Ukraine Support Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle because there are not people on the floor of the House that support Putin. There are not people on the floor of the House tonight that support Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
I rise to speak, however, in opposition to H.R. 2913, the Ukraine Support Act, and explain, in my judgment, the flaws in this bill. I stand here concerned and somewhat sad that I am here because no one has been a more steadfast supporter of Ukraine than I have, in my judgment.
I thank my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle and the Republican side of the aisle who have been so passionate.
I have consistently advocated and voted in support of Ukraine. I have consistently advocated for increased sanctions on Russia. My record of supporting Ukraine is strong. I have made two trips to Kyiv and two other trips to the region, all to rally support in rejection of Putin's stand in Ukraine and call for his defeat.
I led the design and successful passage of the REPO Act in this House and in this Congress to convert billions of dollars of Russian foreign assets for use in Ukraine.
Unfortunately, today, we are confronted, as my good friend from New York noted, with a flawed measure.
First, this bill is 14 months old, and therefore, it doesn't recognize all the changes that have happened over the past year. It actually cuts $100 million in authorized funding for Ukraine annually. The funding cuts do not reflect what the House agreed to in our bipartisan NDAA.
It does not reflect the commitment that our NATO allies have made and only calls for a 2 percent pledge of their GDP in support of NATO when, in fact, President Trump has gotten our NATO allies to pledge 5 percent of their GDP in defense spending. We would be walking back from our own spending plans here, and we would be walking back from the commitment we have gotten from our European allies.
But the bill has other issues that I am concerned with. It lists ``Iran provisions'' in the document rather than refer to Russia.
The bill includes poorly written sanctions policy, including duplicative sanctions that are already in place.
It mandates certain sanctions without any link to a strategic goal of what those sanctions would achieve or meaningful behavioral change in Moscow.
It includes sanctions on financial messaging services like SWIFT, which I think are exaggerated, and in my judgment, could cause countries to move to a Chinese messaging system rather than a Western- based system.
So there are others, and that is why I have disappointment today that I am on this House floor in opposition to it.
I agree with my friend from New York, too, that this House should take up a bill that can pass and have bipartisan support to counter Putin and send a message from both Chambers in this Capitol that we reject Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the murderous regime that he leads.
My better alternative is the Financial Services bill passed almost unanimously by Zach Nunn called the PEACE Act. It would cut off Russian energy revenues, channel billions from Moscow's sovereign assets to Ukraine to defend itself, and it is past time for that bill to be on this House floor. I have urged House leadership to bring the PEACE Act to the floor. I again ask House leadership to bring the PEACE Act to the floor.
This is a well-crafted bill that will hold Putin accountable, hold Russia accountable, and will demonstrate that on a bipartisan, bicameral basis this Congress is for Putin leaving Ukraine, Ukraine having a sovereign nation, and this country having a great new friend on the Continent of Europe.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source