starttime 1254238231.96231
RIGHT NOW FLIED SENATE COVERAGE
HERE ON C-SPAN2
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATE WILL COME TO ORDER.
THE CHAPLAIN, DR. BARRY BLACK,
WILL LEAD THE SENATE IN PRAYER.
THE CHAPLAIN: LET US PRAY.
ETERNAL GOD WHO READS OUR HEARTS
AND KNOWS OUR MOTIVES, YOU ARE
THE SOURCE OF OUR BEING AND THE
GOAL OF OUR STRIVING.
HALLOWED BE YOUR NAME.
INSPIRE OUR SENATORS TO KEEP
WITHIN THE GRASP OF YOUR FIRM
HANDS THE THREADS OF THIS DAY'S
WORDS AND DEEDS.
MAY THEY
SEEK YOUR WILL THROUGHOUT THIS
DAY AND PERMIT YOU TO TRANSFIGURE
AND REDEEM EVEN THEIR
DISAPPOINTMENTS AND SETBACKS.
AS THEY FACE
PERPLEXING ISSUES OF STATE, MAY
THE STRENGTH OF EACH BE AS THE
STRENG OF TEN BECAUSE THEIR
-- BECAUSE OF PURE PHOU
ALTERNATIVES.
MAY ALL THAT
THEY DO AND ARE TODAY BE SO
OBVIOUSLY AN EXPRESSION OF YOUR
TRUTH THAT THEY CAN BE CONFIDENT
OF RECEIVING THE SMILE OF YOUR
APPROVAL.
WE PRAY IN
YOUR
AMEN
THE PRESIDING OF
JOIN ME IN RECITING THE PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANC
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO
THE FLAG OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND TO THE REPUBLIC
FOR WHICH ITTANDS,
ONE NATION UNDER GOD,
INDIVISIBLE,
WITH LIBERTY A
JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK WILL READ A COMMUNICATION
TO THE SENATE.
THE CLERK: WAS
SEPTEMBER 29 2009.
TO THE SENATE:
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 1,
PARAGRAPH 3, OF E STANDING
RULES OF THE SENATE, I HEREBY
APPOINT THE HONORABLE KIRSTEN
GILLIBRAND,
A SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF NEW YORK,
TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE CHAIR.
SIGNED: ROBERT C. BYRD, PRESIDENT
PRO TEMPORE.
MR. REID: MADAM PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDING OFFICER:
MAJORITY LEADER. MR. REID: FOLLOWING LEADER
REMARKS THE SENATE WILL BE IN A
PERIOD OF MORNING BUSINESS UNTIL
1:30 TODAY.
SENATORS ARE PERMITTED TO SPEAK
DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME FOR
UP TO TEN MINUTES EACH. FOLLOWING THAT MORNING BUSINESS
THE SENATE WILL RESUME
CONSIDERATION OF THE DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
AT 4:30 TODAY THE SENATE WILL
TURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO
DEBATE THE NOMINATION OF JEFFREY
VIKEN TO BE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT
OF SOUTH DAKOTA.
AT 5:30 TODAY WE WILL VOTE ON
THAT CONFIRMATION OF THAT
NOMINATION.
MADAM PRESIDENT, THIS AFTERNOON
WE'LL BEGIN WORK ON THE DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL, AS JUST ANNOUNCED.
THE BILL PROVIDES
IN NEW DISCRETIONARY SPENDING
AUTHORITY FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, INCLUDING MORE THAN
$128 BILLION IN FUNDING FOR
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.
THIS IS A GOOD
IT PROVIDES FUNDING TO GO TO THE
ARMYY 22,000, PROVIDES $108
BILLION FOR NEW EQUIPMENT FOR
MEN AND WOMEN OF THE MILITAR
BALE AS A RESULT OF THE
EQUIPMENT HAVING BEEN DAMAGED
AND WORN OUT.
IT PROVIDES FOR THE MODIFICATION
OF TACTICAL VEHICLES TO BETTER
PROTECT OUR FORCES IN BATTLE.
IN NEVADA, MADAM P
THERE IS SIGNIFICANT
CONTRIBUTIONS BEING MADE AS WE
SPEAK TO THE WARS IN IRAQ AND
AFGHANISTAN WITH MORE THAN #00
GATT TODAY.
BECAUSE THE DESERT TRAINING IN
NEVADA IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN, MANY
PREPARE IN NEVADA.
THE NAVAL AIR
IN NORTHERN NEVADA IS THE HOME
OF THE NAVY'S PREEMINENT STRIKE
AND AIR WFARE CENTER WHICH
INCLUDES NAVY FIGHTERS AND
WEAPONS BETTER KNOWN AS TOP GUN.
FALLON HOUSES THE CARRIER WEAPONS SYSTEM.
MADAM PRESIDENT, IF YOU ARE A
NAVY PILOT, FIGHTER PILOT, ONLY
TRAINING WILL ALLOW YOU TO HAVE
AN EFFECTIVE Ph.D. IN FLYING
THE NAVY'S TOP FIGHTER PLANES
IN EXISTENCE SINCE THE LATE
1920'S AS A RESULT OF THE HUGE EXPLOSION.
SINCE 19 -- LATE 1920'S, THIS
BASE IN THE VERY ARID, DRY NORTH
CENTRAL NEVADA SERVES AS THE
STAGING AREA FOR CONVENTIONAL
BOMBS, ROCKETS AND AMMUNITION
SINCE WORLD WAR II.
CREECH AIR FORCE BASE, LOCATED
ABOUT 35 MILES NORTH
VEGAS, HAS IN PLACE AN AIRCRAFT
SYSTEM CALLED THE DRONES, WHAT
IS CALLED THE DRONES.
IT'S KNOWN AS A JOINT
AIRCRAFT SYSTEM CENTER OF EXCELLENCE.
IT'S FROM THAT FACILITY THAT THE
RIKES THAT TAKE PLACE IN IRAQ
AND AFGHANISTAN, THAT'S WHERE
THE PEOPLE ON THE GROUND THERE
ACTUALLY DO THE WORK THAT ALLOWS
THESE PLANES TO DO THESE --
THESE VEHICLES TO DO THEIR
DAMAGE WHEREVER THEY'RE
DESIGNATED TO GO.
FINALLY, MADAM PRESIDENT, THE
AIR FORCE BASE OUTSIDE LAS
VEGAS, HOME OF THE FIRST
DEDICATED AIR WARFARE LATER AIR
GROUND TRAING FACILITY
CONTINUES TO PROVIDE AIR
TRAINING FOR U.S. AND ALLIED FORCES.
THIS IS THE HOME OF THE
THUNDERBIRDS.
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDS TOMORROW.
WE NEED TO PASS THIS BILL TO
ENSURE THESE MEN AND WOMEN IN
UNIFORM, OUR SOLDIERS, MARINES,
AIRMEN, SAILORS AND WOMEN HAVE
EVERY RESOURCE THEY NEED TO
1KE68LY CARRY OUT THEIR MISSION.
WHETHER IN -- SUCCESSFULLY
OUT THEIR MISSION.
ALL OF AMERICA'S TROOPS ARE
DEPENDING ON US.
THE MANAGERS OF THIS BILL WERE
HERE LAST THURSDAY ANDRIDAY.
THEY ARE LACK THIS AFTERNOON
READY TO COMPLETE ACTION ON THIS LEGISLATION.
THIS IS AN TRAOEPBLGSLY
IMPORTANT -- THIS IS AN
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
THE SENATE NEEDS TO ACT ON IT
QUICKLY SO WE CAN GET TO
CONFERENCE AND MINIMIZE THE TIME
THE DEPARTMENT HAS TO OPERATE ON
STOPGAP RESOLUTION.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I WOULD HOPE
PEOPLE, IF THEY HAVE AMENDMENTS
TO OFFER, THEY WILL OFFER THEM.
WE HAVE HAD TWO DAYS TO OFFER AMENDMENTS.
WE HAVE TWO OF THE MOST
EXPERIENCED MANAGERS IN THE
SENATE WITH SENATORS INOUYE AND COCHRAN.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT PEOPLE
WOULD OFFER THEIR AMENDMENTS.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE
BILL ALL WEEK.
WE'RE GOING TO GET OFF OF IT AS
SOON AS WE
MR. McCONNELL: MADAM PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
REPUBLICAN LEADER.
MR. McCONNELL: THIS AFTERNOON
WE RESUME CONSIDERATION OF THE
DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
AND
CONCERNS ARE THE PROTECTION OF
OUR TROOPS AND AIES IN
AFGHANISTAN AND THE SUCCESS OF
OUR MISSION THR-FPLT THE --
MISSION THERE.
GENERAL McCHRYSTAL MADE CLEAR
MORE FORCES ARE NECESSARY TO
ACCOMPLISH THE MISSION.
WHILE THE ADMINISTRATION HASN'T
YET REACTED TO GENERAL
McCHRYSTAL'S REPORT, IN MY
VIEW,
EXPLAIN TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
HIS REASONS EITHER FOR ACCEPTING
THE McCHRYSTAL PLAN OR
A DIFFERENT COURSE.
TIMING IS IMPORTANT.
THE FAILURE TO ACT DECISIVELY IN
RESPONSE TO GENERAL
McCHRYSTAL'S STRATEGY AND HIS
ANTICIPATED REQUEST FOR
ADDITIONAL FORCES COULD SERVE TO
UNDERMINE SOME O
DECISIONS THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE
ON NATIONAL SECURITY.
THAT SAID, NO PRESIDENT DECIDES
TO COMMIT TROOPS LHTLY.
ALL SUCH DECISIONS HAVE
FAR-REACHING CONSEQUENCES.
AND THAT'S WHY GENERAL
McCHRYSTAL AND GENERAL
PETRAEUS SHOULD ALSO COME T
WASHINGTON TO EXPLAIN TO
CONGRESS AND TO THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE HOW THEIR STRATEGY WILL
WORK.
A COUNTERINSURGENCY STRATEGY
WILL REQUIRE A SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENT IN TIME, TROOPS, AND RESOURCES.
WE NEED AN EXPLANAON FROM OUR
GENERALS WHY THAT INVESTMENT IS NEED.
THE RECENT DISRUPTION OF AN
ALLEGED AL QAEDA PLOT AGAINST
AMERICA WAS A REMINDER TO ALL OF
US OF THE SERIOUSNESS AND THE
URGENCY OF OUR EFFORTS IN AFGHANISTAN.
THERE SHOULD BE NO DOUBT THAT AL
QAEDA REMAINS A SERIOUS THREAT.
WE CANNOT ALLOW AL QAEDA TO
ESTABLISH A SAFE HAVEN IN THE
VERY PLACE WHERE IT PLOTTED AND
PLANNED THE 9/11 ATTACKS.
THE TALIBAN IS GAINING GROUND IN
AFGHANISTAN, AND OUR COMMANDERS
IN THE FIELD ARE IN THE BEST
POSITION TO TELL US WHAT IS
REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THEIR MISSION.
GENERAL McCHRYSTAL SAYS THAT
WITHOUT ADEQUAT
WILL LIKELY FAIL.
IN MY VIEW, WSHOULD LISTEN TO
HIS ADVICE, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL
BE ABLE TO GET THAT ADVICE
PERSON IN A TIMELY MANNER.
MADAM
FLOOR.
I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A
QUORUM. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE RL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MADAM PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM HAWAII.
A SENATOR: MADAM PRESIDENT, I
ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
UNDER THE PREVIOUS OER,
LEADSHIP TIME IS READ SERVED.
UNDER THE PREVIOUS TIME THE
SENATE WILL PROCEED TO A BRIEF
PERIOD OF MORNING BUSINESS UNTIL
1:30 P.M. WITH SENATORS
PERMITTED TO SPEAK UP TO 10
MINUTES EACH.
MR. AKA: MADAM PRESIDENT, I
RISE TO SPEAK AS IF IN MORNING BUSINESS.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. AKA: I RISE TODAY, MADAM
PRESIDENT, TO STAND IN UNITY
WITH O
PHILIPPINES, CHINA, AND VIETNAM
WHO ARE RECOVERING FROM A
TERRIBLE NATURAL DISASTER.
TROPICAL STORM KASANA STRUCK THE
PHILIPPINES SATURDAY NEAR MANILA
CAUSING MASSIVE FLOODING ACROSS
THE ISLAND NATION.
ACCORDING TO NEWS REPORTS,
FOOTAGE SHOWS PEOPLE BEING SWEPT
AWAY BY RAGING TORRENTS.
STRANDED ON ROOFTOPS WITHOUT
SUPPLIES
WASTE-HIGH -- FLOODWATERS.
ACCORDING TO THE ASSOCIATED
PRESST LEA
PHILIPPINES ARE CONFIRMED DEAD
AND NEARLY 500,000 PEOPLE HAVE
LOST THEIR
AS I SPEAK, RESCUERS ARE
SEARCHING FOR ANY REMAINING
SURVIVORS.
FAMILY MEMBERS ARE MOURNING LOST
LOVED ONES.
MILLIONS OF FILIPINOS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY ARE STRUGGLING TO FIND
CLEAN WATER,
SHELTER.
I COMMEND THE UNITED STATES
EMBASSY IN MANILA FOR PLEDGING
FINANCIAL AID TO HELP T
PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT GET
LIFESAVING NECESSITIES TO PEOPLE
LIVING IN THE EMERGENCY
SHELTERS.
I AM PROUD AND HONORED BY THE
WORK OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
UNITED STATES ARMED SERVICES
BASED IN THE
THEIR IMPORTANT MISSION IS TO
PROVIDE COUNTERTERRORISM
TRAINING, BUT IN THE FACE OF
DISASTER, OUR TROOPS HAVE
HEROICALLY CONDUCTED A NUMBER OF
LIFESAVING
NOW THEY'RE HELPING
DISTRIBUTE SUPPLIES.
I ALSO THANK UNICEF FOR ITS
LARGE PLEDGE OF FINANCIAL
SUPPORT.
IN HAWAII, A NUMBER OF
ORGANIZATIONS HAVE STEPPED UP
HELP.
THE FILIPINO COMMUNITY CENTER,
THE UNITED FILIPINO COUNCIL OF
HAWAII, AND THE PHILIPPINE
COUNSELATE GENERAL OF HONOLULU
ARE AMONG THE ORGANIZATIONS
RAISING FUNDS.
OFFERING
AND ACROSS THE NATION.
UNFORTUNATELY, KATSANA'S PATH OF
DESTRUCTION WAS NOT FINISHED AT
THE PHILIPPINES.
THE STORM PICKED UP STRENGTH
OVER THE SOUTH CHINA SEAS,
BRUSHED AGAINST THE COAST OF
CHINA'S ISLAND AND AT FULL
TYPHOON STRENGTH TODAY SLAMMED
DIRECTLY INTO VIETNAM WHERE AT
LEAST 23
CONFIRMED DEAD.
LAOS, CAMBODIA AND THAILAND ARE
NOW BRACING FOR HEAVY RAINS AS
THE STORM MOVES INLAND.
IN THE UNITED STATES, WE ARE NO
STRANGERS TO THE HORRORS OF
TROPICAL CYCLONES.
WE ALL REMBER THE TRAGEDY OF
HUHURRICANE KATRINA.
IT HIT THE GULF COAST MORE THAN
FOUR YEARS AGO, BUT MANY AREAS
ARE STILL RECOVERING.
IN HAWAII WE WILL NEVER FORGET
THE HURRICANE THAT STRUC
1992 KILLING SIX PEOPLE,
DESTROYING HOMES, HOTELS, AND
BUSINESSES, AND LEAVING
RESIDENTS IN SOME AREAS WITHOUT
ELECTRICITY FOR MONTHS.
IT TOOK PARTS OF KAYUI MORE THAN
A DECADE TO RECOVER AND SOME
HISTORIC BUILDINGS HAVE NEVER
BEEN REBUILT.
THE UNITED STATES STANDS WITH
OUR FRIENDS IN THE PHILIPPINES,
CHINA, AND VIETNAM AS THEY WORK
TO HELP THE SURVIVORS.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE --
EVERYONE WHO HAS PITCHED IN TO
HELP OUR FRIENDS RECOVER FROM
THIS TERRIBLE DISASTER.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR.
I NOTE THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE PRESIDING OFFIR: THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MADAM PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM MARYLAND.
MR. CARDIN: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE
DISPENSED WITH. ESIDGTHOU
OBJECTION.
MR. CARDIN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I
TAKE THIS TIME TO BRING TO THE
ATTENTION OF MY COLLEAGUES
LEGISLATION THAT'S BEEN
INTRODUCED BY SENATOR LUGAR, THE
ENERGY SECURITY THROUGH
TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2009.
I HAVE JOINED SENATOR LUGAR AS A
COSPONSOR, AS HAS SENATOR
SCHUMER, SENATOR WICKER, AND
SENATOR FEINGOLD.
LET ME FIRST TELL YOU THE
PROBLEM THAT THIS LEGISLATION IS
ATTEMPTING TO DEAL WITH.
AND THAT IS THERE ARE THESE
MINERAL-WEALTHY COUNTRIES --
COUNTRIES THAT I HAVE OIL,
COUNTRIES THAT HAVE GAS --
COUNTRIES THAT HAVE OIL,
COUNTRIES THAT HAVE GAS -- AND
SOMETIMES IT'S CALLED A CURSE
BECAUSE IN MANY OF THESE
COUNTRIES THERE IS HORRIBLE
POVERTY, THERE'S CONFLICTS, OPEN
WAR AND VERY POOR GOVERNANCE.
AND THE REASON IN MOST CASES IS
CORRUPTION.
QUITE FRANKLY, THERE ARE
INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS AND
SOMETIMES LEADERS WITHIN THESE
CORE NATIONS THAT HAVE WEALTHY
RESOURCES THAT MAKE THEIR OWN
INDIVIDUAL DEALS WITH COMPANIES
THAT EXTRACT THESE MINERALS AND
USE IT FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSE
RATHER THAN SHARING IT AS THEY
SHOULD OR USING IT AS THEY
SHOULD FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE
NATION IN WHICH THESE RESOURCES
ARE LOCATED.
AND THIS IS HAPPENING IN SO MANY
COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD.
IT'S IN THE UNITED STATES
INTEREST TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT
THESE NATIONS DEAL WITH THEIR
RESOURCES, WITH THEIR WEALTH.
IT'S IN OUR INTEREST FOR MANY
REASONS.
THERE ARE AMERICAN BUSINESSES
THAT WOULD LIKE TO DO BUSINESS
IN THESE COUNTRIES.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO HELP THE
ECONOMY OF AMERICA BY HAVING
BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS WITH
COUNTRIES THAT HAVE OIL AND GAS
AND COUNTRIES THAT HAVE OTHER MINERAL WEALTH.
THE PROBLEM IS THEY CAN'T
BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PARTICIPATE
IN CORRUPTIONS AGAINST OUR LAWS
FOR AMERICAN COMPANIES TO BE
COCONSPIRATORS IN CORRUPTION IN
ANOTHER COUNTRY, AS IT SHOULD BE
AGAINST OUR LAWS.
IT'S ALSO NOT VERY STABLE FOR
THEM TO DO BUSINESS IN A COUNTRY
THAT IS CORRUPT, THAT DOES NOT
HAVE THE RULE OF LAW, THAT
DOESN'T HAVE THE PROTECTIONS
NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEIR BUSINESS RE?
-- BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WILL BE HONORED.
SO FOR ALTHOUGH REASONS, IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR US THAT THESE
NATIONS DEAL WITH THEIR MINERAL WEALTH.
IT'S ALSO IN OUR INTEREST AS FAR
AS ENERGY SECURITY.
AND I HOPE WE'LL GET INTO THIS
DEBATE IN THIS CONGRESS ON THE
FLOOR OF THIS BODY, HOW WE CAN
BECOME ENERGY SECURE IN AMERICA.
BUT PART OF THAT IS HAVING A
MUCH MORE OPEN RELATIONSHIP WITH
THOSE COUNTRIES THAT HAVE
MINERAL WEALTH SO THAT WE KNOW
THE ARRANGEMENTS, SO WE KNOW HOW
THE GAS
MINERALS ARE ENTERING INTO THE
INTERNATIONAL MARKETPLACE.
SO WE CAN HAVE AN OPEN POLICY
HERE IN AMERICA TO DEAL WITH OUR
ENERGY.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS COUNTRY,
AS I POINTED OUT FOR OUR
ECONOMICS, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
OUR SECURITY, FOR OUR NATIONAL
SECURITY TO GET THIS DONE.
I MIGHT ALSO ADD, IT'S ALSO
GOING TO BE IMPORTANT FOR OUR ENVIRONMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE THAT DEBATE I HOPE LATER
THAT YEAR IN THIS BODY.
NOW, THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
HAS UNDERSTOOD THIS, AND AS A
RESULT OF -- OF RECOGNIZING THIS
PROBLEM, THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNITY CAME TOGETHER WITH THE
EXTRACTED INDUSTRIES
TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE KNOWN AS EITI.
I MENTION THIS BECAUSE
INTERNATIONAL EFFORT IS TO TRY
TO BRING TRANSPARENCY IN WHAT A
MPANY PAYS FOR
IN A COUNTRY.
SO IF YOU'RE A COMPANY AND
YOU'RE PAYING A ROYALTY TO A
NATION FOR EXTRACTING ITS
MINERALS, YOU NEED TO DISCLOSE
THAT SO THAT THE CITIZENS OF
THAT COUNTRY HAVE THE BASIC
CRITICAL INFORMATION NOSE
EFFECTIVELY MONITOR GOVERNMENT --
NECESSARY TO EFFECTIVELY MONITOR
GOVERNMENT STEWARDSHIP OF THEIR
NATURAL RESOURCES.
THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE IETI
INITIATIVE IS, IT'S ALL ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY SO THAT COMPANIES
AND GOVERNMENTS CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
AND I WOULD THINK WE WOULD ALL
AGREE ON THAT.
I'M PROUD OF THE ROLE THAT THE
UNIT STATES HELSINKI
COMMISSION HAS PLAYED ON THIS
ISSUE.
I HAVE THE HONOR OF CHAIRING
THAT COMMISSION AND WE HAVE MADE
THE EITI INITIATIVE A MAJOR
PRIORITY OF OUR COMSSIONS
WORK, BECAUSE WE KNOW IF WE CAN
GET THE MINERAL WEALTH TO THE
PEOPLE OF THAT NATION, THA SO
MANY OF THISH NEWS WE ARE
CHARGED TO -- SO MANY OF THE
ISSUES THAT WE ARE CHARGED TO
DEAL WITH ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND
ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY, ON
SECURITY OCHES COULD B COULD BE DEALT WITH IF
WE COULD JUST GET THAT WEALTH TO
THE PEOPLE OF THE NATION.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY THE
COMMISSION HAS PLACED A VERY
HIGH PRIORITY IN GETTING MORE PARTICIPATION BY COUNTRIES
AROUND THE WORLD TO THE EXTRACTED INDUSTRIES
TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE.
THAT BRINGS ME TO THE ENERGY
SECURITY THROUGH TRANSPARENCY
ACT OF 2009 THAT SENATOR LUGAR
HAS INTRODUCED AND WHICH I HAVE
JOINED HIM AS A COSPONSOR.
IT WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE UNITED
STATES SHOULD BE AN IMPLEMENTING
COUNTRY OF THE EITI, THAT WE
SHOULD SUBJECT OURSELVES TO
THOSE PROVISIONS, THAT WE SHOULD
LEAD BY EXAMPLE, BY SHOWING THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BELIEVES THAT THERE SHOULD BE
TRANSPARENCY IN ALL THE
CONTRACTS WE ENTER INTO
RESULTING IN EXTRACTION OF
MINERAL WEALTH FROM AMERICA.
WELLWE
PROPER DISCLOSURE OF PAYMENT
FROM COMPANIES THAT USE PUBLIC
LANDS ON MINERAL EXTRACTIONS.
THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO, MADAM PRESIDENT.
WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS ALL ALONG.
THE PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW WHAT'S
BEING PAID AND WHAT -- BY
COMPANIES TO GET -- TOAKE
THEIR WEALTH.
THIS IS AMERICANS' WEALTH.
IT DOESN'T BELONG TO ANY ONE OF
US AND THERE SHOULD BE
TRANSPARENCY IN IT.
IT'S THE RIGHT THI TO DO.
WE SHOULD BE -- ANOTHER PART OF
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD REQUIRE
COMPANIES THAT ARE LISTED ON THE
UNITED STATES STOCK EXCHANGE,
THAT ARE REGULATED BY THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION, TO REQUIRE THOSE
COMPANIES TO DISCLOSE THEIR
PAYMENTS TO OTHEROUNTRIES FOR
BEINGS TRACTN OF MINERAL WEALTH.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE USE THE
LEVERAGE OF PARTICIPATING IN THE
U.S. STOCK EXCHANGE TO BE A
LISTED SECURITY THAT AMERICANS
INVEST IN, THEY H
TO KNOW WHAT THAT COMPANY IS
DOING IN PAYMENTS TO OTHER
COUNTRIES TO EXTRACT MINERAL WEALTH.
THAT AT LEAST GIVES US PART OF
THE DISCLOSURE NECESSARY TO FIND
OUT WHY A COUNTRY WHICH IS SO
PO
PEOPLE IS DOING WITH THE MONEYS
THAT ARE BEING PAID FOR THE EKES
TRACTION OEXTRACTION OF THEIR MINERAL
WEALTH.
THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO
HELPING US WITH TRANSPARENCY.
IT WOULD URGE THE PRESIDENT,
THIS LEGISLATION, TO WORK WITH
OUR PARTNERS IN THE G-8 AND G-20
TO PROMOTE SIMILAR EFFORTS BY
THE INDUSTRL NATIONS OF THE
WORLD, SO THAT WE CAN GET MORE
CREDIBILITY ON THE EITI, THAT IT
BECOMES A MATTER OF PASSAGE FOR
A NATION INTO RESPECTABILITY
INTERNATIONALLY TO JOIN THE EITI
AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
CONTRACTS THAT ARE ENTERED INTO
WITH THAT GOVERNMENT ARE SHOWN
TO BE PEOPLE OF THAT NATION.
BOTTOM LINE IS THE ENERGY
SECURITY THROUGH TRANSPARENCY
ACT OF 2009 IS ASKING THE UNITED
STATES TO TAKE A LEADERSHIP
POSITION, A LEADERSHIP POSITION
IN FIGHTING CORRUPTION.
UNFORTUNATELY, MADAM PRESIDENT,
IN TOO MANY OF THE DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD, THERE IS
CORRUPTION, AND YOU'VE GOT TO
DEAL WITH THAT CORRUPTION IF
WEE GOING TO BE ABLE TO
DEVELOP THE TYPE OF
RELATIONSHIPS WHERE THAT NATION
CAN DEAL WITH THE POVERTY OF ITS
OWN PEOPLE AND WORK WITH US ON
OUR INTERNATIONAL PRIORITIES.
IT HELPS DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.
WE GIVE SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES
TODAY FOR HUMANITIAN EFFORTS
IN THESE NATIONS.
WELL, THESE NATIONS SHOULD USE
THEIR OWN WEVMENT THIS IS A
HUMANITARIAN ISSUE.
THIS IS A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE.
IT ALSO PROVIDES ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PEOPLE OF
THAT AS WELL AS THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY SO THEY
CAN PARTICIPATE IN AN OPEN WAY
TO HELP THAT NATION SOLVE ITS
ECONOMIC PROBLEMS.
IT HELPS US WITH ENERGY SECURITY GLOBALLY.
WE CAN'T AFFORD
THE WORLD'S RESOURCES AS WE LOOK
INTERNATIONALLY FOR PROBLEMS,
FOR ENERGY SECURITY AND GLOBAL
CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND IT CERTAINLY HELPS IN
REMOVING CONFLICTS IN MANY PARTS
OF THE WORLD
IT'S IN OUR NATIONAL SECURITY
INTEREST TO MAKE THE WORLD SAFER
BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY THE UNITED
STATES THAT'S CALLED UPON FIRST
TO DEAL WITH THESE CONFLICTS.
FOR ALL THESE REASONS,
MADAM PRESIDENT, I URGE MY
COLLEAGUES TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE ENERGY SECURITY THROUGH
TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2009 AND TO
JOIN US IN MOVING THIS
LEGISLATION FORWARD BECAUSE I
BELIEVE IT DOES PRESENT GREAT
HOPE FOR AMERICA TO LEAD THE
WORLD IN HELPING THESE NATIONS
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR WEALTH
IN FURTHERING U.S. INTERNATIONAL
GOALS.
WITH THAT, MADAM PRESIDENT, I
WOULD YIELD THE FLOOR AND
SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL: MR. DORGAN: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.
MR. DORGAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE QUORUM
CALL BE VACATED. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. DORGAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I
ASK TO SPEAK IN MORNING BUSINESS
FOR AS MUCH TIME
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. DORGAN: MADAM PRESIDENT,
TODAY A NEWS STORY HAD A TITLE,
"LEADING DEM PLANS TO BLOW UP
DEAL WITH BIG PHARMA."
HOPING TO BLOW UP THE
REACHED BETWEEN THE WHITE HOUSE,
DRUG MAKERS AND SENATE FINANCE
COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN MAX BAUCUS BY
INTRODUCING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
FLOOR TO ALLOW PRESCRIPTIO
DRUGSO BE REIMPORTED FROM
CANADA," ET CETERA.
AND THERE'S A PICTURE OF ME.
AND I WOKE UP THIS MORNING NOT
THINKING I WAS GOING TO TRY BLOW
UP ANYTHING, AND I WANTED TO
RESPOND TO THIS
THE
IN THIS CHAMBER, BIPARTISAN
GROUP OF 30 RANGING FROM MYSELF
AND SENATORNOWE AS THE
SPONSOR, SENATOR STABENOW,
SENATOR McCAIN, SO MANY OTHERS
WHO WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE
OF F
DRUGS, ARE WE TRYING TO BLOW
SOMETHING UP?
THE ANSWER'S NO.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING FOR A LONG,
LONG IN THIS CHAMBER TO SAY THAT
WE OUGHT TO HAVE FAIR
PRES
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND
PRESENTLY IT'S NOT
MADAM PRESIDENT, THIS IS A PILL
BOTTLE THAT WOULD CONTAIN
LIPITOR.
THAT'S MADE BY PFIZER.
IT IS MADE IN IRELAND AND SENT
AROUND THE WORLD.
THESE TWO BOTTLES ARE IDENTICAL.
ONE IS RED, ONE IS BLUE.
BUT THEY HAD THE SAME PILL MADE
BY THE SAME COMPANY, PUT IN THE
SAME BOTTLE, THIS ONE SHIPPED TO
CANADA, THIS ONE SHIPPED TO THE
UNITED STATES, AND THIS WAS
$1.83 PER TABLET.
THAT'S WHAT THE CANADIAN
CONSUMERS PAID.
AND OUR CONSUMERS GOT TO PAY
$4.48 PER TABLET.
SAME PILL, SAME COMPANY, SAME
BOTTLE, DIFFERENT PRICE.
AMERICAN CONSUMERS, YOU GET TO
PAY THE
$4.48 PER PILL. $1.83.
AND IT'S NOT JUST LIPITOR.
THAT'S THE MOST POPULAR
CHOLESTEROL-LOWERING DRUG. WIDELY TAKEN.
IT IS
IT IS CONSUMERS -- THIS HAPPENS
TO BE CANADA, BUT I COU
HERE FRANCE, GERMANY, SPAIN,
ITALY, AND SO ON.
IT IS THAT WE ARE CHARGED THE
HIGHEST PRICES IN THE WORLD FOR
BRAND-NAME DRUGS.
PLAVIX 73% HIGHER THAN CANADA.
BONIVA, 91% HIGHER THAN CANADA.
ZOCOR, 103% HIGHER THAN CANADA.
AND THE LIST GOES ON.
157% HIGHER THAN THEY PAY IN
CANADA, 194%.
IT IS JUST NOT FAIR.
ONE DAY I SAT ON A HAY BALE AT A
LITTLE FARM RECEPTION WITH A GUY
IN HIS 80'S.
WE SAT THERE JUST TAWSMG HE SAID.
MY WIFE HAS BEEN FIGHTING BREAST
CANCER FOR THREE YEARS.
HE SAID, FOR THREE YEARS WE'VE
DRIVEN TO CANADA
MAX FEN WHERE SHE COULD -- TO
BUY AT THAT FOBUY
I'M SAYING IT'S NOT FAIR.
A GROUP OF US HAVE BEEN TRYING
FOR AON
LEGISLATION THAT ALLOWS
CONSUMER FREEDOM, THE FREEDOM TO
SAY IF THIS IDENT
BEING SOLD IN WINNIPEG, CANADA,
WHY
COUNTRY ACCESS THAT DRUG?
WHY DON'T THEY HAVE
TO ACCESS THAT DRUG?
WAF A PUT OUT IN LEGISLATION A
PIECE OF LEGISLATION -- WE'VE
PUT OUT IN LEGISLATION A PIECE
OF REGULATION THAT ESTABLISHES
MUCH GREATER SECURITY FOR THE
SAFETY OF OUR DRUG SNRIE WITH
BATCH LOTS AND PEDIGREES AND
EVERYTHING THAT ATTACHES TO THE
SECURITY SIDE AND THEN WE SAY
THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN
ACCESS THE F.D.A. HFD APPROVED
DRUGS IN THE COUNTRIES THAT HAVE
THE SAME CHAIN OF CUSTODY THAT
WE HAVE AND HAVE THE SAME KIND
OF SAFETY THAT WE HAVE.
GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM.
WHEN THEY HAVE THAT FREEDOM TO
ACCESS THOSE IDENTICAL DRUGS AT
A LOWER PRICE SOLD AT A FRACTION
OF THE PRICE IN OTHER
THE WORLD, THEN
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY WILL BE
REQUIRED TO RE-PRICE THOSE DRUGS
IN THIS COUNTRY AND GIVE THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIR
THAT'S JUST A FACT.
NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE WHITE
HOUSE NEGOTIATED WITH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND CAME
UP WITH A PLAN BY WHICH THE??
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY OVER 10
YEARS WOULD FILL PART OF WHAT IS
CALLED THE DOUGHNUT HOLE -- IT
IS ALL
SHOULDN'T SAY "CONTROVERSIAL."
IT IS COMPLICATED IN TERMS OF
PEOPLE UNDERSTANDING THE
DOUGHNUT HOLE AS A PORTION OF
THE DRUG BENEFIT IN WHICH THE
SENIORS HAVE TO PAY THEIR OWN
COSTS, SO I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE WHITE
HOUSE AND THE PHARMACEUTICAL
INDUSTRY TO DO THAT.
BUT NOBODY HERE WAS A PART OF
THAT AGREEMENT.
AND THE 30 OR SO OF US WHO HAVE
BEEN VERY STRONGLY WORKING TO
ADDRESS THIS ISSUE FEEL THAT
WHEN THE HEALTH REFORM BILL
COMES TO THE FLOOR OF THE
SENATE, WE WOULD INTEND TO OFFER
THIS AMENDMENT.
IF YOU DON'T DEAL WITH THE
INCREASI COST OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUGS, WHEN YOU TRY TO PUT
DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON THE CT OF
HEALTH CARE, IN MY
YOU'VE FAILED.
ONE OF THE FASTEST AREAS OF COST
INCREASES HAS BEEN PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.
YOU'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE THAT
ASIDE AND SAY, DON'T PAY ANY
ATTENTION TO THAT, DOESN'T MATTER?
YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIND
TO PUT SOME DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON
HEALTHARE PRICES.
AND THAT MUST INCLUDE, IN MY
JUDGMENT, PUTTING SOME DOWNWARD
PRESSURE ON PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.
LET ME BE QUICK TO
THAT THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
DOES IMPORTANT THINGS.
I DON'T WISH THEM ILL AT ALL.
I'VE DONE THINGS THAT SUPPORT
THEM, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT,
TAX CREDITS AND SO ON.
BUT I HAVE NOT SHALL -- I AM NOT
INTERESTED IN JUST WAITING T
HOTOALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE TO
THEIR BRAND-NAME DRUGS MUCH,
MU
IT IS NOT FAIR AND WHEN THE
HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL COMES TO
THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, I AND
MY
STABENOW, SENATOR McCAIN RING
MANY OTHERS, A BIPARTISAN GROUP
-- WILL INTEND TO OFFER THIS.
IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BLOW UP
ANYTHING.
WE ARE NOT
SOMETHING UP.
ALL WE'RE GOING TO DO IS DEMAND
THAT SOME COMMONSENSE AND SOME
BASIC FAIRNESS BE ESTABLISHED IN
THE PRICING OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUGS IN THIS COUNTRY
THE WAY TO DO THAT IS TO GIVE
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE FREEDOM
TO ACCESS THIS IDENTICAL
PRESCRIPTION DRUG IN OTHER AREAS
WHERE IT IS SOLD AT A FRACTION
OF THE PRICE TO THEIR CONSUMERS.
SO, MADAM PRESIDENT, I, AGAIN,
JUST WNTSEWANTED TO DISABUSE ANYBODY OF
THE NOTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO
BLOW SOMETHING UP.
NOT TRUE.
THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
WOULD NOT LIKE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
THEY WOULD LIKE THE CAPABILITY
TO PRICE OUR DRUGS, IN THE CASE
OF LIPITOR, $4.50 TABLET WHEN
THEY TELL IT TO
THAN THAT -- I UNDERSTAND THEY'D
LIKE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN
CITIZEN I SAY THAT'S NOT FAIR.
IT IS WRONG AND IT OUGHT CHANGE.
AND IF WE PASS THE REGULATION
THAT WE HAVE INTRODUCED, A
BROAD, BIPARTISAN GROUP HERE IN
THE UNITED STATES SENATE, IT
WILL GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
THE FREEDOM AND FORCE, IN MY
JUDGMENT, A RE-PRICING TOWARDS FAIR PCING OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUGS IN OUR
SO AGAIN I WANTED TO MAKE A
POINT, WE'RE NOT TRYING ANYTHING UP.
WE ARE TRYING TO FIX SOMETHING
THAT'S WRONG.
AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO
THAT WHEN THE HEALTH CARE REFORM
BILL COMES TO THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE.
WE HAVE BEEN GUARANTEED --
SENATOR
OTHERS -- WE WERE INTENDING TO
OFFER IT EARLIER IN THE YEAR.
THE MAJORITY
DO IT HERE.
I WILL MAKE CERTAIN YOU HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE.
THAT'S WHY WHAVE BE IN THE
LINE TOWARDS T
OFFER THE AMENDMENT AND HAVE A DEBATE.
MADAM PRESIDENT, IF I MIGHT JUST
IN A COUPLE OF MINUTES
ANOTHER SUBJECT SAY
SPOKEN OFTEN ABOUT AN ISSUE ON
THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE THAT
GOES BACK SOME DECADE OR SO ON
THE ISSUE OF
AND I'M NOT GOING TO REVISIT ALL
OF THAT THAT HAPPENED 10 YEARS
AGO, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THIS:
I HAPPE
THE FIRST ITEMS OF BUSINESS THIS
YEAR SHOULD HAVE BEEN FINANCIAL
REFORM, BUT I NO HE THAT OTHERS
DISAGREED.
I KNOW THE PRESIDENT WANTED TO
DO HEALTH CARE FIRST AND SOME
OTHER ITEMS FIRST.
BUT I KNOW THAT THE PRESIDENT
AND HIS TEAM ARE WORKING VERY
HARD NOW ON FINANCIAL REFORM.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO GET THIS
RIGHT.
AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE A POINT
--, I'VE BLN READIN
ABOUT -- I WANT TO DEMONSTRATE
WHAT IS HAPPENING AS A RESULT OF
A NEAR-COLLAPSE OF THE
LAST FALL, A WHOLE SERIES OF
THINGS STEEREDHIS ECONOMY INTO
THE DITCH LAST FALL.
THE DEEPEST RECESSION SINCE THE
GREAT DEPRESSION.
SO NOW WE ARE HERE A YEAR LATER
AND SEPTEMBER 12, 2009, "THE NEW
YORK TIMES" "A YEAR LATER,
LITTLE CHANGE ON WALL
"ONE YEAR AFTER THE COLLAPSE OF
LEHMAN BROTHERS, THE SURPRISE IS
NOT HOW MUCH HAS CHANGED IN THE
FINANCIAL INDUSTRY, BUT HOW
LITTLE."
NOT MUCH CHANGE ON WALL STREET.
SEPTEMBER 15, "THE WASHINGTON
POST," "THE WALL STREET CAY KNEE
KNOW, BACK IN BUSINESS."
THINK OF THAT.
A YEAR AFT
UNBELIEVABLE DEEP RECESSION
SINCE THE GREAT
YEAR LATER, "THE WALL STREET
CASINOBACK IN BUSINESS."
WHAT ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT?
CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS, YOU NAME
IT ALL KINDS OF EXOTIC PRODUCTS
WHERE THEY SECURE TIED
EVERYTHING.
EVERYBODY MADE A LOT OF MONEY.
ON THE WAY BACK FROM MAKING
THEIR DEPOSITS ONE
DISCOVERED THAT THE ECONOMY HAD
COLLAPSED BECAUSE A LOST BAD
DECISIONS HAD
PEOPLE WHO WERE GAMBLING.
"A YEAR AFTER LEHMAN, WALL
STREET'S ACTING LIKE WALL STREET AGAIN."
NOT MUCH "WALL STREET JOURNAL," AUGUST,
LAST MONTH, "BANKERS PLAY DRESS
UP WITH OLD DEALS."
"IRRESPONSIBLE SECURITIZATION
HELPED BRING THE FINANCIAL
SYSTEM TO ITS KNEES.
YET, AS BANKS START TO HEAL,
LITTLE SEEMS TO HAVE CHANGED.
WALL STREET HAS QUICKLY FALLEN
BACK ON OLD
AND BY THE WAY, SOME OF THESE
FDI TRADING.
THEY JUST PU A CASINO IN THEIR LOBBY.
THEY JUST AS WELL BE PLAYING KE.
N NOVMENT THEIR BOARDROOM.
"WALL STREET'S MANIA FOR
SHORT-TERM RESULTS HURTS
ECONOMY."
LOOK, THE REASON I WANTED TO GO
THROUGH THIS IS I AGREE NOT MUCH
HAS CHANGED.
CERTAINLY NOT ENOUGH HAS
CHANGED.
AND THE
ME, AS WE DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE
OF FINANCIAL REFORM IS:
WILL WE ADDRESS A CENTRAL ISSUE
FOR ME, AND THAT IS THE
TOO-BIG-TO-FAIL ISSUE.
WHEN WE HAVE DECIDEES AS A
MATTER OF
THERE ARE BIG COMPANIES THAT ARE
TOO BIG TO FAIL -
FAIL -- TO ME, THAT'S NO-FAULT
CAPITALISM.
WE SAW THAT LAST FALL.
WE HAD THE TREASURY SECRETARY
COME TO THE CONGRESS AND HE SAID
ON THE ONE HAND A FRIDAY, IF YOU
DON'T PASS A THREE-PAGE BILL
GIVING ME $700 BILLION AND DOT
IN THREE DAYS, THERE IS EMINENT COLLAPSE OF THE AMERICAN
ECON
THE FACT IS I DIDN'T VOTE FOR
THE $7 BLION BECAUSE I DIDN'T
THINK HE HAD THE FOGGIEST IDEA
WHAT HE WAS GOING TO DO WITH
THAT MONEY.
BUT THE PLAIN FACT IS AS WELL AS
THE VERY FIRMS THAT DID THE KIND
OF DAMAGE THAT STEERED THIS
ECONOMY INTO THE DITCH -- BY THE
WAY, ONE
THEN-TREAS
PREVIOUSLY WORKED FOR --
DRAMATICALLY EXPANDING LEVERAGE,
ENGAGED IN UNBELIEVABLY
SOPHISTICATED, EXOTIC PRODUCTS
THAT THEY COU
UNDERSTAND BUT YOU DIDN'T TO
UNDERSTAND THEM AS LONG AS YOU
WERE MAKING A LOT OF
THEM, SECURITIZING ALMOST
EVERYTHING, THE SCANDAL IN
SUBPRIME LOANS, PAYING MASSIVE
BONUSES TO BROKERS TO PUT
MORTGAGES OUT THERE CALLED
LIARS' LOANS, PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE
TO DESCRIBE THEIR INCOME FOR IN
ORDER TO GET A MORTGAGE, AND
THEN SECURITIZE THE GOOD WI
THE BAD AND SLICE AND DICE LIKE
YOU WERE CUTTING SAUSAGE AND
SELL THEM UP TO HEDGE FUNDS AND
INVESTMENT BANKS.
EVERYBODY W
MAKING ALL KINDS OF MONEY
DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY WERE
CREATING THIS HOUSE OF CARDS AND
THE HOUSE OF CARDS COLLAPSED.
AND YOU HAD ALL OF THESE FIRMS
WITH
EXPOSURE, AND THEN WEERM TOLD,
YOU KNOW WHAT YOU GOT TO BAIL THEM OUT.
THEY'RE TOO BHIG TO FAISM THE
AMERICAN TAXPAYER HAS TO COME
UP, OPEN THEIR
PROVIDE THE FUNDS BECAUSE THESE
FIRMS ARE TOO BIG TO FAIL.
WHEN WE DO FINANCIAL REFORM,
THERE'S TOO LITTLE DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.
ALL THE DI
THESE STORIES, WALL STREET IS
BACK IN BUSINESS AGAIN.
BANKS STILL TRADING IN
DERIVATIVES ON THE PROPRIETARY
ACCOUNT.
THEY JUST AS WELL PUT UP A
BLACKJACK TABLE IN THEIR LOBBY.
NOTHING IS CHANGE.
AND SO THE QUESTION IS, WHEN WE
GET TO THIS POINT -- AND IT IS
VERY SOON, I HOPE -- WILL WE
SERIOUSLY ADDRESS THE DOCTRINE
OF TOO-BIG-TO-FAIL?
BECAUSE IF WE DON'T, WE WILL GO
DOWN EXACTLY THE SAME ROAD, AND
MARK MY WORDS, WE'LL FIND THE
ME DITCH ONCE AGAIN.
-- ONCE AGAIN FOR THIS ECONOMY.
WE MUST ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF
"TOO BIG TO FAIVMENT" SOME OF
THE TOO-BIG-TO-FAIL INSTITUTIONS
GOT
AMERICAN TAXPAYER AND, BY
WAY, THEY'VE GOTTEN BIGGER NOW.
TOO BIG TO FAIL.
NOW THEY'RE TOO BIGGER TO FAIL,
I GUESS.
DOESN'T SOUND LIKE GOOD ENGLISH
TO ME.
BUT
SO YOU MAKE THEM BIGGER?
MAKES NO SENSE.
THAT HAS TO BE
OUR DISCUSSION GOING FORWARD.
ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE NO-FAULT CAPITALISM WHERE SOME
OF THE BIGGEST FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS IN THIS
ENGAGED IN GAMBLING, TRADING IN
DERIVATIVES ON THEIR OWN
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS IN A
WHILE THE BANK IS FDIC-INSURED.
ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW THAT?
OR ARE WE FINALLY GOING TO
DECIDE THAT THIS DOCTRINE OF TOO
BIG TO FAIL HAS TO BE ADDRESSED
AHONK WITH THE OTHER
ALONG WITH THE OTHER ISSUES?
RADIO ARE WE GOING TO SECURITIZE
EVERYTHING, GOING TO CONTINUE TO
ALLOW THIS UNBLEEFNL EXPANSION OF LEVERAGE?
ALL OF THESE ARE IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, FOR ME,
THE QUESTION OF THE DOCTRINE OF
TOO BIG TO FAIL IS OVERRIDING.
WE MUST END THAT
AND IT IS NOT JUST ME.
THERE ARE A GOOD MANY ECONOMISTS
THAT FEEL THAT THAT MUST BE A
PART OF OUR FINANCIAL REFORM.
NOW, MY HOPE IS THAT IN THE
COMING MONTH OR SO FOLLOWING THE
DISCUSSION
THAT WE TURN TO FINANCIAL
REFORM, AND I'M GOING TO BE ON
THE FLOOR TALKING AGAIN ABOUT
THE DOCTRINE OF TOO BIG TO FAIL
AN
BOARD'S NOTION OF WHAT THAT
DOCTRINE MEANS AND WHAT THEIR
RESPONSIBILITIES ARE.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR, AND I MAKE A POINT
OF ORDER THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT.
THE PRESIDING O
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MADAM
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE.
MR. ALEXANDER: MADAM
PRESIDENT, ARE WE IN MORNING BUSINESS?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WE ARE
N RIGHT OUT IN TBHEER A QUORUM
CALL
MR. ALEXANDER: I ASK THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE VITIATED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
LOW-INCOME LOCKBOX HOW MUCH TIME
IS --
MR. ALEXANDER: HOW MUCH TIME
IS REMAINING ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
TIME IS NOT DIVIDED.
MR. ALEXANDER: I ASK CONSENT
THAT WEE PERMITTED TO ENGAGE
IN A COLLOQUY FOR UP TO 20 MINUTES.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. ALEXANDER: THANK YOU,
MADAM PRESIDENT.
MADAM PRESIDENT, ALL OF
HOME IN AUGUST, AND IT WAS
PRETTY GOOD THING WE WERE,
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED
STATES HAD A LOT TO SAY TO US
ABOUT THE HEALTH CARE BILL.
AND I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS
VERY CORRECT WHEN HE SAID THE
HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL IS
REALLY A PROXY, REALLY A PROXY
FOR THE ROLE OF FEDERAL
GOVEMENT IN OUR EVERYDAY
LIVES.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEBATING.
ON THE ONE SIDE WE HAVE AN
EFFORT BY THE MAJORITY AND THE
PRESIDENT TO DO THIS MASSIVE
COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE REFORM
WITH 1,000-PAGE BILLS AND WHITE
HOUSE CZARS AND TRILLIONS IN
SPENDING AND TRILLIONS IN DEBT.
THAT'S ON THE ONE SIDE.
WE HAVE REPUBLICANS SAYING WE
WANT HEALTH CARE REFORM, BUT
LET'S FOCUS ON REDUCING COST,
COST TO EACH AMERICAN WHO HAS A
HEALTH CARE POLICY.
THAT 250 MILLION OF US THAT'S
WHY TH IS SO PERSONAL.
THAT IS WHY PEOPLE ARE SHOWING
UP AT TOWN MEETINGS, NOT SOME
ABSTRACT THING.
BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THERE IS $9
TRILLION MORE IN DEBT COMING.
SO I WONDER, MADAM
--
YES.
I'D BE GLAD TO YIELD FOR A QUESTION.
MR. McCAIN: FIRST OF ALL,
CONCERNING THE COST, HOW DO WE
REALLY KNOW WHAT THE COST IS IF
WE DON'T
I THINK ALL OF US HAVE BEEN
AROUND HERE -- WE'VE TALKED A
LOT ABOUT 72 H
ABSOLUTELY IT SHOULD -- 72
HOURS, THAT ABSOLUTELY THE TEXT
SHOULD BE ONLINE SO EVERY
AMERICAN, NOT JUST THE 100 OF US
WHO ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE
HERE, BUT EVERYMERICAN SHOULD
HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT A
FUNDAMENTAL REFORM IN HEALTH
CARE AMERICA IS ALL ABOUT, AND
THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO READ THE
LEGISLATION IF THEY WANT TO.
BUT AS
FRIEND FROM TENNESSEE, HAS HE
SEEN ANY LEGISLATIVE TEXT
ANYWHERE?
IS IT TRUE THAT THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE IS MOVING
LEGISLATION THAT THERE IS NO
LESLATIVE TEXT?
AND, BY THE WAY, WE FIND OUT NOW
THAT IF, ACCORDING TO THIS
BILL -- ACCORDING TO "THE WALL
STREET JOURNAL" THIS
MR. BARTHOLD NOT IN A
FOLLOW-UP LETTER THAT THE
WILLFUL FAILURE TO FILE -- THAT
IS TO TAKE THE GOVERNMENT
OPTION -- WOULD BE PUNISHABLE BY
A $25,000 FINE OR JAIL TIME
UNDER SECTION -- UNDER A SECTION
OF THE BILL.
MY G
AMERICANS KNOW THAT.
HOW MANY AMERICANS ARE AWARE OF THAT?
ITCH TO TELL MY FRIEND FROM TEN
--
I HAVE TO TELL MY FRIEND FROM
TEESSEE I WAS
FIRST SHOULDN'T WE HAVE
LEGISLATIVE TEXT SO AMERICANS
SHOULD KNOW WHAT IS
LEGISL COMMITTEE?
SECOND OF ALL, SHOULDN'T IT BE
ON
9/11 THIS BODY WOULD KNOW ABOUT IT?
MR. ALEXANDER: THE SENATOR
FROM ARIZONA IS RIGHT.
HEND I
COMMITTEE.
WE SPENT MANY HOURS IN JUNE OR
JULY MARKING UP THE FIRST
VERSION OF THE HEALTH CARE BILL.
WE FINISHED OUR WORK ABOUT JULY
15.
THAT BILL WAS 839 PAGES.
IT WASN'T EN PRESENTED TO US
UNTIL EARLY IN SEPTEMBER, AND WE
STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT IT COSTS.
I WONDER IF THE SENATOR FROM
GEORGIA HEARD MUCH ABOUT READING
THE BILL AND HOW MUCH IT COSTS.
MR. ISAKSON: THE SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE AND THE SENATOR FROM
ARIZONA AND I SAT THROUGH 16 1/2
HOURS OF MARKUP IN THE HEULGT
COMMITTEE ON A BILL WHICH WAS
NOT SCORED AND HAD PAGES BLANK,
AND THEY'RE STILL BLANK.
WE DIDN'T HAVE TEXT
THREE TITLENESS THAT BILL.
WHAT THEY'RE DEVELOPING IN THE
FINANCE COMMITTEE TODAY, S-PBDZ
IT, IS THEY'RE TK-PGT CONS TEXT.
THE LANGUAGE IS SOMEWHERE WE
HAVE NOT SEEN.
THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT FOR US TO
TAKE A GUESS, TOO IMPORTANT FOR
US TO TAKE A CHANCE.
IT'S MOST IMPORTANT THAT THE
CONGRESS KNOW PRECISELY WHAT
IT'S DOING.
MR. ALEXANDER: I WOULD ASK THE
SENATOR FROM ARIZONA OR GEORGIA,
THEY ARE DEBATING CONCEPTS, BUT
THEY ARE GETTING DOWN TO SPECIFICS.
I THINK I SAW IN ONE OF THE
MORNING NEWSPAPERS THAT NEVADA
SOMEHOW WAS ANYWHERE RACK
INCLUDESLY TAKEN CARE
MIRACULOUSLY TAKEN CARE OF.
WE'VE HAD DEMOCRATS AND
REPUBLICANS SAYING IF YOU'RE
GOING TO EXPAND MEDICAID IN OUR
STATES, PAY FOR IT.
AND WHAT HAPPENED IN NEVADA?
MR. McCAIN:
FRIEND FROM TENNESSEE, FIRST OF
L, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE
DICAID COSTS INCREASES TO THE
STATES WILL
THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THE
BILL, ACCORDING TO MEDIA
REPORTS, THE STATE OF NEVADA
WOULD HAVE, ALONG WITH EVERY
OTHER STATE, A SIGNIFICANT
MEDICAID EXPENSE.
SO SOMEHOW NOW THE LEGISLATION
HA
ACCORDING TO MEDIA, BECAUSE --
EXCUSE ME -- THE CONCEPT HAS
BEEN CHANGED BECAUSE WE DON'T
HAVE LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE THAT
FOUR STATES WOULD THEN HAVE 100%
OF THEIR MEDICAID COSTS ASSUMED
LONG AS FOUR OR FIVE YEARS.
THAT'S WHAT GOES ON WITH THE
LAWS AND SAUCE SAPBLGS BUSINESS
AROUND HERE.
-- LAWS AND SAUSAGES BUSINESS
AROUND HERE.
I'D LIKE TO ASK AGAIN MY FRIEND
FROM TENNESSEE, DO YOU THINK
THAT AMERICANS -- I WOULD ASK
CONSENT THAT THE ARTICLE
IN THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" BE
MADE PAFRT RECORD.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. McC
BAUCUS' BILL INCLUDES AN
INDIVIDUAL MANDATE ALONG WITH
WHAT HE CALLS A $1,900 EXCISE
TAX IF YOU DON'T BUY HEALTH INSURANCE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN AS
MUCH AS $3,800.
AMERICAN SMALL SMALL BUSINESSES ARE
HURTING MORE THAN ANY OTHER
GROUP OF AMERICANS TODAY, THE
CREATORS OF JOBS ARE NOW FACING
A $1,900 EXCISE TAX.
AND BY THE WAY, THE PRESIDENT,
IN RESPONSE TO GEORGE
NO TAX ENGAGED HERE.
SO, I WONDER HOW MANY AMERICANS
ARE AWARE OFHAT AND HOW MANY
AMERICANS HAVE HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW EXACTLY
WHAT -- NOT ONLY WHAT THE COST
OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND
THE RESPECTIVE STATES ARE, BUT
WHAT ARE THE COSTS TO THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO AR STRUGGLING
TO MAKE IT IN AMERICA AT A TIME
OF ALMOST UNPRECEDENTED
UNEMPLOYMENT.
MR. ALEXANDER: THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT.
THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA WAS IN
SMALL BUSINESS FOR MANY YEARS
BEFORE HE CAME TO THE UNITED
STATES SENATE.
MR. ISAKSON: FOR 22 YEARS I
RAN A SMALL REAL ESTATE COMPANY.
WE TED, THE DISTINGUISHED
SENATORS ON THE TPHRAORBGS TO PASS HEALTH CARE REFORM WHICH
WOULD HAVE MADE AFFORDABLE
HEALTH CARE AVAILABLE TO
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS AND
SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE, BUT IT
WAS REJECTED AND WE COULDN'T GET
A CLOTURE VOTE.
MR. AL
JUST FOR A MOMENT BECAUSE I
OFTEN HEAR IT SAID, YOU
REPUBLICANS, YOU'RE NOT FOROO
MUCH ON HEALTH CARE.
E DIFFERENCE IS WE HAVE A
LITTLE MORE HUMILITY THAN TO TRY
TO SAY WE'RE GOING
THE WHOLE HEALTH CARE
ONCE, ADD TRILLIONS IN DEBT AND
FIX THE WHOLE WORLD.
WE'RE READY TO GO STEP BY STEP.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT STEPS, WHICH IS TO
ALLOW SMALL BUSINESSES TO POOL
THEIR RESOURCES AND OFFER HEALTH
CARE TO THEIRMPLOYEES.
I THINK THE ESTIMATE WAS THAT
WOULD ADD MAYBE A MILLION NEW
PEOPLE WHO COULD BE INSURED THAT WAY.
MR. ISAKSON: OUTSIDE
ESTIMATES -- NOT MINE -- OF THE
47 MILLION ALLEGED UNINSURED, UP
TO 16 MILLION WOULD HAVE HAD
THE SOERBGTED HEALTH PLANS -FPLS
THAT -- BECAUSE OF ASSOCIATED
HE
THAT'S ONE-THIRD OF THE
UNINSURED.
MR. McCAIN: AN IMPORTANT POINT
SAYING THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE NO PLAN.
THE FACT
NO PLAN FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO
TAKE OVER THE HEALTH CARE S
IN THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
WHAT ARE WE FOR?
WE ARE FOR GOING ACROSS STATE
LIS SO THAT THESE SMALL
BUSINESSES AND OTHERS AND INDIVIDUALS THAT THE SE
FROM GEORGIA USED TO BE ONE AND
GET THE HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY
OF THEIR CHOICE.
WHY SHOULD THEY B RESTRICTED TO
THE STATE THEY'RE IN WHEN
PERHAPS THERE ARE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS IN THOSE HEALTH
INSURERS RESIDING IN THAT STATE
FOR COVERAG
WANT NOR NEED?
WHY DON'T WE ALLOW THE SMALL
BUSINESS PEOPLE TO PL
TOGETHER,
TOGETHER AND NEGOTIATE WITH
HEALTH INSURERS ACROSS AMERICA
FOR THE BEST POLICY THEY CAN GET?
WHY DON'T WE HAVE -- AND WE'RE
FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE REFORM,
MEDICAL LIABILITY REFORM.
WE KNOW DOCTORS PRESCRIBE TIME
AFTER TIME TO PROTECT THEMSELVES
UNNEED AND UNNECESSARY
PROCEDURES AND TESTS.
WE ALL KNOW THAT.
AND THAT'S IN TENS, IF NOT
HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WE'RE FOR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE REFORM.
WHERE IS IT IN ANY BILL THAT'S
BEEN PROPOSED BY THE OTHER SIDE?
WE WANT
WE WANT AN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS A
CERTAIN CHRONIC DISEASE TO BE
TREATED ON THE BASIS OF LONG TERM.
WE WANT AMERICANS TO
TO -- WHO HAVE PREEXISTING
CONDITIONS TO HAVE A RISK POOL
THEY CAN GO TO -- THAT A RISK
POOL BE ESTABLISHED SO THEY CAN
AND INSURERS WILL BID ON THOSE
PEOPLE WITH SO-CALLED
PREEXISTING CONDITIONS SO THAT
EVERY AMERICAN CAN HAVE
AFFORDABLE AND AVAILABLE HEALTH INSURANCE.
WE ARE FOR THAT.
WE ARE FOR MEDICAL
REFORM.
WE ARE FOR GOING ACROSS STATE
LINES TO GET A POLICY OF YOUR CHOICE.
WE ARE FOR OUTCOME-BASED CARE.
WE ARE FOR TAKING ON THE
COMPANIES THAT HAVE CUT AN
UNHOLY DEAL WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION WHICH WILL GIVE
THEM THE OBSCENE PROFITS AND
THEIR LOBBYISTS.
THAT MAKES OVER $1 MILLION.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO IMPORT
DRUGS FROM C
CHEAPER FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
AND WE WANT COMPETION AS THERE
IS IN MEDICARE PART-D FOR THESE
PATIENTS THAT ARE -- THAT NEED
THEM, THAT DON'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE.
SO WE ARE FOR A NUMBER OF
THINGS, BUT WE ARE NOT FOR A
GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.
SO THE NEXT TIME THAT
THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DOES
NOT HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE
FOR, THEN THEY'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.
AND THERE'S MORE THAT WE ARE
FOR.
IT'S GOT TO DO WITH COMPETION
AND IT'S GOT TO
AVAILABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY
OF HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA, NOT A
GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER, WHICH WE'VE
SEEN THAT MOVIE BEFORE IN OTHER COUNTRIES.
MR. ALEXANDER: AS I LISTEN TO
THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA, AND I
WONDER IF THE SENATOR FROM
GEORGIA IS HAVING THE SAME
IMPACT, EVERY STEP THAT YOU SAID
REPUBLICANS ARE FOR, W
IT'S RUNAWAY JUNK LAWSUITS,
WHETHER ALLYING SMALL BUSINESSES
TO POOL THEIR RESOURCES, WHETHER
IT'S INCENTIVIZING PREVENTION
AND WELLNESS, ALL OF THOSE ARE
FOCUSED ON REDUCING COSTS.
I ASK THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA,
I THOUGHT THIS WHOLE DEBATE WAS
SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT REDUCING
COSTS, COSTS TO YOUR HEALTH CARE
PREMIUM AND COST OF YOUR GOVERNMENT, OUR GOVERNMENT.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME ALL WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT IS MORE BILLIONS,
MORE DEBT, MORE SPENDING AND
MORE TAXES.
MR. ISAKSON: THAT'S THE TWO
THINGS REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT,
IS MORE D
GRANDCHIREN AND CHILDREN, AND
MORE TAXES.
ROBERT FROM LOGANVILLE WAS ON MY
TELETOWN HALL.
HE SAID SENATOR I WANT TO ASK
YOU A QUESTIO
HE SAID THE ADMINISTRATION KEEPS
TALKING ABOUT THERE BEING $500
MILLION OF WASTE, FRAUD AND
ABUSE IN MEDICARE.
HE SAID IF THAT'S TRUE WHY
HAVEN'T Y'ALL ALREADY SAVED IT?
THE PAY-FORS THEY'RE TALKING
ABOUT TO KEEP US FROM GOING INTO
DEBT ARE MONIES THAT MAY BE
THERE, MAY NOT BE THERE, INVOLVE
RAISING TAXES ON SMALL
BUSINESSES, THOSE ARE THE THINGS
WE DON'T WANT TO DO AS REPUBLICANS.
MR. McCAIN: COULD
THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA, DO YOU
BELIEVE, ONE, THAT SMALL
BUSINESS PEOPLE IN AMERICAN
PEOPLE TODAY ARE READY FOR
ADDITIONAL COST LAID ON THEM TO
OBTAIN HEALTH INSURANCE FOR
THEMSELVES AND THEIR KPHRAOES?
SHOULDN'T WE MAKE IT EASIER AND
LESS COSTLY RATHER THAN IMPOSING
A GOVERNMENT MANDATE WHICH MAY
HAVE TYPES OF HEALTH CARE THAT
THEY NEITHER WANT NOR NEED OR
PAY A -- QUOTE -- "EXCISE TAX"
AND THE SECOND POINT I WOULD
LIKE TO ASK THE SENATOR ABOUT,
OF COURSE, IS THIS WHOLE ISSUE
OF WHAT SHOULD BE THE
GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN HEALTH CARE
IN AMERICA TODAY?
AND WE
ADMIT BUT APPRECIATE THE FACT
THAT MEDICARE IS A
PROGRAM.
BUT WE ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THE
COSTS OF
SKYROCKETED TO THE POINT WHERE
WE NOW HAVE A, BY ESTIMATES AS I
RECALL, A LIABILITY.
IN OTHER WORDS, OUR KIDS AND OUR
GRANDKIDS WILL NOT
SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW
UNLESS WE FIX THE ISSUE OF COSTS.
MR. ALEXANDER: THE SENAT IS --
MR. ISAKSON: THE SENATOR IS RIGHT.
AS OF RIGHT NOW MEDICARE GOES
BROKE IN 2017.
ONLY EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW.
IN THIS BILL, PART OF THE
PAY-FOR IS TO RAISE THE COST OF
MEDICAID ON THE STATES TO A
LEVEL THAT WOULD TAKE GEORGIA'S
MEDICAID PAYMENTS IN THE YEAR
2014, STATE TAX DOLLARS, TO BE
FROM 12% TO 20% OF OUR STATE BUDGET.
THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO RUN A
RAILROAD.
MR. ALEXANDER: GOING BACK TO
THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA'S
POINT, I HEAR SOME OF OUR
FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE SAY
YOU'RE RUNNING AROUND WITH SCARE
CTICS SAYING THERE ARE GOING
TO BE MEDICARE CUTS.
I ASK THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA,
DID I NOT HEAR PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES SAY HE'S GOING TO
TAKE $1 TRILLION OUT OF
MEDICARE, OUT OF MEDICARE FOR
SENIORS, THERE IS ABOUT 45
MILLION SENIORS ON MEDICARE,
THEY DEPEND ON KPHAEURBGS AND
SPEND IT ON A NEW PROGRAM?
IS THAT NOT WHAT I HEARD HIM SAY?
MR. McCAIN: THAT'S WHY THERE
IS A RISING SENTIMENT
PARTICULARLY AMONG SENIORS
AGAINST THIS PLAN THAT THE ONE
PASSED THROUGH THE HOUSE AND
PASSED THROUGH OUR "HELP"
COMMITTEE AND IS NOW BEING
FORMULATED.
OUR SENIORS AND OUR CITIZENS ARE
A LOT SMART ARER THAN MANY TIMES
WE GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR.
AND THEY KNOW THAT YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO GET A $500 BILLION IN
-- QUOTE -- "SAVINGS FROM
MEDICARE" WITHOUT THERE BE
REDUCTIONS IN MEDICARE.
NOW THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF SAVINGS
THAT CAN BE ENNACTD MEDICARE,
BUT -- ENACTED IN
BUT WHY DIDN'T WE START
YESTERDAY OR AT THE BEGINNING OF
THIS DEBATE IMPOSING THOSE
SAVINGS SO THAT WE COULD HAVE A
DELAY IN THE YEAR WHEN MEDICARE
GOES BROKE?
MR. ALEXANDER: MAY I ASK THE
SENATOR, IF THERE'S SAVINGS IN
ON MEDICARE?
MR. ISAKSON: ABSOLUTELY.
MR. McCAIN: THAT'S AN
EXCELLENT POINT.
BUT ALSO THE POINT IS TO ROOT
OUT THE WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE
IS GOING TO TAKE TIME
EFFORT.
AND IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME
PRETTY HARD WORK ON OUR PART.
BUT IT ALSO NEEDS
OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE -- OF
THE MEDICARE SYSTEM IN PROVIDING
MORE COMPETION IN THE FORM F
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, IN THE FORM
OF MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LIABILITY
REFORMIN THE REFORM IN
COMPANIES AND -- IN MEDICAID AND
MEDICARE PATIENTS.
AND SO THESE REFORMS THAT WE ARE
ADVOCATING HAVE TO BE ENA
ORDER TO BRING DOWN THE COST OF
MEDICARE AND MEDICAID AND
OVERALL HE
AMERICA.
THE COST ESCALATION THAT'S ARE
BRINGING MEDICARE TO THE CRISIS
ARE THE SAME KIND OF
THAT EVERYBODY ELSE IN AMERICA
IS EXPERIENCING.
MR. ISAKSON: AND A LOT OF THEM
ARE BASED IN
WHICH IS PRACTICED BECAUSE OF
RUNAWAY LAWSUITS AN VERDICTS.
THE ADMINISTRATION'S MOST RECENT
COMMT ABOUT TORT REFORM, WHI
YOU REFERRED TO IS, THEY WANT TO
DO A STUDY.
A STUDY NOT WHAT WE NEED. WE NEED ACTION.
THAT IS ONE OF THE
CONTRIBUTORS OF THE RISING COSTS
OF HEALTH CARE.
MR. McCAIN: A DEMONSTRATION
PROJECT CONDUCTED BY THE HEALTH
AND HUMAN SOURCES SECRETARY, SHE
WAS A HEAD OF THE TRIAL LAWYERS
ASSO
YEARS, SO I'M SURE THAT GIVES
SIGNIFICANT QUALIFICATIONS TO
THE PERSON WHO IS TASKED WITH
THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, LIFE IS
FULL OF ANTIDOTES AND EXPERIENCE THAT'S WE
I WAS DOWN IN MIAMI AT THE PALMETTO HOSPITAL.
AND I SPOKE TO A
AND, BY THE WAY, THEY TREAT A
LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO COME
TO THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY.
AND I ASKED THE SURGEON: HOW ARE
YOU DOING ON
INSURANCE PAYMENTS, YOUR
MALPRACTICE OR MEDICAL LIABILITY
INSURANCE PAYMENTS?
I SAID -- HE SAID I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.
I DON'T HAVE IT.
HE SAID I DON'T HAVE IT BECAUSE
I COULDN'T AFFORD IT AND
PROBABLY I'M NOT GOING TO GET
SUED, BECAUSE IF THEY SUE
THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO GET
EVERYTHING THAT I'VE GOT, NOT
WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY HAS.
SO WE HAVE -- WE'RE GIVING
PHYSICIANS AND CAREGIVERS
UNTENABLE OPTION OF EITHER
PAYING SKYROCKETING MALPRACTICE
INSURANCE PREMIUMS -- IN SOME
CASES $200,000 A YEAR FOR
NEUROSURGEON, OR, AS THIS
SURGEON DID, AND OTHERS HAVE
DONE IS JUST I'M NOT GOING HAVE INSURANCE.
THAT'S NOT AN
TO DO TO PHYSICIANS IN AMERICA
OR ANYBODY IN AMERICA.
MR. ISAKSON: AND THE OTHER CONSEQUENCE OF THAT IS THE
THREAT OF IT AND THE COST OF
BECOMING A PHYSICIAN IS DRIVING
YOUNG PEOPLE TO GO INTO OTHER PROFESSIONS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SHORTAGE
OF PROVIDERS NOT JUST IN
PHYSICIANS, BUT IN NURSES OR
CAREGIVERS IF WE HAVE AN OVERLY
REGULATORY SYSTEM AND
INDEFENSIBLE TORT SYSTEM.
MR. ALEXANDER: THE SENATORS FROM
ARIZONA AND GEORGIA HAVE RAISED
A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT NEED
TO BE ANSWERED.
HOW MUCH ARE THE TRANSFER OF
MEDICAID GOING TO COST IN STATE TAXES?
HOW MUCH ARE THE MEDICARE COSTS
GOING TO COST PEOPLE ON
MEDICARE?
ARE PEOPLE ON INDIVIDUAL
PREMIUMS GOING UP OR DOWN WHICH
IS WHAT THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET
OFFICE SAID WHY IS THERE NOT
SOMETHING FOR GETTING RID OF
JUNK LAWSUITS IN THE BILL?
WHY DON'T WE HAVE SMALL BUSINESS
HEALTH INSURANCE POOL?
AND THE POINT THAT WE MADE WHEN
WE FIRST CAME ON HERE: IF WE'RE
TAKING ON 17% OR 18% OF THE
WHOLE ECONOMY IN ONE OF THESE
1,000-PAGE-PLUS BILL, WHY DO THE
SENATORS VOTE DOWN THE BILL THAT
SAY THAT THE BILL NEEDS TO BE
ONLINE FOR 72 HOURS SO THAT WE
AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN READ IT?
SHOULDN'T WE READ THE BILL WE'RE
VOTING ON AND SHOULDN'T WE KNOW
HOW MUCH IT COSTS BEFORE WE
START VOTING ON IT?
MR. McCAIN: THE SENATOR'S
EXACTLY RIGHT.
AGAIN, WOULDN'T IT BE NICE FOR
OUR CONSTITUENTS - BY THE WAY,
MANY COME TO THE TOWN HALL
MEETINGS WITH A SIGN THAT SAYS
"YOU HAVE READ THE BILL?"
LET THEM READ THE BILL TOO.
WOULDN'T IT BE NICE IF EVERY
AMERICAN CITIZEN COULD GO ONLINE
AND READ THE BILL AND GIVE US
THEIR THOUGHTS ON HOW IT COULD
BE MADE BETTER?
I WON'T COME BACK TO THIS ISSUE
OF MEDICAL LIABILITY AGAIN, BUT
PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPER
SAYS THAT DEFENSIVE MEDICINE
COULD COST US AS MUCH A
AS $200 BILLION ANNUALLY.
SO IFE'RE REALLY INTERESTED IN
SAVINGS, WHY DON'T WE GO RIGHT AT THAT?
DO WE NEED A DEMONSTRATION
PROJECT SOMEPLACE AROUND
COULD I MENTION ONE OTHER THING,
AND THEN I'D BE INTERESTED IN MY
COLLEAGUES' VIEWS ON.
THIS PROPOSAL ALSO LEVIES NEW
TAXES ON MEDICAL DEVICES.
WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD WE WANT
TO DO THAT?
MEDICAL DEVICES AND THE BEST
TECHNOLOGY IN THE WORLD IS
DEVELOPED HERE IN AMERICA, BUT
THEY'RE VERY EXPENSIVE AS THEY ARE.
WHY WOULD WE WANT TO LEVY NEW
TAXES ON MEDICAL DEVICES WHEN WE
KNOW VERY WELL THAT IF THE
INSURANCE COMPANY THEN IS PAYING
FOR THEM,
PASSES ON THOSE INCREASED COSTS
TO THE
INCREASING THE COST OF HEALTH
INSURANCE IN AMERICA.
WHY WOULD
MR. ISAKSON: AND RAISING THE
COST TO THE CONSUMER.
BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE TYPES OF
THINGS THAT ARE BEING TAXED ARE
PURCHASED DISCRETION ORDINARILY,
ARE PAID FOR OUT OF THE POCKET
BY THE CONSUMER.
WHEN
YOU ARE RAISING THE COST TO THE
CONSUMER.
MR. McCAIN: WHAT THE OTHER
SIDE IS TRYING TO DO HERE
EXPAND GOVERNMENT, EXPAND
COVERAGE, AND, YET
TIME REDUCE COST.
YOU CAN'T SQUARE THE CIRCLE.
AND THAT'S WHY THEY KEEP BUMPING
INTO -- EVERY TIME THERE'S A NEW
PROPOSAL AND TO MAKE THINGS MORE
EXPANSIVE AND MORE AVAILABLE,
THEY RUN INTO ESCALATION AND
COSTS AND HOW ARE WEOING TO
PAY FOR IT?
AND I BELIEVE OUR CONSTITUENTS,
AGAIN, HAVE FIGURED IT OUT.
A REESTIMATE OF MILLION TO
-- $7 TRILLION
OVER 10 YEARS.
A
THAT MIGHT HAVE STIMULATED WALL
STREET, BUT, FRANKLY, HAS NOT
STIMULATED MAIN STREET AND NOT
HAD AN EFFECT ON UNEMPLOYMENT IN
AMERICA.
THE NEIGHBORING STATE OF
CALIFORNIA NOW HAS 12.2% UNEMPLOYMENT.
AND, SO, THEY CAN'T GET TO WHERE
THEY WANT TO GO WITHOUT
INCREASING THAT DEFICIT AND DEBT
FUTURE GENERATIONS OF AMERICA.
I WISH THEY WOULD SIT DOWN AND WITH.
I WISH WE COULD SIT DOWN
TOGETHER, START WITH THE
BEGINNING, KNOW -- KNOWING WHAT
WE KNOW.
WE'VE ALL BEEN WELL EDUCATED BY
THIS
KNOWIN
KNOWING WHAT WE CAN DO TO
TO REDUCE HEALTH CARE COSTS IN
AMERICA AND MAKE IT AFFORDABLE
AND AVAILABLE.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE WATCHED THE
MASMATC--WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE.
MR. ISAKSON: THERE I
GROUND, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO BE
WILLING TO FIND IT AND SO FAR
THAT HASN'T BEEN THE CASE.
WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT WE CAN
SOLVE A LOT OF THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE'S PROBLEMS.
BUT RAMMING THROUGH SOMETHING WE
CAN'T READ, WE CAN'T QUANTIFY,
AND CAN'T SCORE ISN'T THE RIGHT
WAY TO
MR. ALEXAN AMBITIOUS PROGRAM.
THE STAKES ARE SO HIGH.
THIS IS NO ABSTRACT DEBATE.
THE REASON PEOPLE ARE TURNING UP
AT TOWN HALL MEETINGS, IT'S
ABOUT YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE.
AND IT IS ALSO WHETHER
GOVERNMENT WILL GO BROKE IN A
FEW YEARS DUMPING BURDENS ON OUR
CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE NEED TO
READ THE BILL AND WE NEED TO
KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS BEFORE WE
START VOTING ON IT.
WE NEED TO READ THE BILL.
IT NEEDS TO BE ONLINE FOR 72 HOURS.
THAT'S A MODEST REQUEST, IT
SEEMS TO ME.
THAT'S A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
AND THEN WE NEED TO KNOW HOW
MUCH IT COSTS.
DOES IT RAISE OUR PREMIUMS OR
DOES IT LOWER THEM?
DOES IT CUT YOUR MEDICARE OR
DOES IT NOT CUT YOUR MEDICARE?
DOES IT INCREASE THE NATIONAL
DEBT OR DOES IT NOT INCREASE THE
NATIONAL DEBT?
WE NEED TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO
THOSE QUESTIONS.
AND IT WOULD BE THE HEIGHT OF
IRRESPONSIBILITY FOR US TO BEGIN
TO DEBATE PA BILL THAT AFFECTS
-- DEBATE A BILL THAT AFFECTS
17% OF THE ECONOMY AT A TIME
WHEN THE DEBT IS GOING UP SO
RAPIDLY WITHOUT HAVING READ THE
BILL AND HAVING THE
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE TELL
US WHAT EVERY PROVISION IN THE
BILL COSTS.
MR. McCAIN: IF THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO KNOW THE
DETAILS OF THIS LEGISLATION, I
THINK THEY WOULD BE SURPRISED TO
KNOW THAT THE NEW TAXES, THE
MEDICAL DEVICES, THE
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS, AND OTHER
TAX INCREASES, THEY
YEAR 2010, THREE YEARS BEFORE
THE PROVISIONS IN THE BILL FOR
-- QUOTE -- "REFORM" ARE
IMPLEMENTED.
SO THE -- SO FOR THE NEXTHREE
YEARS THE COST OF HEALTH CARE
AND HEALTH INSURANCE
TO THE NEW TAXES AND FEES, BUT
THE SO-CALLED REFORMS ARE NOT IMPLEMENTED.
NOW, WHY DID THEY DO THAT?
SO THAT THEIR ACTUAL COSTS AS WE
-- COST IT OUT ON A 10-YEAR
PERIOD IS DISGUISED BY
HAVING -- BY BEGINNING THE TAXES
AND NOT IMPLEMENTING THE REFORMS
WHICH THEN THE CONGRESSIONAL
BUDGET OFFICE THEN CAN GIVE A
COST ESTIMATE WHICH IS LESS
THAN, FRANKLY, WHAT IT ACTUALLY
IS IF
THE SAME TIME SINCE THE TAX
INCREASES.
THAT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED, BUT
I THINK AMERICANS REALLY NEED TO
KNOW THAT.
MR. ISAKSON: AND MY ONLY COMMENT
IN CLOSING IS SIMPLY THIS - THE
SENATOR IS EXACTLY RIGHT.
ONCE THIS HORSE IS OUT OF THE
BARN, YOU CAN NEVER PUT HIM BACK IN.
WE HAVE TO GET IT RIGHT TO BEGIN
WITH.
WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE
DRAWING BOARD AND HAVE A BILL WE
CAN READ AND A BILL WE CAN AFFORD. MR. ALEXANDER: I WANT TO THANK
THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA AND
SENATOR FROM GEORG GEORGIA.
WE NEED TO START OVER AND GET IT
RIGHT.
IT SEEMS A BASIC THING TO SAY,
IT'S ALMOST EMBARRASSING TO SAY
IT ON THE SENATE FLOOR, WE NEED
TO READ THE BILL BEFORE WE BEGIN
TO VOTE ON IT AND WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHAT IT COSTS
BEFORE WE VOTE TON.
THOSE TWO THI
THOSE TWO THINGS ARE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS.
AND FROM THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, WE
WANT TO REDUCE HEALTH CARE
COSTS.
AND RATHER THAN TRY A
COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE
REFORM, WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK
STEP BY STEP IN THE DIRECTION OF
REDUCING COSTS IN ORDER TO
REEARN THE TRUST OF THE AMERICAN
PEEP.
LE.
PEOPLE.
SENATOR McCAIN AND SENATOR
ISAKSON HAVE TALKED ABOUT
ALLOWING DOCTORS TO POOL THEIR
RESOURCES TO
I THANK THE SENATORS AND YIELD
THE FLOOR AND NOTE
OF A QUORUM.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
123450
QUORUM CALL:
KAWAI.
QUORUM CALL:
QUORUM CAL
QUORUM CALL:
MR. McCAIN: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT FURTHER
UNDER THE QUORUM CALL BE
SUSPENDED.
PRIM THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA.
WITHOUT
-- THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROMRIZONA.
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. McCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I
RISE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2010, WHICH IS THE PENDING
BUSINESS BEFORE THE SENATE.
THE FUNDING PROVIDED IN THIS
LEGISLATION IS VERY CRUCIAL.
IT NEEDS TO SUPPORT OUR
COMMANDERS AS THEY LEAD
OPERATIONS IN
AND ELSEWHERE.
CARE FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO
ARE IN THE MILITARY, INCLUDING
MAKING SURE THEY ARE PROVIDED
FOR AS WELL AS OUR WOUNDED WARRIORS.
BUT I ALSO NOTE WITH GREAT
CONCERN AN ALARM -- IN ALARMED
DISMAY AND EVEN DISGUST THAT
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN WASTEFUL
EARMARKS, UNREQUESTED,
UNAUTHORIZED HAVE AGAIN FOUND
THEIR WAY INTO THIS LEGISLATION.
AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, THESE ARE
SERIOUS TIMES, AND
CONGRESS ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE
SERIOUS DECISIONS, TOUGH
DECISIONS THAT MAY GO AGAINST
THE NATIONAL -- THE SPECIAL INTERESTS.
I NEED NOT REMIND MY COLLEAGUES
THAT WE'RE AT WAR OR THAT THE
NATIONAL DEBT IS GROWING EVER
LARGER
RECENTLY THERE WAS A REESTIMATE
OF THE DEFICIT FOR THE NEXT TEN
YE
TRILLION.
WE ARE FACING DEFICITS OF
YET T SPENDING GOES ON HERE
LIKE, AS SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID,
A DRUNKEN SAILOR.
I DON'T USE THAT PHRASE ANYMORE
BECAUSE I NEVER KNEW A SAILOR
EITHER DRUNK OR SOBER WITH THE
IMAGINATION THAT MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS HAVE, WHICH IS BEST
EPITOMIZED IN THIS BILL AS I'LL
POINT OUT SEVERAL PROVISIONS.
WE CAN'T AFFORD TO WASTE.
WE CAN'T AFFORD IT.
IT'S OUR DUTY TO FULLY
THE FUNDING FOR OUR NATIONAL
DEFENSE AND ENSURE THAT EACH
DOLLAR WE SPEND IS SPENT WISELY
IN DELIVERY OF THE STATED NEED
AND NOT IN SPECIAL INTERESTS.
FUNDING FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, $498 BILLION FOR THE
BASE BUDGET AND $128 BILLION FOR
ONGOING
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.
INTERESTINGLY, IT'S $3.9 BILLION
LESS THAN THE
REQUEST AND THE BILL FURTHER
REDUCES DEFENSE PROGRAMS
REQUESTED BY THE PENTAGON TO
MAKE ROOM FOR $2.5 BILLION IN
C-17 CARGO AIRCRAFT SLATED FOR
TERMINATION BY THE
ADMINISTRATION AND ABOUT $2.7
BILLION -- I REPEAT -- $2.7
BILLION IN EARMARKS AND SPECIAL
INTEREST ITEMS.
YOU KNOW, I'VE LONG TALKED ABOUT
THE BROKEN
PROCESS AND THE CORRUPTION THAT
IT BREEDS.
I REMAIN DEEPLY CONCERNED OVER
THE DAMAGE DONE TO OUR COUNTRY
AND THE INSTITUTIONS BY -- THAT
WE ARE SO PROUD TO SERVE IN BY
THEIR CONTINUED ABUSE.
WHILE WE'VE MADE SOME PROGRESS
ON THE ISSUE IN THE LAST COUPLE
OF YEARS, WE CERTALY HAVE NOT
GONE NEARLY, NEARLY, NEARLY FAR ENOUGH.
LEGISLATION WE PASSED IN 2007
PROVIDED FOR GREATER DISCLOSURE
OF EARMARKS, AND THAT WAS A GOOD
STEP FORWARD.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE SIMPLY
EARMARKS.
WE NEED TO ELIMINATE THEM.
WE SHOULD ADOPT THE PRACTICE, AS
WAS THE PRACTICE HERE FOR A
LONG, LONG TIME, UP UNTIL RECENT
YEARS THAT WE DIDN'T APPROPRIATE
UNLESS IT WAS AUTHORIZED. IN THE YEAR THAT I HAVE BEEN
HERE, I'VE SEEN A TREMENDOUS
SHIFT FROM AUTHORITY AND
RESPONSIBILITY FROM THE
AUTHORIZING COMMITTEES TO THE
APPROPRIATING COMMITTEES, ANY
COMMENSURATE RISE IN EARMARK
AND CORRUPTION.
I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES DON'T LIKE
TO HEAR ME USE THE WORD
CORRUPTION, BUT WE HAVE FORMER
MEMBERS OF CON FEDERAL PRISON.
WE HAD A CONGRESSMAN FROM
CALIFORNIA WHO USED TO LIST THE
APPROPRIATIONS THAT HE WAS ABLE
TO GET ON ONE COLUMN AND IN THE
OTHER COLUMN THE AMOUNT OF MONEY
THAT HE RECEIVED FOR EARMARKING
THOSE APPROPRIATIONS.
THAT'S CORRUION.
IT'S NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR US TO
CONTINUE TO LOAD UP
APPROPRIATIONS BILLS WITH
WASTEFUL AND SPENDING.
AMERICANS ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY
ARE HURTING, PEOPLE ARE LOSING
THEIR JOBS, THEIR SAVINGS, THEIR HOMES.
SO WT ARE WE DOING?
WE CONTINUE THE
EARMARKING PROCESS, HE WILL
SRAEUGT PAROCHIALISM AND
PATRONAGE POLITICS OVER THE TRUE
NEEDS AND WELFARE OF THIS NATION.
AND I WILL BE POINTING
DURING THE COURSE OF THIS DEBATE
A NUMBER OF EXAMPLES OF
CORRUPTION WHICH I THINK IS
REALLY UNACCEPTABLE TO THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE.
AND, BY THE WAY, IS ONE OF THE
REASONS WHY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
HAVE RISEN UP IN UNPRECEDENTED
MANNER IN DEMONSTRATIONSGAINST
THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS HERE IN
WASHINGTON.
SO, I
DISCLOSURE IS GOOD, BUT IT
WASN'T TPHAD KWAT DISCLOSURE --
INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE
REQUIREMENTS WHICH LED DUKE
CUNNINGHAM TO TAKE BRIBES IN
EXCHANGE FOR DOLING OUT $70
MILLION TO $80 MILLION OF
TAXPAYER FUNDS CONTRACTOR.
IT WAS HIS ABILITY TO FREELY
EARMARK TAXPAYER FUNDS WITHOUT QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, DURING THE CAMPAIGN, A
LOT OF THINGS ARE SAID DURING
CAMPAIGNS.
A LOT OF PROMISES ARE MADE, AND
UNFORTUNATELY SOME ARE NOT KET KEPT.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITE
STATES PLEDGED DURING HIS
CAMPAIGN THAT HE WOULD WORK TO
ELIMINATE EARMARKS.
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE
PROMISED TO DRAIN THE SWAMP.
JUST LAST MONTH THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES SPOKE IN
PHOENIX, ARIZONA, TO THE
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS.
IN THAT SPEECH, THE PRESIDENT'S
WORDS WERE QUITE COMPELLING
ABOUT WASTE AND PORK-BARREL
SP
WITH THAT SPEECH, THE PRESIDENT
PROMISED AN TONED -- QUOTE --
"SPECIAL INTERESTS
EXOTIC PROJECTS." UNQUOTE.
AND REAFFIRMED THAT HE WAS
LEADING THE CHARGE TO KILL OFF
PROGRAMS LIKE THE F-22, THE
SECOND ENGINE FOR THE JOINT
STRIKE FIGHTER
OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE
PRESIDENTIAL
THE PRESIDENT WENT ON TO SAY --
AND I QUOTE -- "IF A PROJECT
DOESN'T SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, WE
WILL NOT FUND IT.
IF THE SYSTEM DOESN'T PERFORM
WELL, WE WILL TERMINATE
AND IF CONGRESS SENDS ME A
BILLOWED WITH THAT KIND OF
WASTE, I WILL VETO IT."
THIS LEGISLATION, IF THE
PRESIDENT MEANS THOSE WORDS,
THIS LEGISLATION SHOULD BE
VETOED IN ITS PRESENT
FORTUNATELY BY THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES.
HE WENT ON TO SAY, HE WOULD DO
RIGHT BY OUR TROOPS AND
TAXPAYERS.
HE'S RIGHT, WE SHOULD DO RIGHT
BY OUR TROOPS AND TAXPAYERS.
THE BILL HAS AT LEAST $5.2
BILLION IN PROGRAMS THAT THE
PENTAGON DOESN'T NEED AND DIDN'T
ASK FOR.
$5.2 BILLION.
THE PRESIDENT
PUT AN ALL-COURT PRESS TO
TERMINATE THE F-22 PROGRAM IN
THE FACE OF CONGRESSIONAL
DETERMINATION TO CONTINUAL
FUNDING PRODUCTION OF THE
AIRCRAFT.
SO WHY WAS THE PRESIDENT SO
ADAMANT ABOUT TERMINATING THE
F-22 WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
POSSIBLY GIVE A FREE RIDE TO TEN
UNREQUESTED C-17'S IN IN BILL AT
A COST OF $2.5 BILLION?
HOW CAN ONE DIFFERENTIATE
BETWEEN A FIGHTER AIRCRAFT THAT
THE PENTAGON SAYS FURTHER
PRODUCTION IS UNNECESSARY FROM A
CARGO AIRCRAFT THAT THE PENTAGON
SAYS
WITH THOSE ON ORDER IS
SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE
PENTAGON'S NEEDS EVEN UNDER THE
MOST STRESSING SITUATIONS?
WHY HAS
INCLUDING THE SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE, BEEN SILENT ON
BILLION IN MEMBER-REQUESTED
EARMARKS?
THESE ARE QUESTIONS FOR WHICH I
DON'T SPRA
WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT THE
APPROPRIATORS DID NOT ADD $5.2
BILLION TO THE BILL TO PAY FOR
THE UNREQUESTED ADDITIONS, BUT
RATHER SECURED THIS ADDITIONAL
FUNDING BY OFFSETTING PROGRAMS
IN OTHER PARTS OF THE BILL.
SO WHAT DID THE APPROPRIATORS
DECIDE TO CUT TO MAKE ROOM FOR
MOST OF THESE UNREQUESTED
EARMARK AND PORK-BARREL PROJECTS?
THEY REDUCED $900 MILLION FROM
THE PRESIDENT'S REQUEST
AFGHANISTAN SECURITY FORCES FUND
AT A TIME THE ONE THING WE ARE
IN AGREEMENT ON, THE ONE THING
WE'RE IN AGREEMENT ON IS THAT WE
NEED TO INCREASE THE SIZE AND
CAPABILITY OF THE AFGHAN ARMY
AND SECURITY FORCES.
IT'S A KEY COMPONENT OF THE
UNITED STATES STRATEGY IN AFGHANISTAN.
SO THEY CUT IT BY $900 MILLION.
REDUCING FUNDING IN THE ACCOUNT
RUNS COUNTER TO OUR GROUND
FORCES TO ASSUME A GREATER SHARE
OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR SECURITY
AS QUICKLY AS
EQUALLY AS INCREDIBLE, THE BILL
REDUCES OVER $3 BILLION IN
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
ACCOUNTS THROUGH DIRECT CUTS AND
MANDATED IN OTHER PROVISIONS IN
THE BILL BASED ON ECONOMIC
ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCESS CASH
BALANCES.
THE ADMINISTRATION STRONGLY
OPPOSES THESE CUTS, AND IN A
STATEMENT ON ADMINISTRATION
POLICY SAID -- QUOTE -- "THESE
REDUCTIONS WOULD HURT FORCE
READINESS AND INCREASE STRESS ON
THE MILITARY PEOPLE AND
EQUIPMENT."
THIS IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF OUR MILITARY.
THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
OF OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN THE
MILITARY AND THE EQUIPMENT THAT
THEY USE IS ABSOLUTELY VITAL.
SO WHAT DID WE DO?
TOOK $3 BILLION OUT OF OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE AND PUT IT INTO
THESE PORK BARREL PROJECTS,
INCLUDING THE C-17.
SO, I
FOR SERVICES WITH FUNDS
OUT DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITIES SUCH
AS RECRUITMENT AND FIELDING OF A
TRAINED AND DREAD DID I FORCE,
ALL MILITARY TRAING AND
EXERCISES, FOOD, WEAPONS, SPARE
PARTS, EQUIPMENT REPAIRS, DEPOT
MAINTENANCE, SHIP OVERHAULS,
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
INCLUDING AVIATION, FUEL, NAVY
AND MARINE CORPS, STEAMING DAYS,
CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
AND PAY AND CHILD-CARE AND
FAMILY CENTERS.
YOU KNOW, THE ONE THING IN
DETE ABOUT AFGHA
ALMOST EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT
ON IS THAT OUR EQUIPMENT IS
WEARING OUT AND WE'RE WAY BEHIND
IN THE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF
SPARE PARTS, EQUIPMENT, ALL OF
THE THINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY
FOR OUR ACTIVITY DUTY FORCES AND
OUR GUARD AND RESERVE WHO ARE
FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES ACTIVE DUTY.
AND WE ARE
GUARD CONFIDENCE THAT THE
PRESIDENT WILL
McCHRYSTAL AND PETRAEUS AND
ADMIRAL MULLINS' RECOMMENDATION.
WE WILL NEED MORE MONEY F
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
BECAUSE WE WILL BE SENDING MORE
MEN AND WOMEN AND EQUIPMENT TO AFGHANISTAN.
SO WHAT IS IN THIS BILL?
A $3 BILLION REDUCTION.
WELL, AND WHAT'S IN ITS PLACE?
I'LL BE GOING OVER SOME OF THE
PROJECTS THAT ARE IN ITS
MR. PRESIDENT.
WELL, ONE OF
ITEMS IN THE LEGISLATION WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY IS THE
ADDITION OF $2.5 BILLION, FOR 10
C-17 GLOBE MASTER CARGO AIRCRAFT.
FIRST LET'S HAVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND.
RECOGNIZING THAT THE
DEPARTMENT'S TOTAL REQUIREMENT
FOR 180 C-17 AIRCRAFT HAD WELL
BEEN EXCEEDED FOR THREE
CONSECUTIVE YEARS, THE BUSH
ADMINISTRATION HAD ACTIVELY
TRIED TO CLOSE DOWN THE
PRODUCTION LINE FOR C-17'S.
NONETHELESS EARLIER THIS YEAR
THE HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ADDED
C-17'S FOR $2.25 BILLION TO THE
2009 SUPPLEMENTAL SPENDING BILL,
A BILL THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE
USED TO FUND THE WARS IN IRAQ AND
THE FINAL VERSION OF THAT BILL
INCLUDED ALL EIGHT OF THESE
AIRCRAFT.
WHEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE MET LATER
TO CONSIDER THE 2010 DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL, IT WENT
AHEAD AND ADDED THREE
SO, IT'S
A LITTLE HARD TO SEE THIS CHART,
BUT IT'S AN INTERESTING ONE.
THESE WITH THE C-17'S IN THE AIR
FORCE'S BUDGET.
THESE ARE THE C-17'S IN RED THAT
HAD BEEN ADDED BY CONGRESS.
EACH YEAR THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE AND THE ADMINISTRATION
HAS SAID: ENOUGH.
WE HAVE ENOUGH C-17'S.
OBVIOUSLY THAT HAS NOT BEEN THE
CASE.
IT BRINGS US TO WHERE WE ARE NOW
-- WHERE WE ARE NOW.
WELL IN EXCESS OF REQUIREMENTS.
CONTINUING TO SPEND
DOLLARS FOR AIRCRAFT WE JUST
DON'T NEED.
INCLUDING THE EIGHT, KRN-17'S IN
THE 209 SUPPLEMENTAL.
THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT HAS
BOUGHT A TOTAL OF 13, C-17
AMENDMENT THE ORIGINAL
REQUIREMENT WAS 180.
ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
POSITION, THE ADMINISTRATION --
QUOTE -- "STRONGLY OBJECTS"
UNQUOTE TO THE ADDITION OF$2
.5 BILLION FOR 10 -- COUNT THEM
-- 10 UNREQUESTED C-17 AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT.
THE DEPARTMENT'S OWN ANALYSIS
SHOW THAT THE 205C-17'S ON
ORDER, TOGETHER WITH THE
EXISTING FLEET OF C-5 AIRCRAFT
ARE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT TO MEET
THE DEPARTMENT'S FUTURE AIRLIFT
NEEDS EVEN UNDER THE MOST
STRESSING CONDITIONS.
IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, SECRETARY
GATES HAS STATED THAT THE
MILITARY HAS NO NEED TO BUY MORE
C-17'S.
SO HERE WE ARE, MY FRIENDS, WITH
A $3 BILLION CUT IN OPERATIONS
AND MAINTENANCE WHICH ANY
OBSERVER, MUCH LESS THE
ADMINISTRATION AND THE SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE AND THE JOINT CHIEFS,
SAY ARE VITAL TO CONTINUING OUR
OPERATION AND WELL BEING AND
PROTECTION OF THE MEN AND WOMEN
IN THE MILITARY, WE'RE
ADDING $2.5 BILLION FOR C-17'S.
WHAT KIND OF A TRADEOFF IS THAT?
SECRETARY GATES HAS STATED THE
MILITARY HAS NO NEED TO BUY MORE
C-17.
WHILE SECRETARY GATES CALLED THE
C-17 -- QUOTE -- "A TERRIFIC
AIRCRAFT," AND I AGREE HE
STRESSED THAT THE AIR FORCE AN
U.S. TRANSPORTATION C
-- QUOTE -- "MORE THAN NECESSARY
STRATEGIC AIRLIFT CAPACITY FOR
AIRLIFT IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS.
" NONETHELESS
PRODUCTION WOULD COST $3 BILLION
A YEAR FROM 2010 AFTERWARDS.
IN CONNECTION WITH
BUDGET REQUEST, THE PRESIDENT
NOT ONLY REQUEST
FOR ADDITIONAL C-17'S, BUT ALSO
RECOMMENDED THIS PROGRAM FOR
TERMINATION.
PARTICULARLY IN LIEFT
FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS,
CONTINUING
DOLLARS FOR MORE C-17'S THAT WE
JUST DON'T NEED IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY UNSUSTAINABLE.
FOR THESE REASONS I'LL BE
OFFERING AN AMENDMENT TO STRIKE
THE ADDITIONAL 10 AIRCRAFT.
GIVEN HOW MUCH OUR AIRLIFT
CAPACITY CURRENTLY EXCEEDS
OPERATION REQUIREMENT, I SEE
INTO REASON TO BUY MORE OF THESE
AIRCRAFTS AT
KEY ANALYSIS ON T SUBJECT SUCH
AS THE DEFENSE ANALYSIS REVIEW
AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
MOBILITY, CAPABILITIES AND
REQUIREMENT STUDIES ARE
COMPLETED.
SO, MR. PRESIDENT, I WILL BE
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT SHORTLY
THAT I HOPE WILL CORRECT THIS
REALLY EGREGIOUS ACTION ON THE
PART OF THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE.
MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
WHO ARE FIGHTING AND
THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE DESERVE
A LOT BETTER THAN THAT.
NOW I WANT TO TALK FOR A FEW
MINUTES ABOUT EARMARKS.
THE PRACTICE OF EARMARKING IS
DETRIMENTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT
AND WITH INCREASING FREQUENCY TO
MELS THEMSELVES.
THE -- MEMBERS THEMSELVES.
THE GUILTY PLEAS OF
CONGRESSIONAL STAFFERS AN
LOBBYISTS DEMONSTRATE HOW
EARMARKS HAVE BEEN
CORRUPT THE LEGISLATIVE
PROGRESS.
CHECK THE POLLS.
THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE ON THE
PART OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON
THE CONGRESS IN THE UNITED
STATES IS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW AND
DESERVEDLY SO.
BY MY PRELIMINARY COUNT, THERE
ARE ALMOST 070 UNREQUESTED
700 UNREQUESTED EARMARKS IN THIS
BILL.
OVER 400 OF WHICH ARE NOT
AUTHORIZED IN THE FISCAL YEAR
2010 DEFENSE NATIONAL AUTHORIZATION ACT.
THAT REPRESENTS MORE THA
THAN $1.3 BILLION IN FUNDING FOR
UNREQUESTED, UNAUTHORIZED MEMBER
INTEREST ITEMS.
IT'S UNACCEPTABLE.
IT'S THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY OF
CONGRESS TO PROVIDE THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENS
RESOURCES IT NEEDS WHILE
PROVIDING THE OVERSIGHT OUR
CONSTITUENTS DEMAND.
WE HAVE
TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER.
EVERY TIME WE TUCK PORK IN
APPROPRIATION MEASURE, WE SHUN THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
ONE OF THE GREAT UNTOLD STORIES
OF EARMARKING IS T
DIVERTED TO SPECIAL INTEREST
PROJECTS WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE
HAVE BEEN USED TO ADDRESS THE
STATED NEEDS OF OUR MILITARY
SERVICES.
THE MONEY DS NOT COME FROM
ANYWHERE BUT THE
WALLETS AN PURSES.
-- AND PURSES.
BUT THE SERVICE
IN THE BEST POSITION TO ADVISE
CONGRESS OF THEIR PRIORITIES,
ARE ROUTINELY SHORTCHANGED SO
THAT SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN
CAN FUND THE
A SAMPLING: $9.5 MILLION IS IN
THIS BILL TO FUND RESEARCH IN
MONTANA ON HYPER SONIC WIND
TUNNELS CALLED MARIAH.
THIS SELF-LICKING ICE CREAM CONE
HAS BEEN W
UNREQUESTED SINCE 1998.
THE AIRORCE, LEADER IN HYPER
SONIC TESTING AND TECHNOL
LOST INTEREST IN 2004.
SO APPROPRIATORS MOVED IT TO THE ARMY.
THE ARMY HAS
CAPABILITY
REPORT IN 2005 STATING THEIR
DISINTEREST IN THE P
TO DATE THE ARMY HAS NO PLANS TO
FUND THE MARIAH WIND TUNNEL
EFFORT AS THEY HAVE STATED IN
THEIR BUDGET DOCUMENTS.
THAT HAS NOT KEPT THE CONGRESS
FROM POURING MORE THA
THAN $70 MILLION INTO IT.
MORE
DISCERNIBLE RETURN.
ONE GROUP HAS DONE VERY WELL IN
THE DEAL, HOWEVER.
OF COURSE I'M REFERRING TO
LOBBYISTS INCLUDING GAUGE
L.C., WHOSE C.O.E.,
COINCIDENTALLY HAD B
STAFFER TO AN APPROPRIATOR FROM MONTANA.
I INTEND TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT
TO STRIKE THIS EARMARK FROM THE
BI AND I CAN ASSURE YOU YOU
WILL HEAR MORE FROM ME ON THIS.
WE HAVE SPENT MORE THA
THAN $70 MILLION ON A PROJECT
THAT HAS HAD NO RETURN THAT THE
MILITARY HAS SAID THEY HAVE NO
INTEREST IN PURSUING.
$5 MILLION TO THE BATTLESHIP
U.S. MISSOURI MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION.
IT'S A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION
WHICH OWNS AND OPERATES THIS
BATTLESHIP AS A MUSEUM IN PEARL HARBOR.
I'M AWARE THAT THE ASSOCIATION
PLANS T
DOCK AND REFURBISH IT.
AND I'M ALSO AWARE THAT IT WAS
NOT PART OF THE
AGREEMENT WITH THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT WOULD PAY FOR
REQUIRED MAINTENANCE.
I AM ALL FOR NAVY SHIPS BEING
PLACED IN PLACE WHERE -- PLACES
WHERE AMERICANS CAN SEE AND
APPRECIATE THE GREAT SERVICE AND
SACRIFICE OF THE MEN AND WOMEN
IN MILITARY, NAVY, AND MARINE
THE DEAL WAS THAT THEY
THAT THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE MAINTENANCE OF.
IT THAT THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF
WHATEVER NEEDED EXPENSES ARE.
SO HERE'S $5 MILLION.
$25 MILLION FOR THE NATIONAL
WORLD WAR II MUSEUM IN NEW
ORLEANS TO HELP PAY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW FACILITIES
AS PART OF A $300 MILLION
EXPANSION.
IT'S A PRIVATELY FUNDED MUSEUM,
OPENED I
HELP OF THE LOUISIANA DELEGATION
HAS RECEIVED $13 MILLION IN
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FUNDS
TUCKED INTO
APPROPRIATIONS BILLS.
AGAIN, IF THE MEMBERS OF THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE WOULD
LIKE TO GO THROUGH THE
AUTHORIZATION PROCESS AND HAVE
THIS PROJECT AUTHORIZED, I WOULD
BE MORE THAN WILLING TO CONSIDER
IT.
$13.8 MILLION FOR FE DIFFERENT
EARMARKS PERTAING TO NANO-2
RESEARCH OF THE ALMOST 800
EARMARKS I MENTION
HUNDREDS ARE FOR HIGH-TECH
RESEARCH OR DEVICES.
I ASKED MY COLLEAGUES
CAPABLE OF WEIGHING THE MERITS
OF SPECIFIC TECHNOLOGIES
THEY FUND IN THIS BILL.
$20 MILLION FOR A CENTER AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
DEDICATED TO EDUCATING THE
GENERAL PUBLIC, STUDENTS,
TEACHERS, NEW SENATORS, AND
SENATE STAFF ABOUT THE ROLE AND
IMPORT
THE SENATE WAS NEITHER REQUESTED
IN THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET NOR
AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS.
AND,
QUESTION SHOULD BE
WHETHER $20 MILLION SHOULD BE
APPROPRIATED FOR A PROJE
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE
DEFENSE OF THIS NATION.
IT MAY BE A
WHY COULDN'T WE GET IT
AUTHORIZED?
$10 MILLION, AS USUAL, TO THE
UNIVERSITY O
PROGRAM CALLED THE PANNA RAMMIC
SURVEY TELESCOPE AND RAID
RESPONSE
ON THE SERVICE I
REASONABLE NEED FOR THE AIR
FORCE AS A
SITUATIONAL AIR AWARENESS.
THE AIR FORCE WOULDN'T BE
GETTING MUCH OF A
THIS PROGRAM, SINCE IT WILL ONLY
BE ALLOWED TO USE
5% OF THE TIME.
THE AIR FORCE IS
PAYING $5 MILLION TO DEVELOP AND
MAINTAIN THE TELESCOPE AND THEY
THE AIR FORCE PACE $10 MILLION
TO THE UNIVERSITY AND RECEIVE
RECEIVES $500,000 IN RETURN.
ONCE MORE, THE AIR FOR
IN THE NINE-YEAR LIFE OF THIS
EARMARK REQUESTED A SINGLE
DOLLAR FOR THE PROGRAM.
SO
BEEN FORCED TO SPEND MORE THA
THAN $75 MILLION OF ITS BUDGET
ALLOCATION ON A PROGRAM IT
DOESN'T WANT BUT MIGHT BE ABLE
TO USE ONLY TO BE DENIED USE 95%
OF THE TIME.
I DON'T DISPUTE SOME OF THE
EARMARKS LISTED IN THIS BILL
HAVE VALUE.
I'M SURE THEY DO.
I PROTEST THE PROGRESS WHERE
CONGRESS -- SO THAT MEMBERS CAN
DELIVER TAX DOLLARS TO THEIR
CONSTITUENTS FOR PROGRAMS WHICH
MAY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE
DEFENSE OF OUR NATION.
AT A TIME WE CAN LEAST AFFORD TO
MISUSE RESOURCES.
WE KNOW THAT THE ECONOMY IS
TAKING A BEATING OVER THE LAST YEAR.
UNEMPLOYMENT IS JUST UNDER
THE NATIONAL DEBT I
IS $11.8 TRILLION.
WE WILL PROVIDE $20 MILLION TO A
CENTER WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO
THE USE OF THE
WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO MAKE SACRIFICES.
IT'S ABOUT TIME WE START TO SET
AN EXAMPLE.
TODAY'S "WASHINGTON POST", AN
ARTICLE BY GEOFFREY SMITH,
"DEFENSE BILL LAUDED
HOUSE CONTAINS BILLIONS IN EARMARKS."
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THIS MORNING'S
"WASHINGTON POST" STORY ENTITLED
"DEFENSE BILL LAUDED BY WHITE
HOUSE CONTINUES -- CONTAS
BILLIONS IN EARMARKS."
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. McCAIN: AS PART OF THIS
PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS REPEATEDLY
-
SPECIAL INTERESTS AND ENTRENCHED
LOBBYISTS THAT HE
DISTORTED MILITARY PRIORITIES
AND BLOATED APPROPRIATIINGS IN
THE PAST -- APPROPRIATIONS IN
THE PAST."
IN AUGUST I TOLD YOU THAT HE
TOLD A
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WAR, IF
THERE IS A BUNCH OF PORK, I WILL VETO.
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS BILL FITS
THAT DESCRIPTION.
IT GOES ON -- THE BILL WOULD
ADD $1 BILLION FOR AN EXTRA
DESTROYER, THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT DID NOT WHY IT TALKS
ABOUT THE C-17'S AND THE SENATE
PROPOSED SHIFT OF MORE THA
THAN $3 BILLION FROM OPERATIONS
AN MAINTENANCE ACCOUNTS TO
NOT REQUEST.
NO VETO WAS THREATENED OVER THOSE PROVISIONS.
AND I WANT TO SAY, AGAIN, MR.
PRESIDENT, I'M SURE THAT THE
MANAGERS OF THIS BILL WILL
SOMEHOW TRY TO JUSTIFY THIS
TRANSFER OUT OF OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE INTO THE C-17.
IT'S NOT A CREDIBLE ARGUMENT.
THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A THREAT
PROVOKE WINSLO WHEELER, DIRECTOR
OF A MILITARY REFORM PROJECT TO
DESCRIBE THAT LONG-TIME SENATE
-- SENATE -- SENATE -- SENIOR
OBAMA AIDES RESPONDED THAT THE
WHITE HOUSE NEVER SOUGHT TO FIX
THE PROBLEM OF EARMARKS IN ONE
YEAR.
THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN
FROM DAY ONE, HE WANTS TO CHANGE
THE WAY THAT BUSINESS GETS
IN WASHINGTON.
ONE THING I KNOW ABOUT EGREGIOUS
PRACTICES, IF YOU DON'T STOP
THEM EARLY IN AN ADMINISTRATION,
YOU NEVER WERE.
NOW, IT WILL BE ALLEGED THAT
EARMARKS ARE DOWN SOME -- THAN
THEY WERE BEFORE.
IT'S AN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD.
AND THE FIGURES, THEY'LL SAY --
THE SPONSOR OF THE BILL W
EARMARKS ARE DOWN 27% IN THE
HOUSE AND 19% IN THE HOUSE.
THESE FIGURES ARE THE MOST
FLATTERING THE WHITE HOUSE COULD
HAVE USED.
THEY REFER TO THE NUMBER OF
EARMARKS IN
SPENDING.
TOTAL SPENDING ON MILITARY
EARMARKS IN THE SENATE DECLINED
BY ONLY 11% FROM THE $3 BILLION
APPROVED BY CONGRESS LAST YEAR.
DESPITE THE FACT THAT EARMARKS
ARE DOWN, THERE'S STILL NEARLY
800 FOR PROJECTS THAT ROSE TO
THE TOP BY POLICAL POWER
RATHER THAN PROJECT MERIT SAID
RYAN ALEXANDER, PRESIDENT OF
TAXPAYERS
QUOTE, "THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO
TAKE A HARDER LINE AGAINST WASTE
AND POLITICAL GAMESMANSHIP
PARTICULARLY IN THE DEFENSE
BILL, WHICH IS PAYING FOR TWO
YEARS."
HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK
AND ASK FOR ITS IMMEDIATE
CONSIDERATION.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE BILL
IS NOT YET PENDING.
MORNING BUSINESS IS CLOSED,
UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER THE
SENATE WILL RESUME CONSIDERATION
OF H.R.
WILL REPORT.
THE CLERK:
MAKING APPROPR
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDING
2010, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
MR. McCAIN: MR. MR. PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM AIR AIR.
MR. McCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE A A
AND ASK
CONSIDERATION. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK
WILL REPORT.
THE CLERK: THE SENATOR FROM
ARIZONA, MR. McCAIN, PROSES
MR. McCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I
ASK FURTHER READING OF THE
AMENDMENT BE DISPENSED WITH.
THE ESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. McCAIN: MR. PRESIDENT, THE
AMENDMENT DESCRIEKS FUNDING
IN -- STRIKESUND NOT GUILTY
THE DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL
FO
NEED NOR CAN AFFORD.
THE AMENDMENT ALSO REDIRECTS
THOSE FOUND CRITICALLY
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
ACCOUNTS WHICH THE APPROPRIATORS
HAVE SEEN FIT TO CUT.
AT ABOUT $250 MILLION PER
AIRCRAFT, THE TOTAL COST TO THE
TAXPAYER OF THE
THIS BILL
BUT HOW ARE WE PAYING FOR THESE
AIRCRAFT?
FROM THE CUTS MADE IN THE BILL,
IT APPEARS MUCH OF THE OFFSET
FOR PAYING FOR THE TEN AIRCRAFT
FALLS ON THE O&M ACCOUNTS.
SO WHY ARE WE BUYING C-17'S THAT
WE DON'T NEED AND CAN'T AFFORD
WHILE AT THE SAME
OVERALL O&M ACCOUNTS BY $3 BILLION?
NOW, I AM SURE THAT THE MANAGERS
OF THE BILL WILL JUSTIFY THIS
CUT IN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.
I WOULD RELY ON THE JUDGMENT OF
THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND THE
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, WHO WILL
TELL YOU THEY NEED THIS MONEY
FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.
I HOPE
WHAT IT REALLY MEANS
IF THIS BILL PASSES WITH THESE
CUTS, THE AIR FORCE IN
PARTICULAR WOULD BE FORCED TO
DECREASE FUNDING FOR TRAING,
EQUIPMENT, DEPOT MAINTENANCE AND
THE RESTORATION AND
MODERNIZATION OF AIR BASES
ACROSS THE UNITED STATES, AND
THEY WOULD NOT
THE ARMY, NAVY, MARINE CORPS AND
NATIONAL GUARD WOULD
OUT ON THE WRONG END OF THESE
CUTS AND WOULD BE FORCED TO
REDUCE FUNDING FOR FACILITIES,
SUSTAINMENT, TRAING AND RECRUITING.
AFTER EIGHT YEARS OF WAR, THE
ARMY'S EQUIPMENT READINESS HAS
FALLEN TO TRULY WORRISOME LEVELS.
IN TESTIMONY BEFORE THE ARM
SERVICES COMMITTEE THIS YEAR,
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY PETE
GUERRIN SAID -- AND I QUOTE --
"PREDICTABLE AND TIMELY FUNDING
IS KEY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO
OPERATE AN ORGANIZATION THE SIZE
OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY.
WHEN FUNDING IS UNPREDICTABLE,
IT MAKES IT VERY HARD TO PLAN
LONG TERM."
MR. PRESIDENT, I'VE SEEN A
HOLLOW ARMY, DEEPLY DEGRADED IN
THE DECADE AFTER VIETNAM AND
AGAIN DURING THE DRAWDOWN OF THE 1990'S.
TODAY'S FORCES ARE NOT IN SUCH
DIRE STRAITS AS THOSE, BUT EIGHT
YEARS OF WAR HAS TAKEN ITS TOLL
ON THE ARMY, MARINES, GUARD
RESERVE COMPONENT GROUND FORCES.
AS GENERAL GEORGE CASEY SAID IN
TESTIMONY THIS SPRING --
QUOTE -- "CURRENT DEMAND FOR OUR
FORCES
SUPPLY, PARTICULARLY IN A
OF WAR, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO
INVEST IN THE RECAPITALIZATION
OF OUR GROUND FORCES, NOT FUND
AIRCRAFT WE NEITHER NEED NOR
AFFORD WITH THOSE INVESTMENTS.
FINAL, I WANT TO MENTION THE
ARMY RE --
FINALLY, I WANT TO MENTION THE
ARMY RESERVE AND NATIONAL GUARD
IN WHICH GENERAL CASEY
DESCRIBED -- QUOTE --
"PERFORMING AN OPERATIONAL ROLE
FOR WHICH THEY WERE NEITHER
ORIGINALLY DESIGNED NOR RECESSED."
IN MY VIEW, ANY DOUBT THEIR
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE --
CUT IN THEIR OPERATIONS AND MAY
NOT THEN IN ACCOUNTS WILL --
MAINTENANCE ACCOUNTS WILL
DEGRADE THEIR ABILITY TO RESPOND
EITHER AT HOME OR
AND I AM SURE THE SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE WOULD SAY HE WOULD LIKE
A LOT MORE BECAUSE OF THE
ALREADY WEAR AND TEAR AND
DEGRADATION OF MUCH OF OUR
EQUIPMENT AND CAPABILITIES.
WE CAN AND MUST DO BETTER.
LEFT UNCORRECTED, WHAT WE WOULD
DO IN THIS BILL IS EFFECTIVELY
FUND THE PURCHASE OF NEW
AIRCRAFT THAT WE NEITHER NEED
NOR CAN AFFORD WITH CRITICAL
SUSTAINMENT MONEY.
THAT WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE
THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONAL
FUNDING THAT OUR SERVICEMEN AND
WOMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES
DESE
THE MERITS OF THE C-17 EARMARK ITSELF.
IF SOME OF THOSE REMARKS SOUND
FAMILIAR, THAT'S BECAUSE I WAS
ON THE FLOOR LESS THAN THREE
MONTHS AGO SPEAKING ABOUT C-17'S
WHEN THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE EARMARKED EIGHT OF
THES
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL
AT A COST OF $2.25 BILLION.
THAT'S RIGHT, IN JUST THREE
MONTHS,
$5 BILLION FOR 18 C-17 AIRCRAFT
AFFORD.
AGAINST THAT BACKDROP, OVER THE
LAST THREE YEARS,
HOUSE HAS ACTIVELY BEEN TRYING
TO CLOSE DOWN COUNTRY-17
PRODUCTION LINE -- CLOSE DOWN
THE C-17 PRODUCTION LINE, ASKING
FOR AS MUCH AS $3 BILLION PER
YEAR TO SHUT DOWN THE LINE.
BUT OVER THAT SAME PERKED THE
APPROPRIATORS HAVE BEEN WORKING
IN THE EXACT
AND CONTINUED FUNDING IN
SUPPLEMENTAL WAR FUNDING BILLS,
BILLS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE
USED TO FUND THE WARS IN IRAQ
AND AFGHANISTAN.
SO DESPITE THAT THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'S OVERALL
REQUIREMENTS FOR C-17'S TON SIT'S CONTINUE
TO SIT AT 180.
THE APPROPRIATORS HAVE REQUIRED
THE DEPARTMENT TO BUY THROUGH
FISCAL YEAR 2007 A TOTAL OF
AND THEY'VE DONE SO BEFORE TWO
KEY STUDIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
THIS CHART ILLUSTRATES WHAT'S
GOING ON HERE.
MARKED IN RED ARE THOSE C-17'S
THE APPROPRIATORS HAVE ADDED. WHY?
BECAUSE OUR SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN
NEED THEM?
NO.
IN 2008 -- 2007, 2008, 2009,
2010, THE AIR FORCE BUDGETED
MONEY TO CLOSE THE LINE EACH AND
EVERY
IS THE REASON SOME SORT OF NEW
STIMULUS PACKAGE WHICH WILL
CREATE NEW JOBS?
NO.
THAT'S BECAUSE, AS I
THEY'VE ADDED THREE DOZEN MORE
C-17 THAN NEED.
IN FACT, RIGHT NOW THE BACKLOG
OF C-17 IS SUCH THAT BOEING WILL
NOT BEGIN BUILDING THESE
AIRCRAFT EARMARKED BY THE
APPROPRIATORS
YEARS.
IN THE BILL WE'RE DEBATING
TODAY, THE TEN C-17'S THAT THE
APPROPRIATORS WANT TO FUND WOULD
BRING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF C-17'S
THAT THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE HAS ADDED ABOVE ANY
VALIDATED MILITARY REQUIREMENT
TO 44.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
SO THE STATEMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION POLICY, THE
ADMINISTRATION -- QUOTE --
"STRONGLY OBJECTS TO THE ADMINISTRATION -- THE ADDITION
OF $2.5 BILLION IN FUNDING FOR
TEN UNREQUESTED C-17 AIRCRAFT.
THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OWN
ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT THE 205
C-17'S IN THE FORCE ORDER
TOGETHER WITH THE EXISTING FLEET
OF C-5 AIRCRAFT ARE SUFFICIENT
TO MEET THE DEPARTMENT'S FUTURE
AIRLIFT NEEDS, EVEN UNDER THE
MOST STRESSING CONDITIONS."
SECRETARY GATES HAS LIKEWISE
SAID VERY CLEARLY THAT THE
MILITARY HAS NO ND TO BUY MORE
C-17'S SECRETARY GATES CALLED
THE C-17, AND I AGREE, A
TERRIFIC AIRCRAFT.
HE STRESSED EARLIER THIS YEAR
THAT THE AIR FORCE AND THE U.S.
TRANSPORTAON COMMAND --
QUOTE -- "HAVE MORE THAN
NECESSARY STRATEGIC AIRLIFT
CAPACITY FOR AIRCRAFT OVER THE
NEXT TEN YEARS."
NONETHELESS, CONTINUING C-17
PRODUCTION WOULD COST ABOUT
$3 BILLION PER YEAR FROM 2010
AFTERWARDS.
THERE IS LITTLE REASON WHY, IN
CONNECTION WITH THE 2010 BUDGET
REQUEST, THE PRESIDENT NOT ONLY
REQUESTED NO FUNDING FOR
ADDITIONAL C-17'S BUT ALSO
RECOMMENDED THIS PROGRAM FOR
TERMINATION.
IN LIGHT OF TODAY'S FINANCIAL
EXIGENCIES, TONGUE SPEND
BILLIONS -- CONTINUING TO SPEND
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR
THAT THE PENTAGON JUST DOESN'T
NEED AND CAN'T AFFORD IS
BECOMING INCREASINGLY
UNSUSTAINABLE.
SO -- MORE SO THAN ALMOST ANY
OTHER EARMARK EAR MARK I'VE DISCUSSED ON
THE FLOOR, THIS EARMARK SHOWS
THAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE JUST
ABOUT THE OPPOSITE OF WHERE THEY
SHOULD BE.
FOR THAT REASON, I AM PERSUADED
BY THE STRENGTH OF SECRETARY
GATES' OPPOSITION AND I FIND
UNACCEPTABLE THE APPARENT SOURCE
OF FUNDING FOR THIS EARMARK AND
URGE THE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY TO
SUPPORT MY AMENDME
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE
AMENDMENT WOU
FROM FUNDING -- FROM BUYING THE
C-17'S WE DON'T NEED AND CAN'T
AFFORD TO CRITICALLY OPERATIONS
AN
ARE THE LIFEBLOOD OF OUR TROOPS
AND THEIR FILIES.
SO WE HAVE A CHOICE IN THIS
AMENDMENT, MR. PRESIDENT.
WE CAN EITHER CONTINUE TO FUND
AN AIRPLANE
NEITHER WANTS NOR NEEDS, OR WE
CAN RESTORE THE CUTS IN FUNDING
IN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE
TESTIMONY OF EVERY
LEADER, IS BADLY NEEDED AND
WANTED.
THE BODY WILL BE PRESENTED WITH
THAT CHOICE.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK FOR THE
YEAS AND NAYS ON THIS AMENDMENT.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE
A SUFFICIENT SECOND?
THERE APPEARS TO BE.
MR. McCAIN: YIELD THE FLOOR.
MR. BROWN:
SR. MR. PRE THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM OHIO.
MR. BROWN: THANKS, MR. PRESIDENT.
I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO SPEAK
AS IF IN MORNING BUSINESS FOR UP
TO TEN MINUTES. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. BROWN: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
AS CONGRESS DEBATES HEALTH
REFORM AND CLIMATE CHANGE, WE
MUST ALSO REMBER THAT
EDUCATION IS ANOTHER ONE OF THE
GREAT MORAL ISSUES OF OUR TIME.
LAST WEEK, MY WASHITON OFFICE
WAS HONORED TO HAVE DEANTHONY
CUMMINGS SERVE AS AN INTERN FOR
THE DAY.
DEANTHONY WAS ONE OF ONLY 60
STUDENTS SELECTED
TRAVEL TO WASHINGTON AND
PARTICIPATE IN JOB CORPS DAY 45,
YEARS OF BUILDING LIVES AND
LAUNCHING CAREERS.
FOR MORE THAN FOU DECADES, JOB
CORPS CENTERS AROUND THE NATION
HAVE PROVIDED VOCATIONAL AND
ACADEMIC TRAING FOR NEARLY
3 MILLION ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED YOUNG AMERICANS.
DEANTHONY'S ENROLLED IN THE
CINCINNATI JOB CORPS SUPER,
WHERE HE'S SERVING HIS SECOND
TERM AS CLASS PREDENT.
I VISITED WITH HIM SEVERAL
MONTHS AGO AND HIS FRIENDS AT
JOB CORPS THERE.
THE OLDEST SIB BLING,
DETHONY WANTS TO SET A GOOD
EXAMPLE FOR HIS FAMILY.
HE SAID THAT JOB CORPS' PREPARED
HIM FOR COLLEGE, WHERE HE WANTS
TO STUDY PSYCHOLOGY AND
POLITICAL SCIENCE.
HE TOLD ME WANTS TO RUN FOR
ELECTIVE OFFIC SOMEDAY TO SERVE
HIS CONTRACT.
HE DESERVES AN EDUCATION SYSTEM
THAT HELPS HIM GET THERE.
IN THE COMING WEEKS, THE SENATE
WILL TAKE UP A MAJOR BILL TO
EXPAND STUDENT AID AND EDUCATION
FUNDING AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO TAXPAYERS.
FOR ASPIRING COLLEGE STUDENTS
LIKE DEANTHONY, THE BILL WOULD
MOVE ALL
TO THE MORE EFFICIENT AND LESS
COSTLY PUBLIC DIRECT LOAN
PROGRAM.
THE $87 BILLION IN SAVINGS OVER
TEN YEARS CAN BE INVESTED IN
EDUCATIONAL STUDENTS FOR OUR
STUDENTS, FOR OUR FUTURE
TEACHERS AND DOCTORS AND
ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS AND
COMPUTER TECHNICIANS AND
FARMERS.
THE BILL WILL PROTECT A
STUDENT'S PURCHASING POWER OF A
PELL GRANT BY ENSURING THAT THE
MAXIMUM GRANT GROWS FASTER THAN
INFLATION, AS SENATOR CASEY FROM
PENNSYLVANIA HERE, WHO'S WITH US
TODAY SITTING NEAR ME, WAS -- HE
AND I LAST YEAR WORKED TO RAISE
THOSE PELL GRANTS THAT HADN'T
BEEN RAISED IN FIVE OR SIX YEARS
AND GET THEM TO THE PLACE WHERE
STUDENTS HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY
TO GO TO SCHOOL.
FOR STUDENTS ATTENDING COLLEGE
TODAY, THE MAXIMUM PELL GRANT IS
NOW $5,3050, AN HISTORIC HIGH.
BY ELIMINATING WASTEFUL
SUBSIDIES TO LENDERS, WE CAN
MAKE COLLEGE MORE AFFORDABLE AND
FOCUS OUR ATTENTION ON RETENTION
AND STUDENT SUCCESS.
AND THAT'S WHERE ONE OF THE
NATION'S MOST VALUABLE RESOURCES
PLAYS A CRITICAL ROLE.
THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
ESSENTIAL TO TRAING OUR
TALENTED WORKERS AND STUDENTS
FOR NEW JOBS IN NEW INDUSTRIES.
LAST MONTH, "THE NEW YORK TIMES"
REPORTED HOW SINCLAIR COMMUNITY
COLLEGE IN DAYTON FOCUSES ON
JOBS, NOT JUST DEGREES.
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S AMERICAN
GRADUATION INITIATIVE HAS
PROPOSED INVESTING $12 BILLION
IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND
INCREASINGLY NUMBER OF COMMUNITY
COLLEGE GRADUATES BY 5 MILLION
OVER THE NEXT DECADE.
DR. JILL BIDEN, ONE OF THE
NATION'S MOST ELOQUENT RECOGNIZE
ON COMMUNITY COLLEGES, SAID, "COMMUNITY COLLEGES CHANGE LIVES
AND SERVE AS A GATEWAY TO
OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDENTS AT ALL
STAGES OF THEIR LIVES AND
CAREERS
A FEW MONTHS AGO AT A
CONSTITUENT COFFEE IN
WASHINGTON, I MET AN OHIOAN WHO
INSPIRED ME.
DENAI FROM COLUMBUS GREW UP WITH
13 DIFFERENT FOSTER CARE
FAMILIES AND SPENTIME AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES.
BUT SHE BELIEVED THAT BETTER
THINGS WERE AHEAD FOR HER.
DENAI WORKED HARD, SHE EARNED
HER G.E.D., SHE ENROLLED IN
COLUMBUS STATE UNIVERSITY.
SHE'S NOW FINISHING UP NURSING
SCHOOL AND WILL START A NEW JOB
IN THE FALL.
LEGISLATION LIKE THE
STUDENT SUCCESS ACT, WHICH I
RECENTLY INTRODUCED, WILL HELP
COMMUNITY COLLEGE GRADUATES
GENERATE -- WILL HELP COMMUNITY
COLLEGE GENERATE BETTER OUTCOME
FOR THEIR STUDENTS.
IT'S THAT TYPE OF FEDERAL
INVESTMENT THAT WILL HELP
PRESIDENTS OF OHIO'S COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES PROVIDE THE
RESOURCES FOR STUDENT SUCCESS ON
CAMPUSES ALL OVER MY STATE.
FOR THE LAST --
FOR T
ME -- I'VE HELD THE OHIO COLLEGE
PRESIDENT'S CONFERENCE
BRINGS TOGETHER PRESIDENTS OF
OHIO'SWO-
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES TO
CRAFT EDUCATION POLICY IN
WASHINGTON THAT MEETS THE NEEDS
OF OHIO STUDENTS.
SOME 55 COLLEGE PRESI
OF THE LAST TWO YEARS HAVE
ATTENDED AND SHARED THEIR
EXPERIENCES AND IDEAS AND VIEWS
AND BEST PRACTICES WITH ONE ANOTHER.
MUCH OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED IS
WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S EXPLAINED
BEFORE, THAT IT'S NOT ENOUGHOR
OUR ECONOMY JUST TO RECOVER.
WE MUST REBUILD IT AND THAT
STARTS IN OUR CLASSROOMS.
REFORMING FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN
PROGRAMS FREES UP RESOURCES TO
MODERNIZE SCHOOLS AND STRENGTHEN
EARLY CHILDHOOD
THE IMPACT OF THESE INVESTMTS
WILL, OF COURSE, SPAN GENERATIONS.
STUDENT LOAN REFORM GIVES US AN
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS ANOTHER
PROBLEM THAT HAS BECOME MORE
ACUTE BECSE OF THE ECONOMIC CRIS.
TOO MANY OF OUR NATION'S
STUDENTS ARE SIGNING AWAY THEIR
ECONOMIC FUTURE WHEN THEY SIGN
UP FOR COLLEGE.
IN 2007, 63% OF OHIO GRADUATES
AT PUBLIC COLLEGES FINISHED
SCHOOL WITH AN AVERAGE DETECT OF
$21,000.
75% -- 75% OF OHIO GRADUATES AT
PRIVATE COLLEGES FINISHED SCHOOL
WITH AN AVERAGE DEBT OF $22,700.
PRIVATE LOANS TYPICAL, THOUGH,
HAVE HIGHER INTEREST RATES THAT
CAN TOP 18% AND HAVE FEWER
REPAYMENT ONGSES THAN LOANS --
OPTIONS THAN LOANS ADMINISTERED
DIRECTLY BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
ACCORDING TO ANALYSIS BY THE
PROJECT IN STUDENT DEBT,
TWO-THIRDS OF STUDENT LOAN
BORROWERS DIDN'T EXHAUST THEIR
FEDERAL LOAN ELIGIBILITY.
THAT'S WHY I INTRODUCED THE
PRIVATE STUDENT LOAN DEBT SWAP ACT.
UNDER MY DEBT SWAP BILL, IF YOU
HAVE AN EXPENSIVE AND
UNAFFORD
LOAN YOU COULD USE YOUR
REMAING FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN
ELIGIBILITY TO PAY OFF OR AT
LEAST PAY DOWN SOME OF THAT
LOAN.
BY SWAPPING EXPENSIVE PRIVATE
LOAN DEBT -- SOMETIMES WITH
LOCAL BANKS -- OR NATIONAL BANKS
OF 18% INTEREST -- BY SWAPPING
EXPENSIVE PRIVATE LOAN DEBT WITH
LOW-COST FEDERAL STUDENT LOANS
CAPPED AT UNDER 7%, BORROWERS
COULD MUCH MORE READILY REPAY
THEIR LOANS.
THIS LEGISLATION WOULDN'T
INCREASE GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
IN FACT, IT'S LIKELY TO REDUCE IT.
EXPANDED PELL GRANTS AND A
STRONG DEBT SWAP BILL WOULD HELP
OWEIANS LIKE
TEACHER FROM COUL LEE DOUGH IN
NORTHWEST, OHIO.
DURING COLLEGE KIMBERLY TOOK OUT
COLLEGE LOANS EXPECTING TO
CONSOLIDATE THEM AFTER GRADUATING.
AFTER ACCEPTING A TEACH POSITION
HER LENDERS WOULDN'T LET --
WOULD NOT CONSOLIDATEHE
BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMY.
SHE'S A TEACHER -- KIM BEERILY
IS A TEACHER AT A LOW-INCOME
HEAD START SCHOOL.
SO SHE DOESN'T MAKE AS MUCH
MONEY AS A TEACHER AT A PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL.
SHE HAS FOUR LARGE LOANS WITH
FOUR DIFFERENT INTEREST RATES,
ALL OF THEM SLICK HIGHER THAN
FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN RATES.
SHE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SPEND THE
REST OF HER CAREER PAYING OFF LOANS.
"AT THIS POINT, SOMEONE ELSE
WILL STRO PAY OFF THE LOAN LONG
AFTER I'M GONE."
IMAGINE THAT, A HEAD START
TEACHER WHO WENT TO COLLEGE,
PLAYED BY THE RULES, TOOK OUT
OUT LOANS, THINKS SHE WILL NEVER
BE ABLE TO PAY THIS LOAN BACK
BECAUSE OF THE EXORBITANTLY HIGH
INTEREST RATE CHARGED BY THE
BANKS.
PRIVATE STUDENT LOANS WITH
ENORMOUS INTEREST RATES ARE
DRIVING YOUNG AMERICANS INTO
NEVER-ENDING DEBT.
FLOSS AMERICAN DREAM IN REACH IN
THAT SCENARIO FOR THE KIMBERLYS
OF THE WORLD.
JUST A SENSE OF HOPELESSNESS AND HELPLESSNESS.
JO F. KENNEDY SAID OUR PROGRESS
AS A NATION CAN BE NO SWIFTER
THAN OUR PROGRESS IN EDUCATION.
IN PORTSMOUTH IN L.
MIVMENT A, IN TOL TOLEDO, AKRON, IN
MASON, WE HAVE LEADERS IN OUR
COMMUNITY LIKE KIMBERLY TEACHING
IN OUR
HEALING PEOPLE IN OUR HOSPITALS.
YEARS FROM NOW DEAN ON THIS KNOW
CUMMINS SHOULD BE ABLE TO
REPRESENT THE STATE OF OHIO
BECAUSE THERE WAS AN EDUCATION
SYSTEM THAT BELIED IN HIM.
THE STUDENT AID REFORM BILL
SPART OF THE PROGRESS WE SEEK
THAT ALLOWS A CHILD, A WORKING
MOTHER, AN OLDER WORKER TO
BELIEVE IN THIS NATION IF YOU
WORK HARD AND PLAY BY THE RULES
YOU, TOO, CAN HAVE PART OF THE
AMERICAN DREAM. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
I YIELD THE FLOOR.
I
HAWAII FOR HIS THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE ?
SENATOR FROM HAWAII.
MR. INOUYE: MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE SIX UNANIMOUS CONSENT
REQUESTS FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET
DURING TODAY'S SESSION OF THE
SENATE.
THEY HAVE THE
MAJORITY AND NATURALS.
ACCORDINGLY, I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE
AGREED TO AND THAT THESE
REQUESTS BE PRINTED IN THE
RECORD. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
THE SENATOR FROM MISSOURI.
MR. BOND: MR. PRESIDENT, THANK
THE FLOOR MANAGERS.
I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT MY
MILITARY FELLOW, LIEUTENANT
COLONEL JOHN MORETH, BE GRANTED
FLOOR PRIVILEGES FOR THE
CONSIDERATION ON THE FLOOR.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. BOND: I THANK THE CHAIR.
MR. PRESIDENT, THERE'S NO DOUBT
THAT THERE MAY BE T
DEFENSE BUDGET THAT YOU COULD
CHARACTERIZE AS EXPENSIVE, OVER
BUDGET AND BEHIND-SCHEDULE
PROGRAMS BUT THE C-17 AIRCRAFT
IS
IT IS SO BEWHICH WOULDERING AND
DISAPPOINTINGS THAT SOME OF THIS
CHAMBER'S WELL-KNOWN BUBT HAWKS
ARE TOPPED A MODEL PROCUREMENT
PROGRAM AND A BOON FOR TAXPAYERS.
OUR MOST IMPORTANT CONCERN, OF
COURSE, IS FOR OUR WAR FIGHTERS
AND NATIONAL SECURITY, WHICH I
WILL
MOMENT.
BUT LET ME ADDRESS WHAT SEEMS
LIKE THE PRIMARY CONCERN FOR
SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES: THE
BUDGET.
INVESTING IN THE C-17 IS
ACTUALLY A BETTER USE OF
TAXPAYER DOLLARS THAN THE
OBSOLETE AND UN
THE C-17'S ARE PLANES WE NEED
AND WE CAN AFFORD.
THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
HAS FOUND THAT
WOULD TAKE SEVEN REHABBED AND
REMANUFACTURED C-5A'S AT A COST
OF
TO EQUAL THE CAPABILITY OF JUST
ONE NEW C-17.
NOW, THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE THAT AIRLIFT.
THEY'RE PLANNING RIGHT NOW --
RIGHT NOW THE C-5A IS PART OF T
BUT IT CAN'T CONTINUE AS IT IS,
AND YOU CAN GET A C-17 FOR A LOT
LESS THAN YOU CAN REMANUFACTURE
AND REHAB ONE OF THE OLD
AND THAT DOESN'T EVEN WORK S
GOOD.
MY BIGGEST CONCERN, OF COURSE,
IS NATIONAL SECURITY.
SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE
ATTACKED THE C-17 AS A SPECIAL
INTEREST IM.
I
INVESTING IN THE C-17 IS IN THE
SPECIAL INTEREST OF OUR WAR FIGHTERS.
IT IS CRITICAL TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS.
IT GIVES US THE HEAVYLIFT AIR
MOBILITY THAT WE REQUIRE THESE
DAYS.
THE C-17 IS A PROVEN,
COMBAT-TESTED AIRLIFT THAT IS
ESSENTIAL TO THE FIGHT WE'RE IN
RIGHT NOW AND IT HAS BEEN A
WORKHORSE IN IRAQ
SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE
MENTIONED, WE ARE AT WAR.
I COULDN'T AGREE MORE THAT THIS
IS OUR PRIMARY CONCERN, WHICH IS
AGAIN WHY
IMPORTANT.
HEATING UP, THE WAR IN IRAQ
CONTINUING, OUR AIRLIFT NEEDS
ARE ONLY GROWING.
LET ME TELL YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
HAS INDICATED THAT THE C-17 WAS
DESIGNED TO FLY 1,000 HOURS PER
YEAR OVER 30 YEARS.
BUT AS OUR OVERSEAS
HAVE GROWN, SOME AIRCRAFT HAVE
EVEN REACHED 2,400 FLYING HOURS
IN A SINGLE YEAR.
MY COLLEAGUE FROM ARIZONA HAS
JUST POINTED OUT THAT EQUIPMENT
IS BEING WORN OUT QUICKLY IN
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN, AND THAT'S
NO DOUBT TRUE, BUT ONE KEY PIECE
OF OUR EQUIPMENT THERE IS OUR
HEAVY AIRLIFT CAPABILITY.
THE HEAVY USAGE IS IN ADDITION
TO THE GROWTH OF THE ARMY AND
MARINE CORPS.
THE LOGISTICS, DIFFICULTY OF
GETTING SUPPLIES INTO
AFGHANISTAN, AND THE NEED FOR
INCREASED HUMANITARIAN
SMART-POWER MISSIONS IN
AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ,
AROUND THE WORLD ARE ALL REASONS
WHY I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO
SUPPORT THE PROVISION IN THE
BILL THAT WOULD ADD THE LONG
LEAD TIME PURCHASE THAT WE NEED
RIGHT NOW TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
CAN
C-17'S AS THE NEEDS DEVELOP.
THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
AND THE PRESIDENT DO NOT WANT
MORE, THEY HAVE ENOUGH C-17'S
AND C-5'S TO DO THE JOB.
HOWEVER, THE C-5A WITH A 50%
READINESS LEVEL, A PER-HOUR
OPERATING COST OF $29,000, AND
40 MAINTENANCE MAN HOURS PER ONE
HOUR
INEFFECTIVE AND OVERLY COSTLY TO
RUN.
BY REPLACING THESE OBSOLETE AND
INEFFECTIVE COSTLY C-5A'S WITH
THE NEW C-17'S WHICH THIS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO DO BY
LIFTING A TRULY SPECIAL
LEGISLATIVE INTEREST PROHIBITION
SAYING IN THE PAST THEY COULD
NOT RETIRE THEM, WE CAN SAVE
MONEY, PROVIDE A MORE RELIABLE
CAPABILITY FOR OUR WAR FIGHTER,
AND PRESERVE INDUSTRIAL
CAPABILITY FOR THE FUTURE.
NOW, I'VE TALKED ABOUT THE
IMPORTANCE OF INVESTING IN OUR
AIRLIFT CAPABILITY FOR OUR WAR
FIGHTERS AND OUR EFFORTS IN
AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ.
BUT AS AMERICA'S ONLY LARGE
AIRLIFT PRODUCTION LINE, THE
C-17RODUCTION LINE, FENLDZED,
WOULD PUT AT RISK OUR NATION'S
LONG-TERM SECURITY, ELIMINATING
THE ONLY LARGE AIRLIFT
PRODUCTION LINE IN THE U.S.
WOULD DEMONSTRATE A LACK OF
UNDERSTANDING AND APPRECIATION
FOR THE SKILL SETS AND EFFORTS
NEED TO BUILD THESE AIRCRAFT.
WITHOUT A FOLLOW-ON PROGRAM AND
BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY SHRUNK
OUR AEROSPACE
SUCH A LOW LEVEL, ONCE THESE
SKILLED WORKERS --
ENGINEERS, DESIGNERS AND THEIR
EXPERTISE ARE GONE -- WE DO NOT
GET THEM BACK.
IF WE LOSE THE SKILL
ENGINEERS, DESIGNERS AND OTHERS,
WE WILL BE FORCED TO TURN TO
EUROPE.
MORE AND MORE THIS INDUSTRIAL
TALENT AND WORK FORCE WHICH
MANUFACTURES THE CRITICAL AND
UNIQUE EQUIPMENT WHICH HELPS US
FIGHT AND WIN OUR WARS, IS BEING
EVISCERATED.
WITHOUT ADIBBLE FUNDING, OUR
AEROSPACE ENGINEER, DESIGN WILL ATROPHY.
THIS WILL PUT AT RISK OUR
COMPETITIVENESS IN THE GLOBAL
MARKET, 0 OUR ABILITY TO ADDRESS
FUTURE AIRLIFT REQUIREMENTS AND
PUT AT RISK 30,000 AMERICAN JOBS
STRETCHED ACROSS 43
THIS IS NOT ABOUT PRESERVING
JOBS IN TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES,
ALTHOUGH I
ADMI
A BIG STUDENT INHE STIMULUS
BILL TO RECOMMEND IN STIMULATING
THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION.
THEY DIDN'T PUT A SINGLE DOLLAR
IN DEFENSE PRODUCTION NEEDS,
WHICH IS WHERE WE HAVE
TREMENDOUS NEEDS.
THE C-17'S ADDED BY THE SENATE
ADDRESS A SHORTSIGHTED DECISION
ON THE PART OF THE
ADMINISTRATION.
THAT DECISION TOOK FOR GRANTED
THE INNOVATION OF OUR DEFENSE
INDUSTRIAL BASE, BUT WE CANNOT
AFFORD TO LET THAT WITHER,
BECAUSE THEIR PROPOSAL WOULD GET
OU OF WORK THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
DESIGNED THESE AIRCRAFT.
WE FIND IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE
SHUT DOWN THESE ACQUISITION
LINES, THE SKILLED ENGINEERS,
FOR ONE EXAMPLE, WENT TO WORK AT DISNEY. THAT'S GREAT.
IT IS GOOD WORK.
BUT IT IS NOT PROTECTING OUR
NATIONAL DEFENSE.
AFTER THE DRACONIAN DEFENSE CUTS
DURING
ADMINISTRATION, T ARSE MILLION -- THE
ARSENAL SHRUNK.
THERE WAS AN
IN INNOVATION.
THE C-17 PRODUCTION WILL SHUT
DOWN IN 2010 WITHOUT THESE 10
AIRCRAFT AND THE STARTING
PRODUCTION WOULD BE INCREDIBLY
DIFFICULT AND EXPENSIVE,
ACCORDING TO THE G.A.O., UP TO
$1 BILLION.
THE G.A.O. STUDY FURTHER NOTED
THAT CAREFUL PLANNING IS NEEDED
TO ENSURE THAT THE C-17
PRODUCTION LINE IS NOT ENDED
PREMATURELY AND LATER RESTARTED
AT SUBSTANTIAL COST.
ADDITIONALLY, THE G.A.O. FOUND
THAT BOTH THE MANUFACTURER AND
AIR FORCE AGREE THAT SHUTTING
DOWN THE
WOULD BE NEITHER FEASIBLE NOR
CO
KEEPING THE C-17 LINE OPEN IS
CRITICAL NOT ONLY FOR OUR
NATIONAL DEFENSE BUT FOR
THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN
WHO RELY ON THIS AIRCRAFT FOR
THEIR LIVELIHOOD.
WITH THE WANING DEMAND FOR
COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT AND A LULL
IN MILITARY JET PRODUCTION, IT
IS MORE CRITICAL THAN EVER THAT
WE MAINTAIN THE AEROSPACE
INDUSTRIAL BASE THAT RUNS THE
ONLY REMAINI WIDE-BODY
ASSEMBLY LINE IN THE UNITED
STATES.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO EXERCISE
THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
AND NOT GO ALONG WITH WHAT I
BELIEVE WILL BE SHOWN VERY
SHORTLY, IF WE MAKE THE
DECISION, TO HAVE BEEN VERY SHORTSIGHTED.
THIS IS A DECISION THAT WE UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY CAN AND MUST MAKE
HERE.
WE CANNOT AFFORD DISASTROUS
DEFENSE CUTS COMING OUT OF THE
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
WHICH IS WHY WE FOUGHT AND WON
IN C
IT IS CRITICAL THAT MY
COLLEAGUES JOIN WITH ME IN
SUPPORTING THE MANAGERS OF THE
BILL ON THE FLOOR, AGAIN, TO
FIGHT A SHORTSIGHTED ATTEMPT TO
EVISCERATE OUR WAR FIGHTERS'
AIRLIFT CAPABILITY AND OUR
NATION'S INDUSTRIAL BASE.
BOTH CRITICAL ELEMENTS FOR THE
LONG-TERM SECURITY AND FUTURE OF
OUR COUNTRY.
MR. PRESIDENT, I URGE MY
COLLEAGUES JOIN ME
TH
MR. PRESIDENT, I THANK THE CHAIR
CHAIR, AND I SUGGT THE ABSENCE OF A
QUORUM.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
MR. JOHANNS: MR. PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR? NEVADA.
MR. JONNS: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT TO SPEAK IN MORNING
BUSINESS FOR 10 MINUTES.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WE ARE
IN A QUORUM
MR. JOHANNS: I ASK THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE SET ASIDE.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. JOHANNS: NOW I ASK TO --
UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO SPEAK IN
MORNING BUSINESS FOR ABOUT 12 MINUTES.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTIO
MR. JOHANNS: MR. PRESIDENT,
MANY HAVE COME TO THIS CHAMBER.
THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT THEIR
CONSTITUENTS AND THE CONCERNS
THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED TO US
ABOUT HEALTH CARE AND HOW THEIR
FAMILIES WOULD BE DIRECTLY
IMPACTED.
THE FRUSTRATION DRIVING MANY OF
THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
WRITTEN TO US, PICKED UP THE
PHONE, ATTENDED A TOWN HALL
MEETING CONTINUES.
THEY WORRY THAT WE'RE NOT
LISTENING HERE.
THAT THOSE WHO ARE RAISING
CONCERNS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S
HEALTH CARE PROPOSALS BELIEVE
THAT SOMEHOW THEY ARE DEFENDING
THE STATUS QUO, AND THAT COULD
NOT BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.
WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT HEALTH
CARE COSTS ARE RISING AT RATES
THAT CREATE HARDSHIPS ACROSS OUR
COUNTRY.
THEY IMPACT FAMILIES AND
BUSINESSES AND ULTIMATELY
THEY'RE NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR
FEDERAL AND STATE BUDGETS.
NOW THERE ARE MANY THINGS, I
BELIEVE, THAT THERE WOULD BE
VERY, VERY UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT UPON.
FOR EXAMPLE, I SUPPORT INSURANCE
MARKET REFORMS THAT INCREASE
ACCESS TO INSURANCE FOR PEOPLE
WHO HAVE PREEXISTING CONDITIONS.
MANY OF US DO HERE IN THE SENATE.
I SUPPORT ALLOWING SMALL
BUSINESSES TO BAND TOGETHER TO
BRING DOWN HEALTH INSURANCE
PREMIUMS.
MANY HERE DO.
I SUPPORT SUBSIDIES FOR THOSE
WHO TRULY CANNOT AFFORD
INSURANCE, HELP THEM BUY DOWN
THEIR PREMIUMS, THEIR
DEDUCTIBLES, THEIR CO-PAYS.
AGAIN, MANY HERE DO.
I SUPPORT MEL MACK REFORM THAT
WOULD CURB COSTS.
AGAIN, MANY HERE DO.
THESE COMMONSEN REFORMS AND
OTHERS THAT WE COULD MENTION
COULD BE THE CORNERSTONE OF WHAT
I BELIEVE WOULD BE A TRULY
BIPARTISAN SOLUTION TO OUR
HEALTH CARE CRISIS.
BUT I BELIEVE THE CURRENT
PROPOSALS HAVE VEERED IN A VERY
DIFFERENT DIRECTION.
I CANNOT SUPPORT SO-CALLED
REFORM THAT LOWERS THE QUALITY
OF OUR HEALTH CARE, COMPROMISES
E DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP,
DRASTICALLY INCREASED COSTS FOR
AMERICANS.
YET, I WORRY THAT THE PROVISIONS
WORKING THEIR WAY THROUGH THE
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE APPEAR
TO DO PRECISELY THAT.
INCREASE COSTS AND JEOPARDIZE QUALITY.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS THE
KIND OF HEALTH CARE REFORM THAT
AMERICANS HAVE SENT US TO
WASHINGTON TO
IN OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS,
THE LAST THING AMERICAN FAMILIES
NEED IS TO SEE MORE OF THEIR
PAYCHECKS GOING TO PAY TAXES.
THIS LEGISLATION PRESENTS A
DARNED IF YOU DO, DARNED IF YOU
DON'T SCENARIO.
IT TAXES YOU IF YOU HAVE
INSURANCE AND IT TAXES YOU IF
YOU DON'T.
PEOPLE WHO DEPEND UPON MEDICAL
DEVICES WILL SEE PRICES RISE.
AND SO WILL INDIVIDUALS WHO TAKE
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.
STATES WILL HAVE TO RAISE MONEY
TO PAY FOR WHAT I REGARD AS AN
UNFAIR UNFUNDED MEDICARE
MANDATE.
HAVING BEEN A GOVERNOR, I CAN
TELL THAT YOU REALLY THERE ARE
LIMITED CHOICES IN STATE
BUDGETS, AND STATE BUDGETS ARE
IN CRISIS TODAY.
THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO HAVE TO
RAISE TA
REVENUE TO DEAL WITH THAT
MANDATE OR THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE
TO DO SOMETHING EQUALLY AS
UNPLEASANT, AND THAT IS CUT
PROGRAMS.
WHICH STATE PROGRAMS DO YOU
THINK AMERICANS WILL WANT TO
SACRIFICE SO WASHINGTON CAN HAVE
ITS WAY WITH THE STATES IN THE
MEDICAID
I CAN TELL YOU FROM EXPERIENCE
CUTTING PROGRAMS IS AN
IMPOSSIBLE DECISION, A SO IS
RAISING TAXES.
STATES SHOULD NOT BE PUT IN A
DIFFICULT POSITION AGAIN AND
AGAIN BY AN OVERREACHING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
EMPLOYERS WILL BE TAXED IN ORDER
TO PAY FOR REQUIRED HEALTH CARE
INSURANCE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES.
THESE TAXES WILL CREATE
FINANCIAL HEARTBURN THAT
DOCTOR'S PRESCRIPTION CAN EASE.
THIS LEGISLATION WILL REQUIRE
EVERY AMERICAN TO HAVE HEALTH
INSURANCE WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS.
AND NOT JUST ANY HEALTH
INSURANCE.
IT REQUIRES HEALTH INSURANCE
THAT MEETS SPECIFIC
QUALIFICATIONS THAT THE
BURE
WILL DICTATE. THE FINANCE COMMITTEE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE YOU TO SPEND A CERTAIN
SHARE OF YOUR INCOME BEFORE
BECOMING ELIGIBLE FOR HEALTH
INSURANCE SUBSIDIES.
UNDER THE ORIGINAL FINANCE
COMMITTEE PROPOSAL, THE
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
ESTIMATED THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WHO
MAKES $3 2,400 A YEAR -- NOT A
LOT OF MONEY -- WOULD BE
REQUIRED TO PAY $4,100 IN HEALTH
CARE INSURANCE PREMIUMS BEFORE
BECOMING ELIGIBLE FOR A SUBSIDY.
THAT INDIVIDUAL WOULD ALSO BE
REQUIRED TO PAY ON AVERAGE
$1,600 IN CO-PAYMENTS AND
DEDUCTIBLES. THESE INDIVIDUALS WOULD BE
REQUIRED THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT
MANDATE, AGAIN, THEY WOULD BE
REQUIRED TO SPEND 18% OF THEIR
INCOME ON HEAL
SURPRISINGLY, THE CHEAPER
CATASTROPHIC COVERAGE THAT SOME
WOULD PREFER WOULD NOT BE
CONSIDERED A SO-CALLED QUALIFIED
PLAN; THEREFORE,
FURTHERMORE, IF YOU CHOOSE NOT
TO HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE THAT
MEETS THESE QUALIFICATIONS, YOU
COULD BE FORCED TO PAY OUT AS
MUCH AS $1,900 IN ADDITIONAL
TAXES PER FAMILY.
THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WILL BE KNOCKING ON YOUR DOOR TO
MAKE SURE THAT YOU LITERALLY BUY
INTO FEDERALLY DICTATED HEALTH
CARE REFORM EFFORTS.
I'VE HEARD FROM MANY NEBRASKANS
WHO FEEL AS IF THIS INDIVIDUAL
MANDATE IS REALLY A DIRECT
ASSAULT ON THEIR FREEDOM.
MOST PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE THE
NOTION THAT WASHINGTON TELLS
THEM HOW TO LIVE THEIR LIVES,
AND IMPOSING AN INDIVIDUAL
MANDATE TAX REALLY RUBS
AMERICANS THE WRONG WAY.
NOT ONLY
THEY MUST BUY INSURANCE, BUT WE
ARE TELLING THEM WHAT KIND OF
INSURANCE THEY MUST BUY.
NOW, I KNOW SOME, INCLUDING OUR
PRESIDENT, ARGUE THIS ISN'T A TAX.
RATHER, IT'S SIMPLY A SHARED
RESPONSIBILITY WELL, THE VERY
LANGUAGE IN THE FINANCE
COMMITTEE PLAN CLEARLY STATES
THAT THIS IS A TAX.
AND IT BRINGS IN ABOUT $20 BILLION.
WHERE'S THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISE
THAT HE WOULD NOT RAISE TAXES ON
INDIVIDUALS WHO MAKE UNDER
$250,000 A YEAR?
WELL, IT'S NONEXISTENT.
LAST WEEK THIS WAS MADE
DURING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MARKUP.
WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE EFFECT OF
THIS TAX ON THE
THE CHIEF STAFF FOR THE JOINT
COMMITTEE ON TAXATION RESPONDED
-- AND I QUOTE -- "WE WOULD
EXPECT THAT SOME PEOPLE PAYING
WOULD MAKE LESS THAN $250,000." UNQUOTE.
FOR HARD-WORKING FAMILIES, THE
INDIVIDUAL MANDATES WILL LOAD
THEM UP WITH A FANCY BENEFIT
PLAN COVERING SERVICES THEY MAY
NOT WANT OR NEED.
AND THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO BUY
IT OR THEIR GOVERNMENT
PENALIZE THEM.
NOW, THIS IS A COMPLEX AND IT'S
A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT IN HOW WE
APPROACH HEALTH CARE
GREAT COUNTRY.
AND, INDEED, IN HOW MUCH THE
GOVERNMENT DICTATES THE HEALTH
CARE DECISION OF EACH AND EVERY
AMERICAN.
FURTHERMORE, THIS LEGISLATION
RAISES MONEY BY TAXING INSURANCE
COMPANIES, MEDICAL DEVICE
MANUFACTURERS, AND PRESCRIPTION
DRUG
DOES ANYBODY DOUBT FOR A MINUTE
THAT THAT WILL BE PASSED ON TO
THE AVERAGE GUY?
THERE'S LITTLE DOUBT THAT THESE
INCREASED TAXES WILL LEAD TO
HIGHER PREMIUMS, MORE EXPENSIVE
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, AND HIGHER
DRUG PRICES FOR AMERICANS.
THESE INDUSTRIES WILL COMPENSATE
FOR THE ADDED TAX BY RAISING
PRICES.
ULTIMATELY, RAISING THE COST OF
HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS PLAN IS
LIKELY TO DECREASE RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT IN THE HEALTH CARE
SECTOR, WHICH HAS BEEN A MAJOR
DRIVER OF INNOVATION AND
IMPROVEMENTS IN HEALTH CARE QUALITY.
CREATING POLICY THAT DECREASES
THE QUALITY OF OUR HEALTH CARE
MAKES NO SENSE.
IT IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
REQUIRING, MANDATING EMPLOYERS
TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE TO
THEIR EMPLOYEES OR BE FINED OR
TAXED JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
THE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSAL
IS EXPECTED TO COLLECT $27
BILLION WORTH OF THOSE FINES OR
TAXES.
IN TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES WITH
UNEMPLOYMENT ALMOST IN DOUBLE
DIGITS AND FORECAST TO GO INTO
DOUBLE DIGITS, PUTTING MORE
REQUIREMENTS AND MANDATES ON JOB
CREATORS AND JOB SUSTAINERS IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
EMPLOYERS WILL THINK TWICE ABOUT
HIRING MORE WORKERS.
THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT THESE
INCREASED TAXES WILL LEAD TO
HIGHER INSURANCE PREMIUMS, MORE
EXPENSIVE MEDICAL EQUIPMENT AND
H HIGHER DRUG PRICES FOR
AMERICANS FPLT THESE INDUSTRIES
WILL COMPENSATE BY RAISING THEIR PRICES.
THEY JUST SIMPLY WILL.
MR. PRESIDENT, I FEAR THAT
LOW-INCOME AMERICANS WILL SUFFER
THE MOST.
THEY NEED THOSE JOBS.
WE MUST CAREFULLY EVALUATE THE
DETAILS OF THIS LEGISLATION AND
INSURE THAT OUR ATTEMPTS TO MAKE
THINGS BETTER, WHICH I BELIEVE
WE CAN DO IN A BIPARTISAN WAY,
DON'T ULTIMATELY MAKE THIS WORSE.
I WOULD SUGGEST IN TOUGH
ECONOMIC TIMES CREATING
LEGISLATION THAT INCREASES THE
COST OF HEALTH CARE AND RAISES
TAXES IS NOT TRUE HEALTH CARE
MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
MAJORITY LEADER.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THE SEN
RES. 290.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
THE CLERK WILL
CONSTITUTE THE MAJORITY PARTY'S
MEMBERSHIP ON CERTAIN COMMITTEES
FOR THE 111th CONGRESS OR
UNTIL THEIR CHOSEN.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION, WE'LL PROCEED TO THE MEASURE.
MR. REID: THANK YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT.
WITH THE FILLING OF SENATOR
KENNEDY'S SEAT BY THE STATE OF
MASSACHUSETTS, WE NOW ARE
REARRANGINGHE
SOME HAVE BEEN VACANT SINCE HIS DEATH.
SO I WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT
THE RESOLUTION BE AGREED TO, THE MO
THE
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
SO ORDERED
MR. COCHRAN: MR. PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI.
MR. COCHRAN: MR. PRESIDENT,
THE SENATE REALIZES THE BUSINESS
TODAY IS THE ADMINISTRATION'S
FISCAL YEAR
PROPOSALS, OUR COMMITTEE ON
APPROP
KNOWS, IN THE REGULAR ORDER,
HEARINGS, TOOKING ADVANTAGE OF
ADVICE FROM TESTIMONY AND
SUGGESTIONS RECEIVED BY OTHER
SENATORS ON AND OFF THE
COMMITTEE ABOUT THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS IMPORTANT LEGISLATION.
IT SETS OUT, AS THE SENATE
APPRECIATES, THE FUNDING THAT
WOULD BE PERMITTED BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR THE
NEXT FISCAL
SO THE SUBJECT WE HAVE TODAY
BEFORE US IS SPECIFICALLY AN
ISSUE INVOLVING A
PROVISION IN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S FISCA
2010 DEFENSE BUDGET PROPOSAL.
THE ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED
SEVERAL FUNDING CUTS FOR WEAPONS
PROGRAMS THAT THEY DEEMED UNNEED.
THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE AT HIS HEARINGS AND
HIS DELIBERATIONS REVIEWED EACH
OF THE
AGREED WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS
SET FORTH IN THE
ADMINISTRATION'S BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEAL.
THIS BILL DOES NOT -- BUDGET SUBMITTAL.
THIS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR F-22
AIRCRAFT, PRESIDENTIAL
ALTERNATE ENGINE, THE COMBAT
SEARCH AND RESCUE HELICOPTER,
THE KINETIC ENERGY INTERCEPTOR
AND
WERE PROPOSED FOR FUNDING
BY THIS ADMINISTRATION.
THE C-17 AIRCRAFT IS AN AREA
WHERE WE DID NOT
THE COMMITTEE PROPOSED $2.5
BILLION BE INCLUDED IN THE
FOR TEN ADDITIONAL AIRCRAFT.
AS WE ALL KNOW, THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT IS NOT I
CONGRESS WHEN IT RECOMMENDED
PROGRAM TERMINATIONS OF THE
F-117 STEALTH FIGHTER AND THE
SR PB 22S -- AND THE V-22 OSPREY.
THE C-17 IS THE CURRENT BACKBONE
OF OUR STRATEGIC
CAPABILITY, AND IT WILL BE
DECADES TO COME.
C-17'S ARE BEING UTE HRAOEUDZ
OVER THE WORLD -- UTILIZED OVER
THE WORLD AT A FASTER PACE THAN ANTICIPATED.
WHILE THEY COMPRISE 60% OF THE
AIR FORCE'S STRATEGIC AIR FORCE
FLEET, THEY COMPRISE
STRATEGIC AIRLIFT MISSIONS.
THIS DEMAND FOR C-17 LIFT
CAPABILITY IS ONLY GOING TO GROW
AS NEW AIRLIFT MISSIONSMERGE.
ALREADY ARE RAPID DEPLOYMENT OF
THEATER MISSILE
COUNTERINSURGENCY OPERATIONS, AS
WELL AS GROWING AIRLIFT DEMANDS
FOR AN EXPANDING ARMY AND MARINE
CORPS.
FAILURE TO FUND THE C-17 WILL
RESULT IN THE UNITED STATES
SHUTTING DOWN ITS AIRLIFT
MANUFACTURING BASE AT A
WHEN THE DEMAND FOR AIRLIFT IS
LIKELY TO GROW.
ALLOWING THE C-17 SUPPLY BASE
AND PRODUCTION LIN
AND THEN TRYING TO RECONSTITUTE
IT WOULD COST BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS AND TAKE YEARS TO
ACCOMPLISH.
THE DEFENSE REVIEW AND THE
UPCOMING MOBILITY CAPABILITY AND
REQUIREMEN
REASSESSING OUR STRATEGIC
AIRLIFT REQUIREMENTS.
UNTIL THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE
REEVALUATED, THE C-17'S SHOULD
BE INCLUDED IN THIS BIL
THE AIR FORCE CHIEF OF STAFF HAS
STATED THAT HE BELIEVES 205
C-17'S AND
TO MEET STRATEGIC AIRLIFT REQUIREMENTS.
AND PROCURING MORE THAN THE 205
C-17'S ALREADY PURCHASED SHOULD
INVOLVE A LIKE
RETIREMENT OF C-5-A AIRCRAFT.
PRIOR TO THE FISCAL YEAR OF 2009
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, THE AIR
FORCE WAS PROHIBITED FROM
RETIRING THE OLDER AND
CAPABLE C-5-A'S.
NOW THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS A
AUTHORITY TO RETIRE THESE
AIRCRAFT, WE SHOULD REPLACE A
NUMBER OF THEM WITH A HIGHLY
CAPABLE AIRCRAFT IN PRODUCTION
TODAY.
THE GOVERNMENT
OFFICE HAS CONCLUDED AND I QUOTE
-- "1 WILL TAKE SEVEN FULLY
MODERNIZED C-5'S
OF $132 MILLION EACH TO ATTAIN
THE EQUIVALENT CAPABILITY
ACHIEVED BY BUYING ONE
ADDITIONAL C-17 AT
OF $276 MILLION.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT WOULD COS
COST $924 MILLION TO
SEVEN C-5'S TO GET THE SAME
CAPABILITY OF ONE C-17 COSTIN
COSTING $276 MILLION.
BASED ON THE
NEEDS AND THE NEW AUTHORITY TO
RETIRE THE AGING AND
HARD-TO-MAINTAIN C-5 AIRCRAFT,
WE ADDED THE $2.5 BILLION TO
SUSTAIN PRODUCTION OF THE C-17
PROGRAM FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR.
THIS ADDITIONAL YEAR WILL GIVE
THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TIME
TO COMPLETE THEIR AIRLIFT
REVIEWS AND PRESERVE THE OPTION
OF ADDING
AIRLIFT FLEET.
IF FUNDING FOR C-17'S ELIMINATED
IN THIS BILL
STUDIES DETERMINE ADDITIONAL
AIRLIFT IS
THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT COST
IN INCREASES AND DELAYS IN
GETTING THE AIRCRAFT TO THE
FLEET.
AT WORSE IT WILL BE COST
PROHIBITED TO RESTART THE LINE
AND OUR SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN
WILL BE DENIED EQUIPMENT NEEDED
TO PERFORM THEIR MISSIONS.
THAT, MR.
TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.
AND I URGE A NO VOTE ON THE
McCAIN AMENDMENT.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM HAWAII.
MR. INOUYE: THE STATE
ABOUT TO PRESENT MAY APPEAR A
BIT REDUNDANT AFTER LISTENING TO
THE GREAT STATEMENT FROM THE
SENATOR OF MISSISSIPPI, THE VICE
CHAI
BUT AS CHAIRMAN OF THIS
COMMITTEE, I WANT TO SAY THIS
REDUNDANCY TO SAY THAT ARE
SENATOR COCHRAN AND I
TEAM AND WE AGREE WITH THE
PROVISIONS IN THIS
AND IN THE INTEREST OF THIS BODY
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS
MEASURE WAS PASSED AND PRESENTED
TO THE SENATE BY A VOTE OF 30-0.
UNANIMOUS.
A
THE COMMITTEE AFTER DUE
CONSIDERION UNANIMOUSLY.
$636 BILLION BILL COMING OUT OF
THE COMMITTEE AFTER DUE
CONSIDERATION UNANIMOUSLY.
MR. PRESIDENT, THE AMENDMENT BY
THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA,
ARIZONA, $6 MILLION FUNDS
PROVIDED IN THIS BILL TO SUSTAIN
THE C-17 PROGRAM.
AS I INDICATED THAT VICE
CHAIRMAN AND COCHRAN AND
PROPOSED AND THE COMMITTEE
ACCEPTED OUR RECOMMENDATION
PROCURE ADDITIONAL 1 AIRCRAFT.
IF APPROVED
C-17 INVENTORY TO 223 AIRCRAFT.
WE BELIEVE THIS IS A CRITICAL
INVESTMENT WHICH
OUR NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY
AND ADD MUCH TO THE NEEDED
AIRLIFT CAPABILITY.
MR. PRESIDENT, THERE
MAIN REASONS THAT THE COMMITTEE
SUPPORTED ADDING FUNDING FOR THE
C-17.
FIRST, AS EVERYONE IN THE
MILITARY FROM SENIOR LEADERSHIP
TO THE SOLDIERS
TRANSPORTED WILL AGREE, IT
SIMPLY PUT, A SUPERB AIRCRAFT.
THE C-17 REPRESENTS THE FINEST
IN MILITARY TECHNOLOGY.
IT IS
HIGHLY CAPABLE.
IN SHORT, MR. PRESIDENT, IT HAS
NO DETRACTORS.
SECOND, WE BELIEVE
SHOW THA
ARE NEEDED TO MEET
REQUIREMENTS DESPITE THAT IT IS
BEING RECOMMENDED BY THE
AND, THIRD, C-17 EODIES THE
ONLY STRATEGIC AIRLIFT
PRODUCTION PROGRAM IN NATION.
AS THE SENATOR FROM MISSOURI
POINTED OUT , THAT THERE IS
NOTHING ON THE PLANNING LEDGER
TO REPLACE IT.
IF WE CUT OFF THE PRODUCTION AT
THIS MOMENT, IT WILL
UNAFFORDABLE TO RESTART THIS
PROGRAM.
MR. PRESIDENT,
THE U.S. MILITARY WITH ESSENTIAL
FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND ON NOTICE.
OUR AIR FLEET ALLOWS
AND OPERATIONAL PLANS.
THERE IS NOT A MILITARY SCENARIO
IN EXISTENCE TODAY WHICH CAN BE
PUT IN
AIRLIFT
THE C-17 WAS DESIGNED
SPECIFICALLY TO MEET VIRTUALLY
ALL OF THE NEEDS OF OUR WAR
FIGHTERS.
MR. PRESIDENT, IT IS THE ONLY
AIRCRAFT --
THAT HAS THE ABILITY BOTH TO FLY
GREAT DISTANCES AND TO LAND ON ON
AIR FIELDS ANYWHERE IN THE
WORLD.
THAT IS VERY
WE DON'T HAVE LONG
PREPARED FOR US IN FAROFF
COUNTRIES.
WHEN TEAMED WITH THE
C-130 AND C-5,
THE NATION WITH THE
TO DELIVER OUTSIZED
FORCES WHEREVER THEY MAY BE
LOCATED.
WE BELIEVE THE C-17 IS TODAY THE
FINEST AIRCRAFT IN
ARSENAL.
WITH ITS NEW
STRUCTURES, IT CAN
HIGH CAPABILITY RATE.
THIS IS A TERM USED BY THE AIR
FORCE TO
ABILITY TO
COMPARATIVE DATA PROVIDED BY THE
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
IN NOVEMBER OF 2008, SHOWED T
THE C-17 WAS
SUCCESSFULLY PERFORM ITS MISSION
IN EXCESS OF 85% OF THE TIME.
I THINK WE SHOULD NOTE THAT.
85% OF THE TIME THEY'RE ABLE TO
PERFORM THE MISSION.
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE AGING C-5
WAS ONLY ABLE TO MEET ITS
TIME.
-- 58% OF THE TIME.
FOR OUR MEN AND
UNIFORM, WHAT THIS MEANS IS IF
THEY'RE DEPENDING ON A C-17;
THEIR NEEDS -- C-17, THEIR NEEDS
WILL ONLY BE ADDRESSED LITTLE
MORE THAN HALF THE TIME.
WHILE THE C-17 WILL MEET THEIR
NEEDS MORE THAN EIGHT TIMES OUT
OF 10.
IN ADDITION, THE C-17 IS MUCH
EAPER TO OPERATE THAN THE C-5.
IT IS TRUE THAT A C-5 HAS THE
CAPACITY TO CARRY MORE CARGO.
BUT IN THE ACTUAL USAGE BY THE
AIR FORKS THE COST -- AIR FORCE,
THE COST PER FLIGHT NOW OF THE
C-17 IS ONLY 40% OF THE COST OF
THE C-5.
THE AIR FORCE HAS INFORMED
TODAY ITS CURRENT STATISTICS
SHOW THAT IT COSTS $6.42 TO FLY
ONE POUND OF CARGO FROM SOUTH
CAROLINA TO BAGHDAD ON A C-17.
$6.42 FROM SOUTH CAROLINA TO
BAGHDAD.
BUT $13.64 TO FLY
FLY THE SAME ITEM ON A C-5. WHY?
BECAUSE THE C-5 IS UNRELIABLE.
BECAUSE WE RARELY NEED
EITHER PLAN TO ITS MAXIMUM
CAPACITY ON AN AVERAGE MISSION
AND
AND MODERNIZED IN COMPARISON TO
THE C-5.
WE
OLDER, OUTDATED C-5.
OPPONENTS MIGHT ARGUE
MODERNIZE THE C-5, IT WILL BE
ABLE TO OVERCOME MANY OF THESE
PROBLEMS.
I WOULD CONCUR THAT A MODERNIZED
C-5 WOULD BE AIRCRAFT.
HOWEVER, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT
THE
HAS BEEN PLAGUED WITH DELAYS AND
COST OVERRUNS.
BECAUSE OF THE HIGH COST OF THE
C-5 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM, THE
DEFENSE DEPARTMENT DECIDED THAT
IT
MODERNIZE ALL
AND CUT THE PROGRAM TO 52.
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT MNS OUR
MILITARY WILL BE DEPENDENT ON 59
OF THE OLD AND OFTEN BROKEN
C-5'S THAT COST TWICE AS MUCH TO
OPERATE AS THE C-17 FOR THE
FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
THAT'S 47% OF THE C-5 FLEET THAT
WON'T BE UPDATED AND WILL BE
UNABLE TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY TO
MEET OUR MILITARY NEEDS.
THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE NOTED THAT ADDITIONAL
INVESTMENTS IN THE C-17 MAY BE ATTRACTIVE.
IT CALCULATED
DEPARTMENT WOULD NEED TO MODER
MODERNIZE, AS SENATOR COCHRAN
POINTED OUT, SEVEN
MODERNIZE SEVEN C-5
EQUIVALENT CAPABILITY OF
SO YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE SEVEN
C-5'S TO DO THE WORK
C-17
BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, IT WOULD
COST THREE TIMES AS MUCH TO
MODERNIZE THE SEVEN C-5'S AS IT
WOULD TO PURCHASE ONE C-17.
AND I'D
PRESIDENT, THAT THE C-17 IS A
FULLY
COSTS
WHILE THE C-5 MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM IS STILL IN ITS INFANCY.
IF THERE'S ONE THING THAT WE
KNOW ABOUT DEFENSE PROGRAMS, IT
IS THAT NEW PROGRAM COSTS
GENERALLY INCREASE
EARLY YEARS.
MR. PRESIDENT, SOME MAY ADDRESS
THE SENATE AND SAY THAT WE
NEED ANYMORE C-17'S.
THEY NOTE THAT
FORC
THE 213 THAT WE ALREADY HAVE
I'D
PRESIDENT, THAT IN 2002, THE
COMMANDER OF THE U.S.
TRANSPORTATION COM
THAT A C-17 REQUIREMENT WAS
222 C-17'S.
HOWEVER, THE 2005 MOBILITY
CAPABILITY STUDY ALSO RAISES
QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW MANY
AIRCRAFT ARE REQUIRED.
THIS STUDY, WHICH
BE THE BASIS OF OUR STRATEGIC
AIRLIFT
IDENTIFIED THE NEED OF BETWEEN
292 AND 383 STRATEGIC AIRLIFT
AIRCRAFT.
A
MODERNIZED C-5'S.
IN THE FORCE TODAY WE
C-5'S AND 205 C-17'S.
A TOTAL OF 315 AIRCRAFT.
NEAR THE BOTTOM OF THE
REQUIREMENT LEVEL.
BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT DOESN'T
IN THE LAST DEFENSE REVIEW IN
2006, THE DEFENSE DEPAR
OPTED TO KEEP ITS TOTAL
INVENTORNEAR THE BOTTOM OF
THIS REQUIREMENT RANGE WITH 180
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE ADDED C-17'S
SINCE THAT TIME AND
C-5, THE MOST IMPORTANT
QUADRENNIAL REPORT BASED ON THE
PLAN TO MODERNIZE A
WITH A PLAN TO ONLY MODERNIZE
A52 C-5'S, THE AIRLIFT
CAPABILITY OF THE FLEET IS
DRASTICALLY DIMINISHED.
IN 2008,
AIR FORCE AIR MOBILITY COMMAND
EXPRESSES CONCERN WITH THI PLAN.
HE TESTIFIED THAT THE PLAN WITH
52 MODERNIZED C-5'S AND 213
C-17'S WILL NOT PROVIDE
STRATEGIC AIRLIFT THAT WE
REQUIRE.
I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THESE
EA
INTO ACCOUNT TODAY'S FORCE
STRUCTURE AND THAT IS A VERY
IMPORTANT POINT.
SINCE THAT MOBILITY STUDY AND
THE QUADRENNIAL REVIEW, WE HAVE
TRANSFORMED OUR ARMY, CREATIN
ADDITIONAL COMBAT CAPABILITY
THAT REQUIRES AIRLIFT.
WE HAVE INCREASED THE END
STRENGTH OF OUR MARINE
WE HAVE COMMAND.
ALL OF THESE HAVE INCREASED
AIRLIFT NEEDS
AT THE SAME TIME, PROVISIONS IN
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN ARE AGING
OUR AIR FLEET BEYOND ANTICIPATED RATE
WE ARE FLYING THE WINGS OFF OUR
C-17 FLEET.
IN NOVEMBER OF 2007, THE AIR
FORCE ACHIEVE OF STAFF
RECOMMENDED BUYING 44 ADDITIONAL
C-17'S TO
LEVEL.
ON THE 2009 UNFUNDED
ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 15 C-17
AI
OBJECTIVE OF 248 C-17'S.
MR. PRESIDENT, OUR MILITARY
AIRCRAFT.
OUR FORCES HAVE GROWN SINCE
LAST STUDIES WERE WRITTEN AND
OUR PLANS HAVE BEEN ALTERED TO
CUT BACK ON OUR
PROGRAM.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT
NOTWITHSTANDING THE PLAN OFFERED
BY THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, THE
COUNTRY HAS A CHOICE WE CAN
EITHER AGREE
THE C-5'S OR WE CAN CONTINUE TO
PROCURE ADDITIONAL C-17'S, AS
NOTED EARLIER.
AND AS NOTED, THE G.A.O.
DISCOVERED A NEW C-17 OFFERS
GREA
PRICE.
TO ME AND TO MANY OF MY
COLLEAGUES, THIS JUST MAKES GOOD
SENSE.
UNLESS WE ACT THIS YEAR APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM
THIS COMMITTEE, WE WON'T HAVE A
CHOICE
WITHOUT THE FUNDS IN THIS BILL,
THE C-17 PROGRAM WILL BEGIN TO
SHUT
I SAY TO MY COLLEAGUES, THIS IS
A CRITICAL DECISION AND WE HAVE
TO BE CERTAIN ON OUR COURSE.
AS THE G.A.O. WAS NOTED
QUOTE -- "CAREFUL PLANNING IS
NEED TO ENSURE C-17 PRODUCTION
IS NOT ENDED PREMATURELY."
THAT'S THE G.O.
RESTARTING PRODUCTION WOULD BE
FEASIBLE -- WOULD NOT BE
FEASIBLE OR COST-EFFECTIVE.
EARLIER THIS DECADE, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT URGED THE CON
ALLOW IT TO BEGIN TO RETIRE THE
OLDEST AND
IT, TOO, THE DEPARTMENT ALSO BELIEVED THAT PURCHASING
ADDITIONAL C-17'S WAS A FAR
SUPERIOR CHOICE TO MEET OUR
AIRLIFT NEEDS.
HOWEVER, EACH YEAR THE CONGRESS
REFUSED
RETI
EVENTUALLY THE PENTAGON GAVE UP
TRYING AND DECIDED IT WOULD
STUCK WITH THE UNRELIABLE C-5'S.
WHEN IT
UPGRADE ALL THE OLD C-5'S TO AT
LEAST MAKE THE BEST OF A BAD
SITUATION, THE COST OVERRUNS
DELAYS IN THE C-5 MODERNIZATION
PROGRAM MADE THAT DECISION UNAFFORDABLE.
AND, MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD
POINT OUT THAT THE CONGRESS
RECTIFIED THIS
IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND ALLOWED
THE AIR FORCE TO BEGIN TO RETIRE
THESE AGED AIRCRAFT.
WE KNOW THAT IT MAKES ECONOMICAL
SENSE TO R
PERFORMING AIRCRAFT AND TO
WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE AIR
FORCE REVISITING THIS ISSUE IN
THE FY 2011
RENEWED PLAN TO RETIRE THE
OLDEST C-5'S
REPLACE THEM WITH NEW C-17'S.
MR. PRESIDENT, IN THIS YEAR'S
BUDGET, THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
HAS MADE SOME TOUGH DECISIONS
AND PRESENTED THEM TO US.
HE HAS OPTED TO KILL THE F-22,
THE JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER
ENGINE, THE VH-71 PRESIDENTIAL
HELICOPTER, THE COMBAT
SEARCH-AND-RESCUE HELICOPTER,
AND THE KINETIC INTERCEPTOR.
IN THE BILL BEFORE THE SENATE AT
THIS MOMENT, WE HAVE SUPPORTED
THESE RECOMMENDATIONS
WILL BE CANDID THAT I'M NOT
CONFIDENT THAT EACH OF THESE
RECOMMENDATIONS IS IN OUR
NATION'S INTEREST.
BUT IN GENERAL, I SUPPORT THE
THERE'S ONLY ONE PROGRAM THAT
THE VICE CHAIRMAN AND I
STRONGLY ENOUGH TO REVERSE THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE SECRETARY
AND THAT IS THE C-17.
I'VE EXPLAINED AT SOME LENGTH
WHY IT IS COST-EFFECTIVE, IT IS
CAPABLE, AND IT IS NEEDED AND,
THEREFORE, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES, MR. PRESIDENT, TO REJECT THE
AMENDMENT OF THE SENATOR FROM
ARIZONA
CONT
IT'S IN OUR NATION'S INTEREST.
I THANK YOU, SIR. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDE
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA.
MR. JOHANNS: MR. PRESIDENT, I
ASK THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE VITIATED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. JOHANNS: MR. PRESINT, I ASK THAT THE CURRENT AMENDMENT
BE SET ASIDE AND THAT WE CALL UP
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2484.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE
OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THE CLERK
THE CLERK: THE SENATOR FROM
NEBRASKA, MR. JOHANNS, PROPOSES
AN AMEND
MR. ON JOHANNS: MR. PRESIDENT --
MR. JOHANNS: MR. PRESIDENT, I
ASK THAT THE REMAINDER OF THE
AMENDMENT READING BE DISPENSED WITH.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
RISE TO PRESENT AMENDMENT 2484.
ACTUAL, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT
THAT WE'VE --
ACTUALLY, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT
THAT WE'VE ACTED ON IN PREVIOUS
PROPRIATION
IN FACT, THIS IS AN ANDMENT
THAT DEALS WITH NO FUNDING FOR
THE ORGANIZATION ACORN.
IN THE PREVIOUS INTERIOR BILL,
THIS PASSED IN A VERY BIPARTISAN
WAY WITH AN 85-11 VOTE. IN THE HOUSING AND
TRANSPORTATION BILL, AGAIN A
VERY BIPARTISAN VOTE, 83-7.
THIS IS AN AMENDMENT
OVERWHELMING SUPPORT OF THIS
BODY.
MY COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THIS
ORGANIZATION ARE A MATTER OF THE RECORD.
MR. PRESIDENT, I DON'T FEEL A
NEED TO LAY THOSE OUT AGAIN, BUT
I WANT TO PRESENT THIS AMENDNT
ON THIS APPROPRIATIONS BILL, AND
WE HAVE REACHED AN UNDERSTANDING
THAT THIS CAN BE ACCEPT BY VOICE
VOTE AND I JUST WANT TO INDICATE
THAT THAT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE
ME.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE
FURTHER DEBATE ON THE AMENDMENT?
IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY
AYE.
THE AYES APPEAR TO HAVE IT.
THE AYES DO HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
MR. JOHANNS: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
I YIELD, AND I NOTE T
OF A QUORUM. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK
WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
MR. INOUYE: I ASK TO RESCIND
THE QUORUM CALL.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. INOUYE: THE PENDING
BUSINESS BEFORE THE NATIONAL IS
THE DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL
FOR FY SPH 2010.
THIS MEASURE CONTAINS
APPROXIMATELY $636 BLION
INCLUDING NEARLY
CONTINUE THE FIGHT AGAINST
TERRORISM IN
AROUND SOUTHWEST ASIA.
IT CONTAINS FUNDS TO PAY OUR MEN
D WOMEN IN UNIFORM, AS WELL AS
FUNDS TO OPERATE OUR FORCES AND
TO TAKE CARE OF OUR WOUNDED.
IT PROVIDES THE MONEY REQUIRED
TO EQUIP THE WAR FIGHTER AND TO
DEVELOP NEW WEAPONS SYSTEMS SO
THAT THEY MAY BE PROTECTED IN
THE FUTURE.
MR. PRESIDENT, TODAY IS
SEPTEMBER 29.
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDS TOMORROW,
AND I BELIEVE THAT ALL OF US
SHOULD KNOW THAT.
ON THURSDAY, THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE WILL BEGIN
A CONTINUING
STOPGAP MEASURE REQUIRED BECAUSE
THE CONGRESS HASN
ACTION ON ITS 12 APPROPRIATIONS MEASURES.
MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO POINT
OUT THAT THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE REPORTED ITS FIRST
FISCAL YEAR 2010 BILL IN THE
SENATE ON JUNE 18.
MORE THAN THREE MONTHS AGO.
AND
10, NEARLY THREE WEEKS A
AND ALL OF THE OTHER BILLS WERE
REPORTED BEFORE THE AUGUS
RECESS.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE
SCHEDULING PROBLEMS WE'VE
THIS SENATE HAS PASSED JUST SIX
BILLS.
WE HAVE SPENT THE BETTER PART OF
SEVEN WEEKS ON THE FLOOR TO PASS
THESE BILLS.
I'D LIKE TO NOTE, MR. PRESIDENT,
THAT IN
APPROPRIATIONS MEASURES WERE
TAKEN UP AND PASSED BY THIS BODY
IN ONE OR TWO DAYS.
NOW IT IS NEARLY ONE WEEK OR
EACH BILL. MR. PRESIDENT, THE SENATE IS
KNOWN FOR BEING A DELIBERATIVE
BODY, BUT THIS IS
THAT THE SENATE HAS BEEN ON THIS
IMPORTANT BILL, AND UP UNTIL A
FEW MINUTES AGO, NOT A SINGLE
AMENDMENT HAS YET TO BE OFFERED.
MOREOVER, AT THIS POINT, ONLY
EIGHT AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN
FILED.
AND WE HAVE SEEN THIS PATTERN
WEEK AFTER WEEK.
OUR COLLEAGUES ARE WAITING DAYS
BEFORE GETTING SERIOUS ABOUT
THESE BILLS.
THE IMPACT OF THESE DELAYS IS
THAT THE END
IS UPON US AND WE ARE NEARLY
ONLY HALFWAY DONE COMPLETING
SENATE ACTION ON OUR BILLS AND
ONLY ONE OF THE
BEEN REPORTED OUT OF THE
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE.
MR. PRESIDENT, AT THIS JUNCTURE
I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT WE'VE HAD
12 MEASURES
SUBCOMMITTEES, THREE REPORTED
THE BILL TO THE SENE ON A VOTE
OF 29-1.
NOT QUITE
THE REMAINING NIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE
BILLS, AFTER DUE DELIBERATION,
DEBATED, AND DISCUSSION, WAS
PASSED BY THE SENATE.
THE SENATE COMMITTEE.
THEN REPORTED TO THIS SENATE
WITH THE RECOMMEND DHAITION IT
BE PASSED BY A VOTE OF 30-0.
UNANIMOUS.
THIS MEASURE BEFORE US WAS
ADOPTED BY THIS APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE MADE UP OF LIBERAL
MEMBERS, CONSERVATIVE MEMBERS,
MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROAD AND WHATEVER
YOU WANT, MEN, WOMEN, BY A VOTE
OF 30-0, UNANIMOUS.
MR. PRESIDENT, IN JANUARY WHEN I
BECAME CHAIRMAN OF THIS
COMMITTEE, IT WAS APPARENT TO ME
THAT THE SENATE AND THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANC
CONTROL OVER THE BUDGET PROCESS.
WE HAD NOT PASSED ALL OF OUR
SPENDING BILLS AND FREE-STANDING
MEASURES SINCE 2005.
WE ONLY ACCOMPLISHED THAT FEA
ONCE DURING THE PAST DECADE.
IN MANY CASES WE HAVE
TO LARGE OMNIBUS BILLS TO
COMPLETE OUR WORK.
THE SENATE HAD NOT BEEN ALLOWED
TO DEBATE OR AMEND MANY OF THE
MEASURES THAT WERE PASSED, AND,
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS IS NO WAY TO
RUN THE GOVERNMENT. CHAIRMAN COCHRAN AND I
AGRE
PRACTICE.
WE VOWED TO PASS 12 BILLS AND TO
SEND THEM TO
INDIVIDUALLY.
WE HAVE PASSED THOSE 12 BILLS IN
A TIMELY FASHION AND PRESENTED
THAT TO THE SENATE.
AND, MR. PRESIDENT, OUR LEADERS
FULLY SUPPORTED US IN THIS PLAN.
I WOULD REMIND MY
THAT THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN
CAUCUS SENT A LETTER TO THE
MAJORITY LEADER URGING HIM TO
FOLLOW THIS APPROACH.
BUT WHEN IT CAME TO PUT THIS IN
PRACTICE, INSTEAD OF WORKING TO
GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED, WE HAVE
BEEN HAMSTRUNG BY SLOW PROGRESS
IN EACH AND EVERY BILL.
MR. PRESIDENT, WE'RE WELL AWARE
THAT MEMBERS HAVE AMENDMENTS
THEY WISH TO HAVE CONSIDERED ON
THIS AND OTHER BILLS.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND HAVE BEEN WAITING TO
THEM.
SENATOR COCHRAN AND I CAME TO
THE FLOOR THURSDAY NIGHT, BUT
WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS NOTHING
TO DO.
WE CAME HERE ON FRIDAY MORNING
WITH THE SAME
WE'RE
WE H
THE APPROACH TAKEN BY A FEW OF
OUR COLLEAGUES HAS PUT US IN A
POSITION IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT
MUST NOW BEGIN TO OPERATE ON A
CONTINUING RESOLUTION.
AND, MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT DOES
THAT MEAN TO OUR AGENCIES?
IT MEANS THAT THEY MUST THROW
OUT THEIR PLANS FOR OPERATIONS
AND STREAMLINE ACTIVITIES SO
THAT ONLY THE MOST ESSENTIAL
OPERATIONS
CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS WILL
CONTINUE PROGRAMS THAT HAVE
EXPIRED AND NO LONGER NEEDED.
AND THE NEW PROGRAMS WILL
REPLACE THEM, WILL NOT BE IN
PLACE.
IT MEANS THEY MUST DELAY
PURCHASES UNTI
THAT THE RESOURCE THEY ARE
SEEKING WILL BE APPROVED.
IN THE CASE OF THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT, IT MEANS THEY HAVE
TO DELAY STARTING NEW WEAPONS
DEVELOPMENT AND PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS.
SOME OF MY FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE
COLLEAGUES MIGHT APPLAUD, AND
THEY THINK
CUTTING SPENDING.
BUT, UNFORTUNATELY,
MR. PRESIDENT, THEY'RE
IN FACT, WE ARE ONLY RUNNING UP
EXPENSES AS WE FOLLOW
PENNY-WISE, POUND-FOOLISH
PRACTICES WHICH COST MORE IN THE
LONG RUN.
AND THEY SAY, MR. PRESIDENT,
SENATE RULES ARE WRITTEN TO
PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE
MINORITY AND TO ENSURE THAT
LEGISLATION IS CAREFULLY REVIEWED.
BUT IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT WHEN
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE, THE
DELIBERATIVE PROCESS IS
FREQUENTLY TURNED ON ITS HEAD
AND
THROUGH WITH NO TIME TO DEBATE
OR OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER
AMENDMENTS.
RATHER THAN DELAY THESE BILLS
WHICH HAVE MINIMAL
LEAVING THE BODY NO CHOICE BUT
TO ADOPT EXPEDITED PROCEDURES TO
COMPLETE ACTION, LET US PROCEED
A PACE TO GET THIS AND
FIVE BILLS THROUGH THE SENATE AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
BECAUSE, MR. PRESIDENT, IT IS
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONGRESS
TO ENSURE THE TAXPAYER FUNDS CAN
BE EXPANDED EFFICIENTLY BY
PASSING EACH OF THESE
APPROPRIATIONS MEASURES WITHOUT
DEPENDING ON CONTINUING
RESOLUTIONS OR OMNIBUS MEASURES.
MR. PRESIDENT, I URGE ALL OF MY
COLLEAGUES TO
CAN COMPLETE OUR WORK, THE WORK
OF THIS NATION.
I YIELD TH
ABSENCE OF A
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION. MR. INOUYE: MR. PRESIDENT, I
ASK UNIMOUS CONSENT THAT A
MILITARY FELLOW IN THE OFFICE OF
SENATOR CHRISTOPHER DODD,
CAPTAIN LINDSEY GEORGE, GRANTED FLOOR PRIVILEGES FOR THE
CONSIDERATION OF THIS MEASURE,
H.R. 3326, THE DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
THE PR
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
MR. INOUYE: THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE SENATOR FROM
MR. DODD: MR. PRESIDENT, I'M
GOING TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES HERE AND ADDRESS THE PENDING
AMENDMENT IF I MAY, AND THEN AT
THE CONCLUSION OF
I'D LIKE TO ASK THAT WE GO INTO
MORNING BUSINESS FOR A FEW
MINUTES TO ADDRESS ANOTHER
MAER THAT
JCT OF THE PENDING LEGISLATION
-- SUBJECT OF THE PENDING
LEGISLATION IF THAT'S
PE
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
MR. DODD: I RISE IN STR
OPPOSITION TO
MY FRIEND FROM ARIZONA THAT
WOULD -- THAT'S NOTHING LESS
THAN THAT IS AT STAKE WITH THIS
AMENDMENT.
IRREPARABLY DAMAGING OUR COMBAT
READINESS AND DEPRIVE OUR TROOPS
OF RESOURCES.
THAT'S WHAT'S INVOLVED WITH THE
ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT BY THE
SENATOR FROM ARIZONA IF IT'S ADOPTED.
I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE THREE
WORKERS
THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS WORKING
ON THIS ENGINE.
THEY'RE REMOVING TEST
AFTER COMPLETING TESTING ON A
POWER FU, CUTTING-EDGING -- ON A
POWERFUL, CUTTING-EDGE ENGINE.
THE MAN ON OVER
HE HAS BEEN WORKING AT PRATT
WHITNEY FOR 37 YEARS.
THE MAN IN THE MIDDLE IS STEVEN.
HE SPENT F
FORCE BEFORE COMING TO PRATT
WHITNEY AND HAS A
CENTURY OF AVIATION EXPERIENCE.
AND ON THE SIGHT HIS
MICHAEL, WITH 15 YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE ON THE
EIGHT AS A SUPERVISOR AT THIS FACILITY.
IF WE EFFECTIVELY LAY OFF THESE
WORKERS AND THE 30,000 AMERICANS
LIKE THEM
THE
TREMENDOUS PAIN AND HARDSHIP AT
A TIME WHEN OUR LEAST AFFORD.
IT IN MY
CONNECTICUT, 29th IN TOTAL
POPULATION, BUT
RECEIVED WORD THAT PRATT WHITNEY
WOULD CLOSE FAC
HARTFORD COSTING 1,000
IF THIS FAILS, MY STATE'S
EMPLOYER WILL LOSE 12,000 JOBS.
MEN LIKE
HAVE 100 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN
MAINTAING -- TO MAINTAIN
SUPERIORITY IN THE WORLD IN THE
ARE THE
OUR
TO MEN IN CRITICAL AREAS OF THE
PERHAPS MY COLLEAGUES ARE NOT
PERSUADED BY THE IMMINENT LOSS
OF JOBS.
IF THAT WERE THE ARGUMENT, I
SUPPOSE EVERYONE
I WANT MY COLLEAGUES TO
UNDERSTANDHAT'S AT STAKE IF
THIS AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED WHEN
IT COMES TO A CRITICAL COMPONENT
IN A MAJOR PART
COMMITTED TO DEVELOPING THIS
KIND OF TEC TECHNOLOG
SOME MIGHT BE PERMITTED TO
AFFECT THE LIVELIHOOD OF 30,000
PEOPLE.
I WOULD SAY THINK OF THESE THREE INVIDUALS.
WITH YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND
COMPETENT SI HAVE ALLOWED US TO
MAINTAIN
UNPARALLELED IN THE WORLD.
ACCORDING TO THE AIR FORCE OVER
THE LAST THREE YEARS IN THE
MILITARY CENTER COMMANDLONE,
THE C-17 HAS FLOWN 100,000
AIRLIFT
THAN 300,000 TONS OF CARGO AND
EXECUTED NEARLY 2,000 AIR DROPS.
ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL
ACCOUNTING OFFICE, THE C-17'S
HAVE DELIVERED MORE
2.4 MILL
CARGO TO IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN
ALONE.
THAT'S 2.4 MILLION TONS OF SUPPLY.
EVERYTHING FROM CRITICAL GEAR TO
LARGE VEHICLES.
THE GENERAL ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE ALSO NOTES THAT THIS
AIRCRAFT HAS
-- "DRAWN PRAISE DURING COMBAT OPERATIONS."
AND LISTEN
READINESS RATE.
COMPARED TO
RATE.
THE C-17 IS THE MOST RELIABLE
AIRLIFT PLANE IN OUR ARSENAL.
AND IT'S ALSO THE MOST VERSATILE.
UNLIKE ANY OTHER AIRCRAFT THAT
WE HAVE, THE C-17 CAN COMPLETE
COMBAT, HUMANITARIAN,
TRANSPORTS MISSIONS ALL OVER THE
WORLD.
THANKS TO ITS UNIQUE ABILITY TO
TAKE OFF AND LAND IN DIFFICULT
ENVIRONMENTS, REMOTE AIRFIELDS
OR IN
ARE SHORTENED OR DEGRADED.
THE AIR FORCE REPORTS THAT THE
C-17 IS ABLE TO TAKE OFF AND
LAND ON 65% OF THE WORLD'S SOIL.
WHEREAS OLDER AIRLIFT PLANES CAN
ONLY LAND ON 6%.
THIS VERSITILITY MAKES THE C-17
COUNTERINSURGENCY AND
HU
MISSIONS THE WORLD OVER.
IT CAN OPERATE NOT ONLY IN IRAQ
AND AFGHANISTAN, BUT IN
RWANDA AND SUDAN AND ANARTICA.
TODAY I FEEL IT IS TAKEN
GRANTED AND OUR COMMITMENTS
OVSEAS SINCE
FAR GREATER BURDEN ONS THIS
AIRCRAFT THAN WE ANNED FOR.
THE CONGRESSIONAL
SERVICE REPORTS THAT THE C-17
WAS DESIGNED TO FLY 1,000 HOURS
PER YEAR WITH AN EXPECTED LIFE
SPAN OF 30 YEARS.
AS OUR OVERSEAS COMMITMENTS HAVE
GROWN
AVERAGED 1,250 HOURS PER
AIRCRAFT AND
2,400 FLYING HOURS IN A SINGLE
YEAR.
GENERAL AUTHOR LIGHT, THE AIR
MOBITY COMMANDER, HAS
THIS RATE THE C-17'S MAY HAVE A
LIFE SPAN AS SHORT AS 22 YEARS
WITH A MISSION CRITICAL AIRCRAFT
IS DUE T
EARLIER THAN
ONE WILL BE, WE ARE CHARGED WIT
EQUIPPING OUR TROOPS IN THE
FIELD AND MUST ADJUST OUR
PROCUREMENT PLANS AND WE MUST DO
IT NOW.
SOME OF T
ALREADY 15 YEARS OLD.
LAST JULY THE
E ARMY BY 30,000 SOLDIERS.
I, ALONG WITH NEARLY ALL OF
COLLEAGUES SPRKTSD THAT
TO MEET OUR GROWING SECURITY
DEMANDS.
BUT WE TOOK
TOOK THAT VOTE, MR. PRESIDENT,
WE INCURRED AN OBLIGATION AS
WELL TO PROVIDE THOSE TROOPS
WITH THE SUPPORT THAT THEY'LL
NEED IN ORDER TO DO THEIR JOBS.
CHAIRMAN DAN INOUYE AND MEMBERS
OF THE SENATE
COITTEE HAVE DEM
INCREDIBLE FORESIGHT BY
TO
THIS IMPORTANT FLEET.
IN THIS AMENDMENT TO UNDO THEIR
GOOD WORK PREVAILS, WE'RING
DISIFS TO OUR TRO
WE'RE ALSO DOING A GREAT DISIFS
TO OUR TAXPAYERS.
THE AUTHOR OF THIS AMENDME
HAVE SAID THAT WE SHOULD KILL
THE C-17 NOW AND WAIT FOR A
GOVERNMENT STUDY DOWN THE ROAD
TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED
MORE OF THESE AIRCRAFT.
IF WE KILL THE C-17, WE WILL
LOSE OUR ONLY WIDE BODY ASSEMBLY
LINE IN THE UNITED STATES.
ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL
ACCOUNBILITY OFFICE, IT WILL
COST UP TO $1 BILLION TO RESTART
THE LINE WHEN IT INEVITABLY
DAWNS ON US THAT WE NEED THE
MILITARY CARGO PLANES TO SUPPORT
OUR TROOPS IN THE FIELD.
AN IF WE HAND THESE THREE
INDIVIDUALS AND THE 30,000 OF
THEIR FELLOW WORKERS AROUND THE
COUNTRY PINK SLIPS IN THE NEXT
FEW DAYS, WHO DO WE THINK IS
GOING TO BUILD THOSE PLANES DOWN THE ROAD?
BY THE WAY, IF WE CHOOSE TO TRY
AND TAKE UP THE
EXTENDING THE LIVES OF THE
C-5-A'S, WE NEED TO OVERHAUL AND
REPAIR SEVEN OF THEM AT A COST
OF
TO EQUAL WHAT WE'RE DOING TO
BUYING A C-17.
MR. PRESIDENT, THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD HURT OUR WORKERS, OUR
TROOPS, AND OUR NATIONAL
SECURITY.
IT IS MASSIVE EXPENDITURE
DISGUISED AS A SHORT-TERM SAVINGS.
IT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF
CUTTING OFF OUR KNOWS DESPITE
OUR FACE WHEN IT
CRITICAL NEEDS OF OUR TROOPS IN
THE FEEL.
WHATEVER VIEWS YOU MAY HAVE ON
AFGHANISTAN OR ON IRAQ, WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR TROOPS,
WHEREVER THEY ARE, HAVE THE
CAPABILITY OF RECEIVING T
SUPPORT THAT THEY
DEPRIVING THEM OF THIS AIRCRAFT,
BY DEPENDING UPON AN AIRCRAFT
GETTING OLDER AND OLDER AND OLD
ARE BY THE DAY AND NO IDEAS OF
REPLACING THEM AT ALL,E PUT
THESE TROOPS AND OUR NATIONAL
SECURITY AT RISK.
AND, SO, MR. PRESIDENT, WHILE
THERE IS A PAROCHIAL
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, THERE IS A FAR
BRODEUR ONE COMBINED TO THE
BORDERS OF MY STATE.
THIS ISSUE GOES FAR BEYOND
LIMITATIONS OF ONE JURISDICTION.
IT GOES TO OUR VERY CAPABILITIES
AS A NATION TO RESPOND BOTH IN
TERMS OF MILITARY CAPACITY AS
WELL AS HUMANITARIAN NEEDS.
THE FACT THAT 86% OF THESE
AIRCRAFT ARE READY A
ONLY 53% OF THE C-5'S.
THE FACT THAT WE CAN LAND THIS
AIRCRAFT IN AS MANY DIVERSE
PLACES
AND THE ALTERNATIVE IS VERY
LIMITED, INDEED.
IT SEEMS THESE A
TO PREVAIL.
TODAY WHEN THE VOTE OCCURS, I
WOULD URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO
SUPPORT THE COMMITTEE, THOS WHO
HAVE DONE THE WORK ON THIS, WHO
UNDERSTAND WHAT IS AT STAKE AND
REJECT THE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD
CUT OUT THESE AIRCRAFT.
CONSENT TO MOVE TO A MATTER
OTHER
DISCUSSED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. DODD: IT HAS BEEN A
TUMULTUOUS YEAR I IRAN.
THE IRANIAN REGIME PURSUED ITS
NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES AN REPRESS
ITS ONLY PEOPLE AS WE SAW IN THE
WAKE OF THIS
ILLEGITIMATE ELECTIONS WHERE
BRAVE AND PEACEFUL PROTESTERS
WERE VIOLENTLY ATTACKED.
IF IRAN WERE TO ACQUIRE NUCLEAR
WEAPON CAPABILITIES, IT WOULD
POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE
PEACE AND
EAST, ESPECIALLY TO OUR CLOSE
ALLY IN THE STATE O
TO MENTION OTHERS IN THE REGION
AS WELL AS TO OURSELVES.
FOR YEARS THE IRANIAN REGIME
REFUSED REASONABLE REQUESTS BY
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND
FAILED TO MEET ITS OBLIGATIONS
UNDER INTERNATIONAL
NONPROLIFERATION RULES.
VERY AGGRESSIVE
DUEL-TRACK A-- DUAL-TRACK
APPROACH WITH SUSTAINED PRESSURE
TO ECONOMI
WARNING THAT IRAN WILL NOT BE
ABLE TO RUN OUT THE CLOCK.
AS CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE
BANKING COMMITTEE, I INTEND TO
INTRODUCE LEGISLATION,
MR. PRESIDENT, TO ARM THIS
ADMINISTRATION WITH THE ABILITY
TO IMPOSE TOUGH,
SANCTIONS IF THE
GOVERNMENT DOES NOT RESPOND TO
THE ADMINISTRATION'S FINAL
DIPLOMATIC EFFORT IN THE COMING WEEKS.
WE MUST CONFRONT IRAN'S
GOVERNMENT ABOUT ITS LONG RECORD
OF DUPLICITY AND DECEPTION ON
ITS NUCLEAR FACILITIES.
LAST WEEK, PRESIDENT OBAMA
REVEALED THAT IRAN IS BUILDING A
SECRET URANIUM ENRICHMENT
FACILITY IN VIOLATION OF
INTERNATIONAL RULES.
THE PRESIDENT AND OUR ALLIES
HAVE RIGHTLY INSISTED ON PROMPT
ACCESS TO THE IAEA INSPECTORS TO
THIS FACILITY.
AND OVER THE WEEKEND, IRAN MOVED
FORWARD ON PROVOCATIVE MISSILE TESTS.
IN TWO DAYS, THE UNITED STATES
AND OUR ALLIES WILL BEGIN KEY
TALKS WITH IRAN'S LEADERS.
UNFORTUNATELY, MR. PRESIDENT,
IRAN'S PRESIDENT HAS ALREADY
SUGGESTED THAT APPROPRIATE
LIMITS TO HIS COUNTRY'S NUCLEAR
ENRICHMENT PROGRAM ARE OFF THE TABLE.
STRONG INTERNATIONAL REJECTION
OF ELECTION ABUSES, RENEWED
SUPPORT OF OUR ALLIES,
INTENTIONS WITHIN THE IRANIAN
REGIME NOW BREAKING INTO
ALL ARE REASONS FOR HOPE THAT
IRAN MIGHT BE FORCED TO CHANGE
COURSE.
BUT IT WILL BE HARD, TO PUT IT
MILD, DIFFICULT, TO PUT IT MILDLY.
2 WILL REQUIRE SUSTAINED
DIPLATIC EFFORTS TO ENSURE
THAT ALL OF OUR PARTNERS, THE
RUSSIANS, THE CHINA, THE INDIANS
AND MODERATE ARAB STATES
THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST JOIN
IN THIS EFFORT.
WE WILL ONLY SUCCEED IF IRAN IS
CONFRONTED BY THE PROSPECT OF
SUSTAINED, PROGRESSIVELY
INTENSIFYING, MULTILATERAL
ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE
ON ITS GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING
TOUGHER SANCTIONS.
THIS WEEK'S NEGOTIATIONS SHOULD
CONFRONT IRAN'S LEADERS WITH A
CLEAR CHOICE: END ILLEGITIMATE
EFFORTS TO ENRICH URANIUM, HALT
PROLIFERATION EFFORTS AND STOP
SUPPORT FOR TERRORISTS AROUND
THE WORLD OR CONTINUE TO DEEPEN
IRAN'S ISOLATION AND RUIN ITS
ECONOMY.
I SUPPORT THE ADMINISTRATION'S
EFFORTS TO ENGAGE IRAN WHILE
MAKI CLEAR THAT BITING
SANCTIONS WILL FOLLOW IF THEY
CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO MEET THE
DEMANDS OF THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMUNITY FOR GREATER
TRANSPARENCY.
ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS HAVE
OUTLINED TO ME A MENU OF
ADDITIONAL TOUGH MULTILATERAL
SANCTIONS THAT THEY'RE
CONSIDERING IMPOSING AND ARE
WORKING TO BROADEN SUPPORT AMONG
OUR ALLIES.
CONGRESS MUST EQUIP THE
PRESIDENT WITH A FULL RANGE OF
TOOLS TO DEAL WITH THE THREATS
PASSED BY IRAN.
IN THE LAST CONGRESS, THE
BANKING COMMITTEE, WHICH I CHAIR
CHAIR, APPROVED COMPREHENSIVE
LEGISLATION TO IMPROVE TOUGH --
APPROVE TOUGH, NEW SANCTIONS ON
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN,
AUTHORIZING INVESTORS TO DIVEST
FROM COMPANY'S ACTIVE IN IRAN'S
ENERGY SECTOR AND TO COMBAT
BLACK-MARKET NETWORKS SPREADING
WEAPONS AROUND THE WORLD.
UNFORTUNATELY, FLOOR
CONSIDERATION IN THIS BODY WAS
REPEATEDLY BLOED BY A SMALL
MINORITY IN THIS CHAMBER.
GIVE ENTHE RISING STAKES, I
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MY
COMMITTEE COLLEAGUES, RANK
MEMBER SHELBY OF ALABAMA TO
PRESS FORWARD TOR FOR SIMILAR
SANCTIONS AND LEGISLATION IN THE
NEXT FEW WEEKS.
I WANT TO CONGRATULATE MY COLLEAGUE FROM CONNECTICUT,
SENATOR LIEBERMAN, AND SENATOR
BAYH AMONG OTHERS FOR THEIR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE AS
WELL, INCLUDING THEIR
LEGISLATION TO IMPOSE EVEN
FURTHER SANCTIONS ON ENTITIES
INVOLVED IN IMPORTING GASOLINE
TO IRAN
EFFORTS TO EXPAND ITS DOMESTIC
REFINING CAPACITY.
IRAN'S ENERGY SECTOR IS A KEY
SOURCE OF REVENUE TO THE
GOVERNMENT, AND IRAN IS
ESPECIALLY SUSCEPTIBLE BECAUSE
OF ITS DEPENDENCE ON IMPORTED
GASOLINE.
AND SO I WILL INTEGRATE THESE
CRITICAL PROVISIONS INTO THE
LEGISLATION I'MING OFFERING IN
THE NEXT FEW -- I'LL BE OFFERING
IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.
OUR LEGISLATION WILL BE A TARING
EXPETD STRATEGIC -- TARGETED AND
STRATEGIC MAXIMIZING THE
ECONOMIC LEVERAGE OF THE UNITED
STATES AND
ALLIES AND INVESTORS WHILE AVOIG
THE RISKS OF A MORE
INDISCRIMINATE -- AVOIDING THE
RISKS OF A MORE INDISCRIMINATE APPROACH.
THE BILL WOULD ALSO EXPAND
COVERAGE UNDER THE IRAN
SANCTIONS ACT TO INCLUDE
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS,
UNDERWRITES, GUARANTORS AND
OTHER BUSINESS ENTITIES AND
EXTEND THE APPLICABILITY OF
SANCTIONS TO OIL AND GAS
PIPELINES AND TANKERS.
IT WOULD IMPOSE A BROAD BAN ON
IMPORTS DIRECTLY FROM IRAN TO
THE UNITED STATES AND EXPORTS
FROM THE UNITED STATES TO IRAN
OF THOSE FEW ITEMS THAT THEY ARE
STILL ABLE -- THEY ARE STILL
ABLE TO BE SHIPPED WHILE
EXEMPTING FOOD AND MEDICINES.
IT WILL STRENGTHEN EXISTING
AUTHORITY FOR A FREEZING OF
ASSETS OF IRANIANS ACTIVE IN
WEAPONS OF PROLIFERATION OR
TERRORISACTIVITY AND MAKE
CLEAR THAT THE UNITED STATES
ENTIES WHO ESTABLISH A
SUBSIDIARY TO GET AROUND U.S.
SANCTION LAWS WILL BE HELD
LIABLE FOR THE ACTIVITIES OF
THEIR SUBSIDIARIES.
FINALLY, MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT WE
WILL BE PROPOSING IMPOSES NEW
REQUIREMENTS THAT THE PRESIDENT
ACTUALLY MAKE A DETERMINATION
AND REPORT EVERY SIX MONTHS TO
CONGRESS REGARDING THE
SANCTIONABILITY OF ELIGIBLE
INVESTMENTS IN IRAN'S ENERGY SECTOR.
MR. PRESIDENT, IN ADDITION TO
EXPANDING U.S. SANCTIONS, THE
LEGISLATION THAT I'LL BE WRITING
WOULD ALSO PROVIDE A SIMPLE
FORMULA AUTHORIZING DIVESTMENT
FROM FIRMS WHICH INVEST
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS IN IRAN'S
ENERGY SECTOR.
WITH PROVISIONS PATTERNED AFTER
THE SUDAN ACCOUNTABILITY AND
DIVESTMENT ACT ENACT
AGO.
MANY OF US BELIEVE,
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT AMERICANS
SHOULD BE ABLE TO DIVEST FROM
ENERGY FIRMS DOING BUSINESS WITH
THE IRANIAN REGIME WHOSE
POLICIES THEY ABHOR AND WHICH
INDIRECTLY HP TO PROP UP THAT REGIME.
THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN THE TOOLS
THEY NEED TO MAKE SOCIALLY
RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS, AND
INVESTORS WHO CHOOSE TO DIVEST
STATES' LARGE PENSION AND MUTUAL
FUNDS AND OTHERS SHOULD BE HELD
HARMLESS FOR THESE DECISIONS.
INVESTING IN IRAN IS RISKY
BUSINESS, AND INVESTORS SHOULD
BE FULLY INFORMED OF THOSE RISKS
GOING IN.
THE LEGISLATION WE'LL BE WRITING
DOES NOT REQUIRE DIVESTMENT, IT
SIMPLY PERMITS IT.
FINALLY, THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE
INCENTIVES FOR COUNTRIES TO
STRENGTHEN THEIR EXPORT CONTROL
SYSTEMS TO STOP THE ILLEGAL
DIVERSION OF SENSITIVE, DUAL-USE
TECHNOLOGY TO COUNTRIES LIKE
IRAN AND IMPOSE TOUGH, NEW
LICENSING REQUIREMENTS ON THOSE
WHO REFUSE TO COOPERATE.
AS WE CONFRONT THE REALITIES OF
A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE, WITH
MANUFACTURERS ASSEMBLING PARTS
OF COMPLEX MACHINERY SUCH AS
AIRCRAFT AND COMPUTERS FROM A
SUPPLY CHAIN SPANNING THE GLOBE
AND AS REGIMES LIKE IRAN AND
NORTH KOREA AND SYRIA TROLL
VARIOUS TRANSSHIPMENT00S FOR
SUCH PARTS TO A--
HUBS FOR SUCH PARTS TO ASSEMBLE
HIGH-TECH WEAPONS, IT MAKES
SENSE, IN MY VIEW, TO ADDRESS
THIS PROBLEM HEAD-O. WE HAVE
DEVELOPED A WAY TO DO THIS WITH
AN ARRAY OF CARROTS AND STICKS
TO PROD UNWILLING COUNTRIES TO
GET SERIOUS ABOUT DEVELOPING AND
IMPLEMENTING TOUGH,
COMPREHENSIVE EXPORT CONTROL
RULES AND SYSTEMS.
OUR EUROPEAN AND OTHER ALLIES
CONTINUE TO WORK CLOSELY WITH
THE UNITED STATES TO INCREASE
ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE
ON IRAN.
I BELIEVE OUR LEGISLATION WILL
COMPLEMENT AND REINFORCE THOSE
ONGOING DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS AND
SEND A VERY, VERY CLEAR
CLEAR SIGNAL, MR. PRESIDENT, TO
IRAN'S GOV
STORE IF THEY CHOOSE TO CONTINUE
TO FLAUNT THE WILL OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.
CONGRESS WILL BE MOVING FORWARD
ON THE SAME TIMETABLE THAT THE
PRESIDENT AND OUR ALLIES HAVE
SET FOR THIS FALL TO UNDERSCORE
TO IRAN'S LEADERS THE HUGE PRICE
THEY WILL PAY ECONOMICALLY,
POLITICALLY, DIPLOMATICALLY AND
OTHERWISE IF THEY DO NOT CHANGE
COURSE.
MR. PRESIDENT, THE GOVERNMENT OF
IRAN MUST COME CLEAN ON ITS
NU NUCLEAR PROGRAM, WHICH AS
PRESIDENT OBAMA OBSERVED LAST
WEEK, REPRESENTS A DIREC
CHALLENGE TO THE BASIC
FOUNDATION OF THE NONP
I WOULD HOPE THAT MY COLLEAGUES
WOULD JOIN US IN SUPPORTING
THESE EFFORTS IN THE COMING
WEEKS, TO MAKE CLEAR TO THE
IRANIANS THAT WE IN THE UNITED
STATES CONGRESS, DEMOCRATS AND
REPUBLICANS ALIKE, WILL STAND
WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES IN OR COMMON
DETERMINATION TO CONFRONT THIS
PROBLEM
MR. PRESIDENT, WE'LL HAVE OUR
HEARING ON
BANKING COMMITTEE AND MY
INTENTION IS THAT SHORTLY
THEREAFTER, A WEEK OR SOHRAVE,
THEREAFTER, TO COMBINE THE SARAH
YES, SIR PROPOSALS -- THAT HAVE BEEN --
COMBINE THE VARIOUS PROPOSALS
THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED INTO ONE COMPREHENSIVE BILL.
I, LIKE OTHERS, BELIEVE WE
SHOULD TAKE NO OPTIONS OFF THE TABLE,&WE UNDERSTAND THE
IMPLICATIONS OF THAT.
AND I HOPE MOST OF US AGREE, AT
LEAST I HOPE WE DO, THAT EVERY
EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE
THIS MATTER SHORT OF THE USE OF
MILITARY FORCE.
BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT OPTION
REMAINS OUT THERE.
BUT I BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE
PROPOSG HERE IS A SANCTIONS
REGIME ALONG WITH THE NEEDED
COOPERATION, RATHER, OF OTHER
NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD WILL
SEND THAT UNEQUIVOCAL MESSAGE.
NOTHING WOULD BE MORE IMPORTANT
AT THIS HOUR THAN TO SEND THAT
CLEAR, UNITED MESSAGE FROM THIS
BODY AND THE OTHER OF OUR
DETERMINATION TO USE ALL THE
TOOLS AVAILABLE TO US SHORT OF
THAT MILITARY USE TO BRING ABOUT
THE DESIRED CHANGE WE SEEK.
BUT IF THAT SULD FAIL, THOSE
OTHER
MY HOPE IS WE WOULD NEVER HAVE
TO GET THERE, AND BY ADOPTING
THIS STRONG LEGISLATION, MY HOPE
WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD
UNDERSTAND HOW SERIOUS WE ARE IN
OUR DETERMINATION TO ACHIEVE THE
COMMON GOAL BEING SOUGHT BY THIS
ADMINISTRATION AND ALL OF US IN THIS BODY.
AND WITH
YIELD THE
MR. CASEY: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA.
MR. CASEY: MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE
IN -- AND WOULD FIRST ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT I BE
PE MORNING BUSINESS.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. CASEY: MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE
TODAY WITH RESPECT TO IRAN'S
NUCLEAR PROGRAM AND I WANT TO
COMMEND THE -- THE COMMENTS BY
OUR SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT,
OUR CHAIRMAN OF THE BANKING
COMMITTEE, SENATOR DODD, ON HIS
PRENTATION JUST A FEW MOMENTS
AGO.
LIKE SO MANY AMERICANS, WE'VE
LEARNED A LOT IN THE LAST COUPLE
OF DAYS WHICH IS TROUBLING.
THE IRANIAN REGIME, DISCREDITED
THIS SUMMER BY THE DEPLORABLE
REPRESSION OF PEACEFUL
PRO-DEMOCRACY DEMONSTRATORS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY, HAS REACHED
A NEW LOW ON THE INTERNATIONAL STAGE.
AND, AGAIN, I SPEAK TODAY OF THE
RANKING MEMBEREERNLG THE
REGIME, THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT,
NOT THE PEOPLE OF IRAN.
THE DISCLOSURE OF THE URANIUM
ENRICHMENT FACILITY NEAR THE C
OF COHM, SHOULD SERVE AS A
WAKE-UP CALL FOR THOSE WHO
BELIEVED THAT IRAN'S NUCLEAR
PROGRAM WAS ONLY FOR PEACEFUL PURPOSES.
IT CONTINUES, THE REGIME CONTINUES, TO DECEIVE THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ABOUT
ITS NUCLEAR INTENTIONS AND
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT.
IT CONTINUES TO THREATEN OUR
ALLY, ISRAEL.
IT CONTINUES TO DISREGARD
INTERNATIONAL.
AND, YES, MR. PRESIDENT, THE
REGIME CONTINUES TO DIRECTLY
THREATEN THE NATIONAL SECURITY
INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
AS THE ADMINISTRATION BEGINS
TALKS ON THURSDAY, WE IN THE
SENATE SHOULD BE PREPARE TO DO
OUR PART AND PASS TOUGHER
SANCTIONS ON THE IRANIAN REGIME
TO COMPEL ITS COMPLIAE WITH
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS.
WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO
PROVIDE THE ADMINISTRATION THE
TOOLS IT NEEDS TO MAXIMIZE
PRESSURE ON THIS INCREASINGLY
INTRANSIGENT IRANIAN REGIME.
I APPLAUD THE ADMINISTRATION'S
APPROACH IN RECALIBRATING U.S.
ENGAGEMENT AROUND THE WORLD.
AT A MINIMUM, THIS INTERNATIONAL
EFFORT WILL RESTORE AMERICA'S
LONG-HELD REPUTATION OF BEING AN
HONEST BROKER OF A COUNTRY THAT
VALUES DIPLOMACYND OF A
COUNTRY THAT VALUES
RELATIONSHIPS WITH ALLIES AND
WELCOMES NEW ONES.
INTERNATIONALLY, THE UNITED
STATES IS ON A BETTER FOOTING
THAN IT HAS BEEN IN YEARS.
TIES WITH ALLIES HAVE BEEN
STRENGTHENED.
THOSE ON THE FENCE, LIKE RUSSIA
AND CHINA IN THIS PARTICULAR
QUESTION, ARE SHOWING SIGNS OF
COOPERATION ON ISSUES THAT ARE
CRITICAL TO OUR NATIONAL
INTEREST.
AND OUR ADVERSARIES, NOT SURE TO
YOU TO DEMONIZE THE UNITED
STATES LIKE THEY USED TO DO, ARE
ON THEIR HEELS.
THE ADMINISTRATION'S DIPLOMAC
OFFENSIVE HAS PUT US INTO A
POSITION WHERE WE HAVE A STRONG
COALITION GOING INTO THESE
IMPORTANT DISCUSSIONS ON THURSDAY.
THE EVENTS OF THE LAST WEEK ARE
UNFORTUNATE EVIDENCE OF THE
IRANIAN REGIME'S DECEIT,
DEFIANCE, AND DISREGARD FOR
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR
PEACE AND SECURITY.
FIRST, ON MONDAY, THE IRANIAN
REGIME SENT A LETTER TO THE IAEA
DISCLOSING THE EXISTENCE OF THE
SECOND ENRICHMENT REFINING
FACILITY.
A SITE THAT THE U.S. AND ISRAELI
INTELLIGCE REPORTEDLY HAVE
BEEN TRACKING FOR YEARS.
THIS MISSIVE DENIED THAT THE
SITE WAS INTENDED FOR NUCLEAR
PURPOSES THROUGH THE 3,000
CENTRIFUGES WHO WERE CLEARLY
MEANT FOR WEAPONS-GRADE
REFINEMENT.
MOREOVER, THE SITE WAS BURIED
DEEP SPURNED GROUND AND UNDER
PROTECTION BY -- UNDERGROUND AND
UNDER PROTECTION BY THE ELITE
REVOLUTIONARY GUARD, NOT THE
TYPICAL PROTOCOL FOR A PEACEFUL
ERGY SITE.
ON WEDNESDAY, THE IRANIAN
PRESIDENT, MR. AHMADINEJAD, USED
HIS TIME AT THE ROSTRUM AT THE
UNITED NATIONS, NOT TO WELCOME A
NEW DAY OF ENGAGEMENT WITH THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, BUT IN
TYPICAL FASHION, TO RAIL AGAINST
ISRAEL.
THIS DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO DIVERT
ATTENTION AWAY FROM HIS OWN
INTERNAL POLITICAL PROBLEM AS
WELL AS HIS GOVERNMENT'S
DECEITFUL NUCLEAR PROGRAM ONCE
AGAIN SHOWED THAT THIS REGIME IS
NOT A RESPONSIBLE ACTOR ON THE
WORLD STAGE.
IRAN'S PEOPLE RECOGNIZED THIS
LAST JUNE BY VOTING AGAINST
MR. AHMADINEJAD AND HIS BRAND OF
POLITICS.
THE WORLD WITNESSED ON LIVE
TELEVISION HOW MR. AHMADINEJAD
USED THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
HIS PEOPLE PAID DEARLY, PAID
DEARLY, FOR THE AUDACITY OF
THEIR VOTE.
FINALLY, OVER THE WEEKEND,
IRAN'S NEWS SERVICE REPORTED
THREE ROUNDS OF MISSILE TESTS,
INCLUDING THOSE CAPABLE OF
HITTING ISRAELI.
GENERAL SALAMI, HEAD OF THE
REVOLUTIONARY AIR FORCE SAYS
THAT THE DRILLS WERE MEANT TO
SHOW THAT IRAN IS PREPARED TO
CRUSH ANY MILITARY THREAT FROM
ANOTHER COUNTRY.
THISSER RADIC DISPLAY WILL
ACTUALLY WEAKEN IRAN'S HAND IN
GENE AND WILL HOPEFULLY SERVE
TO CONVINCE OUR RUSSIAN AND
CHINESE FRIENDS THAT THE IRANIAN
REGIME IS NOT A CREDIBLE ACTOR
NOR A RELIABLE TRADING PARTNER.
AND SO AFTER THIS DISTURBING BUT
STRANGELY PREDICTABLE WEEK OF
IRANIAN REGIME BEHAVIOR,
AMERICAN NEGOTIATORS WILL HEAD
TO GENEVA.
THIS IS THE FIRST OFFICIAL AND
DIRECT MEETING WITH IRANIAN
NEGOTIATORS IN 30 YEARS, LEADING
THE AMERICAN DELEGATION IS
AMBASSADOR BILL BURNS, ONE OF
MECHANIC'S MOST RESPECTED
DIPLOMATS.
HANG SERVED IN RUSSIA,
AMBASSADOR BURNS IS
TO ADDRESS THE COMPLEX
INTERNATIONAL DIMENSIONS IN THIS
DIPLOMATIC PROBLEM.
WE WILL BE WELL-REPRESENTED IN
GENEVA, AND I WISH AMBASSADOR
BURNS AND HIS TEAM THE BEST IN
WHAT WILSURELY BE A
CHALLENGING ASSIGNMENT.
IRAN IS NOT GOING IN THESE
NEGOTIATIONS ON SURE FOOTING.
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY HAS
NEVER BEEN UNITED.
LED BY THE UNITED STATES,
BRITAIN, GERMANY, AND FRANCE,
OPPOSITION TO IRAN'S NUCLEAR
PROGRAM IS BASED IN FACT -- IS
BASE -- IN FACT, ROOTED IN A
WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE IN BACKUP
A FIRL AND CLEAR MESSAGE:
AN IRAN WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS
UNACCEPTABLE UNDER ANY
CIRCSTANCES.
LET ME REPEAT THAT.
AN IRAN WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS
UNACCEPTABLE UNDER ANY
CIRCUMSTANCES.
THIS MESSAGE IS GAINING STRONGER
RESONANCE WITH CHINA AND RUSSIA.
THE RUSSIAN PRESIDENT'S COMMENTS
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
LAST WEEK INDICATED A
WILLINGNESS TO CONSIDER
SANCTIONS.
THIS IS POTENTIALLY A REMARKABLE
BREAKTHROUGH BECAUSE IF THE
RUSSIANS ARE WILLING TO SUPPORT
INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS, THE
CHINESE COULD BE LEFT ALONE
AMONG THE P-5-PLUS-1 GROUP AMONG
THAT DETERMINATION.
WHILE CHINA RELIES UPON IRAN FOR
SUBSTANTIAL FUEL IMPORTS, I
TRUST THAT THEY ARE CAREFULLY
WEIGHING THEIR NEED FOR ENERGY
AGAINST IRAN'S INCREASINGLY
IRRADIC AND IRRESPONSIBLE BEHAOR.
THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS OF DOING
BLISS WITH THIS REGIME HAVE
INCREASED CONSIDERABLY AND MAY
BE TOO HIGH A PRICE TO PAY.
I HOPE THAT THE CHINESE WILL
SUPPORT INTERNATIONALESTS TO
PRESSURE THIS IRANIAN REGIME AT
THIS CRITICAL TIME WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE EFFORTS
COULD ULTIMATELY RESULT IN A
MORE RELIABLE AND STABLE PARTNER
IN TEHRAN.
IT IS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE THAT
THE IRANIAN REGIME WILL BE ABLE
TO PROVE THAT ITS NUCLEAR SITES
ARE FOR PEACEFUL PURPOSES BY
THIS THURSDAY.
THE OBAMA ADMISTRATION NEEDS
TO BE READY TO MOVE QUICKLY AND
BUILD ON INTERNATIONAL MOMENTUM
CREATED OVER THE PAST WEEK TO
PRESSURE THIS REGIME.
THAT IS WHY WE IN THE SENATE
NEED TO BE READY TO PLAY OUR
PART TO SUPPORT THE
ADMINISTRATION AND MOVE ON SANCTIONS.
WE CURRENTLY IS HAVE TWO
PROPOSALS ON IRAN PENDING BEFORE
US.
FIRST, THE IRAN SANCTIONS
ENABLING ACT IS A MEASURE
INTRODUCED BY SENATOR BROWNBACK
AND I.
WE INTRODUCED THIS LAST MAY.
THIS WOULD ALLOW STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT PENSION FUNDS TO
DIVEST FROM COMPANIES THAT DO
MORE THAN $20 MILLION IN
BUSINESS WITH THE IRANIAN ENERGY
SECTOR.
SECOND -- THE SECOND BILL, THE
IRANIAN REFINED PETROLEUM
SANCTIONS ACT, INTRODUCED BY
SENATORS BAYH AND KYL,
EXPLICITLY EMPOWERS THE
PRESIDENT TO IMPOSE NEW ECONOMIC
SANCTIONS ON FOREIGN FIRMS
INVOLVED IN THE EXPORT OF
GASOLINE OR OTHER REFINED
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS TO THE
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN.
I'M COSPONSOR OF THIS BILL ALONG
WITH MORE THAN 75 OF MY SENATE
COLLEAGUES.
THE IRAN SANCTIONS ENABLING ACT
IS MODELED ON SIMILAR
LEGISLATION PASSED IN RESPONSE
TO THE GENOCIDE IN SUDAN.
18 STATE LEGISLATURES HAVE
PASSED INDIVIDUAL IRAN SANCTION
MEURES AND OUR LEGISLATION
WOULD BRING THOSE STATE EFFORTS
INTO LINE WITH FEDERAL LAW.
WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA W IN THE
SENATE, HE INTRODUCED AN EARLIER
VERSION OF THIS LEGISLATION.
IT WAS RIGHT IN 2007, AND IT'S
RIGHT IN 2009.
ANALYSTS HAVE ESTIMATED THAT
IRAN REQUIRES $20 BILLION
ANNUALLY FOR INVESTMENTS IN ITS
OIL AND NATURAL GAS SECTOR.
THIS SECTOR DIRECTLY PROVIDES
FUNDING FOR IRAN'S NUCLEAR
PROGRAM AS WELL AS ITS SUPPORT
FOR INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM.
IRAN WILL ONLY CEASE ITS IS
LITTLE I THINK NUCLEAR PROGRAM,
END ITS SUPPORT FOR TERRORISTS
IN HAMAS AND HEZBOLLAH, AND STOP
ARMING MILITANT GROUPS IN IRAQ
WHEN IT IS COMPELLED TO PAY AN
ECONOMIC PRICE.
WE'RE ENTERING A CRITICAL PHASE
IN PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STRATEGY OF
ENGAIMENT WITH IRAN, WHERE
TEHRAN WILL FACE A TRUE TEST
RIGHT NOW.
I 0 HOPE THAT THE OCTOBER 1
NEGOTIATION WILL THREAD A FREEZE
IN IRAN'S NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT
EFFORTS AND ULTIMATELY A NUCLEAR
WEAPONS-FREE IRAN.
WILL THE REGIME ACCEPT THE
PRESIDENT'S GENUINE OFFER OF
DIALOGUE AND COMPLY WITH
INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR STANDARDS
OR WILL IT CONTINUE A LOSING
STRATEGY THAT SERVES TO DEEPEN
ITS OWN ISOLATION?
THESE ARE QUESTIONS FOR THE
IRANIAN REGIME, AND THEY MUST
ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.
IF LAST WEEK IS ANY INDICATION,
CONGRESS SHOULD BE PREPARED TO
SEND THE PRESIDENT THE LEVERAGE
HE NEEDS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO
THE REGIME THAT AMERICA CANNOT
AND WILL NOT ACCEPT AN IRAN WITH
NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
THE ADMINISTRATION NEEDS ALL THE
TOOLS AT ITS DISPOSAL TO
INCREASE PRESSURE ON THE REGIME,
DIPLOMATICALLY, POLITICALLY, AND
THROUGH MORE STRINGENT ECONOMIC SANCTIONS.
I CALL ON MY COLLEAGUES TO
LISTEN TO LEGISLATURES IN SO
MANY STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY
WHO HAVE PASSED DIVESTMENT
MEASURES ALREADY.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DO NOT WANT
ANYTHING TO DO WITH INVESTING IN
THIS REGIME.
LET'S PASS DIVESTMENT AND
PETROLEUM SANCTIONS AND SEND A
MESSAGE TO THIS REGIME AND TO
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT
A NUCLEAR-ARMED IRAN IS UNACCEPTABLE.
MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE FLOOR
AND WOULD NOTE
QUORUM.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
THE PRESING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM HAWAII. MR. INOUYE: I ASK THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE RESCINDED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJE
MR. INOUYE: MR. PRESIDENT,
EARLR THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
RAISED CONCERNS THAT THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HAVE
REDUCED FUNDING IN THE OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE
MR. PRESIDENT, AS I NOTED IN MY
OPENING STATEMENT, THIS
COMMITTEE OF OURS VIEWS THE
ENTIRE BUDGET
BASED ON THAT REVIE
AND THE REVIEW CAME OUT WITH
VARIOUS RESULTS.
AND I'D LIKE
THEM WITH YOU.
FOR
BEFORE I DO
WANT TO POINT OUT TO MY
COLLEAGUES THAT THE BUDGET THAT
WE ARE CONSIDERING AT THIS
MOMENT WAS FORMULATED ABOUT A
YEAR AGO.
A YEAR AGO.
THAT'S WHEN THE PROCESS BEGAN.
AND I
AGREE THAT SINCE THAT TIME MUCH
HAS CHANGED.
AND, THEREFORE, THE COMMITTEE
FELT THAT WE OWE IT TO THE
SENATE TO APPLY THE FUNDS THAT
WE RECOMMEND WHERE THEY ARE MOST
NEED AT THIS MOMENT, N
THEY WERE NEEDED A YEAR AGO
FOR EXAMPLE, THE REDUCTIONS TO
OPERATIONS AND
PROGRAMS THAT WE
BASED ON A LACK OF JUSTIFICATION
OR CHANGED REQUIREMENTS.
THE FUNDS WERE NOT REDUCED
BECAUSE OF A NEED TO TRANSFER
FUNDING TO OTHER APPROPRIATIONS.
THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
CERTAIN FUNDING TO
EARMARKS.
THE O&M ACCOUNTS -- OPERATION
AN
REDUCE IN THIS FISCAL YEAR 2010
BASE BUDT FOR
JUST LET ME EXPLAIN A
$500 MILLION, OFF HALF A BILLION
DOLLARS, WAS -- OR HALF A
BILLION DOLLARS, WAS NOT A CUT
AS SUGGESTED BY THE SENATOR FROM
ARIZONA, BUT IT WAS RATHER A
TRANSFER FROM THE BASE BUDGET
REQUEST TO THE OVERSEAS
CONTINGENCY OPERATION BUDGET
BECAUSE THE RESOURCES FOR
CERTAIN PROGRAMS WERE MORE
APPROPRIATELY FUNDED FOR THE
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN WAR.
THIS
$100 MILLION WAS REDUCED BASED
ON ADMINISTRATIVE SAVING
PROPOSALS.
IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR THE OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET WAS
DIRECTED BY THE PRESIDENT TO
WORK WITH AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY
CUTS TO THE AINISTRATIVE BUDGETS.
SEPARATE AND APART FROM THOSE
IDENTIFIED BY THE FY 2010
BUDGET, BEYOND THAT, THE D.O.D.
SAVINGS IDENTIFIED
ADMINISTRATION WAS $100 MILLION
IN F
THESE FUNDS TO OTHER PROJECTS.
AND FINALLY $100 MILLION WAS CUT
FROM THE SECURITY PROGRAM
BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT AUTHORIZED
BY THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES
COMMITTEE.
MR. PRESIDENT, WE DO THIS TYPE
OF REVIEW EVERY YEAR.
EVERY YEAR SOMEONE COMPLAINS
THAT THEIR PROGRAMS WERE CUT.
AND, MR. PRESIDENT, WE STAND BY
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE DO MORE TO ENHANCE THE
READINESS OF THE FORCES IN THIS
BILL THAN WAS REQUESTED.
KEEP IN MIND THAT S
BUDGET WAS DRAFTED, WE HAVE
REQUESTED AND ADDED 30,000 TROOPS.
WE DO SO BY PROVIDING EQUIPMENT
TO OUR NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVES.
EVERYONE SUPPORTS THE NATIONA
GUARD, BUT WE GIVE THEM
SECONDHAND TOOLS.
IT'S ABOUT TIME THEY GOT SOME GOOD ONES.
WE DO SO
TO BUY MRAP'S TO PROTECT OUR TROOPS.
AND, YES, WE DO SO TO BUY MORE
C-17'S TO CARRY OUR FORCES
WHEREVER OUR LEADERS SEND THEM.
I THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND
SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE
QUORUM CALL:
MR. JOHNSON: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATORROM SOUTH DAKOTA.
MR. JOHNSON: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE SUSPENDED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION. UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE
SENATE WILL NOW PROCEED TO
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER
THE FOLLOWING NOMINATION WHICH
THE CLERK WILL
THE CLERK:
JUDICIARY, JEFFREY L. VIKEN OF
SOUTH DAKOTA, TO BE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA.
MR. JOHNSON:
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE DUTIES OF
THE
THE ATD VICE AND -- ADVICE AND
CONSENT OF JUDGES APPOINTED BY
THE PRESIDENT TO THE BENCH.
THE LIFETIME APPOINTMENT OF A
JUDGE IS A VERY SERIOUS
DECISION, ONE THAT HAS LASTING
PACT ON OUR DEMOCRACY.
TODAY THE SENATE TAKES UP THE
NOMINATION OF JEFFREY VIKEN TO
BE U.S. F DAKOTA.
IT IS THIS NOMINATION THAT I
WISH TO SPEAK OF TODAY.
SO FAR THIS
NEW PRESIDENT, WE HAVE CONFIRMED
TWO JUDGES.
ONE OF THOSE JUDGES IS SUPREME
COURT JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR
AND THE OTHER IS A SECOND
CIRCUIT JUDGE.
I'M PROUD TO HAVE A SOUTH
DAKOTAN AS A THIRD JUDGE TO BE
CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE.
HOWEVER, WE'RE NINE MONTHS INTO
THIS NEW ADMINISTRATION, AND WE
HAVE ONLY CONFIRMED TWO JUDGES.
I MUST SAY THAT I THINK THE
PROCESS OF NOMINATING AND
CONFIRMING JUDGES HAS BECOME
INCREASINGLY OVERPOLITICIZED.
WHILE I BELIEVEHAT THE
PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE SOME
LATITUDE IN SELECTING J
JEFF ATTENDED LAW SCHOOL AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA WHERE
OUR ATTENDANCE OVERLAPPED.
I RECEIVED MY LAW DEGREE IN
1975, AND JEFF RECEIVED HIS LAW
DEGREE IN
JEFF HAS SERVED AS ASSISTANT
U.S. ATTORNEY AND ACTING U.S.
ATTORNEY FOR SOUTH DAKOTA BEFORE
GOING INTO PRIVATE PRACTICE.
HIS EXTRAORDINARY REPUTATION OF
SKILL AND INTEGRITY DURING HIS
YEARS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAW
PRACTICE WILL TRANSLATE WELL AND
BENEFIT THIS COURT.
THE SAME CAN BE SAID OF HIS
TENURE AS FEDERAL PUBLIC
DEFENDER FOR NORTH AND SOUTH
DAKOTA, A JOB HE HAS HELD SINCE 2003.
REGARDING HIS NOMINATION, JEFF
RECEIVED A WELL-QUALIFIED RATING
FROM THE AMERICAN BAR
ASSOCIATION.
IT IS CLEAR THAT HE HAS AN
ACCOMPLISHED RESUME AND MANY
YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE
IT IS A GREAT HONOR THAT
PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS PLACED ON
JEFF.
WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE A
GREAT MEMBER OF THE SOUTH DAKOTA
LEGAL COMMUNITY NOMINATED TO
THIS POST.
JEFF HAS MANY YEARS OF PUBLIC
SERVICE
HIS FUTURE WORK FOR THE PEOPLE
OF SOUTH DAKOTA.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, HIS NOMINATION
TO THE BENCH IS FOR JUST AND THE
RULE OF LAW FOR
DAKOTA, BUT FOR OUR NATION.
I HAVE KNOWN JEFF FOR A LONG TIME.
I FIND
GOOD, MORAL CHARACTER AND STANDING IN THE COMMUNITY.
MR. PRESIDENT, IT IS WITH GREAT
SATISFACTION THAT I WILL CAST MY
VOTE TODAY FOR THE CONFIRMATION
OF JEFF VIKEN TO BE THE NEXT
U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
SOUTH DAKOTA.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THIS VERY QUALIFIED NOMINEE AND
THANK YOU AND I YIELD THE FLOOR.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM ALABAMA.
MR. SESSIONS: MR. PRESIDENT, I
THANK THE -- SENATOR JOH
HIS COMMENTS AND VALUE HIS
OPINIONS IN THIS NOMINATION AND
LOOK F
NOMINEE BE CONFIRMED.
THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS WE HAVE
IN THIS COUNTRY IS A VERY
IMPORTANT MATTER.
OUR DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES
UNDERSTANDABLY INCLINED TO BE
SU
PRESIDENT PUTS UP AND IT'S JUST
BEEN A RECOGNIZED RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE MINORITY
PARTY THAT'S NOT OF THE
PRESIDENT'S
QUESTIONS AND DIG INTO THESE
NOMINEES AND MOVE THE GOOD ONES
AND RAISE THE APPROPRIATE
QUESTIONS IF THERE'S A PROBLEM.
SO,
IMPRESSIVE BACKGROUND.
EARLY IN HIS KA, REHE WAS AN
ENACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY.
HE WAS ALSO A FEDERAL PUBLIC
DEFENDER AND A MEMBER OF THE
TRIAL LAWYERS, A BEHALF BAR
ASSOCIATION IN SOUTH DAKOTA.
HE HAS BEEN IN PRIVATE
FOR 22 YEARS AND THE LAST 16
HE'S BEEN A FEDERAL PUBLIC
DEFENDER WHERE HE DEFENDS
CRIMINAL CASES.
SO
PUBLIC DEFENDER.
I GUESS THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD MAX.
AND I'M HAP
WORK OUT THIS AGREEMENT WITH
MAJORITY AND PROCESS THIS
NOMINATION VERY QUICKLY TO GO FORWARD.
ACTUALLY, HE WAS VOTED OUT ON
THE FIRST APPEARANCE BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE AND IS ALREADY ON THE
FLOOR.
BUT I WOULD NOTE, FOR SOME
PEOPLE WHO
BEEN A DRAGGING OF FEET ON THE
NOMINATIONS, THAT THE PRESIDENT
DID NOT SEND THIS NOMINATION
FORWARD, HIS FIRST DISTRICT
COURT NOMINEE TO THE SENATE
UNTIL JUNE 25, A FEW MONTHS AGO,
OR WEEKS AGO, WHEN
COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME WAS
CONSUMED WITH THE SUPREME COURT
NOMINATION OF NOW JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR.
CHAIRMAN LEAHY DID NOT REPORT
HIS NOMINATION UNTIL AFTER THAT
CONFIRMATION PROCESS WAS OVER
UNTIL AFTER LABOR DAY.
SO WE WERE ABLE THEN TO
TIME AGREEMENT AND VOTE THE
NOMINEE OUT AND ALSO TO VOTE ON
THE
LYNCH, WHO IS A HIGHLY ABLE MOM
ME BUT AN ACT -- NOMINEE, BUT AN
ACTIVIST JUDGE
THAT -- TOO CLOSE TO MY WAY OF
THINKING WITH JUSTICE BRENNAN ON
THE SUPREME COURT, FOR WHOM HE CLERKED.
SO I THINK IT'S HEALTHY FOR US
TO ASK QUESTIONS.
I VOTED FOR JUDGE LYNCH FOR THE
SECOND C
HE WAS CONFIRMED BY A VERY LARGE
VOTE.
SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
THE NOMINEE AND MOVE -- WITH THE
MAJORITY PARTY AND THE PRESIDENT
AND MOVE THE NOMINEES AND -- IN
AN APPROPRIATE PACE.
I WANTED
MORE ABOUT THE PACE OF
NOMINATIONS.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE FOR
THE SENATE TO CONFIRM A
NOMINATION UNTIL THE PRESIDENT
HAS NOMINATED ONE.
AND I'VE HEARD MY COLLEAGUE,
CHAIRMAN SENATOR LEAHY, TALK
ABOUT THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD ENOUGH CONFIRMATIONS.
BUT I WOULD NOTE THAT THERE IS
AN 11% VACANCY RATE IN THE
FEDERAL COURTS.
THAT'S NOT AN EXTRAORDINARILY
HIGH VACANCY RATE.
IT TAKES SOME TIME TO DO
BACKGROUND CHECKS.
AND FOR THE PRESIDENT TO
CONSIDER THE PEOPLE HE MIGHT
WANT TO NOMINATE AND TO CONSULT
WITH MEMBERS OF THE SENATE, AS
HE DOES SO, I WOULD
THAT AT THIS MOMENT THERE'S 74
DISTRICT COURT VACANCI
FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT VACANCIES
AS JUDGE VIKEN IS NOMINATED FOR ONE.
BUT THERE
BEFORE THE
THERE ARE 28 CIRCUIT AND
DISTRICT COURT SEATS THAT ARE
DEEMED TO BE JUDICIAL
EMERGENCIES, BUT ONLY SIX
NOMINEES HAVE BEE SUBMITTED TO
THE SENATE FOR THOSE JUDICIAL EMERGENCY SEATS.
SO I WOULD JUST SAY THAT IT IS
-- WE CAN'T CONFIRM SOMEBODY
UNTIL THEY'RE NOMINATED.
WE CAN'T DO A BACKGROUND CHECK
ON A NOMINEE UNTIL THEY'VE BEEN NOMINATED.
WE CAN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION
AND THEIR RECORD SUBMITTED AND
THE F.B.I. BACKGROUNDS AND ALL
THAT TAKE PLACE.
AND THE BAR ASSOCIATION
EVALUATIONS.
SO I -- I WOULD JUST MAKE MY
COMMITMENT THAT WE'LL CONTINUE
TO MOVE NOMINEES
MR. VIKEN AND -- IN A TIMELY
FASHION.
I REVIEWED HIS RECORD.
I ALSO CAREFULLY REVIEWED HIS
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
AND ONE OF HIS ANSWERS I HAVE TO
NOTE WAS TROUBLING TO ME.
HE STATED THAT
FITS PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STANDARD
FOR THE TYPE OF JUDGES HE WILL
NOMINATE TO F
THAT IS, HE MEETS THE
PRESIDENT'S EMPATHY STANDARD. PRESIDENT OBAMA DESCRIBED THAT
STANDARD AS FOLLOWS: THE
PRESIDENT SAID THIS: WE NEED
SOMEBODY WHO'S GOT THE HEART
THE EMPATHY TO RECOGNIZE WHAT
THE EMPATHYO UNDERSTAND WHAT
IT'S LIKE TO BE POOR OR
AFRICAN-AMERICAN OR GAY OR
DISABLED OR OLD AND THAT'S THE
CRITERIA BY WHICH I'M GOING TO
BE SELECTING MY JUDGES.
IN 2005, WHEN THEN SENATOR OBAMA
WAS ON THE -- IN THE
HE EXPLAINED ON THE FLOOR HERE
HIS
ONROBERTS, WHO I THINK WAS --
JOHN ROBERTS, WHO I THINK WAS
ONE OF THE FINEST NOMINEES WE
HAVE SEEN IN DECADES AND WHOSE
TESTIMONY BEFORE THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE WAS JUST STUNNING IN
ITS IMPSSIV
OF THE LEGAL
COMPREHENSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW
THE COURT WORKED AND CASES -- IT
WASN'T A CASE BROUGHT UP THAT HE
DIDN'T SEEM TO FULLY K
VIRTUALLY EVERY CASE THAT THE
SUPREME COURT EVER WRITTEN HE
SEEMED TO BE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT.
HE
HE VOTED AGAINST JUDGE ROBERTS
AND STATED THAT 5% OF CASES ARE
DETERMINED BY -- QUOTE -- "ONE'S
DEEPEST VALUES AND CORE CONCERNS
AND THE DEPTH AND BREADTH OF
ONE'S EMPATHY."
CLOSE QUOTE.
NOW, WE CAN ONLY TAKE TS TO
MEAN THAT THE PRESIDENT BELIEVES
THAT IN 5% OF ALL CASES JUDGES
SHOULD NOT SET ASIDE THEIR
PERSONAL BELIEFS BIASES OR
EXPERIENCES.
AND I THINK THIS IS A RADICAL
AND A
THE MOST IMPORTANT PILLAR, THE
FUNDAMENTAL PILLAR OF THE
JUDICIAL SYSTEM, JUDICIAL
IMPARTIALITY.
WHATEVER THE EMPATHY STANDARD
IS, IT'S NOT LAW.
AND WE HAVE COURTS OF LAW IN
THIS COUNTRY.
WHENEVER A JUDGE
PERSONAL BELIEFS, BIASES OR
EXPERIENCE TO MAKE A DECISION
THAT FAVORS ONE PARTY, IS IT NOT
TRUE THAT HE NECESSARILY HAS,
THEREFORE, DISFAVORED THE OTHER
PARTY AS A RESULT OF HIS
PERSONAL BELIEFS AND BIASES.
FROM THE JUDGE'S SO CALL
EMPATHY, THERE'S A LITIGANT WHO LOSES.
NOT ON THE BASIS OF LAW, BUT
BECAUSE A JUDGE DID NOT IDENTIFY
WITH THEM.
SO WHEN A PERSON IS NOMINATED TO
OUR FEDERAL BENCH, WE ASK THEM
TO TAKE A JUDICIAL OATH BEFE
THE OATH
HONORED AMERICAN TRADITION OF
BLIND JUSTICE.
THE OATH SAYS THIS -- QUOTE --
"I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL
ADMINISTER JUSTICE WITHOUT
RESPECT TO PERSONS.
AND DO EQUAL RIGHT TO THE POOR
AND TO THE RICH.
AND THAT I WILLAITHFULLY AND
IMPARTIALLY DISCHARGE AND FORM
ALL OF THE DUTIES INCUMBENT UPON
ME UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND
LAWS OF
HELP ME GOD."
IMPLEASEED TO SAY THAT THE
SUPREME COURT HAS NOT YET STRUCK
DOWN SO HELP ME GOD IN THE OATH.
AND, HOPEFULLY, THEY NEVER WILL.
THE PRESENT STANDARD FOR
JUDICIAL NOMINEES, I THINK,
PLAINLY, CONFLICTS WITH THAT OATH.
AND WE'VE HAD A BIG DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
AND IT'S NOT A LITTLE BITTY
MATTER.
IT'S NOT A SMALL MATTER.
JUDGES TAKE THE OATH TO BE
IMPARTIAL.
I PRACTICED LAW
FOR MANY YEARS.
AN I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVED AND A
JUDGE WHO HEARD MY CASE WOULD
RULE ON THE LAW FAIRLY AND
OBJECTIVELY.
AND IF I LOST AND DID NOT HAVE A
SUFFICIENT LAW O
LOGIC TO -- TO SUPPORT MY
POSITION I DIDN'T EXPECT TO
PREVAIL.
AND THAT'S THE KIND OF CON CONCEPT
THAT UNDERLIES AMERICAN JUSTICE.
ASIDE FROM DAVID
ALMOST EVERY ONE OF PRESIDENT
OBAMA'S NOMINEES, INCLUDING
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR HAVE OBJECT --
I FOUND
HE BELIEVES HE FITS THAT
STANDARD TO BE CONCERNING.
HOWEVER, HE HAS ALSO
ACKNOWLEDGED IN HIS ANSWERS TO
QUESTIONS WE SUBMITTED TO HIM
FOR THE RECORD
COMPLETE VIEW.
NOW, THIS IS WHAT HE SAID IN HIS
ANSWER IN WRITING -- QUOTE -- "A
JUDGE'S CONSIDERATION OF A CASE
MUST ALWAYS BE GOVERNED
ATTENTION TO T FACTS PRESENTED
BY THE
ESTABLISHED LAW.
EMPATHY IS A PERSONAL
CHARACTERISTIC WHICH MAY ASSIST
A JUDGE IN ANALYZING THE HUMAN
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH BRING PEOPLE
BEFORE THE COURT.
BUT THE LAW -- BUT THE LAW
NOT THE PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF
JURISTS IS THE PATH TO JUSTICE
IN CONSIDERING EACH CASE."
CLOSE QUOTE.
I THINK THAT'S OK.
I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU CAN HAVE
ANY EMPATHY OF A PERSONAL
CH
LIKE TO DISAGREE WH THE
PRESIDENT WHO NOMINATED.
THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD STATEMENT OVERALL.
AND HE ALSO STATED THAT HE
BELIEVES -- QUOTE -- "THE ROLE
OF A JERL DISTRICT JUDGE --
COMPETENCE, A STRONG WORK ETHIC. TRUE.
IMPARTIAL AND DISPASSIONATE
CONSIDERATION OF PROVEN FACTS
AND
FIDELITY TO BINDING AND
PERSUASIVE PRECEDENT AND RESPECT
FOR ALL WHO APPEAR BEFORE THE
COURT.
CLOSE QUOTE.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD STATEMENT.
AND I THINK IT -- IF HE'LL
ACCORDING TO THOSE STANDARDS, HE
WILL DO WELL, AND I BELIEVE HE
WILL.
I'M GLAD TO SEE HE'S AN HONORS
GRADUATE, BUT DIDN'T GO TO SOME
OF THESE SCHOOLS, SENATOR
WENT TO SCHOOL IN SOUTH DAKOTA,
UNIVERSITY, AN HONORS GRADUATE
THERE.
HE PRACTICED LAW
OVER THE YEARS, A LOT OF PRACTICE
AND IN THE COURSE OF THAT YOU
LEARN THAT JUDGES REALLY -- THE
GOOD JUDGES DO CONSISTENTLY TRY
TO REACH THE RIGHT,
DISPASSIONATE RESULT, AND I
THINK HE
STATEMENTS ABOUT EMPATHY THAT
ARE NOT PERFECT, BUT MY JUDGMENT
IS THAT HE'S BEEN IN THE
COURTROOM, HE'S BEEN BEFORE GOOD
JUDGES AND I'M HOPEFUL HE'S
GOING TO BE A VERY GOOD JUDGE.
BUT WE'LL SEE.
AND I THINK IT'S --
BECOME EVEN MORE PROBLEMATIC IF
YOU'RE NOMINATED FOR THE SUPREME
BECAUSE THOSE HIGHER COURTS SEEM
TO BE THE ONE -- ONES WHO FEEL
LESS COMPUNCTION IN ALLOWING
THEIR PERSONAL VIEWS IN THE CASES.
THIS JUDGE IS
BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, BUT
ALSO HIS CIRCUIT -- THE CIRCUIT
PRECEDENT AND BECAUSE HE STATED
HE BELIEVES THAT THE RULE --
ROLE OF
IMPARTIAL AND
CONSIDERATION OF PROVEN FACTS
AND RECENT LEGAL ARGUMENTS,
FIDELITY TO BINDING AND
I'LL CERTAINLY GIVE HIM
BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AND VOTE IN
FAVOR OF HIS NOMINATION AND HOPE
HE WILL VOTE
STATEMENTS AND WILL INTERPRET
THE LAW AS WRITTEN, REFRAIN FROM
IMPOSING PERSONAL VIEWS IN HIS
DECISION AND WILL
FOLLOW THE OATH TO UPHOLD THE
CONSTITUTION FIRST AN MOAR MOST
DIDN'T LE IT HE SHOULD UPHOLD IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE FROM AN
ESSAY BY A FORMER CHAIRMAN OF
THE JUDICIARY
HATCH, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED ON
CONSTITUTION DAY.
HE SAID THIS -- QUOTE -- "THE
CONSTITUTION, ITS WORDS AND
THEIR MEANING WAS ESTABLISHED BY
THE PEOPLE, CAN CAN ONLY BE
SACREDLY OBLIGATORY UPON ALL
GOVERNMENT
THAT IS WHY THE DEBATE OVER
JUDICIAL SELECTION IS REALLY
DEBATE OVER JUDICIAL POWER.
IT IS A DEBATE OVER WHETHER THE
CONSTITUTION CONOLS JUDGES OR
JUDGES CONTROL THE CONSTITUTION.
OVER WHETHER THE CONSTITUTION
REALLY IS WITH NOTHING LESS --
OVER WHAT THE CONSTITUTION
REALLY IS WITH NOTHING LESS THAN
LIBERTY AT STAKE.
I THINK THAT'
STATEMENT.
THE ROLE OF A
WHY AT ITS MOST BASE LEVEL
POLICY IN A DEMOCRACY MUST BE
SET BY THE ELECTED BRANCHES WHO
ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE.
AND JUDGES ARE TO BE NEUTRAL
ARBITERS OF DISPUTES, DECIDING
THE CASES BASED ON THE LAW AND
THE FACTS, WITHOUT A
THEIR PERSONAL, POLITICAL,
IDEOLOGICAL VIEWS OR BIASES TO
ENTER PROCESS.
THAT'S WHY THEY PUT ON A ROBE,
TO SUGGEST THEIR IMPARTIALITY.
THAT'S WHY THEY TAKE THE OATH
THAT I QUOTED FROM.
THAT'S THE KEY INGREDIENT OF OUR
LEGAL SYSTEM, THE GREATEST LEGAL
SYSTEM THE WORLD HAS EVER KNO
I THANK THE CHAIR AND WOULD
YIELD THE FLOOR.
The Presiding Officer:
YIELDS TIME?
IF NO ONE YIELDS
BE
A Senator: MR. PRESIDENT.
THE PRO SIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM VERMONT.
MR. LEAHY: WHAT IS THE
PARLIAMENTARY SITUATION?
THE PRESIDING
NOMINATION IS THE PENDING
QUESTION.
MR. LEAHY: HOW MUCH TIME IS
AVAILABLE TO EACH SIDE?
THE PRO SIDING OFFICER: 17 1/2
MINUTES
CHAIRMAN.
5 1/2 MINUTES REMAIN WITH THE
REPUBLICAN -- THE VICE CHAIRMAN. MR. LEAHY: THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I THANK THE DISTINGUISHED
PRESIDING OFFICER, MY DEAR
FRIEND FROM NEW JERSEY.
WE'RE CONSIDERING THE NOMINATION
OF JEFFREY VIKEN FOR A LIFETIME
APPOINTMENT TO THE U.S. DISTRICT
COURT
DAKOTA.
THE DISTINGUISHED SENIOR SENATOR
FROM SOUTH DAKOTA,
HAS ALREADY SPOKEN, AND THIS
NOMINEE IS HERE WITH HIS
STRONG -- WITH SENATOR
STRONG SUPPORT.
PRESIDENT OBAMA NOMINATED
MR. VIKEN.
SENATOR JOHNSON HAD SUP
HIM, AND SENATOR THUNE,
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.
IT'S GOING TO B THE
SENATE CONFIRM -- EVEN THOUGH
IT'S ALMOST THE END OF
SEPTEMBER, IT'S THE FIRST SENATE
CONFIRMATION FOR A FEDERAL
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND THE
FIRST TO FILL ONE OF 74 CURRENT
FEDERAL TRIAL COURT VACANCIES.
THERE ARE MORE
VACANCIES THROUGHOUT THE FERAL
JUDICIARY, AND WE'RE SOON
TO BE AT NEAR-RECORD LEVEL.
I ACCOMMODATED THE RANKING
MEMBER AND OTHER REPUBLICANS ON
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BY
POSTPONING A HEARING ON
MR. VIKEN'S NOMINATION WHILE WE
CONSIDERED THE RECENT SUPREME
COURT NOMINATION OR THE NAME
WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE
BUT I AM PLEASED THAT THE
COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY REPORTED
THE NOMINATION AT THE BEGINNING
OF THIS MONTH BY A
AND I THINK THAT THE VOTE
TONIGHT
GU
OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE VOTE,
AND I HOPE IT'S A SIGN THAT WE
MIGHT FINALLY, FINALLY START
MAKING SOME PROGRESS ON JUDICIAL
NOMINATIONS AND DO
EXPEDITIOUSLY.
THE SENATE HAS TO DO A BETTER
OF REGULARLY CONSIDERING QUALIFIED, NONCONTROVERSIAL
NOMINEES TO FILL VACANCIES ON
THE FEDERAL BENCH WITHOUT
NEEDLESS AND
I LOOK AROUND THIS CHAMBER.
I BELIEVE I HAVE BEEN HERE
LONGER THAN ANYBO
PRESENTLY ON THE FLOOR.
I SAW MY DISTINGUISHED
COLLEAGUE, SENATOR INOUYE, WHO
HAS SERVED HERE LONGER THAN I HAVE.
I HAVE BEEN HERE 35 YEARS.
I HAVE BEEN HERE UNDER BOTH
REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC
PRESIDENTS.
I HAVE NEVER SEEN A SITUATION
WHERE THERE IS THIS KIND OF S
WALKING OF
WE HAVE GOT TO GO BACK TO THE
WAY WE HAVE TRADITIONALLY DONE
IT FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY.
I MENTION THAT DURING -- I WAS
BRIEFLY CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DURING
PRESIDEN
EVEN THOUGH WE HAD HADHE
UNFORTUNATE EXPERNCE OF 61 OF
PRESIDENT CLINTON'S NOMINEES
BEING POCKET FILIBUSTERED
THEN-REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, WHEN I
CAME IN DURING
A YEAR AND A HALF,
100 OF PRES
NOMINEES.
AN ALL-TIME RECORD.
AN
GETTING NOMINEES THROUGH.
THAT WAS BY A DEMOCRATIC
MAJORITY WITH A REPUBLICAN
PRESIDENT.
NOW, I DO WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE'S RANKING MEMBER,
SENATOR SESSIONS.
I SEE SENATOR SESSIONS ON THE FLOOR.
I DO WANT TO THANK HIM.
I, AS I
BACK THIS NOMINEE, THE VIKEN
NOMINATION, BECAUSE OF THE
NOMINATION FOR SOTOM
GIVE TIME TO PREPARE.
SOTOMAYOR WE MOVED QUICKLY
THROUGH.
I WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS
NOMINATION OF MR. VIKEN AT OUR
BUSINESS MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 10
WITHOUT AN UNNECESSARY HOLDOVER
PERIOD.
UNFORTUNATELY, NOW THAT IT
BEEN ON THE CALENDAR, STILL IT
HA
TO SCHEDULE SENATE APPROVAL OF A
NONCONTROVERSIAL NOMINEE WHO IS
PROBABLY GOING TO BE UNANIMOUSLY
CONFIRMED, AND SHOULD BE.
THROUGH THE WIDE RANGE OF
EXPERIENCE MR. VIKEN HAS.
HE IS CURRENTLY THE FEDERAL
DEFENDER FOR THE COMBINED
DISTRICTS OF NORTH DAKOTA AND
SOUTH DAKOTA.
NOT JUST THE POPULATION, BUT FOR
THOSE OF US WHO HAV
NEW ENGLAND, THE AREA IS
COVERED -- THE AREAS
ENORMOUS.
HE SERVED AS
ATTORNEY.
IS ACTING U. ATTORNEY FOR
SOUTH DAK
HE SPENT MORE THAN TWO DECADES
IN PRIVATE PRACTICE.
HE HAS BEEN BOTH PROSECUTOR AND DEFENDER.
HIS NOMINATION
HIGHEST RATING POSSIBLE.
WELL QUALIFIED FOR THE AMERICAN
BAR ASSOCIATION'S STANDING
COMMITTEE ON THE FEDERAL
JUDICIARY.
I WOULD URGE SENATORS TO GIVE
HIM A STRONG BIPARTISAN VOTE.
AND THEN DO A BETTER JOB OF
FILLING THE RISING NUMBER OF
JUDICIAL VACANCIES TO ENSURE
THAT JUSTICE IS
DENIED TO ANY AMERICAN BECAUSE
OF OVERBURDENED COURTS.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT
THREATENING FILIBUSTERS OF
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S JUDICIAL
NOMINEES, THE OTHER S
WORK TO TREAT HIS NOMINEES
FAIRLY, AS DID I WITH PRESIDENT
BUSH'S NOMINEES.
I POINT OUT BY THIS TIME IN
PRESIDENT BUSH'S FIRST TERM, WE
HAD ALREADY CONFIRMED SIX OF HIS
NOMINATIONS TO
AND DISTRICT COURTS.
WE HAVE CONFIRMED ONE OF
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S NOMINEES TO
CIRCUIT COURT.
NINE MONTHS INTO PRESIDENT
OBAMA'S FIRST TERM, WE CONFIRMED
ONLY ONE OF HIS LOWER COURT
NOMINEES, EVEN THOUGH HE MADE
THOSE NOMINEES TWO MONTHS
EARLIER THAN PRESIDENT BUSH DID.
WE CAN DO BETTER.
NOT JUST THAT THE SENATE CAN DO
BETTER.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER.
AFTE MONTHS OF DELAY, ON
SEPTEMBER 17, THE SENATE FINALLY
CONFIRMED
SERVE IN THE SECOND CIRCUIT.
I KNOW THAT CIRCUIT WELL.
THAT'S THEIRCUIT THAT I --
ADMITTED TO.
IT COVERS THE STATES OF VERMONT,
NEW YORK AND CONNECTICUT.
DESPITE THE FACT THAT JUDGE
LYNCH'S NOMINATION WAS NONCONTROVERSIAL, DESPITE THE
FACT IT WAS REPORTED OUT OF
COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY WITH THE
STRONG SUPPORT OF REPUBLICAN AND
DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS, IT STILL
TOOK THREE MONTHS AFTER HIS
NOMINATION WAS REPORTED BY THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE SENATE TO
CONFIRM IT.
DELAYED AND DELAYED AND
AND YOU WOULD THINK THERE MUST
BE SOME CONTROVERSY, BUT
FINALLY VOTED, THE VOTE WAS
94-3.
NOW,
MONTHS BECAUSE
OF 100 SENATORS WANT TO HOLD IT
UP, THAT'S NOT BEING
RESPONSIBLE, A THAT'S NOT
SHOWING THE TYPE OF DEFERENCE
THE -- TO THE JUDICIARY THAT WE
SHOULD.
IN THE TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
REMAIN PENDING ON THE EXECUTIVE
CALENDAR, SOME OF THEM FROM BACK
BE
FIVE OF THE NOMINATIONS ARE FOR
APPOINTMENTS TO BE ASSISTANT
ATTORNEYS GENERAL AT
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
FIVE OUT OF A TOTAL OF 11
DIVISIONS AT THE DEPARTMENT.
AS A RESULT OF THE SENATE'S
DELAY AND INACTION, FIVE
CRITAL DIVISIONS AT THE
DEPARTMENT.
THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL, THE
CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, THE TAX
DIVISION, THE OFFICE OF LEGAL
POLICY, AND THE ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION.
JUST THINK OF THAT.
FIVE CRITICAL PARTS OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REMAIN
WITHOUT
PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES.
NOW, REPUBLICANS HAVE HELD THESE
UP, EVEN THOUGH E PRESIDENT
EVEN THOUGH THEY'VE PASSED OUT
OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE PEOPLE,
VOTE AGAINST THEM.
LET'S HAVE A VOTE, UP OROWN.
PRESIDENT OBAMA MADE HIS FIRST
JUDICIAL NOMIN
MARCH. I REMEMBER IT.
IT WAS SNOWING LIKE MAD.
HE NOMINATED DAVID HAMILTON TO
THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
THAT'S BEEN ON THE EXECUTIVE
CALENDAR SINCE EARLY JUNE, EVEN
THOUGH IT HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE
SENIOR-MOST REPUBLICAN IN THE
SENATE AND ONE OF THE MOST
DISTINGUISHED SENATORS OF EITHER
PARTY THAT'S EVER SERVED,
NATOR LUGAR.
THE NOMINATION OF JUDGE
DAVIS TO THE FOURTH CIRCUIT WAS
REPORTED BY THE COMMITTEE ON
JUNE 4 BY A VOTE OF 16-3.
CAN'T GET IT CON
SENATE.
THESE NOMINATIO OF JUDGE
BEVERLY MARTIN TO THE 11th
CIRCUIT WAS REPORTED UNANIMOUSLY
FROM THE
ON SEPTEMBER 10 AND STRONGLY
SUPPORTED BY THE TWO REPUBLICAN
SENATORS FROM HER STATE.
STILL CAN'T GET IT SCHEDULED OR
CONSIDERED.
NOW,
ARE SOON 120 UNLESS WE START
MOVING FORWARD.
I MENTION THAT JUST BECAUSE WE
SHOULD HAVE THE HISTORY BEFORE
US.
AT LEAST THE ONE BRIGHT SPOT IS
MOVING MR. VIKEN
AT 5:15, IT IS A MR. VIKEN.
AT 6:15, IT WILL BE JUDGE VIKEN.
I CONGRATULATE HIM AND HIS FAMILY.
I REMEMBER HIM COMING BEFORE OUR
COMMITTEE, A WONDERFUL PEN, A
WONDERFUL FAMILY.
I CAN SEE WHY THE TWO SENATORS
--
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR, JUNIOR
SENATOR, A REPUBLICAN SENATOR --
BOTH SUPPORT
HE SHOULD BE A JUDGE.
BUT
MOVING THESE A LITTLE MORE
EXPEDITIOUSLY.
MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT IS THE TIME
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR HAS SIX MINUTES, 45
SECONDS
THE MINORITY HAS FIVE AND A HALF MINUTES.
MR. LEAHY: I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM AND ASK
CONSENT THE TIME BE
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
MR. LEVIN: I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
UNDER THE QUORUM CALL BE DISPENSED WITH.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. LEVIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I
SUPPORT THE McCAIN AMENDMENT
THAT WOULD STRIKE THE $2.5
BILLION IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING
FOR C-17 AIRCRAFT IN THE
COMMITTEE-REPORTED BILL AND TO
RESTORE SERIOUS CUTS THAT WERE
MADE IN THE
IN PART TO IFT FUNDS TO
SUPPORT CONTINUED C-17
TERMINATING PRODUCTION, LIKE
CLOSING A BASE,
ECONOMIC LOSS FOR THE
COMMUNITIES INVOLVED.
IT INVOLVES PAIN.
WE NEED THAT UP CLOSE A PERSONAL.
-- WE UNDERSTAND THAT UP CLOSE
AND PERSONAL.
WE MUST DO SO FROM TIME TO TIME,
MAKE THESE DIFFICULT DECISIONS,
AND WE HAVE TO DO THAT FOR WHAT
IS BEST FOR THE NATION AND FOR
THE MEN AND WOMEN IN THE ARMED
FORCES.
BECAUSE AS SECRETARY GAT
IN A LETTER TO ME TODAY
EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ENDING
C-17 PRODUCTION, THE DEPARTMENT
DOES NOT NEED ADDITIONAL C-17'S
TO MEET STRATEGIC NEEDS.
FIRST, I WANT TO AGREE WITH
CHAIRMAN INOUYE THAT THE C-17 IS
A FINE AIRCRAFT.
I HAVE BEEN A STRONG SUPPORTER
OF THE C-17 PROGRAM, EVEN WHEN
IT WAS HAVING GROWING PAINS
EARLY IN THE PROGRAM.
IF WE DID NOT ALREADY HAVE A
C-17 AIRCRAFT FLEET, WE WOULD
HAVE TO CREATE ONE.
THIS IS NOT A QUESTION OF
WHETHER WE SHOULD BUY THE C-17.
WE
OF 213 AIRCRAFT.
IT IS A QUESTION OF HOW MANY
C-17'S DO WE NEED?
ON THAT POINT, I WROTE A LETTER
TO THE CURRENT CHIEF OF STAFF,
GENERAL SWARTS, WHO WAS THEN
COMMANDER OF THE U.S.
TRANSPORTATION COMMAND, IN
NOVEMBER OF 2007.
I ASKED FOR HIS PROFESSIONAL
OPINION AS TO WHETHER WE NEEDED
C-17
AIRCRAFT THE AIRCRAFT HAD
ALREADY BOUGHT.
HE GAVE US HIS PERSONAL AND
PROFESSIONAL OPINION AND HE SAID
THAT SINCE YOU ASKED FOR MY
PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL
OPINION, I BELIEVE THAT 205
C-17'S AND 111 C-5'S IS THE
CORRECT MIX FOR THE FUTURE.
D HE EXPLAINED HOW HE
THAT OPINION.
I WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT,
MR. PRESIDENT, TO MAKE THOSE
LETTERS FROM GENERAL SCHWARTZ
PART OF THE RECORD AND I ALSO
WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT --
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. LEVIN: I WOULD ALSO ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
LETTER THAT I RECEIVED FROM
SECRETARY GATES ALSO
PART OF THE RECORD AT THIS TIME. OBJECTION.
MR. LEVIN: AND THALT
O-- AND THAT THEBALANCE OF MY STATEMENT BE
INSERTED IN THE RECORD.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. LEVIN: MR. PRESIDENT, I
WOULD ASK THAT MY REMARKS
RELATIVE TO THIS ISSUE BE PLACED
IN THE RECORD NOT TO INTERRUPT
THE DEBATE RELATIVE TO THE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT THAT'S
BEFORE US.
THE PRESIDING OFFIC
OBJECTION.
MR. LEAHY: MR. PRESIDENT, I
AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS
THERE A SUFFICIENT
THERE APPEARS TO BE A SUFFICIENT SECOND.
THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
VOTE: VOTE: VOTE:
VOTE:
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: ANY
SENATORS WHO WISH TO CHANGE
THEIR VOTE OR CAST THEIR VOTE?
HEARING NONE, THIS VOTE IS 99 YEAS.
NO NAYS.
AND THE NOMINATION IS CONFIRMED.
A MOTION
CONSIDERED.
-- IS CONSIDERED MADE AND LAID
UPON THE TABLE.
THE PRESIDENT SHALL BE NOTIFIED
OF THE SENATE'S ACTION AN SENATE
RETURNS --
RETURNS TO
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.
A SENATOR:
CONSENT TO BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK
FOR ONE MINUTE. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT? THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATOR FROM IOWA.
A SENATOR:R. PRESIDENT, WOULD
I BE IN ORDER TO SPEAK AS IF IN
MORNING BUSINESS?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: YES, OF
COURSE.
MR. GRASSLEY: OK.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
SENATE'S NOT IN ORDER.
THE SENATE SHOULD COME TO ORDER,
PLEASE.
THE SENATOR FROM IOWA.
MR. GRASSLEY: OK.
MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY TO
RESPOND TO BRIAN
ARTICLE PUBLISHED AUGUST 31,
2009, IN
ENTITLED "THE REAL COST OF CHEAP FOOD."
I WOULD ASK PEOPLE TO READ
BUT ALSO AS YOU READ IT, TAKE
INTO CONSIDERATION MY VIEW OF IT.
MY VIEW OF IT ISN'T VERY
POSITIVE.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: EXCUSE ME.
THE SENATE'S NOT IN ORDER.
THANK YOU.
THE SENATOR FROM IOWA.
MR. GRASSLEY: I SAY MY VIEW OF
MR. WALSH'S ARTICLE IS NOT VERY
POSITIVE BECAUSE, UNFORTUNATELY,
I SEE THIS ARTICLE AS ONE OF THE
MOST SKEWED AND ONE-SIDED
ARTICLES I'VE EVER HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO READ,
PARTICULARLY IN MAINSTR MEDIA.
THIS REPORT WAS FAR FROM
OBJECTIVE JOURNALISM.
IT SEEMS TO ME WHEN PEOPLE ARE
TALKING ABOUT AMERICA'S FOOD
CRIS AND HOW TO FIX IT, IT
OUGHT TO BE VERY I
ACCURATE.
BEFORE OUTLINING THE
FACTUAL ERRORS THAT THE AUTHOR
PRESENTS IN HIS ARTICLE, I WILL
MENTION THAT
AND SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE.
IN FACT, NORMAN BORLOG, FATHER
OF THE GREEN REVOLUTION, AND
FROM MY HOME STATE OF IOWA, IS
CREDITED FOR CREATING A
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL SYSTEM
DECADES AGO.
AND, AS YOU MAYNOW, THE -- THE
NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER OF
1970, N
I JUST REFERRED TO, RECENTLY
PASSED AWAY AT
WHAT THIS ARTICLE REFERS TO THE
NYMAN RANCH.
WHAT NYMAN RANCH AND OTHER
ORGANIC FARMERS ACROSS IOWA AND
OUR NATION ARE GOING IS TO BE
COMMENDED.
THESE PRODUCERS ARE PROVIDING
ADDITIONAL CHOICES TO CONSUMERS
AND CREATING HIGHLY PROFITABLE
SMALL FARMS WHICH CAN HELP
SUSTAIN RURAL COMMUNITIES.
IN FACT, THE NATIONAL
AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE
REPORTS THAT IN 2007,
ORGANIC FARMS WERE LOCATED IN MY
STATE OF IOWA.
THAT BEING SAID, I'M
DISAPPOINTED THAT AN INFORMATION
SOURCE LIKE I REFERRED TO FROM
"TIME" MAGAZINE BY THE AUTHOR
MR. WALSH
MAGAZINE TO BE KNOWN AS A NEWS
MAGAZINE HAS RESORTED TO AN
INACCURATE, INCOMPLETE, AND
UNFAIR REFLECTION OF FAMILY
FARMERS, AND I WAN TO EMPHASIZE
THE WORD
WITH "FARMERS" FROM ACROSS THE
UNITED STATES.
SO I TAKE A FEW MINUTES HERE ON
THE SENATE FLOOR TO REFUTE A FEW
MAIN POINTS THAT THIS AUTHOR HAS
MADE.
FIRST, I WANT TO DISCUSS HOW OUR
NATION'S FARMERS ARE STEWARDS OF
OUR LAND, PROTECTING AND CARING
FOR THEIR LIVESTOCK AND OUR
ENVIRONMENT.
SECONDLY, I WAN
POPULATION GROWTH AND THE
GROWING DEMANDS TO PRODUCE SAFE
AND AFFORDABLE
AND FINALLY, I WILL ADDRESS HOW
BOTH ORGANIC AGRICULTURE AND
CONVENTIONAL AGRICUL
COMPLEMENTARY NEEDS AND CAN
COEXIST IN HARMONY.
AS
I HAVE BEEN A FAMILY FARMER ALL
MY LIFE.
NOW, OF COURSE, I HAVE
CREDIT TO MY SON ROBIN FOR DOING
MOST OF THE WORK ON THE FARM AND
A GRANDSON IN THAT FARMING OPERATION.
AND ONE THING YOU FIND OUT AS A
GRANDFATHER, WHEN YOU
GRANDSON IN THE FARMING
OPERATION, GREARS -- GRANDFATHERS AREN'T QUITE AS
IMPORTANT AS THEY USED TO BE.
BUT MY SON ROBIN AND I CRO
SHARE OUR LAND AND WE HAVE TAKEN
GREAT PRIDE OVER THE YEARS IN
BOTH CARING FOR OUR LIVESTOCK
AND CONSERVING OUR NATURAL
RESOURCES WHILE PRODUCING
BOUNTIFUL CORN AND SOIBEAN
HARVESTS.
WE'RE NOT UNLIKE TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF OTHER FARMERS
ACROSS IOWA AND THIS COUNTRY
WHOSE LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON
TAKING CARE OF OUR AND ANIMALS.
AND I WOULD GIVE CREDIT TO THE
NEW OCCUPANT OF THE PRESIDING
OFFICER'S CHAIR, SENATOR TESTER,
FROM MONTANA, FOR BEING ANOTHER
FAMILY FARMER AS WELL AND BEING
A GOOD CARETAKER OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
WITH FINAL PASSAGE OF THE FOOD
CONSERVATION AND ENERGY ACT OF
2008, ALSO KNOWN AS THE FARM
BILL, CONGRESS MADE ONE OF THE
LARGEST COMMITMENTS TO
CONSERVATION THAT THIS NATION
HAS EVER SEEN.
AN ADDITIONAL $6 BILLION IN NEW
MONEY
LANDS PROGRAMS SUCH AS
CONSERVATION STEWARDSHIP
PROGRAM, THE WETLANDS RESERVE
PROGRAM, AND THE FARM LAND
PROTECTION PROGRAM.
EVEN ON MY OWN FARM, WE USED NO
TILL FOR OUR BEANS, MINIMUM
TILLAGE FOR OUR CORN, AND WE PUT
IN WETLANDS, A WATERWAY AND A
GRASS STRIP, EVEN THOUGH WE
MOSTLY FLAT FARM LAND.
ROBIN AND I ARE REQUIRED TO DO THIS.
WE DO IT BECAUSE WE KNOW AS
STEWARDS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT, OUR
FARM WILL BENEFIT IN THE LONG
RUN.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S
ECONOMICALLY GOOD TO BE GOOD
STEWARDS OF THE LAND.
IT PUTS MONEY IN YOUR POCKET.
AND WE'LLE ABLE TO THEN IN THE
FINAL ANALYSIS PASS THE
OPERATION DOWN TO OUR
GRANDCHILDREN AND GREAT
GRANDCHILDREN.
THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN POINTS
THE AUTHOR OF THE "TIME
ARTICLE, MR. WALSH, TOTALLY
MISSES.
HE BASICALLY DEMONIZES
PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE.
MR. WALSH I
FAMILY FARMERS IN OUR COUNTRY
ARE THOSE WHO LIVE ON 30 ACRES
OF
BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.
FAMILY FARMERS CAN OPERATE SMALL
FARMS, BUT THEY CAN ALSO OPERATE
LARGE FARMS, AND IF GIVEN THE
OPPORTUNITY, THEY WANT TO BE
ABLE TO PASS THAT FARM ON TO
FUTURE GENERATIONS OF THE
FAMILY.
IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE TO
IMPLY THAT THESE PRODUCERS WOULD
PURPOSELY DEPLETE OUR RESOURCES
R A QUICK BUCK.
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A QUICK
BUCK IN FARMING, BUT I CAN
PROVIDE -- BUT IT CAN PROVIDE
OVER A
SUSTAINABLE LIFESTYLE.
I'M GOING TO USE THREE CHARTS
DURING MY PRESENTATION, AND THE
FIRST ONE ISNE THAT'S GOING TO
BE USED TO REFUTE SOME OF THE
ACCUSATI
PRODUCERS AROUND THE UNITED
STATES CONTINUE TO BECOME MORE
AND MORE EFFICIENT IN THEIR
PRODUCTION PRACTICES, AND THIS
CHART SHOWS IN THE LAST 25 YEARS
, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
PRODUCE MORE BUSHELS OF CORN
WITH LESS FERTILIZER.
NOW, GET THIS.
EVERYBODY THINKS THE COMMERCIAL
AND FAMILY FARMERS -- FARMER IS
JUST POURING ON THE FERTILIZER
WITHOUT ANY CARE WHATSOEVER
ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, JUST TO
PRODUCE, PRODUCE, PRODUCE.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU MONEY,
AND PARTICULARLY IN RECENT YEARS
WITH THE HIGH INCREASE IN THE
PRICE OF PHOSPHOROUS, POTASSIUM,
AND ESPECIALLY NITROGEN.
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY
COURSE TO GO IF YOU'RE A FARMER
THAT JUST THINKS POURING MORE
FERTILIZER ON IS GOING TO MAKE
YOU MORE MONEY.
BUT WHAT WE SHOW HERE IS IN THE
LAST 25 YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE
TO PRODUCE MORE CORN WITH EVEN
LESS FERTILIZER, AND YOU CAN SEE
IT HERE IN THE DOWNWARD TRENDS
OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHATE
POTASH.
WE USE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURAL DATA COMPILED BY
THE FERTILIZER INSTITUTE THAT
NITROGEN, PHOSPHATE AND POTASH
EFFICIENCY ARE GROWING.
-- GROWING IN CORN PRODUCTION.
TO PUT I ANOTHER WAY, WE'RE
GROWING MORE BUSHELS OF CORN PER
POUND OF NUTRIENT APPLIED.
THIS IS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION
TO THE IMPRESSION THAT "TIME"
MAGAZINE AUTHOR
WITH H STATEMENTS.
WE KNOW THAT THE HYPOXIA IS
PARTLY A NATURAL PHENOMENON, BUT
SCIENTISTS GENERALLY AGREE THAT
NITRATES FROM AGRICULTURE AND
OTHER MAN MADE FACTORS
CONTRIBUTE TO IT.
WHEN THE HYPOXIA ZONE FORMS --
AND MOST OF THE TIME WE TALK
ABOUT THIS IN THE GULF OF
MEXICO -- IT DOES, IN FACT,
DISPLACE FISH, BUT IT IS
PARTICULARLY UNFAIR TO TRY TO
QUANTIFY IMPACTS ON THE FISHING
INDUSTRY BECAUSE THERE ISN'T
SUFFICIENT DATA TO BACK THAT
CLAIM UP.
TECHNOLOGY HAS ALLOWED FARMERS
TO APPLY THE EXACT AMOUNT OF
FERTILIZER IN THE RIGHT WAY SO
THAT THERE ISN'T EXCESS.
HOWEVER, EVEN ORGANIC FARMING,
WHICH THE AUTHOR SEEMS TO HOLD
IN HIGHEST OF ESTEEM, USES
MANURE FROM ANIMALS FOR
FERTILIZER, WHICH ALSO CONTAINS
NITROGEN AND SOIL NATURALLY
CONTAINS NITROGEN THAT UNDER
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES OF TOO
MUCH RAIN OR TOO MUCH
IN THE GROUND CAN EVENTUALLY GET
INTO OUR STREAMS.
THAT'S TRUE WHETHER IT'S NATURAL
FR
FROM COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER.
FARMERS HAVE BEEN EMPLOYING
CONSERVATION PRACTICES LIKE NO
TILL, BUFFER STRIPS AND WETLANDS
JUST LIKE IAVE ON MY FARM TO
PREVENT SOIL EROSION AND KEEP
RUN-OFF FROM GOING DIRECTLY INTO
THE WATERWAYS FOR YEARS.
AND I ANTICIPATE THAT ESPECIALLY
UNDER THIS NEW FARM BILL THAT
THESE PRACTICES WILL GROW.
IN ADDITION, RESEARCH IS
STARTING TO SHIFT ON HYPOXIA
ISSUES IN REGARD TO THE GULF OF
MEXICO.
THERE IS INCREASING RECOGNITION
THAT CAUSES OF HYPOXIA RELATE
STRONGLY TO MANMADE ALTERATION
OF THE ENTIRE SYSTEM INCLUDING
CHANNELIZATION OF THE
MISSISSIPPI, REVERSAL OF THE
ECHAFALIA RIVER IN ALABAMA, AND
EXTREME LOSS OF WETLANDS AND
BARRIER ISLANDS THAT FILTER
NUTRIENTS AND PROTECT AGAINST
STORM SURGES, NOT SOLELY
NUTRIENT ISSUES, AS THIS AUTHOR
WOULD IMPLY.
THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY E.P.A., THE
E.P.A. VALENTINES ADVISORY BOARD
HAS A HYPOXIA REPORT OUT
INDICATING THAT 22% OF THE
NITROGEN AND 34% OF THE
PHOSPHOROUS LOADS CAN BE
ATTRIBUTED TO POINT SOURCE
RATHER THAN AGRICULTURE AS FAR
AS THE HYPOXIA PROBLEM IN THE
GULF OF MEXICO IS CONCERNED.
ADDITION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY ESTIMATES THAT
OVER TWO TRILLION GALLONS OF
UNTREATED COMBINED SEWER OVER
FLOW RUN INTO OUR NATION'S
WATERWAYS EACH YEAR, A THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREDICT
PROJECTS DUMP MILLIONS OF YARDS
OF NUTRIENT-RICH SOIL INTO THE
MISSOURI AND OTHER RIVERS FOR
HABITAT RESTORATION PURPOSES
THAT ALSO CONTRIBUTE.
THESE TYPES OF DREDGING PROJECTS
IN THE MISSOURI RIVER FLOOD
PLAIN ALONE MAY REP
MUCH AS 8% OF THE SPRING'S TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS DISCHARGE, LEADING
TO PROBLEMS IN THE GULF OF
MEXICO.
TECHNOLOGY IN CORN PRODUCTION IN
THE UNITED STATES OVER THE LAST
100 YEARS HAS BEEN REMARKABLE.
FROM ABOUT 1860-
AVERAGED ABOUT JUST 25 BUSHELS PER ACRE.
NOT UNTIL THE 1950'S THROUGH
1980'S WHEN CORN BREEDERS BEGAN
USING DOUBLECROSS
SINGLE
SEE THESE GREAT ADVANCES IN
YIELDS OF CORN.
JUST IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, WE
HAVE SEEN
BIOTECHNOLOGY WHICHAVE
PROVIDED YIELDS OVER 150 BUSHELS
PER ACRE, AND THIS AUTHOR,
MR. WALSH, CLEARLY VIEWS
BIOTECHNOLOGY AS A BAD THING
WHEN, IN
DROUGHT RESISTANCE AND NEWT
REPRESENTATIVE USE EFFICIENCY IS
ACTUALLY IMPROVING CORN'S
PERFORMANCES WITH LESS INPUTS,
AS DEMONSTRATED BY THIS CHART.
MANY OF OUR TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES
ARE EXPECTING THEIR YIELD TRENDS
TO EXCEED 300-BUSHEL PER ACRE IN
COMING YEARS, AND FOR SOMEONE
LIKE ME WHO HAS BEEN FARMING FOR
50 YEARS, IT'S ALMOST
UNIMAGINABLE BUT EXCITING AT THE
SAME
PROJECTED YIELDS THAT WE'RE
HEARING FROM.
I WANT TO TURN TO ANOTHER CHART
NOW.
IT DEALS WITH ANOTHER ISSUE
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO
UNDERSTAND WHEN WE'RE TALKING
ABOU
AND REDUCING POLLUTION.
IN FACT,
90 MILLION ACRES -- NOW, LET ME
PUT 90 MILLION ACRES IN -- IN
COMPARISON TO ABOUT 90 MILLION ACRES.
I THINK IT'S MORE LIKE
87 MILLION ACRES THIS YEAR OF
CORN BEING PRODUCED, OR TWO
CORN BEING PRODUCED.
SO I'M REFERRING TO
90 MILLION ACRES HERE ON THIS
CHART -- OR
IN 1950,
90 MILLION ACRES OF CROP LAND IN
AMERICA WAS SIMPLY USED TO FUEL
OUR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION.
SO LET'S GET IT STRAIGHT.
IT TOOK 90 MILLION ACRES OF
CROPS JUS
HORSES AND ALL OF THE MULES THAT
PROVIDED THE WORK AND THE ENERGY
ON OUR AGRICULTURAL LAND.
YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE TRACTORS
WERE INVENTED.
NOW, IF YOU ADD UP ALL OF THE
LAND IN THE UNITED STATES BEING
USED TO PRODUCE CORN, WHEAT, AND
SOYBEANS
ACRES TODAY.
SO LESS THAN 100 YEARS AGO WE
WOULD HAVE BEEN USING NEARLY
HALF OF THE ACRES IN THE UNITED
STES JUST TO FEED THE DRAFT
ANIMALS THAT PRODUCE THE POWER
TO TILL THE SOIL AND TO PRODUCE
OF CORN PER ACRE COMPARED TO THE
150-SOME BUSHELS PER AIRVEG NOW
THAT WE'LL -- ACRE NOW THAT WE
WILL HAVE IN THE UNITED STATES
OF CORN PRODUCTION.
BY 2050 IT'S ESTIMATED THAT THE
WORLD'S POPULATION WILL EXCEED
9.3 MILLION PEOPLE COMPARED TO
-- THAT'S 6 BILLION PEOPLE
COMPARED TO 6
NOW.
AS THE WORLD DEMANDS FOR KNEW
TRENT-RICH FOOD AND PROTEIN
CONTINUE TO GROW, AS BOTH INCOME
LE
DEVEPING NATIONS, AMERICA'S
FARMERS ARE READY TO ANSWER THAT
CALL TO HELP FEED THE INCREASING
NUMBER OF PEOPLE AROUND THE
WORLD.
AND MOST PEOPLE WOULD TELL YOU
TODAY NOT BY PUTTING MORE LAND
INTO PRODUCTION BUT BY GETTING
MORE FROM EACH ACRE OF LAND, AS
THAT PRODUCTIVITY AND YIELD
INCREASES VERY DRAMATICALLY, AS
IT HAS IN THE
INTO THE FIEWMP.
NOW, MR. WALSH OF "TIME"
MAGAZINE ATTACKS ANIMAL AGRICULTURE THROUGHOUT THIS
ARTICLE.
HIS THEME IS THAT IF ANIMAL
DOESN'T ROAM FREE ON THE WES
PRAIRIE AND EAT GRASS, IT SIMPLY
COULDN'T BE HEALTHY OR SAFE TO
EAT.
MR. WALSH CITES THE PEW
COMMISSION ON INDUSTRIAL FARM
ANIMAL PRODUCTION IN HIS
ANALYSIS OF WHY ANIMALS TREATED
WITH ANTIBIOTICS PRODUCE MEAT
UNSAFE TO EAT.
HOWEVER, THE AMERICAN VETERINARY
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION RESPONDED TO
THE PEW REPORT WITH A LENGTHY
REPORT OF THEIR OWN WHICH THE
AUTHOR, MR. WALSH, CONVENIENTLY
FAILS TO MENTION.
PERHAPS BECAUSE THE AMERICAN
VETERINARY MEDICINE ASSOCIATION
STUDY SAID -- QUOTE -- "A
SCIENTIFIC HUMAN-ANIMAL NEXUS
CONNECTING ANTIMICROBIAL
TREATMENTS IN ANIMALS WITH
FOODBORNE OR ENVIRONMENTALLY
CONTRACTED HUM DISEASES HAS
NOT BEEN PROVEN."
LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS TAKE VERY
SERIOUSLY THEIR RESPONSIBILITY
TO PROVIDE SAFE AND ABUNDANT
FOOD TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
DAIRY, POULTRY AND LIVESTOCK
FARMERS HAVE MADE A VOLUNTARY
COMMITMENT TO USING ANTIBIOTICS
RESPONSIBLY.
BY DEVELOPING RESPONSIBLE USE
GUIDELINES, THESE INDUSTRIES
HAVE PROACTIVELY TAKEN STEPS TO
SAFEGUARD BOTH HUMAN AND ANIMAL
HEALTH, AND MR. WALSH MAKES NO
ON ISSUE AFTER ISSUE, I'VE
WORKED ON MY MAIN PRIORITY, IS
THAT THE POLICY DECISIONS WE
MAKE MUSTING BASED ON SOUND
SCIENCE -- MUST BE BASED ON
SOUND SCIENCE AND
POLITICAL IDEOLOGY.
WE'VE SEEN STUDIES THAT INDICATE
THE RISK OF FOODBORNE BACTERIA
ON MEAT INCREASES WHEN
ANTIBIOTICS THAT HELP SUPPRESS
ANIMAL DISEASE ARE REMOVED,
ACTUALLY MAWING OUR FOOD --
MAKING OUR FOOD LESS SAFE TO
EAT, AND DOES MR. WALSH TAKE
THAT INTO CONSIDERATION?
WE ONLY HAVE TO TURN TO OUR
NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE ATLANTIC TO
SEE HOW A BAN ON ANTIBIOTICS HAS
PLAYED OUT, BECAUSE THE EUROPEAN
UNION MADE A DECISION TO PHASE
OUT THE USE OF ANTIBIOTICS AS
GROWTH PROMOTERS OVER 15 YEARS
AGO, AND IN 1998 DENMARK
INSTITUTED A FULL VOLUNTARY BAN
WHICH
AFTER THE BAN WAS IMPLEMENTED IN
1999, PORK PRODUCERS SAW AN
IMMEDIATE INCREASE IN PIGLET
MORTALITY AND POSTWEANING DIARRHEA.
DR. SCOTT HERD, A FORMER U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPUTY
UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND
SAFETY AND A PROFESSOR AT IOWA
STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF
VETERINARY MEDICINE, RELEASED A
STUDY WHICH SHOWS THAT WHEN PIGS
HAVE BEEN SICK
THAT THEY HAVE GREATER PRESENCE
OF FOOD SAFETY PATHOGE ON
THEIR CARCASSES WHEN SLAUGHTERED.
SO I WANT
ON IN DENMARK
LAST CHART.
THE EFFECTS OF BANNING
ANTIBIOTICS.
AND WE HAVE A DANISH MODEL HERE,
AND IT DOESN'T PROJECT VERY
GOOD, HEALTHY ANIMAL AGRICULTURE
OR FOR THE SAFETY OUR CONSUMING
REPUBLIC -- OR CONSUMING PUBLIC.
IF THIS BAN HAD RESULTED IN
IMPROVEMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH --
IN OTHER WORDS, THE BAN THAT THE
EUROPEAN UNION PUT ON ANTIBIOTICS, TELECOMMUNICATIONLY
TELECOMMUNICATION-- PARTICULARLY IN DENMARK -- IF
THIS BEEN HAD RESULTED IN
IMPROVEMENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH,
SUFFERING CONSEQUENCES LIKE
PIGLET MORTALITY WOULD MAKE SENSE.
BUT THE SCIENCE DOES NOT BACK UP
THAT POSITIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN
PUBLIC HEALTH HAS OCCURRED TO
THE DENMARK, AND AS A RULT OF
THE DENMARK BAN.
IN FACT, THE WORLD HEALTH
ORGANIZATION IN 2002 RELEASE ADD
STUDY ON ANTIMICROBIAL
RESISTANCE AND COULD FIND NO
PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFIT FROM THE
DENMARK BAN.
IT IS TRUE THAT OVERALL USE OF
ANTIBIOTICS IN DENMARK HAS
DECLINED, BUT THERE HAS BEEN A
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE USE
OF THERAPEUTIC ANTIBIOTICS WHICH
ARE USED TO TREAT AND CONTROL
DISEASES.
I THINK IT IS AN INTERESTING
STATISTIC -- AN INTERESTING
STATISTIC IS THAT IN 2009 THE
USE OF THERAPEUTIC ANTIBIOTICS
IN DANISH PIGS IS GREATER THAN
WHAT WAS USED TO PREVENT THE
DISEASE AND TO PROMOTE GROWTH
PRIOR TO THE BAN IN 1999.
SO I THINK IT'S VERY EASY TO SEE
THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCIENCE
-- AND MR. WALSH CONVENIENTLY
FOR EXAMPLE OTHERS IN IT -- THAT
THERE IS THE PRACTICE IN THE
UNITED STATES IS SUPERIOR TO THE
PRACTICE OF THE BAN IN DENMARK.
WE HAD A 2009 IOWA STATE
UNIVERSITY STUDY ESTIMATING
PRODUCTION COSTS WOULD RISE BY
$6 PER PIG IN THE FIRST YEAR OF
A PROHIBITION IF A SIMILAR BAN
WAS IMPOSED IN THE UNITED
STATES, AS IT IS IN DENMARK.
OVER 10 YEARS THE CUMULATIVE
COST TO THE U.S. PORK INDUSTRY
WOULD EXCEED $1 BILLION.
THIS WOULD ALL BE ON TOP
STIVMENESTIMATED$4.6 BILLION U.S. PORK PROVIDERS
HAVE LOST SINCE SEPTEMBER 2007
DUE TO A PERFECT STORM OF EVENTS
WITHIN THAT INDUSTRY.
THE AUTHOR, MR. WALSH, ALSO
POINTS TO RECENT RECALLS IN
NUTS, FRIEWLTS, AND VEGETABLES
AS EVIDENCE THAT CONVENTIONAL
AGRICULTURE IS HARMFUL AND
UNSAFE.
WHAT MR. WALSH CHOOSES
IS THAT SALOMON NECESSARILY LOW
AND E. COLI ARE NATURALLY
INCURRING -- NATURALLY OCCURRING
IN ORGANISMS WIT PROPER
HANDLING, PROCESSING, AND COOKING.
BUT, WITH THAT, IF YOU HANDLE
THEM PROPERLY, IF YOU PROCESS
THEM PROPERLY, IF YOU COOK THEM
PROPERLY, THOSE RISKS CAN BE
MINIMIZED OR EVEN ELIMINATED.
ORGANIC AGRICULTURE IS NOT
SOMEHOW EXEMPT FROM BEING
AFFECTED BY THESE BACTERIA, AS
MAYBE MR. WALSH MIGHT WANT YOU
TO BELIEVE.
IN FACT, ONE OF THE MAIN
CHALLE
SAFETY SYSTEM HAS BEEN THE
PERPETUAL UNDERFUNDING OF THE
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION,
AND I HOPE THAT THE SENATE WILL
BE ABLE TO UNDERTAKE A
COMPREHENSIVE FOOD SAFETY REFORM
YET THIS YEAR AND GIVE VERY
SERIOUS CONSIDERATION AND
ATTENTION TO THE FUNDING
DEFICIENCIES OF THAT AGENCY.
AMERICAN CONSUMERS DEMAND NOT
ONLY A SAFE AND ABUNDANT FOOD
SUPPLY BUT ALSO AN
SELECTION TO FEED THEIR FAMILIES
NUTRITIOUS AND HEALTHY FOOD.
THE AUTHOR FAILS TO RECOGNIZE
THAT PERSONAL CHOICE IS PART OF
THAT EQUATION.
ASK ANY AMERICAN CONSUMER.
WHILE LESS THAN 1% OF
AGRICULTURE IS FARMED ORGAN
CLIRKS AS HE PONTS OUT, A SIMPLE
ECONOMICS LESSON WOULD TELL US
THAT
DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO ONE AND ANOTHER.
IN 2008, AMERICANS SPENT 9.6% OF
THEIR DISPOSABLE PERSONAL ON
FOOD
THIS HAS STEADILY DECREASED
SINCE THE LATE 1920'S WHEN
NEARLY 24% OF OUR INCOME WAS
SPENT FOR FOOD INTAKE.
OUR CONSUMERS HAVE DEMANDED AN
AFFORDABLE FOOD SUPPLY, AND OUR
AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY HAS
ANSWERED THAT CALL.
OTHER NATIONS WITH LESS DEVELOPED AGRICULTURAL
INDUSTRIES THAN THE UNITED
STATES SPEND ANYWHERE FROM
BETWEEN 12% TO 45% OF THEIR
INCOME ON FOOD.
AT THE SAME TIME, THE PRODUCERS
ARE PROVIDING NEW -- EFFICIENT
AND ARE PROVIDING U.S. CON
AREL
THE FARM SHARE BEING RETAI
THE PRODUCER -- NERKDZ THE
FAMILY FARMER -- HAS
SAME TIME BEEN DECREASING.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE YEARS 2000
TO 2006, THE FARM VALUE RANGED
FROM 5% TO 6% FOR CEREALS AND
BAKERY PRODUCTS COMPARED TO WHAT
IT IS BEING PAID AT THE RETAIL
LEVEL.
COSTS IN PASSAGING OR PROCESSING
AND TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT FOR
MORE OF THE ACCOUNTS AT THE --
MOST OF THE COSTS AT THE GROCERY
LEVEL.
CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE
PRODUCERS ARE NOT GETTING RICH.
INSTEAD, THEY ARE PRODUCING THE
SAFEST, MOST ABUNDANT, MOST
REASONABLY PRICED
WORLD FOR OUR CONSUMERS AT A
TIME WHEN THEIR SHARE OF THE
FOOD VALUE IS NOT INCREASING.
PERHAPS MR. WALSH, THE "TIME"
AUTHOR, BELIEVES WE SHOULD BE
SPENDING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF
OUR INCOME ON FOOD.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE
FINANCIAL SITUATION OUR NATION
IS FACING WITH INCLUDING
FAMILIES OUT OF WORK AND WITH
LOWER DISPOSABLE INCOME, THESE
CITIZENS WOULD BE OUTRAGED IF
SUDDENLY THEIR FOOD EXPENDITURE SKYROCKETED.
THE ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE AT
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE REPORTED THAT TOTAL
CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES
WAS $1.1 TRILLION IN 2008, A
3.3% INCREASE FROM THE $1.128
TRILLION IN 2007.
PRICES ARE NATURALLY RISING
BECAUSE OF HIGHER COSTS TO DO BUSINESS, INCLUDING
TRANSPORTATION COSTS.
BUT DO
FEASIBLE TO SEE THESE PRICES GO
EVEN HIGHER SO THAT THE AUTHOR,
MR. WALSH, CAN FURTHER PROMOTE
WHAT I CONSIDER A POLITICAL
AGENDA?
GROWING ALL OF
ORGANICALLY WILL TAKE MORE LAND,
COST MORE MONEY TO PRODUCE,
DRIVE PRICES UP, AND ULTIMATELY
MAKE FOOD EVEN LESS AFFORDABLE
TO THOSE IN NEED.
I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITIES
THAT ORGANIC AGRICULTURE HAS
MADE POSSIBLE FOR FARMERS IN MY
STATE OF IOWA, AND I'M SURE
OTHER SENATORS WOULD SAY THE
SAME FOR THEIR
IT HAS TRULY ALLOWED OUR
SMALLEST FARMERS TO FLOURISH AND
RECEIVE PREMIUM FOR
CROPS AND LIVESTOCK.
IT HAS
HAS HELPED US TEA
WHERE THEIR FOOD COMES FROM.
I AGREE WITH THE AUTHOR THAT
FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA'S AND
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE'S
BRINGING MORE VISIBILITY TO
ED
WHERE THEIR FOOD COMES FROM.
I COMND THEM FOR
IMPORTANT ISSUES RELATING TO OUR
HEALTH BY EATING FRESH FRUITS
AND VEGETABLES.
ORGANIC AGRICULTURE AND
CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE CAN
COEXIST.
BOTH WILL BE DRIVEN BY DEMANDS
AND BOTH PROVIDE IMPORTANT
CHOICES FOR THE U.S. CONSUMER.
SOME CONSUMERS
LOCALLY GROWN FOODS.
OTHERS WILL SHOP FOR THE
COST-EFFECTIVENESS IN THEIR
TIGHT HOUSEHOLD BUDGETS.
IT'S TIME -- IT'S TIME FOR
"TIME" MAGAZINE AND MR. WALSH TO
START BEING HONEST WITH THEIR
READERS.
THE NEXT TIME THE MAGAZINE WANTS
TO RUN A STORY THAT CLEARLY
REFLECTS THE AUTHOR'S PERSONAL
VIEWS, THEY SHOULD IDENTIFY THAT
ARTICLE AS SUCH.
I EXPECT THE NEXT ARTICLE THAT
"TIME" PUBLISHES ON AGRICULTURE
TO BE BETTER-RESEARCHED AND TO
PRESENT A MORE BALANCED VIEW.
I YIELD THE FLOOR
THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
MR. REID: SPLP?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE
MAJORITY LEADER.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE CALL OF THE
QUORUM BE TERMINATED.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE SENATE PROCEED
TO CALENDAR
THAT THE NOMINATIONS BE
CONFIRMED EN BLOC, THE MOTION TO
RECONSIDER BE LAID ON THE TABLE
EN BLOC, AND NO FURTHER MOTIONS BE IN ORDER.
THAT ANY STATEMENTS RELATING TO
THE NOMINATIONS APPEAR AT THE
APPROPRIATE PLACE IN THE RECORD
AS IF READ, PROVIDED FURTHER,
THAT THE PRESIDENT IS
OF
RETURN TO LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
THE PRESIDIN
OBJECTION.
MR. REID: MR. PRESIDENT, FAUX ON
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30,
FOLLOWING A PERIOD OF MORNING
BUSINESS, THE SENATE PROCEED TO
TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 2918, LEGISLATIVE BRCH
APPROPRIATION.
ALL DEBATE UNTIL 4:30 BE EQUAL
DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED BETWEEN
SENATOR NELSON OF NEBRASKA OR
SENATOSENATOR MURKOWSKI.
AND THAT NO AMENDMENTS BE IN
ORDER TO THE NEGOTIATIONS.
I FURTHER ASK CONSENT FOLLOWING
THE DISPOSITION OF THE POINTS OF
ORDER THAT THE MOTION -- IF THE
MOTION TO WAIVE IS SUCCESSFUL,
THE SENATE PROCEED TO THE
ADOPTION OF THE CONFERENCE
REPORT IMMEDIATELY WITH TWO
MINUTES BEING EQUALLY
PRIOR TO EACH VOTE. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. REID: WITH WITH RESPECT TO
THE CONFEREES ON THE DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE, I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT SENATOR KIRK AND
LeMIEUX TO REPLACE SENATOR
KENNEDY AND SENATOR MARTINEZ. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION. MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT
RELATIONS
H.R. 3 -- H.R. 2171, EN BLOC, --
LET ME DO THAT AGAIN, MR.
PRESIDENT. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT FOREIGN
RELATIONS COMMITTEE BE
DISCHARGED FROM FURTHER ARE
CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3593, AND
PROCEED TO THEIR IMMEDIATE
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
THE CLERK: H.R. 3593,
AMEND THE UNITED STATES
INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING ACT
OF 1994 TO EXTEND BY ONE YEAR
THE OPERATION OF
ASIA AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES M
H.R. 2131, AN ACT TO AMEND THE
FOREIGN AFFAIRS RESTRUCTURE ACT
OF 1998 AND SO FORTH.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION, THE MEASURE
DISCHARGED EN BLOC.
AND THE SENATE PROCEEDS TO THEM EN BC.
MR. REID: I ASK U
CONSENT THE BILLS BE READ A
THIRD TIME AND PASSED EN BLOC, THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER BE LAID
ON THE TABLE WITH NO INTERVENING
ACTION OR
ANY STATEMENTS RELATING TO THIS
MATTER APPEAR AT THE APPROPRIATE
PLACE IN THE RECORD AS IF GIVEN.
THE PRESID
OBJECTION.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THE COMMERCE ARE SCIENCE
AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE BE
DISCHARGED FROM FURTHER
CONSIDERATION OF S. 2856789. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK
WILL REPORT.
THE CLERK: S. RES. 285,
SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND
OF NATIONAL CYBER
AWARENESS MONTH AND RAISING
AWARENESS AND ENHANCING THE
STATE OF C
UNITED STATES. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION, THE COMMITTEE IS
DISCHARGED AND THE SENATE WILL
PROCEED TO THE MEASURE.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE RESOLUTION BE
AGREED TO, THE PREAMBLE BE
AGREED TO, THE MOTION TO
RECONSIDER BE LAID UPON THE
TABLE EN BLOC.
THE PRESIDING OFFI OBJECTION.
MR. REID: ANY STATEMENTS
RELATING TO THIS MATTER APPEAR
AT THE APPROPRIATE
RECORD AS IF GIVEN.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. REID: MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THE SENATE
TH
WILL REPORT.
THE CLERK: S. RES. 293, RELATIVE
TO THE DEATH OF
BELMAN, FORMER UNITED STATES
SENATOR FOR THE STATE OF
OKLAHOMA.
THE PRESIDG OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE SENATE PROCEEDS
TO THE MEASURE.
MR. REID: I ASK UNANIMO
CONSENT THE RESOLUTION BE AGREED
TO, THE PREAMBLE BE AGREED TO EN
BLOC, AND THE MOTION TO
RECONSIDER BE LAID ON THE TAIL
HE BE BLOCK.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: BLOCK. -- BE LAID ON THE TABLE, EN BLOC.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT OBJECTION.
MR. REID: MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WHEN THE SENATE COMPLETES ITS BUSINESS
TOE, IT ADJOURN UNTIL TOMORROW
MORNING, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER
30, AT 10:00 A.M.
FOLLOWING THE PRAYER AND THE
PLEDGE, THE JOURNAL OF
PROCEEDINGS, THE MORNING HOUR BE
DEEMED EXPIRED, THE TIME FOR THE
TWO LEADERS BE RESERVED FOR
THEIR U
THE SENATE THEN PROCEED TO A
PERIOD OF MORNING BUSINESS FOR
NOT HOUR WITH SENATORS PERMITTED
TO SPEAK UP TO TEN MINIMUM EACH
WITH THE TIME EQUALLY DIVIDED
AND CONTROLLED BETWEEN THE TWO
LEADERS HOYER DESIGNEES, WITH
THE REPUBLICANS CONTROLLING THE
FIRST HALF, THE MAJORITY
CONTROLLING THE FINAL HALF.
FOLLOWING MORNING BUSINESS, THE SENATE PROCEED TO THE
CONSIDERATION OF THE CONFERENCE
REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 2918,
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, A PROVIDED
UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER.
FINALLY, I ASK THE SENATE RECESS
FROM 12:30 UNTIL 2:15 P.M. TO
ALLOW FOR THE WEEKLY CAUCUS LUNCHES.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WITHOUT
OBJECTION.
MR. REID: MR. PRESIDENT THERE,
WILL BE AT LEAST THREE VOTES
AROUND 4:30 TOMORROW AFTERNOON.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS
TO COME BEFORE THE SENATE, I ASK
THE
PROVISIONS OF S. RES. 293, AS A
MARK OF FURTHER RESPECT TO
FORMER SENATOR HENRY BELMAN OF OKLAHOMA.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER: UNDER THE
PREVIOUS ORDER, THE SENATE
STANDS ADJOURNED UNTIL 10:00
A.M. ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30,
2009, AND DOES SO AS A MARK OF
FURTHER RESPECT TO THE MEMORY OF