It were to pass, this could pose a very dangerous threat to our relationship with saudi arabia at a time when the iranians are now have achieved a peninsula all the way across from baghdad to from tehran all the way to baghdad and theres no doubt that the iranians have continued their ie agreesive their aggressive behavior. And if we voted down this arms sale to saudi arabia, it would have a devastating effect on our standing in the middle east and longterm impact on our ability to counter what is clearly iranian aggressive behavior. So i urge my colleagues i strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. A senator mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from south carolina. Mr. Graham id like to join with senator mccain very quickly. 71, 27, september 21 last year we voted to approve tank sales to saudi arabia because they need more weapons and equipment to counter the iranian aggression in yemen and other places. Most of the people who voted for tank sales are now going to vote for precisionguided missiles. This 500 million calved out of this passage gives saudi arabia qualitative edge on the battlefield against iranian proxies, which could who could care less about civilian casualties. The most upside down thinking i have ever seen. Many of you over there actually approved this because it was worked on before President Trump became president. So its really disheartening to see support for president obamas tank sales but not going to support President Trumps sales that actually reduced civilian casualties. Iran with killing this deal, taking these weapons off the table. I would urge everybody in here if youre serious about stand up to iran, stand with saudi arabia, as imperfect as they are. Thank you. Mr. Paul mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from kentucky. Mr. Paul the question is, should we sell arms to saudi arabia, a country that many suspect was involved in 9 11, a country that many suspect gave weapons to isis, the people were fighting in the middle east, a country that imprisons the victims of rape, because its partnersly, or presumably the fault of the woman because its apparently or presumably the fault of the woman who is raped in saudi arabia. One woman was given a sentence of 70 lashes and six months in jail. They increased her penalty to 200 lashes and finally only when we protested was it reversed. They sentenced a poet to 1,000 lashes. Sometimes you dont survive 1,000 lashes. They gave them 100 at a time. Hes going to be in prison for ten years. This is not the kind of person that we should be extend sending your that we should be sending your weapons to. These weapons were funded and supported by the american taxpayer and we should not be willynilly giving them to people who imprison their people for protesting. Currently a young man who is 17 years old, his name i is ali al nimer is on death row. But i it is not just enough to imprison him, they will behead him and crucify him. This barbaric nation should not be getting our weapons. We should not sell them weapons. Currently, there is a blockade of yemen. 17 Million People risk starvation. We should not be supporting this effort. There is probably no greater purveyor of hatred for christianity and judaism than saudi arabia. We should not be giving them weapons. They have madrases across the world teaching hatred of us, preaching hatred of the rest, hatred of christianity, hatred of judaism, and these people want to give them weapons. I dont get it. It makes no sense. Some will argue its a jobs program. Well, isnt that swell. Were going to give money to people who behead you and crucify you to create jobs. That should never be the way we make a decision about arms sales in our country. A famous republican and general, general dwight eisenhower, said that he worried that someday we would make decisions not based on our defense but based on the military industrial complex. I am embarrassed that people are out here talking about making some money and making a buck while 17 Million People live on a starvation diet and are threatened with famine. I am embarrassed that people would bring up trying to feather the nests of corporations in order to sell these weapons. This should be made pure and simple on our national defense. Saudi arabia is not a reliable ally. Saudi arabia should not get these weapons. For every supposed good thing they do, they do five things that are bad for america. They are the biggest purveyor of hatred of christianity and judaism. I request a no vote, and i reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. Corker mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from tennessee. Mr. Corker i respect my friend from kentucky and we Work Together on the Foreign Relations committee. I could not disagree more on this issue. I will give a brief outline. That is the fact that the houthis are an iranbacked entity that overthrough a westernbacked government in yemen. Last year on the floor with a vote of 71 votes, this body voted to support the selling of tanks to saudi arabia. Unfortunately, in this particular case, Foreign Policy generally, partisanship generally stops at the shores, but im afraid that whats happening i know that senator paul has been very consistent on this, but im afraid this vote is somewhat about some members wanting to to get a piece of President Trumps hide on the issue that is far more important than Something Like that. Im fearful that thats whats happening today on the floor. A lot of people dont realize that saudi arabia already has the bombs, the bombs. What we would be selling to them is a precisionguided weaponry that allow systems that allow these bombs to be smart bombs and not dumb bombs. Most people have been concerned about saudi arabia when they have been involved in pushing back the houthis, which by the way are firing weapons into their country from the southern border. It would be no different than if mexico was doing that to ours. I know thats not going to happen, but obviously, we would be firing back. And so whats happening here is they have bought the bomb from italy. What they want to buy from us is these precision systems that allow them to not kill civilians. Its to protect civilians. So think about this. Here in the United States senate, we want to protect civilians in saudi arabia, and in our wisdom, were looking at blocking the sale of the very mechanisms that would allow that to happen. In some cases, im afraid, just to make a point against the Trump Administration. Actually, their policies here have been very sound. The meeting they had in saudi arabia was very beneficial. Saudi arabia has flaws, but they have been an ally. In this case, this would show us as stepping away from an ally in a way thats cutting our nose off to spite our face by not allowing them to have the precision mechanisms that keep them from killing civilians. Weve taken senators down in the skiff. There is absolutely no evidence that saudi arabia tried to kill civilians, none. As a matter of fact, there is evidence to the contrary. So please, lets be rational. I know there are some disagreements over some Foreign Policy issues. This should not be one of them. I urge defeat of this proposal. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from kentucky. Mr. Paul saudi arabia bombed a funeral procession. There was no mistake here. There was no cloud cover. There was no growth or copse of trees and they accidentally bombed a funeral procession. They bombed and killed 125 civilians at a funeral. They wounded 500. This was no mistake, there was no error. This was them pointedly dropping the bombs on civilians. They put protesters in jail. They have got a 17yearold he is now 20, been in jail for three years. He will be beheaded and then crucified. We should not be giving these people weapons. They supported isis. Theyre on the wrong side of the war. They are the greatest purveyor of hatred for christianity and judaism. They do not deserve the weapons. Theyre going to give your weapons that belong to the American People, theyre going to give them to people who behead and crucify protesters. You cant take a bible into saudi arabia. You cant visit their major cities. We cant make them be like us, but we dont have to encourage their behavior by giving them weapons that may well fall into the hands of people who are our enemies. I urge a no vote. I think we should not be selling arms to saudi arabia. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from north carolina. Mr. Burr i have nine requests for committees to meet during todays session of the United States senate. They have the approval of the majority and the minority. The presiding officer duly noted. All time is expired. The question is on the motion to discharge. Is there a sufficient second . There appears to be. The clerk will call the roll. Vote vote vote the presiding officer are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote . If not, the yeas are 47, the nays are 53. The motion to disarm is not agreed to. To discharge is not agreed to. Mr. Mcconnell mr. President . The presiding officer the majority leader. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent that the mcconnell seconddegree amendment, number 233, be withdrawn, the pending cloture motion with respect to amendment 232 be withdrawn, that the amendment be modified with the technical changes at the desk, and that at 2 00 p. M. Wednesday, june 14, the senate vote on adoption of the mcconnellforcrapo amendment number 232 as modified with no intervening action for debate and no seconddegree amendments in order to amendment 232 prior to the vote. Finally, that following leader remarks on wednesday june 14, the time until 2 00 p. M. Be equally divided in the usual form. The presiding officer is there objection . Mr. Schumer reserving i will not object, but reserving first i want to thank the majority leader, as well as senators corker, cardin, crapo and blown. This is an example of where we can Work Together on issues that we agree on. I think it will do a lot of good in both directions, in the iran direction and particular loin the russia direction. The lack of trust of mr. Putin on both sides of the aisle here is paramount. Now this says that these sanctions will stay in place unless Congress Disapproves them anded as some new sanctions. Both good things. I hope the house will pass the bill without change and send it to the president s desk. With that, i withdraw any objection and again thank the majority leader for the cooperation weve had. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell mr. President , i just want toed a, my colleague ever i just want to add, my colleague, the democratic leader, i think this is a good example of the senate at its best. We all know this has been a period of rather partisan sparring back and forth on a variety of different things. But both sides were able to put that aside and deal with two important issues in a very significant way. And i think its good for the senate and good for the country. I want to thank the democratic leader for his comments. Mr. President , i ask consent the senate resume consideration of s. 722. The presiding officer without objection. The clerk will report the bill. The clerk calendar number 10, s. 722, a bill to impose sanctions with respect to iran in relation to irans Ballistic Missile program, support for acts of international terrorism, and violations of human rights, and for other purposes. Mr. Flake mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from arizona. Mr. Flake mr. President , rumor has it that on friday the president will announce a change in u. S. Policy toward cuba. There are lots of different rumors about what that might entail. You thought id talk i thought id talk for just a couple of minutes about the consequences of such action. What has been accomplished in cuba and what our goals are and what i think our goals should be. Weve had a long, long policy of isolation with regard to cuba. For more than 50 years we tried to isolate the island and hoped that the government would change somehow. It didnt. For more than 50 years we have prohibited americans from freely traveling to cuba. Weve had periods of, the restrictions have gone down a bit and been upped again, but by and large americans have been prohibited unless they followed to certain classes to travel to cuba. And then when theyre in cuba, their travel around the island, the activities they undertake are specifically prescribed by the United States government. Now i always thought that certainly there is a place for economic sanctions. Sometimes they can help nudge countries or push countries toward a desired outcome, but a travel ban you only impose a travel ban under extreme circumstances, when National Security reasons dictate. And there hasnt for a long, long time been National Security reasons for a travel ban. Ive always thought that as an american citizen, that if somebody is going to limit my travel, it ought to be a communist, somebody in another country that wouldnt let me in. Not my own government to tell me where i can and cant travel. I think most americans feel that way, and i think we ought to first consider who these sanctions are on, the sanctions weve had for so many years have not really been on cubans. They have been on americans. Gratefully, the Previous Administration removed some of these restrictions, or at least lessened the impact of them. Around 20082009, the last administration said that cuban americans should be able to travel freely at least. Prior to that we had instances where cuban americans had to decide if their parents, for example, were still in cuba and they were aging, maybe their mother was infirmed, they had to decide if my mother passes away, do i attend her funeral. Or if my father passes away within three years it used to be that cuban americans were limited to travel to the island just once every three years. They had to decide do i attend my mothers funeral or my fathers funeral. What a terrible thing for our government to tell american citizens that you have to choose whether to attend your fathers funeral or your mothers funeral. What kind of a country is that . Why would we do that . And yet we did for a number of years. Gratefully the last administration lifted restrictions on cuban american travel, and at the same time lifted considerably restrictions on remittances, allowing money to flow more freely to relatives and others on the island. That republican sided with the time that coincided with the time that the cuban government realized that they couldnt employ every cuban, not even at 20 a month. And so they said go ahead, find another line of work in the private sector. Run a bed and breakfast. Have a private restaurant. Have an auto repair facility or a beauty shop. And hundreds and thousands of cubans have done so over the past five years, largely with seed capital provided by travel from americans, particularly cuban american travel. And remittances. So you had a situation where virtually no cuban was employed in the private sector five years ago very few to today as many as 25 , or as much as 25 of the cuban resource is now in the private sector. They have obviously more Economic Freedom. The average waiter in a cuban restaurant, in a private restaurant, brings in 40 to 50 a day. Or the average cuban working for the cuban government brings in 20 to 30 a month. So significantly more Economic Freedom for those in the private sector in cuba, but also significantly more personal freedom as well. Thats a good thing. That stands with the policy and the goal that weve always had to increase freedom for the cuban people. Now we hear that the Administration May want to turn back some of that progress and say that americans shouldnt be able to travel as freely or as frequently to cuba. Some of the rumors say that theyll limit travel to once a year. We dont know if that will be for cuban americans or all americans. And just, by the way, it seems rather strange to have a policy that is ethnically based where we say youre a cuban american travel, you can travel. Youre another type of american, you cant. That just seems pretty unamerican. But but we cant get back into a situation, mr. President , where a cuban american living in the United States will have to choose whether they can attend their mother or their fathers funeral. So i hope that we dont get back into that time. Another thing we ought to consider is that when americans travel more freely as they have been able to do under whats called a general license for individual travelers one of the changes was made in just past couple of years individual american travelers tend to go to cuba and stay in a bed and breakfast run by a private cuban citizen, travel in a private taxi cab, frequent a private restaurant, use a private taxi cab. My own family has done that. If we go back to the time when american travelers have to travel under a specific license or as a group, then those travelers will be pushed toward the cuban hotels which are owned by the cuban government or military. Therefore, you have aided the cuban government more than the cuban people. Under no system will you be able to cut money off completely from the cuban government or the private sector. Theres leakage everywhere. Thats how economies work. But why in the world would we have a policies where we directly benefit the cuban government by pushing american travelers to the hotels that they own rather than to private homes owned by private cuban citizens . So it seems to me that these policies, if they are going to come forward as it seems that they might be, just go against the policy and the goals that we have. Another thing we need to consider is that in the old times when we had more restrictive policies of travel on americans, those had to be enforced somehow. And that falls upon the office of foreign assets control and treasury. Know ofac you may have heard it recently. Its the office that we charge to look at, enforce our sanctions on iran. Were putting new sanctions on iran. Theyll be charged with enforcing those as well. Sanctions on russia, and new sanctions on russia, theyll be charged with enforcing those. Sanctions on north korea, that again falls to ofac. And yet were going to be telling ofac that now youre going to have to again spend a considerable amount of yo