crash and the extent of the 
damage, the injuries and casualty it may have caused. But, as all of 
America saw after 9/11, the Fire Department of New York and the Police 
Department of New York are truly some of the very, very best we have. 
They are strong, they are brave, they are smart, and I have every faith 
they will do their duty to protect New Yorkers and make sure everyone 
is safe.


                            Border Security

  Madam President, on another subject--the border--the President 
ultimately, of course, backed off his threat of tariffs against Mexico, 
but really, anyone who has observed the President's foreign policy 
efforts could have predicted how this would play out. It is a pretty 
simple pattern. The President stakes out a maximalist position but 
never clearly defines his objectives. That way, after he backs himself 
into a corner, he can use a deal of any kind, even if it is merely a 
fig leaf, to justify retreating from whatever misguided policy he has 
threatened. Then he declares victory, having done little or nothing to 
solve the underlying problem.
  Well, that is exactly what happened right here. According to public 
reports, the agreement President Trump reached with Mexico contains 
policies negotiated months ago--nothing more than warmed-up leftovers--
and then today, after the President tweeted that we have ``a fully 
signed and documented . . . Immigration and Security deal with 
Mexico,'' the Mexican Foreign Minister said that no secret deal exists. 
He clarified that the only agreement reached was to revisit the issue 
in the future. This is the headline of the New York Times: ``No Secret 
Immigration Deal Exists With U.S., Mexico's Foreign Minister Says.'' It 
is amazing how this President will just make stuff up--there is an 
``L'' word here--he just makes it up, and then it is refuted.
  So, to recap, in February, the President declared a bogus emergency 
to build a wall he said would solve the problem. Then he made a bogus 
threat to shut down the border completely, which, of course, never 
materialized. Then he made a bogus threat to impose tariffs, which the 
business community and Republicans in Congress rejected. And now the 
President claims a bogus agreement with Mexico, which contains policies 
Mexico volunteered to do months ago. Bogus, bogus, bogus.
  It is no wonder our problems don't go away in this country because of 
the way the President does things both on the domestic front and the 
foreign policy front. What he did here is typical of the President's 
game-show foreign policy: a big production without very much progress. 
He generates a lot of coverage and attention around big summits, photo-
ops, scare tactics, and belligerent threats, but because the President 
doesn't set clear goals, because the President doesn't have a defined 
strategy about how to achieve them, and because he is impatient to 
always declare victory prematurely even when it doesn't occur, his 
negotiations with foreign countries are ineffective.
  We saw this play out in North Korea last June. The President returned 
from his meeting with Chairman Kim and tweeted: ``There is no longer a 
nuclear threat from North Korea.'' One year later, North Korea 
continues to conduct weapons tests. We are seeing it play out now with 
Mexico, which has not agreed to anything new. And I am deeply concerned 
the same pattern may play out with China--perhaps the most serious of 
them all.
  We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reform China's economic 
relations with the world. But despite the President's success in 
getting China to the table--and he has with the tariffs--the President 
has never clearly defined what an effective agreement with China looks 
like. So I am afraid that, in the end, just like he did with Mexico, 
the President could retreat from his position on China in exchange for 
a face-saving deal that doesn't accomplish much of anything. I hope and 
pray that is not the case. I hope and pray he stands strong because the 
state of the future of jobs in America, of businesses in America, and 
of wealth in America is at stake.
  For the sake of all of those things, I hope that, unlike this charade 
with Mexico, President Trump is willing to stay the course on China and 
not come up with another bogus solution that doesn't solve any problem.
  One final point on this matter, and a very important point, and I 
hope everyone will listen because we have talked about this in the last 
week or two, but so far, the media hasn't written much about it. I hope 
they will today.
  President Trump tweeted this morning that Democrats have no plan to 
deal with the surge of migrants at the border. That is another bogus 
claim. Democrats do have a plan. We proposed it, actually, last year. I 
have talked about it here on the floor of the Senate two or three times 
in the last 2 weeks, and it would be far more effective at dealing with 
the actual problem than what President Trump announced on Friday. Let 
me outline the three things in our plan.
  First, we would allow asylum seekers to apply for asylum within their 
own countries.
  If you are a Guatemalan, a Honduran, or an El Salvadoran, your child 
is threatened with being beat up, brutalized, or killed by gangs, and 
your daughter is threatened with rape, you want to leave the country. 
But it is a long, dangerous trek to go across Mexico. You have to pay 
the coyotes a lot of money.
  Let them apply for asylum in their home countries, not at the border 
with the United States.
  Second, we would provide security assistance to Central American 
countries to crack down on the violent gangs and the drug cartels and 
the human trafficking. That is what most of these people are fleeing. 
If you look at their pictures, most all of them are not criminals. They 
are not gang members. They are average people seeking desperate relief.

[[Page S3278]]

  What we could do to stem the tide--and it wouldn't cost that much--is 
crack down on violent gangs, drug cartels, and trafficking. President 
Obama began to do this, and President Trump has rescinded it. It is 
logical, and it could work. These countries don't have our knowledge, 
our ability, or our resources to go after these horrible gangs and 
these horrible drug dealers, but we can help them. We should.
  Third, here at our border, we could increase the number of 
immigration judges to process the cases faster so people wouldn't have 
to wait so long. Their case could be adjudicated. If they meet the 
asylum requirements, fine, and if they don't, they don't get in.
  Those are three commonsense solutions to the problem that President 
Trump has talked about. As the President's illusory deal with Mexico 
continues to unravel, as the situation doesn't get better, please--
there are Republicans on the other side of the aisle who agree with 
this solution. Please, Mr. President, look at this solution. It can 
work. It can be bipartisan. No, you don't get to pound the table and 
make a lot of demands that won't ever affect anything, but it might get 
the job done. Let's give it a shot in a bipartisan way.


                           Election Security

  Madam President, finally, on election security and my friend the 
Republican leader's graveyard, which continues to grow, ever since the 
Democrats won the majority in the House of Representatives, Leader 
McConnell has hardly considered legislation on the floor of the Senate. 
Instead of bringing up bills passed by the House, Leader McConnell has 
turned the Senate, as now widely quoted and known, into a legislative 
graveyard where pretty much the only thing we debate around here is 
nominations. It is frustrating not just to Democrats but to Americans. 
They say: Can't we get something done for the country? And it is 
frustrating, I am sure, for my Republican friends who didn't come here 
just to rubberstamp nominees.
  One of my biggest frustrations about Leader McConnell's legislative 
graveyard is that even on the nonpartisan issues, there is virtually no 
movement. Take election security. We all know--on a good day, even 
President Trump agrees--the Russians interfered in our elections in 
2016. That is uncontroverted. Senior intelligence officials and 
Director Wray, the head of the FBI--well-regarded and appointed by the 
President--issued multiple warnings that foreign powers will try to 
interfere in our elections again in 2020.
  We have to make sure our election systems are resilient and our cyber 
defenses are up to date. There is nothing partisan about that. When a 
foreign country can twist an American election one way or the other, 
that eats at the wellspring of our democracy. We shouldn't allow it. So 
why, when there is bipartisan legislation, is Leader McConnell just 
sitting on his hands and refusing to bring it up? He is not moving any 
legislation having to do with election security--Democrat, Republican, 
or, best of all, bipartisan. We have multiple bipartisan bills that 
would harden our election infrastructure and punish any adversary that 
tries to interfere in our elections. Why will Leader McConnell not 
bring them to the floor?

  Now, I am certainly glad that he has agreed to my request to at least 
hold a secure briefing on the risks we face in the next election. I am 
looking forward to a date soon. I hope the leader will update us all on 
when it might be scheduled. It should be ASAP. This is serious stuff. 
The Founding Fathers were worried about foreign interference in our 
elections, and in our modern digital world it has taken a new, new 
dangerous turn.
  But a briefing alone isn't enough. We have to take legislative 
action. Democrats and Republicans, we all know, disagree on a whole lot 
of issues, but surely we can all agree that nothing matters more in our 
democracy than defending the integrity of our elections, and I hope 
that we as a body can take bipartisan action soon.
  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.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                247th Anniversary of the ``Gaspee'' Raid

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I come to the floor of the Senate 
today, as I do every year at this time, to remember what Rhode Island 
abolitionist Frances Whipple McDougall called ``the first blood [drawn] 
in the Revolution.'' This past Sunday marked the 247th anniversary of 
the Gaspee raid.
  This is an image of what happened to the Gaspee. We ought to 
remember. Most Americans do not know about the Gaspee Affair. They have 
learned about a far tamer incident in Boston Harbor a year later, when 
some tipsy Bostonians toppled bales of tea into the water.
  I get why Bostonians are proud of their tea party. It is a decent 
story that tea was ruined, the British East India Company was out some 
money, the Crown got angry, and the American patriots gained notoriety 
and momentum for our cause.
  But the Gaspee raid offers so much more--a true villain, a daring 
escape, a vigorous call to action, the storming of a ship, the 
vanquishing of an enemy, a blast in the night, and an earlier stirring 
of revolutionary spirit.
  The story begins in the 1760s, with King George and the English 
Parliament trying to raise money. The Crown needed to recoup losses 
from expensive recent wars, and the Colonies seemed like a convenient 
place to turn. Their solution was to allow the powerful British Navy to 
enforce customs laws, transforming naval officers into well-armed tax 
collectors.
  The Admiralty commissioned sloops and schooners to troll the 
Colonies' most profitable waters for tax revenue. In Narragansett Bay 
the Crown sent Lieutenant William Dudingston in an eight-gun schooner, 
the Gaspee. The boat and its captain quickly earned a nasty reputation. 
Dudingston stopped virtually every vessel in sight, from the biggest 
schooners to the smallest packet boats. He harassed sailors, seized 
cargo, and annexed Rhode Island vessels, merchants, and watermen, often 
on shaky or nonexistent charges.
  Historian George Washington Greene, a Rhode Islander and grandson of 
Rhode Island's legendary Revolutionary War hero, Major General 
Nathaniel Greene, described Dudingston's conduct this way:

       Not contented with performing the duties of his office, 
     still vexatious even when considerately executed, he 
     multiplied its annoyances by a thousand acts of petty 
     tyranny. He stopped vessels of every kind without 
     discrimination--ships just from sea and market boats on their 
     way to Providence and Newport with their perishable freights, 
     and to increase the indignity refused to show his commission 
     or the authority by which he acted.

  A further insult, Dudingston sent prisoners and cargo to Boston to 
face justice before a British tribunal, not the Rhode Island court 
established in Newport. This violated the Colony's agreement with the 
Crown to adjudicate such disputes on Rhode Island's soil, an offense to 
our Colony's sovereignty.
  From winter to spring of 1772, tensions in Narragansett Bay rose. 
Among the incidents involving the loathed Gaspee, Dudingston 
commandeered Fortune, the ship belonging to the influential merchant 
and later Revolutionary War hero, Nathaniel Greene. Rhode Islander 
Daniel Harrington notes in a 2017 Providence Journal article that ``the 
patriotic fervor'' that had swept ``the colonies [had] seemed to elude 
[Greene]--until Dudingston snagged his Fortune and ignited the 
righteous spirit of resentment.''
  When Greene later led the Continental Army's successful Southern 
Campaign, British General Cornwallis would lament: ``That damned Greene 
is more dangerous than Washington.'' The ignited spirit was a forceful 
one.
  On June 9, 1772, the coastal trader Hannah caught Lieutenant 
Dudingston's eye as she sailed up Narragansett Bay en route to 
Providence. The Gaspee pursued the Hannah and ordered her to stop for 
inspection. The Hannah refused. The Gaspee fired a warning shot. The 
Hannah sailed on.
  Off Warwick's shore, near Pawtuxet Village, things came to a head. 
According to the account of Rhode Islander Ephraim Bowen, the Hannah's 
skipper, Benjamin Lindsey, sailed his lighter boat over shallows around 
Namquid

[[Page S3279]]

Point. Dudingston followed in chase taking his Gaspee, a heavier boat, 
into waters too shallow for it. The Gaspee ran aground in a falling 
tide.
  The Hannah sped on to Providence. Captain Lindsey alerted respected 
local merchant John Brown, later a founder of Brown University. Brown 
``immediately concluded that [the Gaspee] would remain immovable until 
after midnight,'' Ephraim Bowen recalls, and saw what he calls the 
``opportunity offered of putting an end to the trouble and vexation she 
daily caused.''
  A Providence man named Daniel Pearce ``passed along the main street, 
beating a drum and informing the inhabitants of the fact that the 
Gaspee was aground on Namquid Point and would not float until 3 o'clock 
the next morning,'' Bowen recalled. Pearce invited ``those persons who 
felt a disposition to go and destroy that troublesome vessel to repair 
in the evening to Mr. James Sabin's house,'' presumably for some strong 
spirits and discussion of an attack.
  Once assembled and refreshed, the Rhode Islanders set off into a 
moonless night in eight longboats with muffled oars. The group's 
``powder was prepared and bullets run'' as it ``set forth on its 
mission of vengeance,'' George Washington Green recorded.
  Aboard the Gaspee, the seaman standing watch, Bartholomew Cheever, 
first thought he saw light dancing off rocks in the near-blackness. 
Suddenly, however, Cheever realized the glints he saw were more than 
rocks. The Rhode Islanders and their long boats encircled the Gaspee. 
Cheever alerted Dudingston, and Dudingston ordered his men to fire on 
the assault party. The Rhode Islanders, however, outnumbered the 
British crew by more than 4 to 1 and quickly overwhelmed the Gaspee. A 
brief and decisive melee ensued. Soon, Dudingston lay on the 
quarterdeck with musket wounds to his arm and groin. The Gaspee would 
never again be under British command.
  The Rhode Islanders ferried the British crew to shore, where they 
were awaited by the Pawtuxet Rangers, a group that exists still today. 
The raiders then returned once more to set fire to the Gaspee. The fire 
burned until it reached the powder magazines below the Gaspee's decks, 
and when the fire reached the magazines, the Gaspee was blown to bits 
and was no more.
  King George soon learned of the Gaspee raid and was not pleased. The 
raiders would face charges of treason, he said, and the gallows, were 
they to be found guilty and convicted. The Crown put up the colossal 
reward of 500 pounds sterling for the capture of the rebels--50 times 
what a colonial farmer would earn in a year.
  No Rhode Islander would give up the raiders. Try as they might, 
British authorities never found and never convicted the brave raiders 
who burned the Gaspee. Word of the Gaspee raid spread swiftly through 
the Colonies and stirred revolutionary spirit. George Washington was 
actually hosting a British officer when he heard the story. The officer 
exclaimed that the Rhode Islanders ought to be ``phlebotomized'' and 
that he would personally march 5,000 British regulars ``from Boston to 
Charleston, South Carolina, and put down all opposition to the revenue 
acts.'' To that assertion, Washington shot back:

       I question not, Sir, that you could march from Boston into 
     Charleston, South Carolina, at the head of 5,000 British 
     regulars; but do you mean to say, Sir, that you could do so, 
     as a friend, or as an enemy? If as the latter, and you will 
     allow me a few weeks' notice of your intention, I will engage 
     to give you a handsome check with the Virginia riflemen 
     alone.

  Washington punctuated his retort, as an onlooker reported, by 
``[striking] the table so violently with his clenched hand that some 
wine glasses and a decanter near him with difficulty maintained their 
upright positions.''
  Every year, Rhode Islanders gather for a celebration and parade 
through Warwick, the neighborhood off of which this event took place. 
We gather to remember the daring assault on the Gaspee. We recall our 
forebears' resolve for independence, freedom of religion, and the rule 
of law. We are also glad to remember that Rhode Islanders are not to be 
trifled with. This is a story worth remembering.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Boozman). The Senator from Maine.
  (The remarks of Ms. Collins pertaining to the introduction of S. 1766 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Braun). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Holte 
nomination?
  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  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 West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Alexander) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), 
the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), and the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
  (Ms. McSALLY assumed the Chair.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Boozman). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 60, nays 35, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 145 Ex.]

                                YEAS--60

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Carper
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Lee
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--35

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Casey
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Leahy
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Alexander
     Capito
     Harris
     Klobuchar
     Warren
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining 
votes in this series be 10 minutes in length.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________