Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1238 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that the Roberts amendment at the desk be considered and 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.

Mr. President, I want to talk this evening about a very serious threat to the United States; that is, the threat from North Korea and what we in the Congress should be doing about it.

Now, over the weekend we saw another piece of news about how the North Korean regime is again testing missiles, testing for intercontinental ballistic missiles, more missile launches, literally two in the last 2 weeks.

I would say this is one of the most serious threats facing the United States of America right now because what has now become clear, it is no longer if Kim Jong Un and the North Korean regime will have the ability to range the United States of America with an intercontinental ballistic nuclear missile. It is no longer if. It is when.

This has been stated time and time again in open hearings we have had on the Armed Services Committee with generals and some of the top experts in the United States. It used to be, hey, maybe he would have this capability sometime down the road. Maybe he will never get it. They are not saying that any longer. Think about that. Every American should be thinking about that. It is no longer if but when one of the craziest dictators in the world will have the capability to launch an intercontinental ballistic nuclear missile. It is not just ranging my State, the great State of Alaska, which unfortunately for me and my constituents is in the line of fire earlier than other States or Hawaii, which faces similar risks to Alaska, but we are talking about the continental United States. We are talking about Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles. It is not if but when.

So yesterday in front of the Armed Services Committee, the Director of National Intelligence, our good friend, former Senator Dan Coats, when I asked him and General Stewart, the top military officer for our intelligence agencies, when they thought this was going to happen-- well, it is a classified number and it is a classified time. I actually think it should be unclassified, given their estimates, to let the American people know what is coming because it is probably a lot sooner, at least in the estimates, than most people think. So that is what we are facing right now, and people should be concerned about it.

Let me give you a little bit more on the facts of this. Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea, the unstable dictator of North Korea, has publicly stated it is his goal to develop a nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile that can strike the continental United States. Now, let's just be clear. This is a man who starves his own citizens, sentences them by the tens of thousands to inhumane labor camps, and just a month ago allegedly assassinated his half-brother in a Malaysian airport with poison to kill him.

In fact, since assuming power just 5 years ago, as my next chart shows, Kim Jong Un has conducted more missile tests and twice as many nuclear tests as both his father and grandfather did in their 60 years of ruling over North Korea. Look at these numbers: That is the Kim Jong Un regime, Kim Jong Il, Kim Il Sung. So he is focused on this more than his father and grandfather were. As I mentioned, it seems almost daily there is another one of these missile tests or even nuclear tests.

Now, one of the things you see in the press sometimes is, well, some of these missile tests are failing. There have been failures, and there have been notable successes, such as the country's first intermediate range ballistic missile, its first submarine launch ballistic missile, its first solid fuel launch missile, and its ability to put satellites in space. This is actual progress. This is significant progress.

On the nuclear side, the country's fifth test--and Kim Jong Un's third--had an estimated yield in terms of its power of 15 to 20 kilotons, approximately the size of the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima. While this yield was not as large as they were expecting, the test again on the nuclear side shows steady progress in their nuclear program and steady progress in their ballistic missile program.

So what does all this mean? Why is Kim Jong Un testing so often? Even though he fails, he is still learning. That is exactly what the commander of U.S. Strategic Command said last month during a Senate Armed Services hearing.

Gen. John Hyten stated: North Korea is going fast. Test, fail, test, fail, succeed. They are learning, and as you can see them learning, they are developing the capabilities for intercontinental ballistic missiles. That is how it works in the rocket business.

That is happening right now. That is happening right now. That is in the news right now.

Also in the news is what the United States has been doing to protect our allies from this and other threats. So let me give you an example. There has been a lot of news about the THAAD deployment, a missile defense system in South Korea deployed by the U.S. Army to protect our troops and South Korea's citizens, to protect our troops in Korea, protect our troops in Japan, and to protect our allies. Now, I am very supportive of this--very supportive of this.

The President is on his Middle East trip. He is going to Europe now. He mentioned just a few days ago maybe having a THAAD system in Saudi Arabia, an American system to help protect the Saudis from the Iranian missile threat. Again, I am very supportive.

As the Presiding Officer knows, in our last National Defense Authorization Act, we had significant authorization and funding to help Israel protect itself with a missile defense system, the Iron Dome system, where we have been working with the Israelis to help their citizens be protected against an Iranian missile threat.

Again, I support all of these. I applaud these efforts, I have supported them, I voted for them, but it does beg the question that some of my constituents back home in Alaska are beginning to ask, and I am sure other Americans are asking in every State in the country: What about us? What about the United States? What about the U.S. homeland? Isn't that where Kim Jong Un said he wants to launch intercontinental ballistic nuclear missiles? It is. It is exactly where he said he wants to do it.

The bottom line is, we need to do much more to protect ourselves. We need to do much more to protect the United States of America. Yes, we need to protect our allies, but we need to start focusing a little bit more on home, and we need to start focusing now.

In fact, if we know this threat is coming, which we do--there has been testimony after testimony--I think it would be the height of irresponsibility to not start working on increasing America's homeland missile defense. That is what we should be doing.

That is why I have introduced a very bipartisan bill called the Advancing America's Missile Defense Act of 2017. Again, Republicans and Democrats are already on the bill. I believe the Presiding Officer is now a cosponsor.

I would like to paint a scenario that we all know will happen unfortunately sometime in the future--again, on why this bill is so important, why what we need to be doing on missile defense is so important.

Just think through the headline. Let's assume a couple years down the road Kim Jong Un has this capability to launch an intercontinental nuclear

ballistic missile to hit a lower 48 city. Well, we know that is going to start leaking out. The headlines will be front page, banner headlines: Dictator of North Korea can range Chicago, New York. It will be all over the news. It will be the only thing we talk about.

There will be enormous pressure on the White House and others to do something about this. On that day when we see the banner headlines, a lot of Americans will be very nervous. The American people and the American media will look at the people in the Pentagon, will look at the people in Congress, will look at the leadership in the White House, and will ask three critical questions. Are we safe? Did we see this coming? Have we been doing anything about it and, if so, what? That is what they are going to ask.

We know that day is coming. We are not sure when, but we know that day is coming--again, not if, but when. People are going to ask those questions. If we know that, and we do, we need to be able to say to all three of those questions--whether it is the Secretary of Defense, the President of the United States, or whether it is all of us here, the Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, we need to be able to answer the American people and say: Yes, we are safe; yes, we saw this coming; and yes, we have the world's most robust, technologically advanced, capable missile defense system that will with near certainty shoot down any North Korean missile launch at the United States and give our President and the Congress the strategic time and space to make potentially world-altering decisions.

We know this is coming, and I think we should be doing everything we can in our power to focus on it, so we will be safe, and we will be able to say yes to all three of those questions if we begin to seriously focus on America's missile defense, which is what our legislation is all about.

Unfortunately, our Nation has not always been focused on funding our missile defense system, and in many ways the funding has been erratic. As the Center for Strategic and International Studies put it recently, such funding for America's missile defense has been marked by high ambition, followed by increasing modesty. I think the time for modesty on an issue of this importance is over.

From 2006 to 2016, homeland missile defense funding, adjusted for inflation, declined nearly 50 percent, and homeland missile defense testing declined more than 83 percent. The goal of our bill is to change that and change it significantly. Among its other elements, Advancing America's Missile Defense Act will grow our U.S. base missile interceptors from what we have now, which is about 44, to as many as 72 and will require our military to look at having up to 100 interceptors distributed across the United States.

The bill will also authorize the more rapid deployment of new and better kill vehicles. These are the bullets, essentially, on top of the warheads. It will allow a layer of space-based sensors and radars to track missile threats from launch to intercept, a technological advancement that would improve all missile systems to make sure we have a layered missile defense, whether it is THAAD in Asia, Aegis Ashore and on ships, or our missile system here at home--all of it integrated. Right now we don't have that.

The bill also will increase the pace of missile defense testing to allow U.S. forces to learn from actual launches of our defense systems and increase the confidence we have in our system and its effectiveness. This is very important. The Department of Defense needs to change the culture around missile defense, testing regularly and conducting more flight tests. Unfortunately, every test is not always going to be a success. It is OK to fail because we learn from failure.

I don't like to admit on the floor of the U.S. Senate that we could learn something from the North Koreans, but that is the approach they are taking. That is why their missile and nuclear programs are advancing so rapidly. They are not afraid to fail.

What we need to do is enhance our testing, enhance our missile defense, enhance our capabilities because, as I mentioned at the outset, it is no longer if, but when. That day is coming, and we need to be ready for it, and the United States Senate can lead in addressing this very significant challenge to America's national security.

I am encouraged that our bill has already gotten strong bipartisan support from Democrats and Republicans because they know how important it is. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle truly understand the significance and seriousness of this threat, and I hope they can continue to support our Advancing America's Missile Defense Act of 2017. There are very few foreign policy and national security issues that are more important than making sure we address this threat to America's security.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, every week I have been coming to the Senate floor to talk about someone in my great State of Alaska who makes Alaska a better place for all of us--for the community, for everybody living there. I call this person our Alaskan of the Week. To be honest, it is one of the most fulfilling things I get to do as a Senator, recognizing back home and across the country special people in my State.

There is no doubt that many here in the Chamber and the people who are watching from home have seen pictures and television shows about Alaska. We are a little biased--I know one of our pages is an Alaskan-- that we have the most beautiful State, not only in the country but in the world. So we want to encourage everybody watching to come visit Alaska. It will be the trip of a lifetime, absolutely guaranteed. It is truly the people of Alaska who make our State so special, people with big hearts who band together to solve challenges. Like all places, we have challenges.

This week I would like to recognize Michael Carson for his work to help people in Alaska who are struggling with addiction. We know this is a problem that is impacting every single State in our great Nation. Michael lives in Palmer, AK, a picturesque town about 45 miles from Anchorage in Alaska's vast Matanuska-Susitna Valley--what we just call the Valley or the Mat-Su. It is about the size of West Virginia, so don't get me going on the size of Alaska. It will embarrass most of my--actually all of my colleagues here, unfortunately for them. Palmer is flanked by the rolling Talkeetna Mountains to the north and the saw- toothed Chugach Mountains to the south. It is a close-knit community where most people know each other.

Many people in Palmer and the Mat-Su across the State know Michael Carson's name. Like many Alaskans, Michael's story is one full of adventure. Originally from California, he received his undergraduate in early childhood development from the University of Texas. After hitchhiking through Africa and spending a summer in Mexico, he took a job teaching in Nome, AK, in 1974. A few years later, he moved to the Mat-Su to teach and taught our students for many years.

He retired from teaching, but his yearning to help people, particularly our youth, did not leave him. He got a job at Covenant House in Anchorage, which is a homeless youth shelter. It is a wonderful place, by the way. I am a little biased on this one; my wife Julie happens to work at Covenant House. Michael's shift started at 8 p.m. and ended at 8 a.m. That is what he was doing at Covenant House. He spent those hours walking through the city, reaching out to kids on the streets, sharing his own story, and inspiring our youth because his story also involves recovery. It is a privilege to say here on the Senate floor that Mike has been sober for 29 years.

Eventually realizing that kids in the Mat-Su Valley also needed a place to go when they were in trouble and needed help, Michael and another incredible constituent of mine, Michelle Overstreet, founded MYHouse in Palmer, a place that provides services like job assistance, access to healthcare, clothing, food, and showers for homeless youth. Michael still sits on the board, still remains a champion for all youth, particularly those in recovery and the homeless or disadvantaged. He leads recovery groups on-site weekly, as well as meetings with clients who are struggling. He has also volunteered to host recovery groups at the Mat-Su youth detention facility for the past 13 years. Michael has helped many young people get sober and stay sober.

In Michelle Overstreet's words, it is not uncommon for youth to come into the drop-in center, homeless and just out of juvenile detention, and ask specifically for Michael, to come in and say that he helped them somewhere along their journey through life to sobriety, just to come in and say: Thank you, Michael.

Most of us know that our country is in the midst of an opioid crisis, one that has become an epidemic in many places across the country. In 2015, more people in America died from overdoses--over 52,000, and most were linked to opioids and heroin--than car crashes or gun violence.

On Wednesday morning, Alaskans awoke to a disturbing headline in the Alaska Dispatch News: ``Anchorage is seeing a dramatic surge in heroin overdoses.'' Anchorage is the largest city in Alaska. It is my hometown. The article said that since May 1, there have been more than 2 overdoses a day in Anchorage--34 overdoses in just a little more than 2 weeks.

Like almost every State in this great Nation of ours, Alaska is being hit hard by the opioid crisis, and we are trying to focus as much attention as we can in a bipartisan fashion on addressing this crisis, whether in Alaska, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Indiana, or Vermont.

We need people like Michael. Every State does. He started the only grassroots opioid task force in the State of Alaska and continues to chair that effort to this day. He knows too well how the abuse of opioids, other drugs, and alcohol robs our citizens--but particularly our youth--of their lives, promise, and future. He also understands how very important it is to have resources for those who need the support and recovery. Those resources come in many forms. We have been trying in the Congress in the last year, year and a half, to bring significant resources to our State and local communities. We are doing that.

State support is also important across the country. Perhaps most important is the community support and having people like Michael on the frontlines who understand that addiction is not a moral failure and that people who are suffering need help. They need help, not moral judgments from us.

Because of Michael's involvement and the involvement of so many others in Alaska and particularly in the Mat-Su, there are places for people who are suffering to call and get help. There are places to go and heal and places where our youth can have leaders who listen to them, like Michael.

Michael says it is vital for his own recovery to continue to help people who are suffering from addiction. He calls it ``survivor obligation.'' I call it the work of angels.

Michael, thanks for all you do, and congratulations on being our Alaskan of the week.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I am honored to recognize a remarkable coalition of veterans today. Every year on May 15, Alaskan Hmong American Vietnam veterans come together to celebrate Hmong American Veterans Memorial Day in remembrance of General Vang Pao's final flight out of Laos.

From February 1961 to May 1975, Hmong fighters from the hill country in Laos risked their homes, their families, and their lives to join the United States and South Vietnam in the fight against communist oppression. They undoubtedly knew that, whether they won or lost the war, life would never be the same for them; yet they willingly chose to serve. For nearly three decades, their involvement was kept a secret, in what is now commonly referred to as ``the Secret War.''

Mr. Pasert Lee, a resident of the Mountain View neighborhood in Anchorage, AK, is one of those honorable Hmong American veterans. He served as a lieutenant in General Vang Pao's army and played a role in rescuing downed American pilots and returning them to American Forces in South Vietnam. He tells me that, under the leadership of the general, Hmong forces rescued nearly 50 pilots and were responsible for saving countless American lives. Many people do not realize that more than 40,000 Hmong were killed or wounded in support of freedom in Vietnam.

May 15, 1975, marked the beginning of the exodus of the Hmong people from their homes in Laos. Mr. Lee, like most of our honorable Hmong American veterans, have never returned home--even to visit--in fear for their lives.

Having lost tens of thousands of our Hmong allies in support of the United States in Vietnam, it is appropriate that we acknowledge and honor the sacrifices of those like Mr. Pasert Lee and all the Hmong veterans who worked tirelessly to protect, rescue, and defend American servicemembers and downed American pilots on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The efforts of the Hmong people have never properly been acknowledged and, like many of our Vietnam veterans, were never properly appreciated.

Today, more than 40 years after the end of ``the Secret War,'' I would like

to commend our Hmong Americans and wish them peace and bountiful blessings as they remember their fallen on May 15, 2017.

Mr. President, every week I have been coming to the floor to recognize someone in my State who has made a difference, someone who has devoted time and energy to making my State a better place to live for others. We call these individuals our Alaskan of the Week.

As I have said repeatedly, I believe my State is the most beautiful State in the country. We have visitors. We want to welcome more and more visitors. Come on up. I guarantee it will be the trip of a lifetime.

When you go to Alaska, one town that nobody should miss is Homer, AK. It is surrounded by the glistening waters of Kachemak Bay, jagged mountains, glaciers, and snowcapped volcanoes. Some people call it the Halibut Fishing Capital of the World. Others call it the Cosmic Hamlet by the Sea. Some, like me, call it a slice of Heaven.

I was there a few weeks ago holding a community meeting. I thanked them then, and I want to thank them all today for the very warm welcome I received.

I also wish to thank Homer for the very warm welcome they gave to Navy destroyer USS Hopper, which spent a few days in Homer before participating in a joint naval exercise with the Army in the Gulf of Alaska. The 300-member crew of the USS Hopper was greeted by hundreds of cheering, flag-waving Homer residents. The commander of the Hopper, J.D. Gainey, wrote that in his 24 years of naval service, ``I have never seen as much patriotism as we enjoyed in Homer.'' Thank you, Homer, from all of us. Alaskans love Homer.

They see it for the landscape but also for the people. It is a tight- knit community. They might not always agree with one another, particularly with regard to politics, but they look out for each other. Like any community with a heart, they look out for their animals.

This week I want to recognize a special person as our Alaskan of the week, Sherry Bess, who spent nearly 30 years--three decades--taking care of Homer's animals as the manager of the Homer Animal Shelter. In 1989, when Sherry began to volunteer at the pet shelter in Homer, there was one building, no phone, and only four cages to hold cats. ``It was basically a shack,'' she said. The snow would come in through the dog door. The drains in the water bowls would freeze. Sherry's hands and feet were always cold, and it was infested with mice. There was no bathroom. Oftentimes, when the shelter was too busy and when the animals needed extra care, Sherry would take them to her home, where she would care for them.

Sherry and a handful of residents cared for over 1,200 animals each year in that little shelter. Along the way, she gathered both happy stories and heartbreaking stories about the animals she found that were abused and the ones she found homes for. In fact, one of the members of my team in Alaska took a puppy that had been abandoned in a crate in the woods near Homer, took him home, fed him, and Mick Fleagle on my staff now has a dog. His dog Sookie, 8 years old, has the full reign of the house. He is loved.

Thanks to Sherry, stories like that abound throughout Homer. For 26 years, she has worked night and day, 7 days a week, for the pets in that community. She recently stepped down from that job. She is taking care of her own pets, lots of them--her family she calls them--but she will always be known to so many people in Homer for what she has done for their pets and their animals.

``Over the years, those animals that came to me,'' she said, `` . . . unwanted and sad and depressed, and then you help them and you love them and they go to a home and they're loved. That's the most rewarding thing about what I did.''

Sherry said over the years she has noticed that the residents of Homer and throughout the country have been kinder to their pets. Part of that is the result of what Sherry and others like her across the country do to educate the public on taking care of animals through vaccinations, neutering. Some of it is more and more because people like Sherry are considering pets as their families.

So I want to thank Sherry, as our Alaskan of the Week, for all she has done and for all she has done for pets in our great State. Great job.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak on a couple of important foreign policy issues.

I begin by talking about what is going to be happening in Alaska in just a few days. Really, the eyes of the world are going to be on Fairbanks, AK--the Golden Heart City in the middle of Alaska's interior--for a major foreign policy event. The United States will be hosting the Ministerial of the Arctic Council and will be passing the chairmanship of that Council over to Finland.

The Arctic Council is an important foreign policy body. It consists of the

Arctic countries of the world--the United States, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Russia. In just a few days, all of the Foreign Ministers of all of those countries will be in Fairbanks, AK.

This is not the first time in recent memory that the Golden Heart City of Fairbanks has been on the world stage in its hosting of a critical foreign policy meeting of world leaders. In fact, almost exactly 33 years ago to this very day in 1984, on May 2, in Fairbanks, AK, Pope John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan met in Fairbanks. It was a great meeting. You could see the chemistry between these two great world leaders. Right now, some historians believe that it was at the Fairbanks meeting of these two great leaders when the Pope and the great President Ronald Reagan laid out their vision and plans to vanquish global communism.

America is an Arctic nation because of Alaska, and we have very significant, strategic interests in the Arctic--economic opportunity, transportation routes, sea routes that are now beginning to open because of receding sea ice, responsible natural resource development-- enormous natural resources of all types, including oil and gas-- protecting the environment, and respecting the culture and way of life of the peoples in the Arctic, particularly of the indigenous peoples, including their subsistence hunting rights. After a substantial discussion I had just a couple of days ago with Secretary of State Tillerson about the upcoming ministerial, I am confident this ministerial will focus on these important issues.

In going forward, it is important to remember that right now in the Arctic, there are real people with real lives, real families, and real needs who live in this part of the world. They are my constituents. These are the people I represent. They are resilient, tough, hard- working, and very generous. The world is going to see them this week in their hosting of the Ministerial of the Arctic Council in Fairbanks. I thank all of them for their hard work in preparing for this event, and I thank Secretary Tillerson for rallying all of the world's Arctic Foreign Ministers to Alaska in the next few days. I will be there to support this very important event.

Mr. President, in addition to the Ministerial of the Arctic Council, as I mentioned, the eyes of the world are on this-- clearly on the important issue of U.S.-China relations.

We had the recent President Trump and President Xi meeting in Mar-a- Lago, and this week Madam Fu Ying, who is one of the top Chinese Foreign Minister officials, is going to be in Washington to meet with a number of us. It is something I believe this body needs to focus on more, this important issue of U.S.-China relations.

Our country faces a lot of significant national security challenges around the world. In my view, however, the most significant long-term, geostrategic challenge we face is not ISIS, not al-Qaida, not Iran, Russia, or even North Korea. Those are very serious and immediate concerns, but the most significant long-term challenge we face as a country is the rise of China and the threat it poses to the post-World War II international order, led by the United States.

This has been made clear in a series of writings by the well-known and respected Harvard professor, Graham Allison, beginning 2 years ago in 2015. In an article in The Atlantic magazine, he started to write about what he called the Thucydides Trap. Professor Allison is set to publish a book this month on the same topic. In the book, he writes that the defining question of global order for this generation is whether China and the United States can escape the Thucydides Trap.

I have had the privilege over the last few weeks to review the book, and I believe it will be a ``must read'' for those who care about the long-term security and economic interests of the United States.

What is he talking about? What is this issue, the Thucydides Trap? Why has Professor Allison been so focused on writing about it and addressing it?

Thucydides is the famed Greek historian. Many actually view him as the father of all history, who wrote an epic historical work about the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. In that 30-year war, which devastated both of those Greek city states, the rising power, Athens, challenged the established order of the ruling power, Sparta.

The ``Thucydides Trap'' is the term Professor Allison describes when he talks about the strategic dilemma and danger that occurs when a rising power threatens a ruling power in the international system. As his new book explores, in the last 500 years when this has happened-- because it does happen a lot in history, and he reviews the last 500 years--of the 16 times this has happened in the last 500 years, 12 of those times ended up having extensive war between the two countries. That is not good. Those are not great odds. Indeed, in his Atlantic article just 2 years ago, he concludes by saying that because of the seismic shifts and friction that is occurring between China and the United States, war between these two countries is more likely than is recognized at the moment. That is not good news.

There is some good news on this because it is not just Harvard professors who are talking about this, such as Professor Allison, who is talking about the Thucydides Trap; so, too, are the Chinese.

I, with a number of Senators, had the opportunity a few years ago, when President Xi Jinping visited the Senate, to meet with him. I went down to the Senate floor to talk about some of the issues, some of the ways in which we need to think about the long-term challenges with regard to the United States and China. The article in the Atlantic had just come out, so I talked about it, the Thucydides Trap, and how we need to avoid it. Then I literally walked into a meeting with the President of China and some other U.S. Senators. In his opening remarks, he talked about the Thucydides Trap and how China and the United States need to avoid it. So that is the good news. At least on that issue, we are on the same sheet of paper.

There is other good news, and that is that this body--the U.S. Senate--in many ways, is the ideal place where we should be discussing, debating, developing, and, yes, implementing the kind of long-term strategic policies we need to address as a country and develop with regard to the rise of China.

In ``The Federalist Papers,'' Madison talks about one of the important roles of the Senate, with its Members having 6-year terms and having significant powers in foreign policy, is to be able to ensure stable and lasting relations between the United States and other nations. Indeed, perhaps more than any other part of the Federal Government, this institution--the U.S. Senate--has the opportunity to act and think and debate and implement policies--strategic policies-- for the long-term interests of our Nation.

Contrary to some conventional wisdom, where we only hear about American ``short-termism,'' in terms of long-term foreign policy issues, our country actually has a history of developing long-term strategic frameworks that address significant challenges to America's security and economic interests. Just think of the Monroe Doctrine in the 19th century or George Kennan's strategy of containment in the 20th century, dealing with the threat posed by the rise of the Soviet Union and global communism. These were long-term, successful strategies for the United States in response to significant challenges facing our Nation, in part developed here in the U.S. Senate and implemented here, and we can do it with regard to the challenges we are facing now with China.

So as we work with the executive branch on developing an American strategy to address the rise of China and to avoid the Thucydides Trap, how should we be thinking about it? What principles should we be focused on? Let me suggest four that we should be focused on as a nation.

First, we must recognize and emphasize that the United States is an Asia-Pacific power; second, we must strengthen, deepen, and expand our comprehensive alliances with the Asia-Pacific region; third, we must engage with, not try to contain, China; and fourth--and perhaps most importantly--we must renew America's strength, particularly the economic power and vitality of this great Nation.

I will turn to each of these principles in a bit more detail. As I mentioned first, America is an Asia-Pacific power, and we must push back on narratives or counterstrategies being developed in the region that talk about Asia for Asians, which are veiled attempts to try to exclude the United States from this dynamic region in the future, in the orders being developed in the Asia-Pacific.

Just look at this map. Geographically, we clearly are an Asia-Pacific nation. A few of us, about a month and a half ago, had the opportunity, when Prime Minister Abe was visiting, to have breakfast with him, and I reminded the Prime Minister at the breakfast that not only are they a key ally of ours in the Asia-Pacific, but for me, as an Alaskan, they are also a neighbor. Just look at this map. I reminded the Prime Minister that my hometown of Anchorage is actually closer to Tokyo than it is to Washington, DC, and having just gotten off the plane from Anchorage, I can tell you it is a lot closer.

When we think of our forces, whether in Alaska or Guam or Hawaii, we look at this map, and on U.S. territory, Alaska forces, based in my great State, are, for the most part, closer to the Korean Peninsula than forces based in Australia. So, clearly, geographically, we are an Asia-Pacific country.

Of course, American history has been embedded in the Asia-Pacific for centuries. During World War II, the United States led the effort to win the war in the Pacific after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the bombing of Alaska, which was bombed, invaded, and occupied by the forces of Imperial Japan. Many Americans are not familiar with that history of the war.

It is not just geographic proximity and the battles we fought to win World War II in the Asia-Pacific, just as important, in terms of our heritage as an Asia-Pacific nation, are the policies we implemented after World War II because it is now clear the United States has underwritten the peace, prosperity, and security of this entire region through our continued military presence, our alliances, and our economic engagement and power in the region.

No country has done more than the United States to make the Asia- Pacific the world's most dynamic and economically vibrant region, and it has been the policies of our great Nation over 70 years that have led to that. By the way, no country has benefited more from the established order that we put forward and established in this region than China, with the rise of China, in many ways, helped, encouraged, and moved forward by the peace and prosperity we brought to the region.

Let me provide just one example of how the U.S. military forces in the region have played the key role in helping keep the relative peace. Our enduring naval presence has helped to keep the sealanes, where all of this transportation and commerce and economic growth has occurred, in the Asia-Pacific. That has been the U.S. Navy, for decades, doing that. As I mentioned, all nations of the region--ours included--have benefited from this order, and from our policies, and our commitment and our sacrifice. All nations--including and particularly true, China has.

So we must flatly and completely reject policies being developed in the region or in Washington that forget our geography and our history. The United States is an Asia-Pacific power. The United States is the preeminent Asia-Pacific power, but many of America's core national interests are at stake in the region, and we will be an enduring presence in this part of the world for decades and centuries to come.

Second, with regard to how to address the rise of China and the principles we need to think about, we must continue to strengthen, deepen, and expand our comprehensive set of alliances in the Asia- Pacific region that have been built over decades. Now, the United States faces many global challenges, but one of the most critical strategic advantages that we have as a nation, in terms of security, is that we are an ally-rich nation and our adversaries and potential adversaries and competitors are ally-poor. Just think about it. Look at this map. Look through and think through all of the countries that are either treaty allies of the United States or wanting to get closer, and then think of other countries, including China, Russia, North Korea, Iran--all ally-poor. This is particularly the case in Europe and the Asia-Pacific. As I mentioned, these alliance systems have been built over decades by Democratic and Republican administrations, and what we need to emphasize now is we should not squander them.

It is also the case--and we are seeing and hearing about it literally almost every day, whether it is countries like Russia or, yes, China that are constantly looking for opportunities to create schisms and tensions between the United States and its longstanding allies. We need to resist that, we need to be aware of that, and we need to focus on our allies. As Winston Churchill famously said, the only thing worse than going to war with allies is doing so without them. With regard to the Asia-Pacific, we have an opportunity to not just deepen existing alliances with critical countries like Japan and Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Philippines, and Thailand, we also have a unique opportunity to expand our alliances in the region of the Asia-Pacific with countries like Vietnam and India.

In my first couple of years in the Senate, I have had the opportunity to travel in the region several times--in fact, every time I go home, I travel in the region--and meet with many of the leaders in the Asia- Pacific when they come to Washington or when we are in the region. It is clear to me there is a deep interest in many countries to strengthen their economic and security relationships with the United States. This is driven, in part, by the role we have played over decades as the force in the region that has kept the peace and promoted prosperity, but this is also driven by concerns of almost every country in the region about China's increasingly aggressive actions, particularly in the South China Sea, where, despite pledges from senior Chinese leaders not to militarize that part of the world--not to militarize that critical crossroads of commerce for the entire world--they clearly are doing it. For a country that in many ways is renowned for taking the long view--for having the ability to see around the corners of history--China's actions are having the effect of driving more and more countries into the American sphere. We should seize this opportunity, while recognizing that the productive work, the hard work of maintaining our alliances in the region takes time, takes patience, perseverance, respect, and consistency.

To be honest, I was a bit concerned--and I gave some speeches last year about this--that given some of last year's campaign rhetoric, the Trump administration would not emphasize the importance of our allies and not undertake the hard but necessary work of deepening and expanding key strategic relationships, but I think, to the contrary, they are off to a very good start. The Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, in his first trip overseas as the new Secretary of Defense, could have gone anywhere, including NATO, the Middle East, where we have critical strategic interests, but he chose to go to Japan and Korea to cement these critical alliances. The Vice President just got back from a 10-day trip to Japan, to Korea, to Australia, and to Indonesia, with stops in the States representing the Asia-Pacific, including my home State of Alaska and Hawaii, along the way.

I had a good discussion with the Vice President recently over dinner. We talked mostly about this and how focused he and the administration were on maintaining and deepening our alliances in the region, but still we can always improve, especially in terms of making sure we are coordinating closely with all of our allies on critical decisions and that we keep surprises, especially on sensitive strategic issues, to a minimum with regard to our allies. In this regard, President Trump's recent statement that South Korea would have to pay for the THAAD missile system that we are deploying in South Korea, after the U.S. had previously stated we would pay, was an unforced error that I hope the administration will be learning from.

Of course, this body, the U.S. Senate, also has an important role to play, not only in emphasizing and helping maintain our alliances by meeting with leaders around the world and working with them but also in bolstering the capabilities of our partners in the region, economically and militarily.

Right now, there are initiatives that are doing just that, coming out of the Armed Services Committee on which I sit. One is the Asia-Pacific Stability Initiative, led by Senator McCain, which would do that-- increase our capabilities with our partners in the region to deepen our alliances.

Our alliances clearly matter. They matter in our long-term strategy to address the rise of China. But, of course, so does our relationship with China. That is the third principle I would like to discuss.

We must continue to engage with China, not seek to contain it, as some have argued. In fact, when we look at the U.S. relationship with China, ever since Secretary of State Kissinger and President Nixon in the early 1970s began having discussions with China's leadership, America's policy toward China has always been about engaging. It has never been about containing, as our strategy was with regard to the Soviet Union.

Of course, it has taken different forms. We had the One China policy, which we are still focused on, and the Taiwan Relations Act, which was developed by this body in the U.S. Senate in the late 1970s. We had recently initiated by President Bush and continued by President Obama the strategic economic dialogue where senior leaders in the United States and China met every 6 months. I had the opportunity to participate in that as an Assistant Secretary of State under Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

There are all kinds of different approaches to our engagement. In my view, the most strategic concept since the One China policy was the policy developed during the Bush administration by former Deputy Secretary of State Bob Zoellick, who went on to be the president of the World Bank. What he called the responsible stakeholder model was very well-received initially in 2006. He laid it out in a big speech, then went to China and focused on this.

Essentially, the essence of that strategy was that China has greatly benefited from the U.S.-led international order, from the U.S.-led international system; therefore, it is in China's interest to become a responsible stakeholder in that system, to strengthen the international system that has so greatly enabled its own economic success.

In the early days of the strategy, when it was launched, there was a lot of promise. I remember having the opportunity to go to China with Secretary Paulson when he was leading the strategic economic dialogue in the Bush administration. We would meet with all the leadership of China, from the President on down. At that time, every leader in these meetings used the term ``responsible stakeholder.'' They talked about it; they talked about this American concept as a framework for our relationship.

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working out so well now. Chinese officials no longer talk about being a responsible stakeholder. In fact, on many military and economic issues, they seem focused on undermining the US-led international order. Professor Allison's book mentions this specifically, where he says an increasingly powerful China is unraveling the American-led order, throwing into question the peace that generations in the region have taken for granted.

When we look at the long arch of history with regard to China, this notion that maybe they wouldn't accept this idea of becoming a responsible stakeholder in our system that we created--that might not happen. Indeed, this was foretold by one of the wisest men in Asia, Lee Kuan Yew, who was the father of Singapore. Decade after decade as he built that country into an economic powerhouse, American leaders-- military leaders, political leaders, Presidents, Democrats, Republicans--would meet with Lee Kuan Yew to get his advice and wisdom.

I had the opportunity as a young National Security Council staffer to be invited to a meeting with Lee Kuan Yew when I was in Singapore--one of the most interesting meetings of my career--with Deputy Secretary Bob Zoellick and our Ambassador. Lee Kuan Yew talked about Asia and about America's role for 2 hours.

But in another book about Lee Kuan Yew by Professor Allison, he was asked about whether China would accept this idea of being a responsible stakeholder in the American-led international order. His answer was: Of course not.

Why not? How could they aspire not to be No. 1 in Asia and in time No. 1 in the world?

When asked about this concept of being a responsible stakeholder in this system which has benefited them, Lee Kuan Yew was complimentary of the concept that the Americans were trying to lay out, but he said: China wants to be China and, as such, not an honorary member of the West and their international system.

So even though it is clear that the responsible stakeholder framework is not working with China, we still need to stay engaged at all levels--senior leaders, economic officials, military leaders. I want to compliment the President on how he started the relationship with President Xi Jinping. They seem to be off to a good start.

At the same time, we need to continue to look at different concepts, different frameworks of how we continue to engage with China. Let me suggest one idea that I have termed ``true reciprocity.''

As China has rejected the responsible stakeholder model, it is also clear they are increasingly rejecting the idea of a reciprocal relationship with the United States across a number of sectors. Let me give a couple examples.

We look at issues like intellectual property theft. The United States has been raising this issue for decades. As a matter of fact, I had the opportunity to sit in a meeting with former President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, and senior Chinese officials in the Oval Office. We talked about this issue. The President pounded the table on this issue. The Chinese committed not to steal our intellectual property. Yet that continues unabated, now often through cyber attacks.

We look at foreign direct investment, how Chinese companies invest in Europe and the United States, how they are buying companies such as advanced robotics, biotech, media, high-tech companies, internet companies. But if an American company or a Western European company wanted to do the same in China, we know what the answer would be. It would be no.

This lack of economic reciprocity extends beyond the trading relationship. I attended a briefing a few weeks ago in the Senate by the Asia Society, which is putting out an important strategy document with regard to China--ideas for the Trump administration, a very thoughtful policy recommendation piece.

One thing they noted in terms of diplomacy: Right now in Beijing, our U.S. Ambassador is typically getting only deputy minister-level access, deputy minister-level meetings, while back here we give much higher access to ministers to the Secretary of State. This was essentially confirmed by former President Obama's own Ambassador, former Senator Max Baucus, who, in a remarkable exit interview about his time as Ambassador to China--a job he loved--talked about how, in many ways, in terms of reciprocity, we were too weak, not firm enough, pushed around. These are his quotes. It was an interview that actually didn't make a lot of news but was quite remarkable--how we had no strategy to deal with this, how we needed to draw our own redlines.

As we develop a long-term strategy toward China to avoid the Thucydides Trap, we need to institute an engagement policy which looks at true reciprocity. I will be speaking about this more in the coming weeks, and I am going to be offering legislation with regard to reciprocity in the economic and trade relationship. But I will say, diplomatically speaking, this should be a no-brainer. If our Ambassador in Beijing gets only deputy minister-level access to Chinese officials in China's capital, then that is what we should provide China's Ambassador here. It is simple, easy.

The final principle we need to focus on in developing our long-term strategy to address the rise of China is the imperative to renew America's strength, particularly the economic power and vitality of the United States. We have to be strong at home again, and we haven't been.

I have a chart here that says it all. Over the last, really, 10 to 15 years, we have a lost decade of economic growth. We have not been able to hit 3 percent GDP growth in almost 15 years. Some

have called this the new normal; this is what we should expect. But in many ways, when we look at this chart--Republican, Democratic administrations--the 3-percent line here is not a great number. It is an OK number. The traditional numbers of economic growth are closer to 4 percent for our country. But literally, in almost 15 years, we haven't hit it--not once. President Obama was the first President who never hit 3 percent GDP growth in a year, ever.

This is not a healthy economy, and in many ways people are starting to question the American dream, the idea that each generation will be better. We have to get back to a strong economy. I certainly hope the Trump administration will be focusing on this. I know that many Members of this body are focused on this issue.

Last quarter we didn't have a good start with the new administration--0.7 percent GDP growth, less than 1 percent growth. Economic growth, even more than military might, in many ways is the coin of the realm in Asia. We must get back to a robust economy.

Many experts at home and abroad say we can't do it. They say our demographic challenges are too great, but I disagree. If we look at U.S. history, every time we are dismissed, every time someone talks about the decline of the great American engine of growth, whether in the 1930s or in the 1970s or beginning in the 1980s when Japan was going to overtake us--every time that has happened and the naysayers are out there, the U.S. economy comes roaring back. It is critical that we do this now.

We have so many strategic advantages, even relative to China, with regard to our economy. So many of our challenges, in my view, are self- inflicted problems that we can solve.

Strong economic growth--at least about 3 percent--will more closely bind our allies to the United States in the Asia-Pacific region.

Strong economic growth will help us rebuild our military, which has been drastically cut over the last 8 years. Strong economic growth will be critical to tackling our challenges at home, such as skyrocketing deficits and debt levels and crumbling infrastructure. Perhaps, most importantly, strong economic growth will enable us to view the future, including the rise of China, with confidence and not fear.

Our great Nation succeeds when we look to the future with opportunity, not with trepidation. In Professor Allison's upcoming book, currently titled ``Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap,'' he notes that fear was the driving force that propelled Athens and Sparta into the Peloponnesian War. ``What made war inevitable,'' Thucydides tells us, was the rise of Athens and the fear this instilled in Sparta.

In the 12 of 16 cases he reviews in his book where a rising power challenged an established power leading to war, fear was a key driving force that often precipitated war. The more our policies at home can renew America's strength, vitality, and confidence, the more likely in my view it is that we will develop clear, long-term foreign policies that can help us avoid the Thucydides Trap.

I have had the opportunity in my career to view the U.S.-China relationship over the past two decades from a variety of different lenses and perspectives. Over 20 years ago, I was deployed as a young marine infantry officer as part of an amphibious task force to what later became known as the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis, defending U.S. interests in the region and those of our ally Taiwan.

Later, I was an NSC staffer and an Assistant Secretary of State under Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and I spent a lot of time in China working on these issues. I became a State of Alaska official, traveling for my State as the commissioner of natural resources and energy. I have traveled to China to pursue the promise of better economic relations. China is now the No. 1 market for my very export-oriented State, for Alaska exports. Now, as a U.S. Senator, I am focused on this issue and cochairing the U.S.-China working group with my good friend Senator Daines and getting out to the region as often as possible.

I have seen the promise, opportunity, and challenges of the U.S.- China relationship as it has matured over the last 20 years, and I have deep respect for China, its history, and all that it has recently accomplished. I know some of the leaders there and consider them colleagues.

This body, the Senate, and our country need to do more to focus on how to make sure that the rise of China is compatible with U.S. economic and national security interests and, most importantly, with the interests of the people we represent.

I have laid out some core principles this evening on how we might begin to develop a coherent, long-term strategy and address the challenges and opportunities of China's rise. I hope my colleagues-- Democrats and Republicans--will work together over the years on this incredibly important issue. There is so much at stake and a lot of work to do by many in the governments, the private sector, and the military--both in the United States and in China and in the countries of the region.

The gravitational pull of history might be working against us. There is a lot riding on how we address this preeminent geostrategic issue.

Let me conclude by reading how Professor Allison, in his book, sums up the challenge. He states:

The return to prominence of a 5,000-year-old civilization

with 1.4 billion people is not a problem to be fixed. It is a

condition--a chronic condition that will have to be managed

over a generation. Success will require not just a new

slogan, more frequent presidential summits, or additional

meetings of departmental working groups. Managing this

relationship without war will demand sustained attention,

week by week, at the highest levels in both governments. It

will require a depth of mutual understanding not seen since

the Henry Kissinger-Zhou Enlai conversations that

reestablished US-China relations in the 1970s. Most

significant, it will mean more radical changes in attitudes

and actions by leaders and the public alike than anyone yet

has undertaken. To escape Thucydides's Trap, we must be

willing to think the unthinkable--and imagine the

unimaginable. Avoiding Thucydides's Trap in this case will

require nothing less than bending the arc of history.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have 8 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders.

Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate.

Committee on Armed Services

The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m.

Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10 a.m. to hold a hearing entitled ``Reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program, Part II.''

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to hold a hearing on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10 a.m. in Room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

Committee on Foreign Relations

The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``International Development: Value Added Through Private Sector Engagement.''

Committee on the Judiciary

The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 2 p.m., in S-216 of the Capitol, to conduct an executive business meeting.

Committee on Intelligence

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017

at 2 p.m., in room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building.

Committee on Intelligence

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017 from 2 p.m., in room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building to hold a closed hearing.

Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety and Security

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to hold a meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10:30 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

The Committee will hold a Subcommittee Hearing on ``Question, Answer, and Perspectives on the Current State of Airline Travel.''

Mr. President, every week I have been coming down to the

floor for months now to recognize someone in my State who has made a difference, someone who has devoted time and energy to making Alaska a better place to live for the community and for others. We call these individuals our Alaskan of the week. It covers Alaskans from all over the State.

As I have said repeatedly in every one of my ``Alaskan of the Week'' speeches, I believe Alaska is the most beautiful State in the country-- I would argue, in the world. I urge everybody in the room--the pages, the Presiding Officer, and the folks watching on TV--to come see for yourself. It will be a trip of a lifetime, I guarantee it. But it is the people who truly make Alaska unique, people who are helping each other, people who face tough odds and conquer them, strong-willed, warm-hearted, tenacious people who have carved generous lives and sometimes in very extreme conditions.

Today, our Alaskan of the week is going to be a twofer. We are going to do two today. So I would like to recognize two Alaskans, Madison Englund of Fairbanks and Jennifer Troutman of Anchorage, as our Alaskans of the week. These are two special athletes who have made all of us in Alaska very proud.

Last month, Madison and Jennifer returned to Alaska with a slew of medals from the 2017 Special Olympics World Winter Games in Austria. First, these young women did everything in their power, including training their hearts out, to qualify for these world Olympic games, and when they got there, they excelled. Madison won a Gold Medal in the advanced super-G snowboard race and added a Silver Medal in the advanced giant slalom. Jennifer claimed a Silver Medal in Monday's advanced super-G ski race, as well.

Jennifer has been an athlete with Special Olympics for 11 years. During her freshman year of high school, she participated in bowling, track and field, and floor hockey through the Partners Club. During her junior year, she found a passion for skiing and has been excelling on the slopes ever since, as you can see from these incredible medals from the Special Olympics. She also works at Petco during her free time.

Madison has been part of Special Olympics for 7 years. Aside from sports, she enjoys other hobbies, to include playing the cello, camping, fishing, and caring for animals. She is proud of her dogs, and she has three of them. She also loves to make jewelry. She said it is her favorite hobby. In addition to all this, she has also won the Good Citizens Award from the Daughters of the American Revolution.

Since its founding nearly 50 years ago and subsequent growth to all corners of the globe, the Special Olympics has brought hope and joy and self-esteem to countless children and adults with intellectual disabilities and, of course, to their families and friends and their supporters like me. Special Olympics has shown what can happen when a group of people get together and sweat it out and work hard in the name of fair competition, camaraderie, and perseverance. These Special Olympians--all Special Olympians, really--make us in Alaska proud.

I want to thank Jim Balamaci, who has been the Special Olympics Alaska head for many years, and his whole team for giving so many Alaskans the opportunity to get out to the field or the slopes and experience the fulfillment of sports for all.

In Alaska, we love our Special Olympics athletes. They are an inspiration to all of us, whether it is when they are competing or even participating in the Polar Plunge in the icy waters of Alaska every winter to raise money for Special Olympics.

Congratulations again to Jennifer and Madison on your hard work and incredible achievements and representing Alaska so well. Congratulations. You have earned it, being our Alaskans of the week.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Con. Res. 14, submitted earlier today.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of H. Con. Res. 35, which was received from the House.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 36, which was received from the House.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee be discharged from further consideration of and the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 127.

Mr. President, 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.