Cory Gardner

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, again, I want to reiterate that this legislation, the America COMPETES bill, is a bipartisan product. We have spent countless hours working with people from around the country to come up with a bill that focuses on giving workers and employees the skills they need to succeed. I understand the objection of the Senator from Ohio, which is based on the need to move forward with the legislation they are talking about, but it is my understanding that there is at least an effort to work on that legislation, which would provide some time to come up with a longer term solution providing an extension of the health care coverage they have been seeking for some time, although not the entire benefit package they were hoping would be extended under the legislation they were also talking about.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Ohio. One of the challenges we have, of course, is the calendar, as this reaches toward the end. Again, I am committed to stay here as long as we can to fix this and make this work. I do worry about our colleagues across the hallway and their calendar and making sure that they are finding the time to process this legislation, along with the legislation that the Senator from Ohio is concerned about. Again, I think this is something that we ought to be able to move on as we address the concerns of the Senator from Ohio--and the concerns that I think, at least to some degree, will be addressed in the continuing resolution--and to continue to work on legislation that is truly bipartisan and beneficial from a standpoint of providing more resources for manufacturing partnerships, more resources for commercialization efforts, additional resources for STEM education, and having more underrepresented minority community members involved in STEM education fields. These are things I think we can work on, and this place has to have the ability to work together on efforts that the Senator from Ohio is so concerned about and also the efforts that we have through the America COMPETES legislation. I believe we can do both. I understand the objection, and I appreciate the offer and willingness to work together. But I know when you have a House and a Senate that work under two different calendars, one of which is under our control--again, let's stay here until we get this done. There is one calendar that is out of our control, and I just hope we can move forward on this because all 50 States do benefit from the bipartisan work we have been able to put forward on the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the veterans of the Honor Flight Northern Colorado and the organization's 17th trip to Washington, DC. More than 120 veterans have traveled to our Nation's Capital to visit the memorials that stand in their honor. This group includes veterans from various wars and generations, but all are linked by their service to our country. Ten years ago, the Honor Flight was created to fly veterans that had served in World War II to Washington, DC, so they could visit the World War II memorial. Now, the Honor Flight welcomes veterans from across the country to fly to Washington, DC, free of charge, to visit the memorials of the wars in which these heroic veterans fought. No words are sufficient to show the gratitude and respect we all have for the courageous men and women who have protected our Nation. These veterans have preserved our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Of the 123 veterans on the most recent honor flight, 20 served in World War II, 34 served in Korea, and 69 served in Vietnam. Please join me in honoring Fredric Arnold, Gene Bennett, C.H. Clark, Lillian Crosley, Raymond Dickey, Darwin Dixon, James Edmisten, Jimmie Godsey, Louis Hamman, Delbert Haynes, John Hess, Robert Horton, Dolores Kochheiser, Harry Maroncelli, Elmer McGinty, Frank Occhiuto, Robert Schueneman, Raymond Valadez, William VanBeber, William Way, Richard Bernhardt, Harold Bohm, Lee Boylan, George Brandt, Casper Brixius, James Comer Jr., Russell Daniels, Ralph Darrough, Ross DeBey, Garold Fox, S. Gilbert Garcia, Ronald Gillam, William Harrison, Virgil Hecker, Allan Hedberg, Dennis Lance, Gordon Leben, Albert Lowe, Jimmy Martin, Francis McKenna Jr., Ernest Medialdea, James Montgomery, Delmer Moss, James Petrie, William Pool, Carroll Quick, Robert Ray, Kennedy Roode, Al Schott, William Sherman, James Shuey, Donald Trettenero, Herbert Wenger, Eugene Ziehm, Roy Armstrong, Wilbur Boegli, Cary Bott, Thurman Bradley, Claude Buehrle, Robert Bullard, John Carpenter, Terrence Carroll, Robert Cofone, Larry Coldren, Paul Conley, Byron Daniels, Robert Davis, Mark DeDecker, Michael Doherty, Gary Dorsey, Mark Drake, Dale Eggleston, Jerry Eldred, Gary Ellerman, Daniel Ferguson, William Fisher, Roy Friesen, Glenn Fulcher, Glenn Gaines, Jerry Graham, Paul Graves, Dwight Gutsche, Percy Hamilton II, Christopher Harris, Robert Hawkey, William Hellyer, Thomas James, Normann Kegerreis, Michael Krier, LeRoy Lawson, Harold Lif, Peter Lister, Jimmy Lofink, William Margheim, Dallas Maurer, Kevin McGrath, Richard Miller Jr., David Naylor, Wesley Nelson, Richard Norris, Larry Perkins, Robert Randall, Danny Robinett, Robert Rutz, Robert Schrader, Billy Schwindt, Jackie Scott, David Sellers, David Shigley, Tommy Silva, Kenneth Skoglund, Darrell Smith, John Smith, Farrell Spencer, Edward Stephens, Stanley Suichta, Martin Treml, Kerry Tyler, Linda Tyler, Daryl Vande Hoef, Thomas White, Terry Willert, and John Young.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, in Washington, DC, today is just another day of bureaucratic rollouts, regulatory nightmares, and government overreach, but if you are in Colorado today, it is also sticker shock day because today the people of Colorado found out--thanks to the new numbers just confirmed by the Colorado Division of Insurance--that if you live in that State, you are going to be paying, on average, an additional 20.4 percent for your health insurance this coming year under ObamaCare. That is the individual rate that was just confirmed for the 2017 plans--a 20.4-percent increase. Remember the promises that were made when ObamaCare was put into law in the most partisan of fashions. The promise that if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor has been proven untrue. And if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan has been proven untrue. Why do we know that? Because in Colorado alone, over the past 3 years, over 750,000 Coloradans have had their insurance plans canceled. Let's just go through those numbers. Over 92,000 people with individual plans from UnitedHealthcare, Humana, Rocky Mountain Health Plans, and Anthem will be forced to find new plans in 2017. In May, UnitedHealthcare and Humana announced they were not going to be offering plans in Colorado at all. We have seen Aetna reduce significantly the number of plans they will be offering. We know the health care co-op in Colorado collapsed because it was unsustainable thanks to the way ObamaCare was designed, costing over 80,000 Coloradans their health insurance. Back in August of 2013, we saw hundreds of thousands more in Colorado lose their health insurance. That doesn't sound like a promise that has been kept to me. That is a promise that has been broken. We also know ObamaCare promised it would reduce the premiums by $2,500 per family. Yet here we are today talking about a 20.4-percent rate increase on the Colorado people alone. We know from studies that one-third of Colorado counties aren't even going to have a choice of more than one insurance provider to choose from. Despite the third ObamaCare promise that the people of this country would have more opportunities to buy different insurance products, more choice, more consumer insurance options, over one-third of the counties in this country will have only one choice or perhaps even fewer. That is why two pieces of legislation introduced in recent days by Senator McCain and Senator Sasse are so important. What do they do? Senator Sasse has introduced legislation that says if an insurance increase is more than 10 percent, then you don't have to abide by the individual mandate forcing people to pay these outrageous increases thanks to ObamaCare. It also says, if you are paying 8 percent of your income in insurance premiums, you don't have to abide by the mandate of ObamaCare. It gives people the ability to actually have that financial certainty they are looking for--the certainty ObamaCare promised but failed to deliver. Senator McCain's legislation says, if a county has one or fewer health insurance options to choose from, they also will receive relief from ObamaCare's individual mandate. These are important because in States such as Colorado, the government is forcing you to pay at least 20.4 percent more if you are in the individual market. That is the average rate increase. While the 20.4-percent increase in the 2017 plans is certainly a significant amount, that is on top of last year's rate increases. If you live on the Western Slope of Colorado, last year you saw average premium rates in the individual market increase by 25.8 percent. One of the most expensive markets in the country is the Western Slope of Colorado--the mountains of our State. We have not been able to break down what it means for the Western Slope. That individual impact might even be higher for Colorado's Western Slope. We don't have those numbers broken down because it was just released today--this massive increase under ObamaCare--but if you just take the statewide average of the individual plan with a 20.4 percent, along with the 25.8 percent from last year, that is an almost 50-percent increase in insurance over the past 2 years. In 2017, it will increase 20.4 percent, on average, and this past year it increased 25.8 percent. That is a nearly 50-percent increase. The people of Colorado can't afford ObamaCare. ObamaCare can't keep its promises. We have to find real solutions for the American people, and I urge the President to come forward with the acknowledgment that his signature law is a signature failure. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GARDNER. Madam President, I rise to recognize the U.S. Air Force on the occasion of its 69th birthday. On September 18, 1947, President Truman signed the National Security Act, which established the U.S. Air Force as an independent service equal to the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy. The mission of the U.S. Air Force is to fly, fight, and win in airspace and cyberspace, and Colorado is proud to call itself home to units that play a vital role in executing all aspects of the Air Force mission. Although it is the youngest of the armed services, the Air Force has accomplished a tremendous amount--a tremendous amount--in those 69 years. With a combined force strength of more than 660,000 Active, Reserve, National Guard, and civilian personnel within the U.S. Air Force, it is a force to be reckoned with. The U.S. Air Force's ability to maintain air superiority is evidenced by the fact that the last time an American ground troop was killed by ordnance delivered from an enemy aircraft was in 1953. On any given day, there are more than 21,000 Air Force personnel deployed to 179 worldwide locations, 16,000 airmen deployed to the CENTCOM area of operations, and more than 1,000 airmen working directly with partner nations. While American airmen serve all over the world, there are thousands of airmen in my State of Colorado protecting our Nation's interests. Colorado is home to five major Air Force installations that include Buckley Air Force Base, Schriever Air Force Base, Peterson Air Force Base, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, and the United States Air Force Academy. Buckley Air Force Base is home to the 460th Space Wing and has air operations, space-based missile warning capabilities, space surveillance operations, space communications operations, and support functions. If North Korea, Iran, or any adversary fires a missile at the U.S. homeland, Buckley would be the first to see it. Buckley is also one of 18 bases nationwide being considered by the Air Force to host the next-generation F-35 jet, and it is my firm belief it fully merits that designation as well. Peterson Air Force Base, named after 1st Lt. Edward J. Peterson, a Colorado native, has been in operation since 1926. Over its 90-plus years, Peterson Air Force Base has served a variety of operational and training missions and is currently home to the 21st Space Wing and Air Force Space Command as well. Peterson is also home to the U.S. Northern Command--NORTHCOM--and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD. NORAD-NORTHCOM is responsible for protecting the U.S. homeland from the myriad of threats we face in today's complex global security environment. On a day like today, when we reflect on what happened in Minnesota, when we reflect on what happened in New Jersey, and when we reflect on what happened in New York, we know that efforts to protect our homeland are critically important. In a recent letter to the President, several colleagues and I expressed grave concerns about the rapid advancement of North Korea's nuclear ballistic missile program. That regime represents a grave threat to global peace and stability and is a direct threat to the U.S. homeland--and that is what our bases in Colorado are responsible for. While we in Congress urge the President to take actions to counter the North Korean threat, the American people rely on the hard-working men and women at NORAD-NORTHCOM to protect us from this rogue regime. Just down the road from Peterson Air Force Base is Schriever Air Force Base, which is home to the 50th Space Wing of the Air Force Space Command. Schriever provides command and control for over 170 Department of Defense warning, navigational, and communications satellites. The global positioning satellite, or GPS, is operated by the 2nd Space Operations Squadron at Schriever. If you successfully use your Google Maps today, it is because of the good work by the satellite operators at Schriever. Schriever is home to the Joint Interagency Space Operations Center, or JICSpOC. Established in 2015, the JICSpOC consolidates efforts between the DOD, U.S. Strategic Command, and the intelligence community to create unity of effort and facilitate U.S. information-sharing across the national security space enterprise. JICSpOC will enhance U.S. space operations, contribute to operational command and control within the Department of Defense, and improve the Nation's ability to protect and defend critical infrastructure in an increasingly contested space environment. Since 1966, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force, stationed in Colorado Springs, has been a synergistic hub for tracking security threats worldwide and serves as an essential component to the defense of North America and global security. Cheyenne Mountain is an engineering marvel that provides an electromagnetic pulse-hardened facility to protect our Nation's most vital interests. Many of the people around the country may know Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station as the site of Matthew Broderick in the movie ``WarGames.'' Last but not least of the major Air Force installations in Colorado is the U.S. Air Force Academy. Since the 1955 swearing-in of its first class of cadets, the Air Force Academy has been developing leaders of character to lead the world's best Air Force. The Air Force Academy educates, trains, and inspires men and women to become officers of character, motivated to lead the U.S. Air Force in service to our Nation. In addition to celebrating the Air Force's 69th birthday, I would also like to recognize that this year, 2016, is the 40th anniversary of women cadets enrolling in the U.S. Air Force Academy. Just as the Air Force leads the way as the preeminent global air power, the Air Force Academy has been leading the way with the integration of women cadets into the Cadet Wing. In 1972, the Air Force Academy issued Operational Plan 36-72, which laid the groundwork for the arrival of its first 156 female cadets in the summer of 1976. In the proceeding 40 years, women cadets and graduates have made extraordinary contributions to both the academy and to the Air Force. These contributions are exemplified by women such as Michelle Johnson, who in 1980 became the first woman cadet wing commander, which is the highest ranking cadet in the academy, and then in 1981 she became the first woman cadet to become a Rhodes scholar. In 2013, Lt. Gen. Michelle Johnson became the first female superintendent of any military service academy when she became the superintendent of the U.S. Air Force Academy. Heather Wilson was the first female veteran to serve in Congress. Lt. Gen. Susan J. Helms was the first woman graduate of the Air Force Academy to go into space. Lieutenant Roslyn Schulte became the first female graduate killed by enemy action in 2009. These women and countless others are why the State of Colorado is proud, honored, and humbled to host the U.S. Air Force Academy. On behalf of all Coloradoans and a grateful nation, I wish the U.S. Air Force a happy 69th birthday. Aim high, fly, fight, and win. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the threat from North Korea. Pyongyang has just conducted its fifth nuclear test, which is the regime's fourth test since 2009. This is also the regime's second test this year, and this is the largest weapon they have ever tested, with an estimated explosive yield of 10 kilotons of TNT. The rapid advancement of North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile program represents a grave threat to global peace and stability and a direct threat to the U.S. homeland in our immediate future. This past week, since the detonation of this fifth nuclear test, I have had the opportunity to visit with General Robinson, our combatant commander of NORTHCOM, to visit with Ambassador Ahn of North Korea, to speak with Ambassador Sasae of Japan, to visit with Ambassador Fried of the State Department, to talk to representatives at the Treasury Department--all about what is happening in North Korea and our response to the provocative actions, the dangerous actions of this regime as they continue to attempt to obtain nuclear status. All of them are very worried about what is happening. In my conversations, it was clear that we can expect and anticipate even more tests coming up, whether that is the launch of rockets against international sanctions, U.S. sanctions, the international community, United Nations security resolutions, or whether that is indeed further attempts to test or actual tests of nuclear weapons. They all recognize this will continue. They recognize the dangerous position our allies and our homeland are in. This morning, there was testimony from the U.S. State Department--Tom Countryman, Assistant Secretary--talking about the fact that these activities continue in North Korea with the assistance of outside actors, that North Korea receives material for its nuclear program from illegal operations in China, operations out of Russia. So in response to this test and the dangerous actions of North Korea and the conversations I have held across all levels of government this past week, I am asking the administration to urgently take the following actions: No. 1. Take immediate steps to expand U.S. sanctions against North Korea and those entities that assist the regime--most importantly, China-based entities. We know there are entities within China that are assisting the North Korean regime, violating U.S. sanctions, and violating United Nations Security Council resolutions. The administration must take immediate steps to expand these sanctions against them and anyone who is violating the regime of sanctions. No. 2. We must negotiate a new United Nations Security Council resolution that closes loopholes that have allowed China to skip full- faith enforcement. I will talk more about that in a little bit, but the fact is that China is finding exemptions in existing resolutions to skip full-faith enforcement. Why is that important? Because we know that about 90 percent of North Korea's economy--their hard currency-- comes from these types of operations and business with China. No. 3. We must expedite the deployment of the terminal high altitude area defense--THAAD--system in South Korea. We must expedite the THAAD system to make sure South Korea has the ability to protect itself from these aggressive actions taken by the North Korean regime. No. 4. Take all feasible steps to facilitate a stronger trilateral alliance between the United States, Japan, and South Korea to more effectively counter the North Korean threat. A strong trilateral alliance between Japan, the United States, and South Korea can be used to help China make sure they are enforcing the regulations, standing up to full-faith execution of the sanctions, and make sure we are pushing peaceful denuclearization of the North Korean regime. It is unfortunate--this aggression in North Korea isn't new. The aggression we see from North Korea today predates the current administration and goes back multiple administrations. Time and time again since I came to the Senate, I have stood before this great body and I have argued that this administration's policy of so-called strategic patience--which was crafted under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton--was failing to stop the forgotten maniac in Pyongyang. The regime's nuclear stockpile is growing fast. Nuclear experts have reported that North Korea may have as many as 20 nuclear warheads and has the potential to possess as many as 100 warheads within the next 5 years. The administration has admitted that the policy of strategic patience has failed. It is evident in the fact that they have 100 nuclear warheads coming online in the next several years. But we have gone from a strategy of strategic patience to no strategy at all when it comes to dealing with the North Korean regime. The regime's ballistic missile capability is rapidly advancing. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has stated in his testimony to Congress that ``North Korea has also expanded the size and sophistication of its ballistic missile force--from close-range ballistic missiles to intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)--and continues to conduct test launches.'' Director Clapper also stated that ``Pyongyang is also committed to developing a long-range, nuclear-armed missile that is capable of posing a direct threat to the United States.'' Assistant Secretary Tom Countryman testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the activities involved for the construction of this nuclear warhead in North Korea have been indigenized, meaning that it is coming from the industry within North Korea. They are not relying on Pakistan or others to provide it for them; they have the engineering know-how and they have the capabilities to build it on their own, within the country, without turning outside for help. He also said that some material, yes, is coming from China and Russia. And that is exactly what we must stop. We should never forget that the Kim Jong-un regime has been one of the world's foremost abusers of human rights. The North Korean regime maintains a vast network of political prison camps where as many as 200,000 men, women, and children are confined to atrocious living conditions, where they are tortured, maimed, and killed. This isn't just report language; I have spoken to defectors from North Korea who talk of these political concentration camps where this torture is occurring. On February 7, 2014, the United Nations Human Rights Commission of Inquiry released a groundbreaking report detailing North Korea's horrendous record on human rights. The Commission found that North Korea's actions constituted a ``crime against humanity.'' We also know that Pyongyang is quickly developing its cyber capabilities as another dangerous tool of intimidation, an asymmetric tool, demonstrated by its attack on Sony Pictures, the hacking incident that occurred in November of 2014, and the repeated attack on the South Korean financial and communication systems. According to a recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, ``North Korea is emerging as a significant actor in cyberspace with both its military and clandestine organizations gaining the ability to conduct cyber operations.'' They are trying and striving to achieve an asymmetric capability so that they can attack South Korea, our allies, such as Japan, and, indeed, the United States. So given this record of aggression from North Korea and fecklessness from this administration--the fact that we went from a failed policy, a strategy of strategic patience to no strategy--the Congress came together this year to pass the North Korean Sanction and Policy Enhancement Act, legislation I coauthored here in the Senate with my colleague Senator Bob Menendez. This legislation, which President Obama signed into law on February 18, 2016, was a momentous achievement, and for the first time ever, our Congress imposed mandatory sanctions on North Korea. Unfortunately, the administration's implementation of this legislation has been lacking and certainly disappointing. While they have taken some positive steps, such as designating North Korea as a jurisdiction of ``primary money laundering concern'' and also designating top North Korean officials, including Kim Jong-un, as human rights violators, these actions only scratch the surface of the sanctions authorities provided to the President under the new law. We know the source of the majority of North Korea's export earnings is the People's Republic of China. Nearly 90 percent of North Korea's trade is with China. Yet, to date, no Chinese entities that are responsible for this 90 percent have been designated for sanctions violations under the new legislation. So while we are trying to keep this regime from continuing to grow a nuclear profile, the entities that are giving them the money and the resources to do it outside of the country haven't faced the sanctions this body authorized earlier this year. The Wall Street Journal wrote in an editorial on August 18, 2016: The promise of secondary sanctions is that they can force foreign banks, trading companies and ports to choose between doing business with North Korea and doing business in dollars, which usually is an easy call. . . . But this only works if the U.S. exercises its power and blacklists offending institutions, as Congress required in February's North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act. The Obama administration hasn't done so even once. As the Wall Street Journal further noted, for instance, the administration has not acted on information from the United Nations Panel of Experts Report that the Bank of China ``allegedly helped a North Korea-linked client get $40 million in deceptive wire transfers through U.S. banks.'' Moreover, there is ample evidence of increased North Korean efforts to evade sanctions with help from Chinese-based entities. According to a New York Times report on September 9, 2016, ``To evade sanctions, the North's state-run trading companies opened offices in China, hired more capable Chinese middlemen, and paid higher fees to employ more sophisticated brokers.'' This isn't a regime that is facing the full wrath of the sanctions of the United States; this is a regime that has figured out how to use its neighboring countries to cheat to evade sanctions. We need those neighboring nations, which I know also agree in the denuclearization of North Korea, to step up, to stand up and agree to stop the provocations of North Korea by ensuring that we can shut down the money flow, ensuring that we can shut down the supplies, the materials they are using in this nuclear production, make sure they stop providing trade opportunities for hard currency going to North Korea that is feeding a nuclear program, not feeding the people of North Korea. This behavior can't be tolerated, and the administration now has the tools to punish these actions. It is unacceptable that it has not done so already, despite the will of this body. Passage of our legislation 96 to 0--every Republican and Democrat supported our efforts to impose sanctions on this regime. These latest developments in North Korea show that we are now reaping the rewards for our weak policies. The simple fact is that this administration's strategic patience has been a strategic failure, both with North Korea and with China, and has resulted in no strategy. As Secretary Ash Carter stated immediately following the latest nuclear test, China shares an important responsibility for this development and has an important responsibility to reverse it. It is important that it use its location, its history, and its influence to further the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and not the direction that things have been going. We must now send a strong message to Beijing that our patience has run out and exert any and all effort with Beijing to use its critical leverage to stop the madman in Pyongyang. We must not tolerate this behavior. The four things that I pointed out at the beginning of this talk are important to secure. Tomorrow I will be sending a letter to the President. Over a dozen Members of this body have signed and agreed to participate in this letter, asking a series of questions about our strategy toward North Korea, about the compliance of China and whether they are living up to the full faith of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2270. Are they skirting the resolution? We are encouraging the closure of the livelihood exemption in the Security Council resolution. It talks about Air Koryo and its ability to skirt the sanctions to help secure luxury goods that are banned by the sanctions. I hope that other colleagues will stand with me as we make sure that we are doing everything we can to stop the actions of a regime that is bent on the destruction of its neighbor South Korea--our great ally. It is bent on the destruction of our allies around the region and certainly intent on finding the capability, the technology to deliver one of those warheads to the U.S. homeland. This is an important issue for this generation. It is important that this generation act and solve it before the next generation bears the consequences. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. I thank Senator Daines for organizing this discussion again today, as he did the discussion we had yesterday. And I thank our colleague from Alaska for his leadership on this matter for a number of weeks as we have discussed why this funding bill for our troops, which pays our troops, gives our troops a pay raise, and is critical mission support, is being filibustered. Six times it has been blocked by a partisan minority that actually supported this measure out of the Committee on Appropriations unanimously. I thank my colleague for bringing attention to this very important discussion as we end the fiscal year and continue providing the men and women in uniform with the resources they need to defend themselves, protect themselves, and defend this Nation's homeland. This is incredibly important, not just for Colorado. Yes, Colorado is home to 49,000 Guard and Reserve members and uniformed military members. It is home to a number of defense installations across the front range of Colorado. My colleague mentioned the important part of the triad that is in Montana. We also share a number of those ICBMs located in Eastern Colorado--a critical part of that triad, which is our deterrent, our efforts to make sure we have the ability to address threats to this Nation. The Senator from Montana mentioned the detonation of a nuclear weapon by Kim Jong Un. He wants nothing more than the ability to place a miniaturized warhead on top of a missile and use it against the United States. These are real threats. These are not made-up problems. These aren't just hypothetical issues. These are real threats. We heard on the floor today from Lt. Col. Dan Sullivan, who has served this Nation in the armed forces; we heard from LTC Joni Ernst, who served this Nation; we heard from Governor Rounds, his unique perspective; and we have heard over the last couple of days and weeks from a number of people with a variety of backgrounds about the need to fund our troops and to pass this bill. We heard from a Governor who had called up members of the South Dakota National Guard and who has gone to ceremonies for National Guard members who are going overseas--Active Duty--and who has gone to funerals of people in South Dakota whom they lost. So this is a very important debate we are having right now. There seems to be a key question that is not being asked, and that key question stems from that 30-to-0 vote out of the Committee on Appropriations for this bill, with Republicans and Democrats alike voting for this bill. There were 30 people who voted for this bill. There was no one in opposition. Yet we cannot get this bill to the floor. There is a partisan obstruction, a tactic known as the filibuster, that is being employed against it to stop this from even being debated. We are not talking about being amended; it is not even being debated because they are afraid, for whatever reason, to bring this bill to the floor. I guess the people of this country ought to be asking every Member of this Chamber--Members on the Democratic side of the aisle and Members on the Republican side of the aisle, anybody: Do you oppose this bill? It is a simple question that ought to be asked of every Member of this body: Do you oppose the Defense appropriations bill? Give the number of the bill. The fact is, this bill passed 30 to 0 out of the Committee on Appropriations. When we asked for unanimous consent yesterday to move to the debate of the bill, we heard a glowing endorsement of the bill. We heard our colleagues on the other side of the aisle state how supportive they were of this legislation and the policies it contained. That is why they voted for the bill. So the question is, Do they oppose the bill? Let's get people in the Senate on record. Do they oppose the bill? Right now, we know of no one who opposes the bill. So the next question ought to be: Why are you blocking it? If they do not oppose the bill--if people don't oppose the bill--then why are they blocking it? The answer clearly isn't policy because they support the policy. The answer isn't funding because they support the funding. The answer isn't that they oppose it because it funds the troops because they support funding the troops. So there must be another reason, right? Well, the reason is simply politics at its worst. The reason is a leadership decision to obstruct this bill--to obstruct the passage of legislation that would fund our troops. Again, in the objection to our unanimous consent request to proceed to this bill, we heard from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are voting to obstruct the bill that, look, they agree with the bill. They agree with it. They agree with it. We just need different timing, we should wait until all the other bills are in place, or we should do it as one big package--basically ceding to this body that we should never do stand-alone appropriations bills, that we have to do everything as one big, massive chunk of omnibus appropriations or continuing resolutions. You know, I don't think I could get away with this at home. If I told our 12-year-old daughter at home that she needs to take the trash out, and her response to me is: Look, I agree with you. I agree the trash should be taken out. I agree that trash can is too full. But then she doesn't do it. That is a problem. That doesn't tell me she agrees the trash can is too full. That tells me she agrees to ignore the wishes of her dad--in that case. And that is the same analogy that can be used here. Mow the lawn. Our son is a little too young for that. If my wife told me to go out and mow the lawn, and I said: You know what, I agree. The grass is too long. It needs to be mowed. I agree with you. But if the lawn never gets mowed, all my neighbors in that whole town know the grass is too tall and that I didn't do my job. That is the same thing that is happening in the Senate. People can say they agree all they want with the funding for this bill, but when they vote to obstruct it, when they vote to shoot it down, when they fail to vote to bring it up for debate, I guess the only way you can consider that is that it is in opposition to the efforts to fund our troops. Filibustering the Defense appropriations bill endangers our military's ability to respond to the threats they face every day, and they face significant threats. Let's just take a look at Iran alone. We only need to look at the recent uptick in unsafe encounters that have been widely reported in newspapers around the country between American sailors in the Persian Gulf and the Iranian Guard vessels in the Persian Gulf to see what happens when our enemies sense weakness. In 2016, there have been 31 unsafe encounters between the U.S. Navy and Iranian vessels in the Persian Gulf. In all of 2015--the entire year--there were only 25 unsafe encounters in the Persian Gulf. Yet this year, in August and September, we have seen 31, far outnumbering what we saw in the entirety of last year. Less than 2 weeks ago, seven Iranian fast attack boats were involved in an unsafe encounter with the USS Firebolt, with one Iranian craft coming to a stop in front of the American ship. That provocative maneuver brought the Iranian boat within 100 yards of the Firebolt, a coastal patrol boat that carries a crew of about 30. This was unsafe, unprofessional, and could have led to a collision. Less than 3 weeks ago, the USS Squall had to fire three warning shots. They fired three warning shots when an Iranian Guard vessel came within 200 yards of it. GEN Joseph Votel, the Commander of the United States Central Command, has said the attacks are ``concerning,'' and he went on to say that he believes the ``unsafe, unprofessional'' behavior is an attempt by Iran to ``exert their influence and authority in the region.'' So while this administration is paying Iran billions of dollars-- while they are giving that money, billions of dollars, to Iran, the same country that held American sailors hostage and that is performing unsafe, provocative maneuvers in the Persian Gulf--this body, the Senate, as a result of a partisan minority, is holding the DOD appropriations bill hostage. They are denying critical funds to those American sailors at the same time we are giving money to the army, the navy of those who would hold our own sailors hostage. They are doing this through the money--the billions of dollars--being given to the Iranian regime. Now remember, this bill isn't a partisan product. This bill is the result of extreme bipartisan collaboration--input from leaders of the Department of Defense, strategists, people who know what they are talking about, and people on the Committee on Armed Services, such as the Presiding Officer of the Senate who served in the Armed Forces. This is a product that had 30 people voting for it--Republicans and Democrats. It is a bipartisan product, yet it is being blocked every time we try to bring the bill up. If the Presiding Officer were on the floor with us now, I would ask him if he thinks that is a rational reason he could explain to the men and women in his unit. Could he say: Look, the Senate has said they support the bill, but they refuse to pass the bill. Would they say: OK. I understand. I get that. That is not the reaction he would receive. When we look at the needs of the commanders to have certainty in their funding, it is real. They need passage of this bill. We can't wait until the last minute and cobble it together, put it together with a bunch of other bills, fund it for a couple of weeks and then do it again and again and again in an uncertain manner. Secretary James said a full-year continuing resolution could underfund the Air Force by nearly $1.3 billion and would cause many issues to their systems. Delaying the annual appropriations bill could limit our ability to take our fight to the enemies because the enemies are certainly taking their fight to us. Production of the Joint Direct Attack Munition--the JDAM--currently being used in the fight against ISIL would be cut in the short term under a continuing resolution. Upgrades could be cut to the fleets of the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aircraft, C-130 cargo transports, and both B-52 and B-2 bombers. Yet that is what our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are insisting by blocking this bipartisan legislation. So to my colleague from Montana and the Presiding Officer from Alaska, I thank them for continuing to shine a light on this. I hope the American people will ask this question to all of us: Do you support this bill? If you do, why do you refuse to pass the bill? It is a simple question, and it is a simple answer. Politics don't cut it. The American people deserve results. So I thank the Senator from Montana for his leadership on this. It is an honor to serve with him as we continue to highlight this failure of the Senate to move beyond petty partisan politics.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 558, submitted earlier today.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 574, S. Res. 485.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment to the resolution be agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; the committee-reported amendment to the preamble be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; and that the committee-reported title amendment be agreed to; and, finally, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of H. Con. Res. 131, which is at the desk.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Madam President, just moments ago I joined a group of my colleagues from the freshman class to talk about the importance of passage of the Defense appropriations bill. Six Members of that class came to speak about the need to pass a bipartisan bill that passed 30 to 0 out of the Appropriations Committee--16 Republicans, 14 Democrats--unanimously. The American people engaged in this debate know the arguments on each side, but that is only one side because it was 30 to 0. There is no opposition, but yet this bill has been held up by a filibuster six times over the past year and a half. So I come to the floor on behalf of my colleagues who are so engaged in this to ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of H.R. 5325, the Senate proceed to H.R. 5293, the Defense appropriations bill.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Daines for the opportunity to come to the floor and talk about a bill that passed with bipartisan unanimous support out of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee addressing defense spending. I thank the Senator for inviting me to join our freshmen colleagues--new Members of the Senate, all elected in 2014--to come to the floor and have this conversation and this colloquy, to be joined by the Senator from Oklahoma who speaks so clearly on why our Nation would allow a policy to send $1.7 billion in currency to Iran but not fund our troops. Think about what the Senator from Oklahoma said. He said it so well; that our Nation's policy is to pay off Iran before we pay our troops. The Senator from Alaska--whom I commend for his courage in standing up on the frontlines of freedom for our country, his service to our country, we thank him for that service--spoke eloquently on the floor earlier, where he talked about six times this Senate has blocked, through the use of a procedural motion, funding for our men and women in uniform--six times--over the past 1\1/2\ years. This isn't a bill that people come to the floor and they are outraged about, they are opposed to it, they want something different. That is not what we are talking about. We are talking about a piece of legislation to fund our men and women in uniform that passed 30 to 0 out of the Appropriations Committee--16 Republicans, 14 Democrats, no opposition, 30 to 0--to fund our troops. That can't move forward because of tactics of obstruction--tactics of obstruction that changed this body in 2014 because the American people were sick and tired of it, watching the 113th Congress fail to do its job, fail to vote on important legislation. Over the past 1\1/2\ years, we have passed bipartisan Transportation bills, we have passed bipartisan Education bills, we have passed bipartisan human trafficking bills. We have changed the way this Congress is working to actually achieve things together, but somehow there is a dictate that came down that we would stop working together now because they are blocking funding for our troops. When did we go from having the ability to accomplish things together to we are going to stop everything? Have people come and talked to us on the floor about why they object to this legislation? Have we heard statements in opposition to funding our troops? Have we heard alternate proposals about funding our troops? No. The bottom line is, a partisan minority--a partisan minority--is blocking the funding of our troops. Why? Because they can, I guess, they decided, because they were told to do so, because they refuse to break ranks with the grip of a leadership office that has said: Block the funding of our troops. Tell the American people that. Explain to the American people why you are opposed to funding our troops. Let me tell you why I am here from Colorado. I am here from Colorado because we have the 9th largest Active-Duty military population in the United States out of 50 States, 12th largest combined Active and Reserve Force population. Colorado is home to more than 35,000 Active- Duty servicemembers, nearly 14,000 Reserve and National Guard Forces, more than 5,000 Department of Defense civilians. These numbers don't even include all the family members and contract employees who directly depend on the passage of this legislation--3,000 DOD contractors in Colorado--which make the defense industry in Colorado the third largest basic industry in our State. El Paso County, CO, population center of the State of Colorado, is the only county in the Nation that is home to five military bases: Fort Carson, U.S. Air Force Academy, Peterson Air Force Base, Schriever Air Force Base, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, also home to NORTHCOM at Peterson, our strategic missile command, space cyber command. Together, these five bases employ approximately 60,000 people, with at least $6 billion to the local economy, and yet a bill that passed 30 to 0 that would have addressed the needs of this Nation, that would have fixed this crisis we are facing in terms of funding our troops, is being filibustered, being blocked, being held up for partisan reasons-- strategic reasons, tactical reasons. This isn't a time when our military is sitting back at home just guarding the homeland from within the 50 States. This is a time where men and women across this country are standing on guard, engaged in combat today around the globe. This is a nation whose military is standing guard in South Korea, watching a madman in North Korea detonate nuclear bombs--not because he just thinks they are fun to show off but because he wants to use them against the United States and our allies. Yet a partisan minority wishes to block this legislation that funds those people on that line in South Korea protecting the United States and our allies. We had a chance to visit with the Secretary of State today to talk about what is taking place in Syria, what is taking place in Saudi Arabia, what is taking place in Iran, Iraq, and throughout the Middle East. A bill that passed 30 to 0 that would fund those efforts-- our troops, defense of this country, the security of our home, our men and women in uniform--is being blocked, and the bill hasn't changed. Our colleague from West Virginia, Senator Shelley Moore Capito, talked about how nothing has changed between this bill passing out of the Appropriations Committee and today, standing here in this colloquy with our freshmen colleagues. Nothing has changed. Yet the individuals who voted in favor of the bill are now standing in the way of the bill moving forward, refusing to even debate. If they have a difference of opinion, if they think there needs to be an amendment, if they think something needs to change in the bill, then stand forward and talk about it, but instead they are blocking it, using politics and strategic reasoning to keep this bill from coming forth. This bill isn't about strategies of political tactics or strategies of political maneuvering. It is about funding our men and women in uniform--a bill that passed without opposition. It is good for our military, it is good for our country, 1.2 million servicemembers--a much needed, much deserved pay raise for our military personnel. It funds U.S. NORTHCOM, headquartered right there in Colorado, protecting the homeland from threats like North Korea, the Joint Interagency Combined Space Operations Center, the JICSPOC, that protects and defends critical National space infrastructure in Colorado. This bill funds it. The European Reassurance Initiative that helps our NATO allies counter the destabilizing threat of a resurgent Russia is funded in this legislation--legislation that passed 30 to 0 out of committee but somehow is being stopped and held up and blocked by partisan dissent. It funds our major military installations in Colorado--170,000 jobs and related jobs in Colorado. It prevents moving Guantanamo Bay detainee terrorists to Americans' backyards, something all Coloradans are worried about. I have talked to many of my colleagues on the floor before about what is happening in Colorado and the possibilities that this detention facility at Guantanamo Bay could be unilaterally shut down by the President, and instead of having terrorists located offshore, they would be onshore and put in Colorado. This bill would keep that from happening. It had bipartisan support out of the Appropriations Committee, but it is now being blocked. Why is such a bipartisan bill--such an important bill--that will serve so well our men and women in uniform, that was put together by listening to senior military leaders who are true subject experts on the subject matter being blocked? Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, General Allyn, has said: ``We must have . . . predictable and sustained funding to deliver the readiness that our combatant commanders require to meet the missions that continue to emerge.'' Marine Gen. John Paxton, Jr., recently testified: ``The strains on our personnel and equipment are showing in many areas, particularly in aviation, in communications and intelligence.'' Earlier this year, General Goldfein--now Chief of Staff of the Air Force--said the current Air Force is ``one of the smallest, oldest and least ready in its history.'' The 2016 DOD appropriations bill put us on a path to address concerns of these military leaders. The bottom line is, preventing this bill from moving forward jeopardizes the ability of our military to effectively, efficiently, and safely do their job and keep our country safe. It is an honor to serve with my colleague from Alaska who served this country in our military; to serve with Joni Ernst, the Senator from Iowa, who served this country; Tom Cotton, the Senator from Arkansas, who served this country, and so many others. Let's listen to them and their leadership, and pass the bill, do what is right for this country, and not listen to the narrowest of partisan voices. I thank the Senator from Montana for the opportunity to join the colloquy.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my military fellow, Ashley Ritchey, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, September 14; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein until 11 a.m.; further, that the Democrats control the time from 10 a.m. until 10:30 a.m. and the majority control the time from 10:30 a.m. until 11 a.m.; further, that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of S. 2848; further, that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, all postcloture time with respect to amendment No. 4979 expire at 2:45 p.m. tomorrow; finally, that if cloture on S. 2848, as amended, if amended, is invoked, the time count as if cloture was invoked at 1 a.m., Wednesday, September 14.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.