I thought it was our policy to put economic pressure on the Kremlin to stop attacking our elections, its illegal occupation of Ukraine, its war crimes in Syria.

I get concerned when I have seen both this and previous administrations use waiver authority in a way that is far beyond discretion.

I rise today to call on my colleagues to vote in favor of the Menendez-Murkowski amendment No. 3705, which I understand we will be shortly voting on on the floor, to provide implementation funding for the Firefighter Cancer Registry Act…

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Amendment No. 3705

Convince me that your leverage to convince individuals to not purchase Russian defense equipment has somehow been strengthened by the new waiver provisions included in the National Defense Authorization Act.

So for the most part, I think it would be fair to say that Russia has not been deterred in terms of its activities.

the bottom line is instead of telling us what is wrong with these ideas and pieces of legislation, why don't you tell us what, in fact, we can do to turn up the pressure on Moscow that we are not?

I would like to take up the Secretary's suggestion that maybe we should have a classified briefing on the impact of sanctions...

I just would say there is no differentiation between what happened in North Korea and the actions the administration took, which I applaud, and the Russian Federation.

Our sanctions regime is only as effective as our ability to convince Europe to increase their pressure.

Is it still the policy of the United States to not recognize the illegal annexation and occupation of Crimea?

It just seems counterintuitive that we are trying to affect the Russian economy, and then we are trying to create business ties.