Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title United States Code, of the Rule Submitted By the Department of Education Relating to ``Waivers and Modifications of Federal Student Loans''

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has been my friend and ally in many causes, and we notably disagree on others. He recognizes--and I share with him--the importance of continued support for Ukraine. He has been a steadfast partner in support of that country and holding Russia accountable for war crimes, but not addressing the manufactured debt ceiling crisis also could threaten to undermine continued U.S. support.

My colleague has raised concerns about the level of growth of defense spending in the bipartisan debt deal that was announced this last weekend. Specifically, the budget for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2024 is $886 billion, at a 3-percent rate of growth over the previous year. That funding level does not threaten our national security. We are still, and we will be for the foreseeable future, the global leader in defense spending--the world's global leader in defense spending.

Now, there are valid concerns about China and Russia and the amount of money they are spending on the military, especially with the war in Ukraine and aggression in the South China Sea.

I have a chart here which demonstrates, in one respect, the difference. You can clearly see, when you look at the United States expenditure, when it comes to military spending in the year 2022, that it is dramatically larger than any other country. In fact, when it comes to our defense budget, the United States continues to outspend the next 10 countries in the world combined.

In the decade following the horrific attacks on September 11, U.S. military spending increased 50 percent, adjusted for inflation, compared to a fraction of that for other discretionary spending priorities.

Our spending wisely goes to competitive pay for servicemembers--to recruit and retain the best, most powerful, all-volunteer force. On average, the Chinese Army pays their soldiers $108 per month, compared to $1,733 per month average here in the United States.

Russian contract soldiers can make $1,100 a month. Conscripts can be paid as little as $25 a month in Russia.

Our spending has gone toward 11 world-class aircraft carriers. China just barely acquired a third carrier, which according to even Chinese analysts is still a long way from competing with the United States in that category.

Finally, our spending goes toward maintaining a global presence, ensuring sea lanes are open to commerce, and fostering stability in key areas of the world. Russia and China don't have that priority. Instead, they focus on aggression closer to their borders and exploiting other nations.

Now, much of the current budget discussion is also focused on responsible spending and oversight, and Congress has an important oversight responsibility.

Pentagon spending keeps increasing--and not just because of inflation but because of increased prices from defense companies--and as recently pointed out on the television show ``60 Minutes,'' in some cases because of what seems like obvious price gouging.

Put simply, increased defense spending does not automatically go toward deterring China or Russia. I chaired the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee for several years and was ranking member as well. It is an awesome responsibility. More than half of our Federal budget goes through that one subcommittee. Many times, I stopped in the middle of our deliberations about the appropriate spending to keep America safe and to protect our allies and interests around the world and asked how these other countries managed to be so powerful and spend so much less.

One explanation I have already accounted for, and that is, they pay their soldiers a lot less. We value the men and women in uniform. We want the best. We want to stand by them. We want them to make a career of service in the military, in many instances, and we need to pay them accordingly. I get it. But if you even take that and put it aside, it still puzzles me how many of these countries spend so little and yet compete with us in so many high-cost categories here in the United States.

We all know that global security goes beyond hardware and soldiers. The conflicts of today and tomorrow are no longer fought just on battlefields. Technology is dramatically transforming warfare through advanced platforms that can allow a single ship to perform what several ships did decades ago to a mass dissemination of propaganda that disrupts democracies and downplays autocracies.

Climate change also will fuel future conflicts and instability.

To quote former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, ``There are limits to what even the strongest and greatest nation on Earth can do--and not every outrage, act of aggression, oppression or crisis should elicit a U.S. military response.''

An even bigger defense budget doesn't equal complete security. China knows this. It is investing billions on spending related to national security outside of defense: infrastructure projects, clean energy, artificial intelligence.

I can recall a trip to Israel on a congressional delegation led by Harry Reid. Shimon Peres was the leader in Israel and a well-respected man for many decades. And when Harry Reid asked him what is the greatest threat to the United States, he said very quickly: China. Don't you see it?

Of all the answers he could have given us--terrorism, loose nukes, other responses--he said it was China.

And I started asking the question then of visitors from foreign countries to my office here in Washington: What is the presence of China in your country? Without exception, every one of them said: Oh, China has a growing presence in our country. They are an important part of our economy and our future.

And I was thinking to myself, China has a plan. It has a vision. It is insinuating itself in countries all around the world. The Belt and Road project is a good example of that. Do we have a plan in the United States? Sometimes I wonder. We certainly have the right values. I have no question about that in my mind. But do we sell those values the way the Chinese sell their interests? I don't think we do. I think when it comes to the U.S. involvement in countries around the world, we believe that the magic of capitalism and free markets will be appreciated by so many other countries and that they will come to our side naturally. I think it takes more effort--effort like the Chinese.

It is interesting in research to compete on cutting-edge technology. My colleagues know this because they have supported the CHIPS and Science Act to precisely address the issue of America's place in the world. China uses these investments as diplomatic influence all over the world with its Belt and Road Initiative.

My colleague has been an excellent chair--Lindsey Graham--and ranking member of the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee. He knows the importance of these investments and the overall strength of the United States. If you want to beat China on spending on national security, we need to look beyond the Pentagon box and look at all the other Agencies that are facing caps and focus on the strength of our capabilities.

Here is the reality. The greater harm to national and global security is not perceived lower defense spending but rather a default on our debt. Let's hope we can avoid that this week, this manufactured political crisis. Not paying our bills would result in a loss of trust in the stability of the United States. That feeds right into Russia and China's narrative that the West is now weak, and they are strong.

A short-term debt limit extension will not project strength or stability. We have a responsibility in Congress to send a message of stability to the world. The choice is simple for me, and I hope my colleagues can see the greater picture as well.

I would just conclude on the obvious difference of opinion I have with Senator Graham. He and I will agree on more than we disagree, but on this particular issue, I believe that larding the budget at the Department of Defense has a deleterious impact on us in the long haul. We have to incentivize the people making these decisions to be careful about the money being spent, to spend it wisely, and not to overspend. The procurement system in the U.S. military, I am sad to say, the Department of Defense, is desperately in need of reform and improvement. That would be part of saving some money that doesn't make us any stronger but costs the taxpayers too much.

So this illustration here of the United States at this dramatic $877 billion compared to $292 billion in China is an indication of our spending and what we can expect from it for the security of our country. We can do a lot better. Just throwing money at the problem is not a solution. Memorial Day

Mr. President, this past weekend marked a sacred and solemn day for Americans. On Memorial Day, we remember those who gave their lives for this country. And on this Memorial Day, we were reminded once again that the struggle to defend freedom is never over.

The peace and freedom, for which more than 1 million American servicemembers gave their lives for in World War II, is now threatened again in the same theater by a delusional despot, drunk on the fantasy of reclaiming a bygone Russian Empire. And once again, the free nations of the world are united in our determination to defend peace and freedom as we did in World War II.

Over the last 2 weeks, the world witnessed a stark contrast between a dictator seeking to crush democracy and leaders determined to defend it. We saw Ukrainian President Zelenskyy travel to the Arab League summit in Saudi Arabia and eloquently argue that nations cannot sit on the sidelines during Russia's brutal war of aggression. He said:

Unfortunately, there are some in the world, and here among you, who turn a blind eye to . . . illegal annexations. . . . I am here so that everyone can take an honest look, no matter how hard the Russians try to influence.''

These were courageous and wise words to an important audience. Saudi Arabia did the right thing by inviting President Zelenskyy to address the Arab League, and it can do more to rehabilitate its tarnished international image by helping Ukraine.

President Zelenskyy then joined the G7 summit in Hiroshima, where he spoke with leaders of the world's major industrialized democracies. It is worth remembering that Russia was kicked out of that organization, what was then called the G8, nearly 10 years ago for its initial unprovoked invasion of the Crimea region of Ukraine.

At this most recent G7 summit, there was no longer any delusion that Russia is a struggling democracy or a major industrial power. Under Putin, Russia has become a mortal threat to freedom and to global security and prosperity. In pledging $375 million in additional military support for Ukraine, President Biden vowed, ``Together with the entire G7, we have Ukraine's back and I promise we're not going anywhere.'' The words of President Biden.

He confirmed the United States would join European allies in training Ukrainians to fly F-16s, a move I fully support.

At the G7, President Zelenskyy also met with Indian Prime Minister Modi, who said that India would do everything it could to stop the war, noting: For me, it is a matter of humanity.

Prime Minister Modi's comments are welcome. I hope he will at long last formally and forcibly condemn Russia's war and rethink India's troubling purchases of Russian oil.

Now contrast President Zelenskyy's statesmanship with the reprehensible conduct of Putin's Russia. I want to show a photo here of what, unfortunately, has been too common. It shows the near total destruction of Bakhmut, a once thriving Ukrainian city of more than 70,000 people; Russia's ongoing indiscriminate missile and drone attacks on civilian targets in Kyiv, including children; Putin's continued cowardly jailing of anyone in Russia who dares to speak out against him or his illegal war, including Vladimir Kara-Murza, Alexei Navalny, and more than 500 other innocent political prisoners; the outrageous hostage-taking of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, whose only offense is daring to report the truth about the rot inside Putin's Russia.

The prisons in Russia are not large enough to hide the truth forever.

Last week, Yevgeny Prigozhin, leader of the paramilitary Wagner Group and a longtime ally of Putin, said publicly that instead of ``demilitariz[ing]'' Ukraine, Russia's failed invasion has instead turned Ukraine's military into one of the ``most powerful in the world.''

That was a quote from the head of the Wagner Group.

Let me reiterate on the Senate floor for Vladimir Putin and his enablers: You have lost the war in Ukraine. Global opposition to your illegal war is growing. Your legacy will be one of an indicted war criminal and a failed leader who weakened his nation, strengthened and expanded NATO, robbed countless Ukrainians of their futures, and sent thousands of Russian conscripts to their graves for your political hubris. And despite your transparent and petty attempts to divide America, the world's democracies stand against Russian tyranny.

The overwhelming majority in Congress of both political parties understand this. President Biden understands it. Putin's warped Soviet nostalgia blinds him to the warning of President Ronald Reagan, who said: ``It is the Soviet Union that runs against the tide of history,'' accurately predicting its place on the ash heap of history among other tyrannies. The Soviet Union failed. So will Vladimir Putin's bloody and delusional attempt to resurrect it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source