 Thank you, Senator. You talked a bit about the process of getting aid and material to Ukraine. Not all of our audience understands the role that Congress plays in making that happen, the appropriations process that supports the diplomatic and military engagement. Could you tell us more about the bill you introduced with your colleagues to support Ukraine and what the broader role of Congress is in conducting foreign policy? Well, thank you for that question. It's a question we are answering in real time. As you may or may not know, I wrote my senior honors thesis at Amherst about the role of Congress in foreign assistance policy. My professor or supervisor was Tony Lake, who later went on to be the National Security Advisor and the head of UNICEF. We are in a tragically broken period in terms of the Senate and policy setting. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on which I serve, and which President Biden chaired, and of course, Senator Vandenberg famously chaired, sets policy through authorizations and the approval and ratification of treaties. The Appropriations Subcommittee, which I now chair and where Senator Graham is my ranking member, sets the priorities for $58 billion a year in spending. Funding for the whole of the State Department and USAID and MCC are bilateral and multilateral foreign assistance and our support for the United Nations and other groups like UNHCR that's providing refugee relief and support. I was pleasantly surprised that we were able to secure quickly strong bipartisan support for 13.6 billion in Ukrainian assistance, both humanitarian and military. And I urge that we provide robust relief when the request first came over from the administration. It was less than $5 billion, and I was really pushing for $10 billion. And within a few weeks, it grew to $13.6 billion. And we are going to have to do another Ukrainian supplemental, both to fund the war effort and to provide humanitarian assistance and reinforcements to the Eastern flank of NATO. Our president has deployed 14,000 troops. We now have more troops in Europe forward deployed than at any point the last 30 years. But we should not be doing this through emergency supplementals. We should not have last minute deals being cut between the leadership of the two parties with very little consultation or transparency. Now I sound like an old institutionalist, but it is true that so-called regular order where committees of the Senate have hearings, the administration presents budgets and we go through them. That is the way it should be done. And fortunately, Secretary Blinken and Samantha Power, administrator of USAID are both going to be appearing in front of my subcommittee to review their budgetary submissions in the coming weeks. But I think we need to be building in more robust support for the ongoing humanitarian crises and for the security needs that we are now going to see. NATO has a new focus, a new purpose. It was initially formed to resist Soviet aggression. It is now being re-strengthened and reformed in some ways in direct opposition to Putin's aggression. I do think we're going to need to look at, over the long term, providing more investment in security and in development, diplomacy and the softer sides of national security, which work best when they work in combination.