Cory Gardner

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alaska for this opportunity to come to the floor to talk about what this Chamber needs to do, along with the House and the President, to get this government reopened and to fund border security, something that all Americans agree on--that we can walk and chew gum at the same time; that we can multitask; that we can find a way to fund priority spending on the border; and that we can find a way to fund 800,000 government employees, including 53,000 Federal employees in my home State of Colorado. In 2014, I was elected to the Senate. In November of 2014, we were dealing with a question of whether the government would shut down. In fact, the first issue we were asked in the new Congress as we headed back into session was this: Would there be a looming shutdown over immigration? That was not in 2018 or 2019. That was actually in 2014. Here is what I said then: There's no time, place, or purpose of a government shutdown or default. That's simply ridiculous and something that a mature governing body doesn't even contemplate. We ought to make it very clear that that's simply not acceptable. I said that in 2014; I echoed it in December 2018; and I stand on the floor today sharing the same belief, sentiment, and value. We need border security in this country. We need to have barriers and structures on the border where it makes sense, as the President has said. He has made a reasonable request to put in place border security. We also have a responsibility to the people of this country to govern responsibly. That means not jeopardizing our economy, not jeopardizing the firefighters in Colorado who can't go to training right now because the government is shut down. My home State lost hundreds of homes last year due to wildfires. Think about the catastrophes in California and across the West last year. Firefighters from around the country were called to do heroic things and save entire towns, yet those training services, classes, and tools they need for a fire season that could start at any time are being denied--training and classes that they need to save their own lives, to save other lives, and to protect our land. We have farmers who are trying to get production loans right now. They can't get their production loans through certain offices because of the shutdown. Farming is not good right now, and prices are so low right now that people are struggling. I talked to a farmer in Colorado yesterday. He doesn't know what the bank is going to say to him on Friday, tomorrow, when he goes in, and he can't get ahold of anybody at the USDA because of the shutdown. We need border security. That is why I voted for both measures today--the $5.7 billion for border security and the continuing resolution proposal that contains the President's 2018 border security proposal. Both measures included border security. We can do this. It is not that difficult. It shouldn't be a challenge to govern responsibly. Shutdowns aren't the solution. Walking and chewing gum at the same time shouldn't be so difficult, and I hope this Chamber will come to its senses, along with our House colleagues and the White House, to move forward.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, to my colleague from South Carolina, Senator Graham, we will challenge the Clemson Tigers to the NCAA skiing championship anytime. I rise to speak about the bill we are working on today, S. 1, Strengthening America's Security in the Middle East Act. I am proud to be a sponsor of this legislation, along with Senator Rubio and Senator Risch. I commend Chairman Risch for working with the majority leader in attempting to move this important legislation and effort without delay. I think it is important to recognize that this bill combines four noncontroversial pieces of legislation from the 115th Congress that are intended to support our strong allies, Israel and Jordan, and to impose sanctions against the gross human rights abuses of the Assad regime in Syria. We have no stronger ally in the Middle East than the State of Israel. Israel has proven itself to be a resilient beacon of democratic values, despite facing existential threats daily since its founding in 1948. Our two nations have worked closely to fight terrorism, to stop the spread of radical Islamist extremism, and to prevent nuclear and chemical weapons proliferation by rogue regimes, such as Syria and Iran. The legislation before us today simply reaffirms our strong support for Israel, including $3.3 billion per year in annual U.S. security assistance, consistent with the 10-year U.S.-Israel memorandum of understanding, which was signed in 2016 by President Obama. In the 115th Congress, 72 Senators--72 Senators, Republicans and Democrats--cosponsored this legislation. It passed in the Senate unanimously on August 1, 2018. There is no reason why my colleagues across the aisle should not support this legislation today--no reason-- in order to show our strong bipartisan support to our friend and ally, Israel, at a time of great need. This package also includes provisions supporting State governments that have taken action against the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic movement known as Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, or BDS. To date, 26 States--including my home State of Colorado--have adopted laws or executive orders against BDS. This legislation before us today simply endorses those decisions and clarifies that these measures adopted or enforced by a State or local government are not preempted by any Federal law if they comply with the requirements in the legislation. This anti-BDS legislation had 48 bipartisan cosponsors in the 115th Congress. There is no reason it should not be passed with bipartisan support today. BDS is a vile movement--a vile movement--and should be vociferously opposed by Republicans, Democrats, and everyone alike. This is why, on December 20, I led a letter, with 14 of my Senate colleagues, to the majority leader and the minority leader to take immediate action against BDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. GARDNER. In that letter, we asked for immediate bipartisan response against BDS, including moving today's legislation forward. In that letter, we quote the minority leader, Senator Schumer, when he spoke at the annual American-Israel Public Affairs Committee conference just this past March. Less than a year ago, here is what Senator Schumer told the audience at AIPAC on March 5, 2018: [W]e must continue to stand firm against the profoundly biased campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel through [boycotts, divestment, and sanctions]. While Iran publicly executes its citizens, Turkey jails its journalists, scores of Arab nations punish homosexuality with imprisonment and torture, why does BDS single Israel out alone for condemnation? When there is such a double standard, when the world treats everybody one way and the Jew or the Jewish State another way, there's only one word for it: anti-Semitism. Let us call out the BDS movement for what it is. Let us delegitimize the delegitimizers by letting the world know when there is a double standard. Whether they know it or not, they are actively participating in an anti-Semitic movement. Those are the words of the Democratic minority leader in March of 2018. I completely agree with Senator Schumer. Yet today I understand that he and Members of his caucus plan to vote against the motion to proceed on bipartisan legislation that would condemn BDS. It is regrettable. It is unfortunate. It is horrible. It is also part of a new and disturbing trend that we see from some of our colleagues in the Democratic caucus. As we noted in our letter, several Members of the House of Representatives have now publicly endorsed BDS and have not been condemned by Senator Schumer and other Democratic leaders. We saw the manifestation of this dangerous trend 2 days ago, when a Democratic Representative issued a statement alleging that the Senators who introduced the bill before us today, myself included, forget what country they represent. This is a reprehensible charge of dual loyalty utterly unbefitting of a sitting Member of Congress, and we all need to come together to condemn such vile insinuations. I am glad to see that respected, nonpartisan organizations, like the American Jewish Committee, AJC, have now issued strong statements rebuking this Democratic Member of Congress. The AJC statement reads in part: AJC is outraged at the tweet posted by [the Representative] that U.S. senators who had introduced Israel-related legislation ``forgot what country they represent.'' That assertion, which completely avoids legitimate debate about the content of the bill itself, insinuates that a number of respected, long-serving senators are somehow more loyal to Israel than they are to the United States. The charge evokes classical anti-Semitic tropes about dual loyalty--in this case applied to some lawmakers who are not even Jewish--that have no place in our political discourse. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the statement from AJC dated January 7, 2019.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I believe this body can do different, so I ask my colleagues to put politics aside and vote yes on the motion to proceed to this legislation that will help enhance our national security and will take strong action against a reprehensible and racist movement known as BDS. I know there are some who believe we should shut down the Senate because of the current funding situation in the Federal Government, but let me remind Members of this Chamber that in 2013, under Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid, what was voted on during the shutdown in 2013--here it is--a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to take actions to implement the agreement between the United States of America and the United Mexican States concerning transboundary hydrocarbon reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico. Somehow, in 2013, it was OK to find time for that measure. While complaining about finding time for other measures right now, during the shutdown in 2013, they found time to address the Security Clearance Oversight and Reform Enhancement Act. They found time for the Small Airplane Revitalization Act. They found time to ensure that any new or revised requirement providing for the screening, testing, or treatment of individuals operating commercial motor vehicles for sleep disorders is adopted pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding and for other purposes. Now they don't want to bring up anti-BDS legislation because we shouldn't be talking about anything else, but in 2013, they had time to vote on and to consider things like extending the period during which Iraqis who are employed by the U.S. Government in Iraq may be granted special immigrant status and temporarily increasing the fee or surcharge for processing machine- readable nonimmigrant visas. I am not downplaying the importance of these bills. I am saying that there seems to be a significant double standard and a significant partisan double standard because what is being complained about today is the same thing that was fine in 2013--had time to vote on a couple of district judges as well, but now there is no time for that. People are saying we shouldn't vote on this legislation until the government is funded. I have said it very clearly--we need to fund the government. What also needs to be very clear is how people will vote on this legislation, to not hide behind the shutdown how they would vote on anti-BDS legislation. We have heard the rhetoric. We have heard the very real comments from not fictitious Members of Congress but from actual Members of Congress who support an anti-Semitic movement. We can condemn it today with a simple vote to proceed. If people don't want to take too much time to debate it, I think everybody knows that it is right to support an anti- BDS position. They know it is right to oppose Assad and his chemical attacks and the other torturous actions he has taken against his own people. It is a pretty simple vote on this motion to proceed--vote yes; support the underlying legislation. Bipartisan Members, Republicans and Democrats, just last year supported this legislation, voted for this legislation, and I hope they will not let partisan politics get in the way of doing what is right. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I come to the floor to honor our men and women in law enforcement. As Members of Congress and their staffs head home this holiday season, we must remember the sacrifice of those who make our communities safe, those who make our safety possible. This year, across the United States, 143 law enforcement officers have paid the ultimate price. In Colorado, we honor three fallen officers. We honor Deputy Sheriff Heath McDonald Gumm, whose final act was to bravely pursue an armed suspect. We will never forget the courage and bravery of his action. We honor Deputy Sheriff Micah Lee Flick, who was killed in the line of duty in February of this year after serving in the El Paso County Sheriff's Office for 11 years. We also honor the memory of Sergeant Matthew Moreno, who was killed in the line of duty in Las Animas County just last week. He was responding to reports of domestic violence when his cruiser and that of another officer's crashed into a civilian's vehicle that was headed in the opposite direction. Unfortunately, the occupants of the other vehicle, including a 1-year-old child, also lost their lives. The pain of losing loved ones this close to the holidays is unimaginable. Sergeant Moreno ends his watch after having served honorably for 5 years. He is survived by his loving family, including his three beautiful children, Summer, Morgan, and Jared. He has been described as being a superhero to his kids. It seems very fitting given the bravery that he showed throughout his career. He is also remembered for his sense of humor and his love for hunting and fishing--something all Coloradans can relate to. Our prayers are certainly with Sergeant Moreno's family and with the families of those in the other vehicle. I also offer my sincere condolences to the entire Las Animas County Sheriff's Department. The officers have not just lost a fellow officer but a brother. All of the officers whom we lost this year were neighbors, beloved family members, and extraordinary Coloradans who gave their lives to protect their communities. Although the need is great, so few of us are blessed with the level of bravery and courage shown each and every day by the men and women in law enforcement. As we all enjoy the warmth of this holiday season, law enforcement officers around the country will stand guard in cold and uncertain streets. This includes the selfless men and women who serve right here in the U.S. Capitol, who work through the holidays to ensure that every American who visits the Nation's Capitol can do so safely. It is important that we keep them in our thoughts as we gather with family and friends this holiday season to celebrate. I would also like to take a moment to thank the families of these brave men and women whose sacrifices must not be forgotten. They endure time apart from their loved ones so that families, like millions across this country, will know peace and security during their holiday celebrations. When thinking about the brave men and women who defend that thin blue line, I am always reminded of the words of LTC Dave Grossman, who said, ``American law enforcement is the loyal and brave sheepdog--always standing watch for the wolf that lurks in the dark.'' It is my hope that the thoughts and prayers we all offer to those who wear the blue uniform will bring them comfort as they carry out this solemn duty. I am thankful for their service and thankful to their families for their continued sacrifice. I am also reminded of the words of Joe Rice, a former State legislator in Colorado, with whom I served. He served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and wrote how he prays for his fellow soldiers and their safety each and every day by saying and praying: For all of those around the world in harm's way, we pray with you. Please God, just not today. Each and every day, we echo that same prayer. Thank you to the men and women in blue. I also thank my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Menendez, for allowing me to speak out of turn. I greatly appreciate it. I thank the Presiding Officer for taking the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask that the Chair lay before the Senate the message to accompany S. 2736. The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message: Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 2736) entitled ``An act to develop a long-term strategic vision and a comprehensive, multifaceted, and principled United States policy for the Indo-Pacific region, and for other purposes.'', do pass with an amendment. Motion to Concur

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I move to concur in the House amendment, and I ask unanimous consent that the motion be agreed to and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I rise to celebrate a momentous bipartisan achievement--this bill that we just passed for our Nation's foreign policy. Shortly, we will send this legislation, now--after its passage--to the President's desk: Gardner-Markey, also known as the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act. I first want to thank an incredible partner throughout this entire effort, Senator Markey and his staff, for their incredibly hard work on this bill and their efforts to get this bill over the finish line. I believe we have set a strong example of how major foreign policy can be accomplished in a very thorough and bipartisan fashion, and I look forward to our next effort together. I also want to thank Senators Cardin and Rubio and their staffs, as well, for early and consistent support on this effort. Thanks go to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Senator Corker, the ranking member, Bob Menendez, and their staffs for helping to shepherd this effort through the Foreign Relations Committee, where ARIA passed unanimously on September 26, 2018. I want to thank and extend my gratitude to the majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, and his staff for their hard work to pass this bill through the House of Representatives with only minimal changes, by voice vote, last week. Leader McConnell and his staff took an early interest in this effort, and it could not have been done without their support. I am grateful to Leader Steny Hoyer, the chairman and ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ed Royce and Eliot Engel, and Representative Illeana Ros-Lehtinen for their support. Nearly 2 years in the making, the Gardner-Markey ARIA Initiative will establish a generational, multifaceted, and principled U.S. policy in the Indo-Pacific region, a region that is vital for U.S. national security and economic interests. ARIA is important because the Indo- Pacific is home to half of the world's population, half of the world's GDP, the world's largest standing armies, and six U.S. defense treaty allies. The security and economic future of the United States depends on having the right policies to ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific. Therefore, the Gardner-Markey ARIA establishes and provides new resources for a long-term strategy to enhance security cooperation with our allies and establishes the Asia-Pacific security initiative. It promotes American businesses through trade opportunities, projects American values of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law throughout the Indo-Pacific. It is a bill designed to drive U.S. leadership as other powers turn to economic colonialism. Starting in June 2017, Senator Markey and I have held over five hearings at the East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee to inform this legislation. The hearings examined a range of national security, economic, and rule of law challenges in the Indo-Pacific and culminated in a final hearing with State Department and Department of Defense officials to allow the administration to express its views on ARIA. We introduced ARIA on April 24 of this year with a bipartisan group that included Senators Rubio, Cardin, and Young. On June 21, we received a letter signed by Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mattis formally endorsing ARIA. The letter states: [We] value the ARIA legislation's reaffirmation of the United States' security commitments to our Indo-Pacific allies and partners. Furthermore, ARIA's focus on promoting stronger regional economic engagement--and its support for democracy, the rule of law, and the development of civil society--is especially welcome as part of a diplomatically- led whole-of-government approach to the Indo-Pacific region. The Gardner-Markey ARIA passed the Foreign Relations Committee unanimously on September 26. It passed unanimously on the floor of the Senate on December 4, and the House passed ARIA by voice vote, as I mentioned, December 12. This bill is a rare piece of bipartisan legislation that enjoys broad support in the Congress and the White House but is also strongly supported by the business community and policy experts. On June 4, the Wall Street Journal editorial board endorsed ARIA, stating: Congress is trying to help with the bipartisan Asia Reassurance Initiative Act. . . . The Senate bill affirms core American alliances with Australia, Japan, and South Korea, while calling for deeper military and economic ties with India and Taiwan. It notably encourages regular weapons sales to Taipei. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has also endorsed ARIA, stating: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports the ``Asia Reassurance Initiative Act of 2018'' and thanks Senator Gardner [and Markey] for [their] efforts to strengthen U.S. strategic and economic relationships across the Indo-Pacific region. Particularly with regard to the legislation's economic goals, we appreciate the bill's focus on closer trade ties, stronger protections for intellectual property, and a renewed focus on trade facilitation. The Heritage Foundation wrote on December 6: Don't look now, but a sweeping bill with bipartisan support in Congress and the backing of the Trump administration is one step closer to becoming reality. The Asia Reassurance Initiative Act, introduced by Sen. Cory Gardner . . . along with key cosponsors Ed Markey . . . and Marco Rubio . . . passed the Senate on Wednesday. This was a welcome display of leadership. In these partisan times, the bill has garnered support from both current and former administration officials and experts across the political spectrum. As the Singapore-based Straits Times wrote on December 13: Under the Obama administration, there was a big rhetorical commitment to the Asia Pacific or Indo-Pacific region, but the US ``just flat out did not readjust our resources in a way that actually backed that up,'' said Dr. Lindsey Ford, Director of Political-Security Affairs for the Asia Society Policy Institute. The ARIA marks an important start to rectifying that, she said. ``The ARIA . . . if passed, would be probably one of the most consequential pieces of funding legislation that has to do with Asia, that US Congress would have passed in years,'' Dr. Ford told Straits Times. When you have the Heritage Foundation and former Obama administration officials on the same page, you know we have done something right. So again, I want to congratulate this body--truly the world's most deliberative Chamber, as this bill has proved--for this bipartisan victory, and I hope the President will sign this important bill into law shortly. Again, I want to thank my colleague, Senator Markey, for his tremendous leadership on this. I yield the floor to Senator Markey.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, as my colleague from Utah knows, we offered the chance to vote on those two words tonight. The two words that he is asking for tonight we offered a chance to vote on.

Mr. GARDNER. Let me talk about this because I am pretty doggone upset because the people of Colorado tonight--who are worried about whether they can protect themselves from fire--lost the Wildfire Technology Act in this bill. That was in this bill--a bill that our committee heard, that our committee voted on, that it voted on with bipartisan support, probably unanimously. That was in this bill to protect our communities from wildfire and to protect our firefighters from injury--in this bill. The other thing in this bill is Minturn, CO, which has a water system over a wilderness area and which for years has been trying to fix it. They can't because it is in a wilderness area. So we have to have an act of Congress to allow the city to fix their water system. Rejected tonight because we weren't allowed to vote on it tonight.

Mr. GARDNER. And you bet the permanent Land and Water Conservation Fund is in here tonight because, guess what, it has the majority support of this body. If we had a vote on it tonight, it would have passed. Republicans and Democrats would have voted yes. It would have passed. Not only that, we have boundary adjustments in here because people died, and they wanted to give it to the national monument. That is not controversial. Somebody wanted to do the right thing, and doggone it, we can't even vote on it here. I give compliments to the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee who struck a deal. Yes, it was yesterday. We got the bill as fast as we could. And so many of these doggone pieces of legislation we have already heard. We had committee hearings on them, and we voted them out unanimously. Bipartisan support. We offered deal after deal after deal to try to get a deal arranged and made so that we could have a vote tonight. Go tell the people of Minturn, CO, that they don't have a water system that they can fix because Congress has decided we are not going to allow that to come to a vote. Sportsmen back home--tell them we are not going to have a sportsmen's package because we decided not to bring a bipartisan bill to the floor for a vote. When we come back to this body next year, we have an agreement--I believe that is correct; and I will defer to the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee--that this will be one of the first actions this Chamber addresses. When that happens, there will be a chance to file cloture, there will be a chance for open debate, and we will have that vote. We will have it next year. There will be different leadership in the Senate, so different negotiations will have to take place, but I have no doubt that we will get this done. It is frustrating to me that some of these bills have languished for year after year after year after year that received unanimous support out of committee. I remember coming to this floor a year ago offering a unanimous consent agreement. It was objected to because somebody didn't get what they wanted, somebody else didn't get what they wanted, and somebody else didn't get what they wanted, so everything was objected to. It created a whole domino effect, so they said just wait for the lands package. So here we are waiting for the lands package. We had a chance to do it. And we tried and tried and tried to make offer after offer to get something agreed to. I have great respect for my colleague from Utah. We are a public lands State too. Yes, our agencies need to make better decisions about how they conserve that public land. The people of Colorado have great support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Great support. They would like to see it made permanent. I would like to see it made permanent. My guess is, next year, it will be made permanent. Why can't we have a vote tonight? Why can't we have people who don't like it vote no and people who do like it vote yes? There is plenty of opportunity to do that tonight. The people of Colorado expect this place to get its work done. The bills we have had have been through, negotiated in the House and Senate, many out of the committee with bipartisan support, if not unanimous. I guess the folks in Minturn will just have to wait one more Congress to get their water system fixed because this body couldn't agree to allow a vote. We wonder why people are sick of this place. It is because of that. I yield the floor.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. I ask unanimous consent that Sean McClintock, a congressional fellow in Senator Cotton's office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 115th Congress.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Thank you, Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up amendment No. 4123.

Mr. GARDNER. I thank the Presiding Officer and Chairman Grassley. After much debate, disagreement, and compromise, this week the Senate is going to be taking up a bill that he has worked very hard to see through to this day, a criminal justice reform package. The package that is on the floor today that we are debating and talking about amending shows the American people that bipartisanship remains alive in the U.S. Senate. Leaders on both sides of the aisle, as well as the White House, should be commended for their admirable and persistent cooperation and determination on this legislation. I believe the package's goals are noble. It is right to help those who have paid their debt to reenter society with the best possible chance to be productive contributors. It is right to take steps to ensure that sentences are fair and appropriately tailored to the defendant. It is right to calibrate the way we treat those in custody based on the risk they pose to society. But being from Colorado, it is hard to think about Federal criminal justice reform without thinking about the biggest problem the Federal law creates for Colorado--the refusal to respect the will of Coloradans when it comes to their decision on marijuana. That is exactly what I am trying to do, is to create a debate so that we can address the conflict between State and Federal law. Every day, Coloradans of good faith follow Colorado law to a T. Yet they are still criminals in the eyes of the Federal Government. Cancer patients who are using medical marijuana to control their pain and veterans who are using marijuana to alleviate the post-traumatic stress they suffer because they served their country--Federal law says they are criminals, even though they are perfectly legal within their rights under State law. The attempt we are making today is to fix the inconsistency between Federal and State law, to begin the debate, because the people don't think that they are criminals when they follow the law in Colorado. So we should change Federal law. This disconnect doesn't affect just the industry's patrons or even the growers or retailers, for that matter; it also makes criminals of those outside of the industry. As we are talking about criminal sentencing reform, we should be thinking about plumbers, electricians, bankers, landlords, real estate service providers, employment and advertising agencies, insurance companies, and HR services. All of the everyday businesses that interact with the marijuana industry--like they do any other part of our economy--are affected by Federal law too. That is because when they take money from a marijuana business, Federal law considers them money launderers, putting them at risk for both criminal liability and civil asset forfeiture. That means the mother who moved to Colorado to treat her child who has epileptic conditions--severe epilepsy, thousands of seizures a month--moved to Colorado to treat her child with CBD oil, derived from the work we are doing on marijuana, which reduces those seizures from 1,000 a month to a few--6, 7, 8, or a dozen a month--that is illegal in the eyes of the Federal Government, putting her at risk for criminal liability and civil asset forfeiture. The disconnect forces Colorado's $1.5 billion market back into the pseudo-shadows, where business is in hard-to-track cash--$1.5 billion in cash--inviting dangerous robberies and hindering law enforcement efforts to ensure that legal marijuana sales benefit legitimate businesses rather than illicit cartels. This is an effort to bring that $1.5 billion in Colorado alone out of those shadows. It also means that researchers can't test marijuana for medical efficacy to help better understand impairment, because those researchers fear the loss of Federal funding. All of this flies in the face of what the Colorado people have chosen to do for themselves. Indeed, it flies in the face of the 33 States that have legalized some form of marijuana, including 10 that allow regulated adult use. This year alone, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Utah have passed laws establishing medical marijuana programs, and Michigan and Vermont have passed laws permitting regulated adult use. Wisconsin voters in 16 counties overwhelmingly passed advisory referenda supporting legalization. Here is the chart. Look at this chart. Green on this chart represents the States that have legalized some form of marijuana, whether it is recreational, whether it is medical, whether it is CBD, or some kind of hemp product, cannabis. Look at the green on this map. Over 95 percent of the population in this country live in a State that have made legalization happen in some way, shape, or form. Let's go to the list of the States. It is almost every State. Here are the States allowing some form of marijuana: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida--it goes on and on. It is easier to say the three States that have not allowed it: Idaho, Nebraska, and South Dakota. They are the only three States that have not. Recent polling from Quinnipiac shows that more than 60 percent of the American people support legalized marijuana, and 93 percent support medical marijuana. The American people have made up their minds. This is happening. Let's be clear. This isn't just happening in blue States, like California or Massachusetts, or purple States, like Colorado. It is happening in bold, deep red States like Utah, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. It is happening in swing States like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Missouri. The bedrock principle of our government expressed in the Declaration of Independence is that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the government. As the Federal Government continues to ignore the will of the people, the people lose respect for the law. The Congress must respond because, one way or the other, the people of this country are having their say. That is why Senator Warren and I are offering the STATES Act as an amendment to this criminal justice package before the Senate. The act is a simple, straightforward plan. Within certain basic Federal guardrails, conduct and compliance with State marijuana law will not violate the Controlled Substances Act. This legislation is the embodiment of federalism our Founders envisioned. It allows each State to move--if at all--at their own pace. It lets States like Colorado be the laboratory of democracy that American people have come to expect. But most importantly, it lets Colorado be Colorado, South Carolina be South Carolina, and Florida be Florida--and they all will have Federal prosecutors backing up whatever decision they make with respect to this decision. The people of Colorado have made their decision already. I did not vote for legalization in 2012. I did not support legalization, but I respect my State's decision. Its people know what is right for the State of Colorado. The decision that Colorado makes may not be right for the people of South Carolina or Florida. But their decision should be respected and supported by the Federal Government just like the decisions in every other State. I am all for helping those who have paid their debt to society, but there are many for whom there should be no debt. That is why the STATES Act should be included in Federal criminal justice reform. Let's close with this map. Over 95 percent of the population of the United States lives in a State where they have legalized some form of marijuana. Every State in green is a State that has legalized some form of marijuana. By the year 2022, this industry will be over $20 billion--all of which can't be in the banking system because it is against Federal law. And what happens when you force a $20 billion all- cash economy? I guess that is what we ought to be dealing with here today. This isn't just about banking; that is a side effect of the STATES Act. The STATES Act recognizes that Federalist principle that a State can decide this issue for itself. This amendment at this time recognizes that you shouldn't go to Federal prison for following State law. That, in its essence, is sentence and reform. If we had a chance to vote on this amendment today, the amendment would be germane. It would have a 50-vote threshold--a simple majority, up or down. I know this amendment has the support of this body on both sides of the aisle to fix this conflict and allow the States to make their own decisions without the heavy hand of Washington telling them what to do. I yield my time and will not give up this fight.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Calendar Nos. 1154 through 1169 and all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy; that the nominations be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak to up 10 minutes each.

Mr. GARDNER

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

Mr. GARDNER. I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3748, introduced earlier today.

Mr. GARDNER. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 489, S. 1158.

Mr. GARDNER. I further ask unanimous consent that the committee- reported substitute amendment be withdrawn; that the Cardin substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and 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 Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 555, H.R. 1222.

Mr. GARDNER. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be withdrawn, the Durbin substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion 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 Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 530, S. 1580.