National Defense Authorization act for Fiscal Year 2027--Motion to Proceed

Text in the Record

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027--Motion to Proceed

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 436, S. 4784. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. The bill clerk read as follows:

Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 436, S. 4784, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.

Remembering Lindsey Graham

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to my colleague but, most of all, to my friend, Senator Lindsey Graham. We were all shocked to learn of his passing this weekend, and I mean it--stunned. It is hard to imagine the Senate without Lindsey. It already seems quieter. We will miss his humor, his advice, and, of course, his friendship. Lindsey was dedicated to serving the people of South Carolina and the Nation. He spent nearly his entire adult life in public service, from the military to the South Carolina House, to the past 31 years--31 years--here, both in the House and in the Senate. In having spent 33 years in the Air Force, the South Carolina Air Guard, or the Reserves, Senator Graham was a staunch supporter of our men and women in uniform. Since 2010, he served as co-chair of the National Guard Caucus. With his help, we were able to successfully convince the Department of Defense to change its policy and allow guardsmen and reservists to concurrently receive their Federal tuition assistance and their GI bill benefits in full. Given our close, personal friendship and his ardent support of our servicemembers, our national defense, and our military, I liked to call him ``Grambo.'' For me, that was his nickname, ``Grambo''--you know, kind of like ``Rambo.'' Well, he was ``Grambo.'' He really was the Senate version of ``Rambo'' in all things military, and he was relentless, as we saw. I mean, right up until almost the day he died, he was working and advocating for our military, on behalf of American military strength, and our role as, truly, the leader of the free world. As chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Senator Graham advanced conservative causes that have made our Nation stronger and more prosperous. He helped steer through the Working Families Tax--the One Big Beautiful Bill, or the OB3. It has got a lot of names, but the important point is that it really made a huge difference for our country and for working families. He cared about that. He cared about taking on the big challenges and doing big things. Likewise, as the Budget chair, he was instrumental in helping us fund border security and law enforcement. He was a big part of helping us implement the Trump agenda, and that was so appropriate. Lindsey was really--you know, as they say in sports, he was a triple threat. He was a triple threat. He was a force in our Republican caucus, and he could work with the Democrats. Of course, he had a tremendous relationship with President Trump, and they truly cared about each other. They were real friends. They worked together, but they truly were friends. We will miss all of that. As the former chairman and the senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Graham shaped the Federal judiciary. Think of how impactful that has been from the Supreme Court down to the district courts. He played a central role in the confirmations of Supreme Court Justices, including Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett, while also helping to oversee a massive conservative shift in the Federal judiciary. I think the time that, on the Judiciary Committee, he really said what he thought, what he felt in his heart about Justice Kavanaugh was perhaps, if not his finest moment, one of his truly finest moments where he truly stood up and said what he felt was right on the national stage and made an incredible difference, a lasting and important, incredible difference. And it wasn't rehearsed; it was just Lindsey spontaneously being Lindsey, saying what was in his heart. There is that old saying: Speak from your gut and your heart. Boy, did he, and it made a huge difference. That was vintage Lindsey Graham. His leadership on defense, judiciary, and budget issues will be felt for years to come. But for all his accomplishments in the Senate and around the globe, Senator Graham was most proud of his family. He was a loyal and loving brother and uncle who once said of his sister:

Of all the things that have happened in my life, her turning out so well is the highlight of it by far.

It is only fitting that his sister Darline will serve in his place. We extend her a warm welcome to the Senate like Senator Graham did with so many of us. It is almost as if Lindsey and President Trump had one more call after the call that night where they talked. Lindsey had gotten back from Ukraine, and the President called him or he called the President. They talked on the phone, and it was shortly after that that Lindsey had his heart attack and died. But it is almost like they had one more call--one more call--where Lindsey was able to call President Trump again or President Trump was able to call Lindsey and they talked about, you know, who should replace Lindsey during that period before the election when the people of South Carolina will elect their next Senator to replace Lindsey, and they decided on Darline. And how fitting. How appropriate. So big thanks to President Trump for recommending to Governor McMaster that he appoint Darline. We are so pleased to have her here, and it is so fitting and appropriate. My wife Mikey and I are praying for Lindsey and for his whole family. I have to say that my wife Mikey was always a big Lindsey fan. One time, we are at dinner or something, and she just tells Lindsey how much I like and respect Lindsey. I said to her: Why did you do that? She goes: Well, because you do. You really like him. You respect him. So I just said: Yes, I know I do, but he is my buddy. You are not supposed to tell your buddy that; they are just supposed to know it. But it is true. I think we all did, both sides of the aisle. We will miss him incredibly. The country, the State of South Carolina will miss him. Our country will miss Lindsey Graham and his incredible service. May God bless Lindsey and his entire family. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from North Dakota for those kind words about our mutual friend. We are both going to miss him. I have given a tribute to him today in the committee and partially on the floor, but it is still hard to imagine the Senate without Lindsey. (The remarks of Mr. DURBIN pertaining to the introduction of S. 4979 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Mr. DURBIN. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas. Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to enter into a colloquy with the Senator from North Carolina Senator Tillis. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Bipartisan Safer Communities Act

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, 4 years ago, Congress passed our legislative response to one of the deadliest school shootings in American history. It happened in Uvalde, TX, at Robb Elementary School. Nineteen innocent children and two adults--teachers--lost their lives that day. It was a devastating--a devastating--occurrence. Unfortunately, it was not

[[Page S3920]]

an isolated event. Americans around the country, though, joined in the suffering of these families' experience as they mourned the loss of their loved ones. Flags at Federal buildings and military installations were lowered to halfstaff. We all knew we wanted to do whatever we could do to prevent something like this from happening again if there was anything that we could actually do legislatively. The much harder question was, What would that look like? In the days that followed, we heard from many Americans--Texans, North Carolinians, and folks all around the country--saying that no parent should ever have to send their child to school wondering will that child be safe, and no child should have to go to school wondering if they were going to be a victim of a mass shooting. We knew that whatever we did, it would not bring back those teachers and innocent children from the act of pure evil that unfolded on May 24, 2022. But we knew that--Senator Tillis, Senator Sinema, Senator Murphy, and I took on the task of trying to come up with a bill that would actually make a difference, that would save lives. But we knew we had to do it consistent with the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but we felt like we could make some progress and save lives. As negotiations continued, there was pressure mounting from some corners of this Chamber to do things that maybe sounded pretty good, but they wouldn't actually change the results or maybe they would be unconstitutional in depriving law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights. During the meetings that we had together, I think we concluded that if we actually wanted to be successful in doing something that would make a difference and save lives, that we couldn't just try to do something that perhaps was a good press release or might make the evening news; we actually had to do something that would be meaningful and that would result in saving lives. I have long been a champion of Second Amendment rights. That is probably no surprise. Texans believe in the Second Amendment. But some of these proposals, obviously, were unacceptable to me, personally, but they, as I said, failed to address the problems that we have seen in these school shootings in a way that would be meaningful. The best solution, in my view, was that we needed to find some way to come to grips with the mental health crisis in our country and particularly that affecting young people and, in this case, in the wake of COVID and the isolation many of these young people had. But we also knew that we needed to be narrow and specifically tailor policy changes that would save those lives. So we worked together and passed a bill called the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which passed the Senate on June 23 and was signed into law June 25 of 2022, 32 days after the shooting. Now, the Senate does not ordinarily operate at that sort of speed, I can assure you, as we all know, but we wrote this law carefully and deliberately to ensure no law-abiding citizen's Second Amendment rights would be impaired. To be plain, if you didn't suffer from a mental illness or you weren't a criminal, you would not be affected by this law. That was true then, and it is true today. What this bill did do is made a historic investment in mental health and school safety and commonsense measures to prevent dangerous individuals from being a harm to themselves and others. Texas, like all the States, has received significant amounts of money; in the case of Texas, hundreds of millions of dollars from this law--more than $312 million, to date, to strengthen our mental health care and school hardening--to make it more difficult for violent individuals to attack soft targets like schools typically have been but no more. Universities use these resources to partner with local school districts to provide training for mental health professionals to support students, and school districts have used these resources to upgrade their security systems, to implement threat alert systems, and improve emergency response plans. I saw some of these firsthand when I visited R.L. Paschal High School in Fort Worth, which received more than $350,000 for specialized emergency radios and safety upgrades. The BSCA, as it is called, also expanded certified community behavioral health clinics around the country, which has allowed mental health clinics to expand their coverage to include not only mental health but substance abuse disorders. We have all come to be aware of the fact that we simply have not treated or provided the resources for people suffering from mental health challenges that are necessary to help them not only get better but prevent them from descending into self-harm or harm to others. There are now more than 500 community-based mental health centers operating in 46 States, and additional States have added to the CCBHC Demonstration Program recently announced by the Health and Human Services Secretary, Secretary Kennedy, that was directly linked to this law that we passed 4 years ago. Now, of course, there has been a lot of misunderstanding living in the world we live in with social media and officeholders and would-be officeholders running in political campaigns. There is a lot of misunderstanding about what this law did and what it did not do. For example, some have described this bill as a gun control law, which it is not. So, today, together with my colleague--our colleague-- Senator Tillis of North Carolina, who is a great partner in this legislation, we want to address some of the widespread misconceptions about the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and just set the record straight. One of the things I heard most in the recent campaign I ran in was that we had passed a red flag law which would make it possible for an aggrieved partner or spouse or family member or maybe even a neighbor to basically turn in somebody and have their firearms confiscated without due process of law. We decided upfront that although some States did have red flag laws, that No. 1, it was important that there be appropriate due process requirements before they can access any of the resources in this law and, secondly, that there not be a national red flag law--leave this up to the States. The truth is, the BSCA actually makes it harder to implement red flag laws because you can't do so and access this money unless you enhance the due process protections that are necessary to protect what is a constitutional right. Our legislation created this due process framework that I know you will hear more about from Senator Tillis, but I knew that my State, Texas, would never pass a State red flag law, and the last thing I was going to do was to support or embrace a red flag law, national law, that would preempt Texas law. So we wanted to make sure that the funding that was available was available for crisis intervention programs, veterans courts, mental health courts--just to use a couple of examples--that did not have those red flag laws while making sure those States that did could not gain access to this money unless they provided an enhanced due process procedure. So it is false to argue that the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act created an incentive for more States to pass new red flag laws, and the statistics bear it out. Only 4 percent of the total money appropriated was obligated to red flag-related activities--4 percent--in States with existing red flag laws, and those States now had to comply with the law so a stricter due process standard applied. The vast majority of BSCA funds have gone, instead, to State mental health programs, veterans courts, as I mentioned, crisis intervention, school safety measures. The only States to implement a new red flag law were two States that already had begun the process to pass one before the BSCA passed. So the BSCA--Bipartisan Safer Communities Act--did not cause or leave any State to pass new red flag laws. What we did is made it harder for those laws to be abused in those States that had them by providing for this enhanced level of due process protection of this Second Amendment constitutional right.

Showing the first 12 paragraphs. The full remarks are in the Record.

Read the full remarks in the Record (opens in a new tab)