[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 74 (Wednesday, May 4, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2310-S2311]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



             Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar

  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, in a moment, I am going to make a motion 
by unanimous consent to call up, and hopefully confirm, significant 
appointments in the Department of Defense.
  We are in the midst of a war in Europe right now. It is hard to 
imagine that, and yet it is the case. Every day we see atrocities 
committed by Vladimir Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine, but every 
day we also see the concerted effort of the United States and NATO 
allies and other nations to provide dramatic support for the Ukrainian 
defense force and the Ukrainian people.
  We honor the Ukrainians' resolve and heroism, and we feel proud of 
the role that the United States and other nations are playing in 
providing defense. And I hope we will take additional defense support 
up on the floor in the days to come. However, this is not easy work to 
do.
  One of the positions that I am going to be seeking a UC on is the DOD 
Assistant Secretary for Sustainment, Christopher Lowman, who is a 
Virginian. He and his family live in Fredericksburg.
  Mr. Lowman is, according to the committee, completely 
noncontroversial and very much desired in this position.
  He was born in Germany, in a military family, grew up in Virginia, 
went to college in New Jersey. He was a U.S. marine beginning in 1984, 
and then after his Active Marine service, entered the Army civil 
service as an Army maintenance management intern in 1989. And he has 
been with the Army ever since.
  His specialty is logistics. So this Assistant Secretary of 
Sustainment is kind of the peak logistics officer in the Pentagon.
  He previously was the Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology. OK. That is a 
title that is--you know, what does that actually mean? I will tell you 
what it means. When the United States is trying to get historic amounts 
of military aid across a contested border from allied countries into a 
war zone, we need people who know logistics. It may not be the sexiest 
part of the military mission, but it is part of the mission that is 
absolutely critical, and it is part of the mission where the U.S. 
military is second to none in the world.
  If you wonder why the Russian military's grand plans to topple 
Ukraine in just a couple of days came to naught, you first say it is 
Ukrainian heroism, and you second say it is the support of our allies, 
but, third, you have to point out the Russian military has demonstrated 
that they haven't mastered logistics. The inability to maintain supply 
chains, the inability to do proper maintenance of tanks and other 
vehicles is one of the reasons that the Russians have not been able to 
accomplish their aims. So what this war in Europe is demonstrating is 
militaries that have the capacity to do logistics and provide supplies 
to people on the front end of the fight are critical to success.
  Given the fact that the United States is the key to pulling together 
the international effort to provide support to the Ukrainian defense 
force, and given the fact that that mission depends upon having the 
best logistics in the world, why would we leave the chief logistics 
official at the Pentagon position vacant in the middle of a war when 
the United States is playing this heroic role?
  For that reason, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following 
nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 477, 599, 777, 779, 780, 781, 861, 
and 886; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without 
intervening action or debate; that the motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to 
the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be 
immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate resume 
legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I find 
myself here on the floor again as my friend the Senator from Virginia, 
whose sincerity and urgency on this issue I don't doubt for a second, 
tries to move a whole slate of nominees to which multiple Republican 
Senators have objections. And let me give you a sense of why.
  One of the nominees that my friend is attempting to move here, let's 
be clear, to do this without a vote--we could be voting on these 
nominees. The majority leader could schedule votes on them any time, 
but he hasn't done that. He hasn't done it in some of the cases for 
months.
  This is an act--this is a request to suspend the regular order of the 
Senate and to confirm these nominees without a vote. Well, I, for one, 
am not going to consent to confirming without a vote people like Ravi 
Chaudhary. He is being nominated for Assistant Secretary of the Air 
Force.
  Mr. Chaudhary, who appeared before the Armed Services Committee, on 
which I sit, as does my friend from Virginia--Mr. Chaudhary has 
proposed using AI technology--artificial intelligence--to track members 
of the military, identify them as extremists, and then have them 
expelled.
  He said:

       The key to disrupting them--

  Meaning ``extremists,'' his word, people whose views he doesn't agree 
with.

       The key to disrupting them is uncovering and understanding 
     their initial behaviors, elements that are contained in their 
     electronic footprints.

  What Mr. Chaudhary has proposed to do is to use surveillance on 
members of the U.S. military to determine whether they might, in the 
future, commit acts that he might disapprove of and then to take action 
against these members of the military.
  In 2015, he wrote this: that the military exhibits a ``culture of 
xenophobic cronyism.'' And he went on to say that there was a 
``xenophobic command climate'' in the U.S. military today.
  I said to Mr. Chaudhary, at the time when we had our hearing, that I 
cannot

[[Page S2311]]

believe that he would propose to use surveillance on members of the 
U.S. military to track their speech, to track their activity online, to 
track their movements online, all in an effort to decide if they might, 
in the future, commit acts that he disagrees with.
  I submit to you, Madam President, not only is that wrong; it is 
blatantly unconstitutional--blatantly unconstitutional--and it is 
frightening. What is further frightening is that he would be nominated 
for a leadership position in the Department of Defense.
  I call on the President of the United States to withdraw this 
nomination today, just as he should withdraw his unconstitutional 
disinformation board that he is attempting to force on the American 
people as we speak. This is the most radically anti-free-speech 
administration in American history. Their actions are an affront to the 
basic constitutional values of this Nation, including and especially 
the First Amendment.
  I am appalled--appalled--at what this administration is doing--
censoring American citizens, surveilling them--and now advocating it in 
the U.S. military, to the men and women who put their lives on the 
line?
  So, no, I will not consent to have this individual, who never should 
have been nominated for this position, fast-tracked to be confirmed 
without a vote, without a single, solitary vote on the floor of the 
U.S. Senate.
  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. HAWLEY. I think you have the floor, Senator; so, yes, I think----
  Mr. KAINE. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  It strikes me that the Senator's objection is you do not want to have 
this candidate--the bloc of them advanced without a vote. If I can 
guarantee that you get a vote on these nominations, will you drop your 
objection?
  Mr. HAWLEY. Can I respond to that?
  Mr. KAINE. Yeah. I mean, I know you will vote no. You have made it 
plain. But if I can guarantee you would get a vote, will you drop your 
objection?
  Mr. HAWLEY. On all eight of them, Senator?
  Mr. KAINE. Yeah.
  Mr. HAWLEY. To have a vote on the floor?
  Mr. KAINE. Yes.
  Mr. HAWLEY. I would be happy to take a vote on the floor on all eight 
nominations.
  Mr. KAINE. And that is what my point is. We are not fast-tracking 
these without a vote. This is a motion to allow a vote en bloc on the 
floor. So you will have an opportunity to vote against Mr. Chaudhary or 
all of these. This is not a motion to immediately approve them without 
a vote. It is just a motion to bring them up so that you and others can 
vote on these nominees. That is all I am seeking.
  And so my request, basically, would guarantee you a vote on all of 
these nominations if you drop your objection.
  Mr. HAWLEY. Is this a recorded vote on the floor, Senator?
  Mr. KAINE. It would be a--yes. It would be en bloc, but it is a 
recorded vote, is my understanding.
  And, again, Madam President, just to clarify, my motion is only that 
the Senate be allowed to vote on these nominees: Alex Wagner for 
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force; Ashish Vazirani for Deputy Under 
Secretary of Defense; Christopher Lowman, Assistant Secretary of 
Defense; Lester Martinez-Lopez, Assistant Secretary of Defense; Agnes 
Schaefer, Assistant Secretary of the Army; Franklin Parker, Assistant 
Secretary of the Navy; Musetta Tia Johnson, Judge of the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Armed Forces; and Ravi Chaudhary, Assistant Secretary 
of the Air Force.
  I understand my colleague will vote no, but all I am moving is for 
the Senate to be able to have a vote on these nominees.
  Mr. HAWLEY. Senator, you want to vote on all eight at one time; you 
don't want to vote on each one?
  Mr. KAINE. My motion is to consider them, yes, en bloc; but it would 
be a recorded vote, is my understanding.
  Mr. HAWLEY. What I propose to do here is--there are multiple Senators 
on this side of the aisle besides myself who have objections to 
different multiple of these. What I propose to do is object to this 
now, but I think we can work something out on this going forward.
  So I think--do I have the floor now?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia has the floor, and 
there is a pending unanimous consent request.
  Mr. HAWLEY. OK. So I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. KAINE. I appreciate the objection being heard, and I would just 
say to my colleague, I hope we could work out a deal that would enable 
us to have a floor vote where my colleague could vote as he chooses on 
these nominees. This was not an attempt to bypass a vote; it was just 
an effort to have a vote where everybody can be recorded on the 
nominees. I hope we can work that out.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.