Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, this continues a discussion we have been having for days and indeed weeks and indeed months. Joe Biden is being flagrantly lawless, in that he is refusing to impose mandatory congressional sanctions passed by Congress in the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, also known as CAATSA.

CAATSA was designed for precisely the purpose of taking away the President's discretion to impose sanctions on Russia in cases where Congress deemed it necessary to mandate them.

CAATSA passed Congress overwhelmingly. The vote was 98 to 2. Indeed, in September 2020, my colleague Senator Wyden wrote a letter that was joined by 10 other Democrats about Russian malign activities.

Senator Wyden's letter stated: ``Congress has mandated a broad range of sanctions tools, and it is long past time for the administration to send a direct message to President Putin.''

The letter continues, specifically citing the ``sanctions mandated provided for in'' CAATSA.

President Biden is legally obligated to Nord Stream 2 AG, the company responsible for the planning, the construction, and the eventual operation of Putin's Nord Stream 2 Pipeline.

Nord Stream 2 AG has committed acts that require the imposition of these mandated sanctions under CAATSA Section 228. Section 228 mandates sanctions on any company that conducts any ``significant transactions,'' including ``deceptive transactions,'' for Russian companies that are already sanctioned.

In May, the Biden State Department sent Congress a certification confirming that Nord Stream 2 AG had engaged in those actions. It is clear that Nord Stream 2 AG falls under the mandatory sanctions of CAATSA. Nobody, not even the Biden administration, denies that the Biden State Department sent that certification confirming those actions. Nevertheless, President Biden and, in particular, the Department of Treasury is refusing to implement the law.

I have spoken directly with Secretary Yellen. I have spoken directly with the Deputy Secretary of Treasury. The law is clear and unequivocal. And because of the political agenda of the Biden White House, because of President Biden's desire to surrender to Vladimir Putin and to give him a multibillion-dollar pipeline, weakening America, weakening Europe, and giving vast resources to Putin to hold Europe subject to energy blackmail, Treasury is refusing to follow the law.

Nevertheless, I have been willing to offer a compromise. I have placed holds on nominees to the State Department and some of the nominees to the Treasury Department. And I have offered a compromise to lift the holds on this nominee and other nominees to the Treasury Department, and also to lift the holds on career nominees to State if either the Biden administration follows the law in CAATSA and impose sanctions. That is option A. That would be the best option.

Or option B, if they decide because, for whatever political reason, they believe surrendering to Putin is a good idea notwithstanding America's national security interest, there is a second option that I have offered to lift those holds, which is they could impose the sanctions under CAATSA and then immediately delist Nord Stream 2 AG. That would prevent the sanctions from going into effect, but it would also trigger an automatic vote here in this Congress to override that decision.

I have made that offer, along with Senator Toomey, in writing months ago. It is a reasonable compromise, and yet the Biden administration won't take it. They won't take it because they are terrified, if and when Congress votes on that override, that an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Congress in the Senate and the House will vote to override Joe Biden's indefensible decision to surrender to Vladimir Putin.

Nonetheless, in the spirit of reasonableness, I am happy to offer the Senator from Oregon the same deal or a similar deal, at least, right here and right now. Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2894

Mr. President, there is a bill that I filed that imposes CAATSA 228 sanctions on Nord Stream 2 AG. Every Democrat in this Chamber has supported sanctions on Nord Stream 2.

In a moment, I am going to ask for unanimous consent to pass the legislation simply mandating that the Biden administration, that the Treasury Department--and this is a Treasury nominee that we are discussing--follow the law.

If the Senator from Oregon will agree to my unanimous consent request and that bill passes the Senate, I will not object to this nominee if the Senator from Oregon is willing to accept that, because that will move the process along. The objective is to stop this pipeline that strengthens Putin, weakens Europe, and weakens America.

And, indeed, if we pass the legislation mandating the CAATSA sanctions, I won't object to this nominee. When that legislation passes the House, I will lift my hold on another Treasury nominee. And when the President does the right thing and signs it into law, I will lift my holds on all the Treasury nominees.

So it is a reasonable, incremental step forward that gives the Senator from Oregon the chance to demonstrate that when Democrats give speeches about how Nord Stream 2 is bad for America, bad for Europe, bad for the environment but good for Russia and Putin, we can now discover whether or not Democrats actually believe what they have said in speeches so many times.

Therefore, I ask that the Senator modify his request so that in addition to confirming the nomination and, as if in legislative session, that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 2894, which is at the desk; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CRUZ. I recognize that my friend from Oregon has been busy with affairs on the Finance Committee and so has not been involved in the now 2 years of debate over Nord Stream 2 on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But, unfortunately, that has resulted in the Senator from Oregon being given talking points--perhaps from the administration, perhaps from colleagues--that are simply factually incorrect. I am sure that is inadvertent.

The Senator from Oregon just said that there is no way to stop this pipeline, and that the Trump administration failed to impose sanctions to stop the pipeline. Both of those statements are factually wrong.

I was the author of two separate pieces of legislation that passed into law concerning Nord Stream 2. Both were bipartisan legislation. Both, I authored with Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, in the Senate. Both passed with overwhelming bipartisan support from both Houses of Congress.

The first bill passed in December of 2019. Nord Stream 2 at the time was more than 90 percent complete, and the argument then that was being pushed by Russian disinformation and that, sadly, has been echoed by the Biden administration and was just echoed by the Senator from Oregon--the argument from Russian disinformation was, the pipeline can't be stopped; it is too late.

We know that was Russian disinformation because it was conclusively disproved. Putin stopped building the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline the very day that the Cruz-Shaheen bipartisan sanctions were signed into law-- not the next day, not the next week. That day, we stopped the pipeline in its tracks.

But, Mr. President, it was not only stopped for 1 day; it was stopped for more than a year. For December of 2019, for January, February, March--every month in 2020, the pipeline lay dormant. It was a piece of metal at the bottom of the ocean. So the claim that we cannot stop this pipeline is flat-out false because we did.

By the way, when the Senator from Oregon said the Trump administration couldn't stop this pipeline, that, again, is just incorrect. When the President signed the legislation, the pipeline was stopped that day. It remained stopped for over a year.

When did Putin return to building this pipeline? The date is important. Putin returned to building the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline on January 24, 2021, 4 days after Joe Biden was sworn into office. And he did so because Joe Biden and his team had already conveyed weakness that they would not enforce U.S. sanctions law and that they would roll over and give Putin and Russia a generational geopolitical gift. The only reason Putin began building again is because the Biden White House defied U.S. law to surrender to Putin.

Now, Joe Biden is entitled to believe that is a good policy idea. What he is not entitled to do is ignore U.S. law. And the Senator from Oregon suggests this nominee has nothing to do with that. Well, it is the Department of the Treasury that is ignoring the CAATSA law, that is refusing to follow the policy.

Sadly, this moment marks a new threshold in that debate. Up until this point, it has only been the Biden White House that has been surrendering to Russia. Sadly, now we have a Democratic Member of the Senate objecting to legislation to stop the Biden White House from surrendering to Russia. That is a move in the wrong direction.

That being said, my offer of reasonable compromise remains if we can come together as we have repeatedly, Republicans and Democrats, to force the President to obey the law and to stop surrendering to Russia in a way that hurts America, hurts Europe.

By the way, the European Parliament--my friends on the Democratic side of the aisle like to consider themselves lovers of our friends in Europe. The European Parliament voted on Nord Stream 2. The vote was roughly 500 to 50 against Nord Stream 2 because it makes our European allies subject to energy blackmail by Putin and his successor dictators.

This is bad for America, bad for Europe, bad for peace, bad for the environment, but good for Vladimir Putin and for Russia. Joe Biden is mistaken to be committing this surrender, and my friend from Oregon errs in joining Joe Biden in that surrender to Russia.

I hope the Senator from Oregon reconsiders. I hope Congress comes together again.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I don't have objection to the article being included in the Record, but I would note that, once again, the Senator from Oregon is limited by the fact that he has not participated in the debate on this in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the last 2 years, because what he stated in his first remarks was that there was no way to stop the pipeline initially and the Trump administration failed to do so. That was factually incorrect.

We stopped the pipeline the day President Trump signed the bipartisan Cruz-Shaheen sanctions into law. That was December of 2019, and the pipeline was stopped for over a year. As I mentioned, on January 24 of 2020, 4 days after Joe Biden was sworn into office, Putin began-- returned to building the pipeline because Biden had already telegraphed his surrender to Russia.

Now, what my friend from Oregon just said is--he repeated news coverage that the pipeline is now, today, complete. That is, in fact, correct, that because Biden surrendered on this point, Putin went all in and finished the pipeline. But this is where being part of the Foreign Relations Committee discussion matters, because even though the pipeline is now physically complete, it does not mean it is operative. After the pipeline is physically complete, there are months of certifications required and multiple authorities.

The legislation that Congress passed as a bipartisan matter also imposes sanctions on any entity, any company that certifies the pipeline. Indeed, the position of the Biden State Department has been that even when the pipeline is complete, we can stop it from ever going online by stopping certification.

So the legislation that I just asked for consent would do exactly that--it would stop certification, and it would leave it as a hunk of metal rather than an operating pipeline enriching Putin at the expense of Europe and America. So we still have time to stop this.

One final observation. This morning, I spent a couple of hours in a classified briefing on this topic, on Nord Stream 2. A question that I posed to the Biden State Department--I said: What exactly did Joe Biden, did the administration get in exchange for surrendering to Russia in a way that will impact this country and Europe for decades to come?

The answer, I will say, was altogether unsatisfactory. The only thing the Biden White House got was good will from Angela Merkel, whose party was just defeated resoundingly this past weekend in the election. So Angela Merkel is on her way out. We got good will from someone who will very soon no longer be the leader of Germany.

Instead, the German people voted in--elevated the Greens, who were vocally opposed to the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline. So the new government in Germany is not going to appreciate Biden surrendering to Putin in a way that hurts the environment and hurts Germany. But we have alienated the Ukrainians; we have alienated the Poles; we have alienated Eastern Europe. The European Union voted 500 to 50, roughly, against Nord Stream 2. We got nothing, and we hurt U.S. jobs.

This is foolhardy, and I am hopeful that the Senate will exercise our historical role over foreign policy and prevent a President and an administration from making this mistake.

I would note, Secretary of State Blinken and the State Department argued vociferously in the interagency process to sanction Nord Stream 2 AG, and it was the political operatives at the Biden White House who overrode the State Department. They should not have done so, and today the Department of the Treasury should follow the law and impose sanctions under CAATSA or delist them and trigger a vote in this Congress.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source