Floor Statements

Mr. President, I want to bring attention to a significant disaster situation in the Great Lakes region. As a result of a deadly combination of the Midwest drought and an unusually warm winter, the Great Lakes are at near record low water levels. The Army Corps of Engineers reports that Lakes Michigan and Huron are more than 2 feet below their long-term average. Lake Superior is more than 1 foot below its long-term average. Keith Kompoltowicz, chief of watershed hydrology for the Army Corps of Engineers, has said regarding the Great Lakes water levels, ``There is a good chance of setting record lows.'' The situation in the Great Lakes has resulted in freighters getting stuck in channels, ships carrying reduced loads leading to millions of dollars in losses, harbors closing or being threatened with closure, and so-called Harbors of Refuge not being able to provide shelter to boaters in distress.

In addition to response, recovery and mitigation related to Hurricane Sandy damage, I also understand this bill provides funds to help respond to other natural disasters. I would ask the manager of the bill, Senator Leahy, is that correct?

Would the near-historic low water levels of the Great Lakes caused by drought and mild winters be considered a natural disaster?

I thank the Senator. I am pleased the bill includes $821 million to dredge federal navigation channels and repair damage to Corps projects nationwide related to natural disasters. Would federally-authorized Great Lakes harbors and channels be eligible for that funding?

I thank the Senator for his clarification. The Army Corps of Engineers estimates that $35 million could be utilized in operations and maintenance funding just to restore minimum operations in the Great Lakes system. I am hopeful that $35 million of the $821 million for dredging will be directed to Great Lakes projects. I thank the Senator for his work on this important legislation, and I thank my friends for their support in addressing the low water level impacts on the Great Lakes navigational system through this supplemental appropriations bill.

Mr. President, for the last 22 years, Daniel Akaka has represented the people of Hawaii in this body. They have been the better for his service, and I have greatly appreciated the wisdom, humility, and passion with which he has served here.

One issue on which we have been able to work closely as fellow members of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is oversight of the Federal workforce, a key issue for his State and for taxpayers everywhere. Senator Akaka's passion for Federal workforce issues comes from his passion for public service and for effective government. Just in this Congress, I was an original cosponsor of his Federal Whistleblower Protection Act, to strengthen the law protecting Federal employees who bring to light fraud, waste, and abuse in Federal programs. That Akaka bill is expected to be signed into law before the end of the year. Also this Congress, I was proud to cosponsor his Hatch Act Modernization Act to allow hard-working employees of State and local governments, who are covered by the Hatch Act, to serve as elected officials in their communities.

In addition to his focus on Federal workforce issues, Senator Akaka has long been a valued member of the Armed Services Committee. We have worked together on legislation to reform Defense Department business and financial management systems; strengthen oversight and accountability of wartime contracting; and strengthen the Defense Department's management of the substantial funds it spends to acquire property and services.

Senator Akaka joined in 2002 with Senator Inhofe to form the Senate Army Caucus, and through this bipartisan group they have focused welcome attention on the programs and needs of our Army. Senator Akaka, himself an Army veteran, has been an important source of insight into the challenges facing our soldiers and their families.

Of course, as the former chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Akaka has long demonstrated an intense dedication to those who have helped defend our Nation. His steadfast advocacy for veterans health programs, education benefits, and other important programs has made a significant and lasting impact on the lives of veterans and their families.

When people describe Daniel Akaka, one of the first words used to describe him is ``humble.'' He is indeed that. He has been a dedicated and principled servant of the people of Hawaii and our Nation, an unfailing ally of our veterans and their families, and a valued colleague and friend. I will miss him, and I will always remember how he taught us that gentleness and effectiveness are not mutually exclusive characteristics.

Herb Kohl

Mr. President, in his four terms representing the State of Wisconsin in this body, Senator Herb Kohl's focus has been precisely where it should be: the welfare of the people of his State and of our Nation. Whether in supporting American manufacturers and the jobs they provide, in fighting for protection from crime and for adequate nutrition for our children, in protecting senior citizens from elder abuse, or in preserving the Great Lakes that our two States share, Senator Kohl has accomplished much on behalf of American families.

I have been fortunate to work closely with Senator Kohl on issues of vital importance to our States. He has long been a strong supporter of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which helps U.S. manufacturers with technical support and services that make them more efficient and competitive in the global marketplace. His support for adequate MEP funding has made a significant difference for American companies and workers.

Now, we in Michigan bow to no one in our love for the Great Lakes, but even I would admit that Wisconsin, second only to Michigan in its length of Great Lakes coastline, is a close competitor. As a member of the Great Lakes Task Force, which I cochair, he has supported cleanup of toxic hot spots, the fight against invasive species, protecting Great Lakes water quality, and sufficient funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

We have also shared an interest in consumer protection. Senator Kohl chairs the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, and from that platform, he has battled those who would prey on American consumers, whether they are abusive credit card companies or oil-exporting cartel nations.

But where Senator Kohl has left what may be his most lasting impression is in his hard work on behalf of our Nation's most vulnerable citizens: children and seniors. He has long advocated solutions to help make college more affordable. He has helped expand the availability of nutritious breakfasts for school-age children and programs to help parents afford food on the table for their families. He has worked to strengthen afterschool programs. And in 2007 and again in 2008, he introduced the Patient Safety and Abuse Protection Act, which allowed employers to perform background checks on nursing home employees to help prevent elder abuse. When this legislation was included in the Affordable Care Act in 2009, it was a major step forward for patient safety.

I will miss working with Herb Kohl on these and many other issues. I will miss the opportunity to give him a hard time whenever our Detroit Pistons beat his Milwaukee Bucks. I hope we can continue the important work he has helped move forward: protecting good jobs, our Great Lakes, our students, and our seniors.

Mr. President, over a half century ago, Rosa Parks sparked a revolution in American race relations when she decided that she would no longer tolerate the humiliation and demoralization of racial segregation on a bus. The strength and spirit of this courageous woman captured the consciousness of not only the American people but the entire world. Her stand on that December day in 1955 was not an isolated incident but part of a lifetime of struggle for equality and justice. Twelve years earlier, in 1943, Rosa Parks had been arrested for violating another one of the city's bus related segregation laws requiring blacks to pay their fares at the front of the bus then get off of the bus and re-board from the rear of the bus. The driver of that bus was the same driver with whom she would have her confrontation years later.

Rosa Parks, by her quiet courage, symbolizes all that is vital about nonviolent protest, as she endured threats of death and persisted as an advocate for the simple, basic lessons she taught the Nation and from which the Nation has benefitted immeasurably. The bus boycott which Rosa Parks began was the beginning of an American revolution that elevated the status of African Americans nationwide and introduced to the world a young leader who would one day have a national holiday declared in his honor, the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.

February 4, 2013, marks the 100th Anniversary of the birth of Rosa Parks. In recognition of this occasion, I am immensely proud to be joined by 56 bipartisan cosponsors of S. Res. 618, which was just adopted unanimously by the Senate, observing the 100th birthday of Rosa Parks and commemorating her legacy. I am especially pleased to have had the input of Senators Stabenow, Sessions, and Alexander in the crafting of this resolution, which is befitting one who so significantly contributed to the breaking down the barriers of legal discrimination against African Americans, and equality for us all.

Although Rosa Parks will be forever associated with one day in Montgomery, AL, she lived most of her life in my home state of Michigan, and we proudly claim her as our own. She continued to dedicate her life to advancing equal opportunity and to educating our youth about the past struggles for freedom, from slavery up to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

In 1987, Rosa Parks and Elaine Steele co-founded the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self-Development. Its primary focus has been working with young people from across the country and the world as part of the ``Pathways to Freedom'' program. With the work of the Institute, we can truly say that in addition to having played a major role in shaping America's past and present, Rosa Parks is continuing to help shape America's future.

In the spirit of the enormous contributions of Rosa Parks to this Nation, the Henry Ford Museum of Dearborn, MI will commemorate the 100th birthday of Rosa Parks by calling for a national day of courage; and sponsoring a program that highlights her contributions to the civil rights movement. The activities will include a day-long celebration, with both virtual and on-site activities featuring nationally- recognized speakers, musical and dramatic interpretative performances, a panel presentation of ``Rosa's Story'' and a reading of the tale ``Quiet Strength,'' and will feature the actual bus on which Rosa Parks sat as the centerpiece in commemorating Rosa Parks' extraordinary life and accomplishments, and affording everyone the opportunity to board the bus and sit in the seat that Rosa Parks refused to give up.

Mr. President, in November of 2005, upon her passing, Rosa Parks became the first woman in the history of the United States to lie in honor in the Capitol Rotunda. And, a few years earlier on June 15, 1999, Rosa Parks was presented with the highest honor of Congress, the Congressional Gold Medal, of which I was pleased to coauthor. I was also pleased to be a part of the effort in directing the Architect of the Capitol to commission a statue of Rosa Parks, which will soon be placed in the U.S. Capitol, making her the second African American woman to receive such an honor.

Mr. President, the cosponsors of the resolution are: Senators Stabenow, Sessions, Alexander, Landrieu, Cochran, Harkin, Shelby, Cornyn, Boxer, Murray, Coburn, Kerry, Hutchison, Gillibrand, Mr. Leahy, Sanders, Reid, Mikulski, Durbin, Pryor, Nelson of Florida, Brown of Ohio, Lieberman, Mr. Conrad, Lautenberg, Kohl, Cantwell, McCaskill, Wyden, Coons, Baucus, Whitehouse, Manchin, Bennet, Cardin, Hagan, Casey, Begich, Menendez, Warner, Udall of New Mexico, Klobuchar, Inouye, Corker, Johnson of South Dakota, Franken, Rockefeller, Udall of Colorado, Blumenthal, Akaka, Reed, Shaheen, Webb, McCain, Lugar, and Grassley.

Madam President, over his time in this body, Jeff Bingaman has worn many hats: champion of education, expert on energy policy, steward of our nation's nuclear arsenal, thoughtful voice on national security.

He has approached each of these varied responsibilities with an attitude aimed not at attention-grabbing or point scoring, but at practical, fact-driven problem solving. In the accurate description of the Washington Post, ``Bingaman isn't one to grab the spotlight, but this six-term senator's logical, cerebral approach tends to get things one.''

He has indeed gotten things done, for the people of New Mexico first and foremost, but his practical approach has benefitted Americans from every State. I know first-hand that the people of Michigan have benefitted from his leadership.

I have worked closely over the years with Senator Bingaman to preserve programs that are vital to America's manufacturing sector, the heart of my State's economy. His support for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program and the Technology Innovation Program has made a major difference in the ability of American manufacturers to research and develop new technologies, to increase efficiency, to improve supply chains and to out-innovate our overseas competitors.

The people of Michigan also have benefitted from Senator Bingaman's leadership of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He worked with me to enact legislation that has brought significant improvements to Michigan parks and recreational lands. With Senator Bingaman's assistance, we have established the River Raisin National Battlefield Park, preserving the site of one of the most important battles of the War of 1812; made major progress toward completion of the North Country National Scenic Trail; enhanced wilderness protection at Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore; and made many improvements at Keweenaw National Historical Park. So, he has played a major role in helping preserve and protect numerous jewels of our State's rich history, culture and natural beauty.

From his post on Energy and Natural Resources, Senator Bingaman has been one of our Nation's most influential voices on energy, an issue that affects nearly every aspect of economic and environmental policy. He has worked with skill, intelligence and determination to find practical, bipartisan solutions in an issue area too often dominated by politics and powerful interests. As we seek to strengthen our Nation's competitiveness, his advocacy on renewable energy, energy efficiency and other important topics will yield important advantages.

While we have not had the benefit of his service in this Congress, Senator Bingaman served in the past with distinction on the Armed Services Committee. In his committee tenure he chaired the Emerging Threats and Capabilities and Strategic Forces subcommittees. His deep knowledge of science and technology issues was of great value in committee deliberations, in particular during the difficult debate over the Bush administration's determination to invade Iraq. His expertise on energy and nuclear issues gave heft to his skepticism over claims that Iraq had sought to acquire uranium from Niger, claims that turned out to be false.

As the son of two educators, it only makes sense that Senator Bingaman would be careful, detail-oriented, and reliant on facts rather than assumptions. And it's no wonder that in addition to his work on energy, defense and natural resources, he has been one of the Senate's most consistent and effective advocates for quality education.

On all of these issues, and so many others, Jeff Bingaman has sought solutions and consensus rather than attention and division. His careful, deliberate style, his focus on facts, and his determination to find practical answers to difficult challenges have been of enormous value to the Senate, to the people of New Mexico, and to the Nation. They will be missed in the Senate, and so will he. I wish Jeff and Anne all the best as the move on from the Senate.

Richard Lugar

Madam President, the Senate has traditionally been seen as a moderating force in American politics, as a place where partisan interests give way to practical problem-solving, and where men and women of good will could, while they might often disagree and debate, find agreement on the challenges our nation must face.

Richard Lugar has, for more than 30 years, upheld that Senate tradition. All of us, regardless of party, have great respect for his intelligence, his integrity, and his concern for the good of our country.

We have worked together on many matters. Manufacturing is a vital sector in the economies of both our states, and Senator Lugar has been a strong supporter of federal programs that benefit manufacturing, including the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which helps U.S. manufacturers research and develop new technologies, increase efficiency, improve supply chains and out-innovate our overseas competitors. We have worked together on other issues of mutual interest to Indiana and Michigan, including preservation of the Great Lakes and strengthening America's agricultural sector.

These are important contributions. Senator Lugar's most lasting legacy, however, is likely to be his work protecting Americans, and people all over the world, from the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. As a Midwestern Senator, he has followed in the finest tradition of Arthur Vandenberg, a Republican Senator from Michigan who famously coined the concept that ``politics stops at the water's edge.''

In 1992, Senator Lugar joined with Senator Sam Nunn in a bipartisan effort to deal with a pressing national security challenge arising from a major national security success: the collapse of the Soviet Union. While the end of the Cold War made the world a safer place, the splintering of a superpower meant the fearsome Soviet arsenal of nuclear and chemical weapons was now in the possession of 15 separate nations. Many worried, with good reason, that these newly independent nations, struggling in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, might be unable or unwilling to prevent the misuse or diversion of these weapons.

The answer was the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, more commonly known as Nunn-Lugar, and widely hailed as one of the smartest investments America has ever made in our security. Nunn-Lugar has eliminated more than 7,000 former Soviet nuclear warheads, and nearly 2,500 nuclear-capable missiles. It has secured two dozen nuclear weapon storage sites, and significantly strengthened controls over remaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and their deadly materials. As the WMD proliferation challenge has evolved, Senator Lugar has worked hard to ensure that the Nunn-Lugar program has adapted to meet that challenge, in new regions such as Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. It has, in short, been an integral part of our national security strategy ever since the end of the Cold War, making our nation more secure, keeping us safe.

This is a legacy of which any Senator would be justifiably proud, and it is one on which Senator Lugar has continued to build. We saw the value of his leadership as the Senate debated and

passed the New START Treaty, and we've seen it in the countless instances when Senator Lugar has advocated for and helped the Senate approve international agreements that have made our nation, our allies and our planet a safer place.

The Senate will miss Richard Lugar's leadership. I hope that each of us who will return to the Senate in the New Year can keep in mind his legacy of bipartisan leadership and practical problem solving as we confront our nation's challenges.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, December 11, 2012, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Streamlining and Strengthening HUD's Rental Housing Assistance Programs, Part II.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 11, 2012, at 10 a.m., in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 11, 2012, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, let me first thank Senator Leahy and members of the Judiciary Committee for the hearing they held on Terry Berg's nomination for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. I know how hard Senator Leahy works to get these judges and their judicial nominations to the floor, and we are deeply appreciative for all the efforts over all the years--indeed, may I say decades--of my good friend Senator Leahy.

I think every member of the Judiciary Committee who had the chance to read the record or to be there during the hearing will agree Mr. Berg is an outstanding nominee for our district court bench. I will not go through all his background. Mr. Berg's qualifications are extraordinarily impressive. He will make an excellent addition to the Eastern District Court. He is going to serve with great distinction, and all of us--and I know I speak for Senator Stabenow as well in terms of strongly supporting this nomination--thank our colleagues for bringing this nomination to the floor and for the strong support it got in the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. President, Terrence, or ``Terry'' Berg, whom the President has nominated to the federal bench in the District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, received a ``Well Qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. He graduated from the Georgetown University Law Center, and then went on to clerk for U.S. District judge. His career has been dedicated to public service. Since 2003, he has worked at the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Michigan where he has worked on various cybercrime issues, has supervised criminal, civil, and administrative divisions, and has handled a full fraud case docket, including theft of trade secrets, mortgage fraud, health care fraud, corporate fraud and other white collar crime cases. During this time, he received the Assistant Attorney General's Award for Distinguished Service and the Director's Award for Superior Performance in a Managerial or Supervisory Role.

Prior to that service, Mr. Berg worked for the Michigan Attorney General where he established and supervised the State's first computer crime prosecution unit. He also served at the U.S. Department of Justice here in Washington as a Computer Crime Fellow. He has also served as an adjunct professor at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law and the Wayne State University Law School.

Mr. Berg has served on the Catholic Lawyers' Society Board of Directors, American Constitution Society and the State Bar of Michigan Committee on Judicial and Professional Ethics and has published numerous articles on cybercrime.

Madam President, I understand now under the existing unanimous consent agreement we are going to be proceeding to debating a judge. I ask unanimous consent that immediately after the disposition of that nomination, I be the first Democratic Senator recognized when we return to the pending trade bill.

Mr. President, the Russia PNTR bill that is before us takes a long overdue action by ending the application of Jackson-Vanik sanctions to Russia. Jackson-Vanik is no longer relevant to Russia because Russia no longer restricts the free emigration of its people.

The Soviet Union began to relax its restrictions on Jewish emigration in 1987, during Gorbachev's perestroika. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, millions of Soviet Jews were permitted to leave. Since then, Russia has allowed free emigration.

I have felt for a long time that we should have graduated Russia from Jackson-Vanik when Jackson-Vanik's noble purpose was achieved, rather than waiting years, often in the effort to make other points relative to Russia on other issues. First some history.

In 2007, I met with Rabbi Lazar, chief rabbi of Russia, regarding Jackson-Vanik. He urged passage of legislation ending the application of Jackson-Vanik to Russia.

Also in 2007, I received a letter from the chairman of the Federation of Jewish Communities, which represents presidents and rabbis of over 200 Jewish communities in Russia, a letter which urged me to work to graduate Russia from the Jackson-Vanik amendment in view of the fact that its goals had already been met. Part of his letter reads as follows:

[W]e are thankful for all your efforts toward gaining

freedom for our country's Jews. We will always appreciate the

role of Jackson-Vanik in bringing about change. We also

remain grateful to those who forced the U.S.S.R.'s Communist

regime to permit Jews to emigrate, and to end discrimination.

For us this was a huge morale boost--Jews behind the Iron

Curtain were thrilled that Americans were willing to risk

political and economic confrontation, in order to stand up

for the freedom and rights of their fellow human beings.

He continued:

Nevertheless, in the last 15 years the situation has

changed, radically. The freedom for Soviet Jews to live

wherever they desire was fully obtained; nearly a million

Jews from the F.S.U. now live in Israel, while hundreds of

thousands live in other countries throughout the world. We

are positive that these developments were in part thanks to

the American lawmakers who supported the Jackson-Vanik

amendment. Yet we now see a backward migration, when Jews

from abroad move back to Russia. This proves that Jews in

Russia feel as confident as those inhabiting other countries

of the Free World.

The rabbi added: ``The provisions of the Jackson-Vanik amendment have

already achieved the goals of its initiators.'' That was in 2007. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia be printed in the Record.

So I am glad, very glad, that finally, the Jackson-Vanik law is no longer going to apply to Russia.

Not only does the bill under consideration grant Russia PNTR, it also contains enforcement provisions that my brother, Congressman Sander Levin, fought for to address concerns about Russia's compliance with its WTO obligations and other trade concerns such as Russia's persistent failure to stop intellectual property rights infringement, and to help promote the rule of law in Russia. These are important enforcement tools that will give us a chance to monitor Russia's progress in fulfilling its commitments. I have looked forward to getting these actions accomplished in PNTR legislation.

The bill before us also includes the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 which was inspired by the Russian whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, who was ruthlessly murdered. The legislation would require that human rights violators in Russia be identified and that we deny them U.S. visas as well as freeze their U.S. assets.

However, and here's the problem for me, the Magnitsky language before us is not the Magnitsky language adopted by our Finance and Foreign Relations committees. Their Magnitsky language applied the same sanctions to human rights violators wherever they might be--whether in Russia, or Syria, or Sudan, or North Korea, or China, or in any other country.

In other words, the Senate committee-approved bill wisely adopted a global Magnitsky standard. The reasoning for this is sound, because while the mechanism of U.S. visa denial for human rights violators was inspired by a single case in a single nation, the principles that it seeks to advance are universal. This bipartisan Senate committee bill, unlike the House-passed version of the Magnitsky Act that we will soon vote on, does not single out Russian human-rights violators for visa denial, but would apply the visa denial mechanism to people from any country who violate important human rights standards. The United States should be clear and firm in its commitment to protecting human rights, wherever the violations occur, and to holding those who violate those rights accountable to the best of our ability, including denying them visas to come to our country. Human rights do not end at the borders of Russia, and anyone who violates those standards, as so many did so blatantly in the case of Sergei Magnitsky, should be held accountable.

Applying the Magnitsky provisions globally, as the Senate bill approved by our committees did, follows in the spirit of Jackson-Vanik, which, while inspired by events in the Soviet Union, was not limited to the Soviet Union.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Finance Committee both voted unanimously to report a version of the Magnitsky bill that applies its sanctions globally. Senators Cardin and Kyl have worked, on a bipartisan basis, to build support for that global standard, and I strongly support their effort. I commend them on their effort.

So why is that Senate committee-reported bill not before the Senate? Why would we deny visas only to Russian human rights violators? Why diminish the universality of the values the Magnitsky bill seeks to uphold?

Applying the sanctions contained in this bill solely to Russians, as the House version does, not only diminishes a universal value. Because it adds a political twist, it will stoke a nationalistic response in Russia. If this bill does not apply the same rule to all human rights violators, if it singles out Russian human rights violators, President Putin will no doubt appeal to the nationalistic passions of many Russians by saying that our bill isn't aimed at protecting human rights, but is aimed at Russia. We should not hand President Putin that argument.

The Senate bill, as approved by our committees, very appropriately pays tribute to the man whose tragic death inspired the legislation, and applies its message universally. I deeply regret that the House bill before us does not take that approach.

I don't understand why we are not taking up the Senate version, the version approved by our two committees, and applying these standards universally. The only answer I get is that the House of Representatives might not accept the Senate version. Well, we should do what we believe in, as reflected in two unanimous votes in two committees, and not be derailed by a prediction that the House will not accept our version. There is time left in this session to test that prediction. The failure to do so is inexplicable to me. The House of Representatives did not have a vote focusing on the issue of applying these sanctions globally. We should give them a chance to do so.

In summary, it is important that we lift the Jackson-Vanik sanctions. It is important that we speak out on the tragic death of Sergei Magnitsky and hold those responsible to account. These are issues on which I believe so strongly and that I have worked long and hard, particularly on Jackson-Vanik, to achieve. Taking these steps should be a cause of celebration.

But the violations of human rights that the Magnitsky bill seeks to remedy are far too widespread for us to apply remedies only to Russians human rights violators. The United States has an opportunity here to make a strong, unmistakable statement about the sanctity of human rights. We should want that statement to ring out not just in Moscow, but around the world.

I know some of my colleagues have expressed hope that we can pass legislation to address this issue in the next Congress. I know of no reason to believe that we will have significantly greater chances of accomplishing this goal next year than we do today.

Mr. President, over the next few weeks, we have time to conference and pass a defense authorization bill. We have time to debate and avoid the fiscal cliff. We have time to address a farm bill and dozens of other important issues. And we have time to address the transcendent issue of the universal rights of mankind.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to join my colleagues in extending condolences to the family of Senator Warren Rudman, and add my voice to those saluting a distinguished, effective and principled member of this body.

It has been hard in the last few months, for those of us who knew and served with him, not to think of Warren Rudman. More than 2 decades ago, our circumstances were strikingly similar to the situation in which we find ourselves today. Rising Federal budget deficits were the cause of alarm. Almost everyone agreed that we needed to bring them down. The difficulty was how. Meeting the widely differing priorities among members of Congress--and the American people we represented-- seemed impossible.

Senator Rudman, along with Senator Ernest Hollings and Senator Phil Gramm, crafted a solution. It is fair to say no one liked it very much. None of us here at the time, including me, voted for it with great enthusiasm. That was its genius. By establishing a mechanism for automatic, across-the-board spending cuts that would take place in the absence of a more tailored program of deficit reduction, they sought to force all of us to make the difficult choices required to reduce the deficit.

The arrangement Senators Rudman, Gramm and Hollings concocted was disagreeable to everybody, and so we looked for ways to avoid it. I voted for the 1985 agreement in part because I believed it would help force elected officials to get serious about the fact that revenue was an important part of the deficit-reduction formula. It was true then, it was true now, and Warren Rudman helped clarify that important fact. We borrowed from Warren Rudman's playbook with the sequestration provisions which are now the subject of so much debate and concern here. I dislike the blind, Draconian cuts of sequestration today as much as I disliked them in the 1980s. Now, as then, I am hopeful that members of good will can reach across the aisle to reach compromise solutions--solutions that we may dislike in part, in order to avoid even worse outcomes. If we do so, it will be because of the Sword of Damocles called sequestration that hangs over our heads. I know that is what Senator Rudman would hope for, and be working hard for, if he were still serving here.

We should reflect on Senator Rudman's career today for another reason. When he decided not to stand for re-election in 1992, he did so, in the words of the New York Times, because ``the Federal Government was not functioning' and that it was impossible to get anything done in a Senate rife with posturing and partisanship.''

Maybe the lesson is that the present always looks more partisan and polarized than the past. I hope all of us can reflect on Senator Rudman's efforts to achieve practical solutions to difficult problems, his willingness to compromise, and his integrity, and keep those qualities in mind as we struggle with the many and complex problems we face today.

Barbara and I were terribly saddened to learn of Warren Rudman's passing. Our thoughts are with his family and the many close friends who mourn him.

Mr. President, in a moment I am going to note the absence of a quorum unless there is someone who wishes to speak.

I want to try to work through this pending issue. I think it is the last issue we need to work through in some way before there will be a unanimous consent request that is propounded. If we can figure out the best way to handle this, and then offer a unanimous consent request, we will be able to reach the end of the bill this very day.

So I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Oh, I withhold that.

It is.

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

Mr. President, I call up a list of 11 amendments which have been cleared by myself and Senator McCain: Kyl amendment No. 2927, as modified by the changes at the desk; Akaka amendment No. 3019; Toomey amendment No. 3062; Brown of Ohio amendment No. 3113, as modified by the changes at the desk; Rubio amendment No. 3175, as modified by the changes at the desk; Carper amendment No. 3241; Carper amendment No. 3242; Thune amendment No. 3277, as modified by the changes at the desk; Moran amendment No. 3285, as modified by the changes at the desk; Bennet amendment No. 3226, as modified by the changes at the desk; and Hatch amendment No. 3117, as modified by the changes at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider these amendments en bloc, the amendments be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the only additional first-degree amendment remaining in order to the bill be the following: McCain amendment No. 3262, on Syria, as modified with changes that are at the desk; that there be 20 minutes equally divided in the usual form on the amendment; that any remaining time prior to 4:30 p.m. be equally divided between the chairman and ranking member for general debate on the bill; that at 4:30 p.m., all postcloture time be considered expired; that the Senate proceed to votes in relation to the McCain amendment, as modified; that no amendments be in order to the amendment prior to the vote; that

upon disposition of the McCain amendment, the Senate agree to the pending Kyl amendment, which is a Kyl-Kerry amendment, No. 3123, as modified; that upon disposition of the Kyl amendment, the Senate proceed to a vote on passage of S. 3254, as amended; that upon passage of S. 3254, the Armed Services Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 4310 and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 3254, as amended and passed by the Senate, be inserted in lieu thereof; that H.R. 4310, as amended, be read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, with the Armed Services Committee appointed as conferees; that no points of order be considered waived by virtue of this agreement, all with no intervening action or debate; and finally that the bill be printed as passed by the Senate.

Madam President, I thank all of our colleagues.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be added as a cosponsor of the McCain amendment and that Senator Coons also be added as a cosponsor of the McCain amendment.

Madam President, I very much support the amendment offered by Senator McCain and thank him for it.

The suffering of the Syrian people and, increasingly, the people of the region continues to grow daily. This amendment tells the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs that we want a classified assessment of the effectiveness of various military solutions to the problems that are there in Syria and in the region.

This information is going to help inform Congress on the challenges and the obstacles to various solutions, including the very challenges and questions which were identified by Senator Paul. Those are the kinds of questions--not the total list, but the kinds of questions-- which this assessment will help us to address. It will also help inform us about the budget and the policy decisions that the congressional defense committees make in the upcoming fiscal year.

The principal purpose of this amendment, as is stated in the amendment, is ``to advance the goals of President Obama of stopping the killing of civilians in Syria and creating conditions for a transition to a democratic, pluralistic political system in Syria.'' That is what is on the mind, I believe, of all of us.

This report--an assessment, to use the word in the amendment--is critically important to Congress, and I very much support the effort of Senator McCain and thank him for it.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I move to reconsider, and I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Kyl Amendment No. 3213, as Modified

I would be happy to have a colloquy with the Senator from Colorado.

I first want to thank the Senator from Colorado for his work on reforming our Nation's export control laws. The House version of the National Defense Authorization Act includes provisions addressing these issues. I support his efforts in this area and I intend to work with the House of Representatives to address these reforms in conference.

Madam President, I will be very brief. I feel so grateful and so proud that the tradition of our committee and this Senate has been maintained on our 51st consecutive Defense authorization bill, a bill that is so vitally important to the Nation. I am grateful to all of our colleagues for working on a bipartisan basis through the normal and open legislative process to produce this bill. I am grateful to stand here with my partner, Senator McCain--we worked together on this bill--to all of the members of the committee, to our staff and the floor and cloakroom staff. We passed over 100 amendments. It was a process that allowed us to be just as accommodating as we humanly could.

One person I wish to single out as someone who has worked for the committee for 41 years--this will be her last year--is Chris Cowart. She is our chief clerk, and I would like to take an additional 2 seconds to mention her name as a symbol of the staff for whom we are so grateful.

I don't know if Senator McCain is here, but I know that I speak for him about our staffs and about our colleagues on the committee.

I yield the floor.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read the third time.

Mr. President, while the leader is here, I would add my thanks to the majority leader. This could not have happened without the willingness of the majority leader to take a little bit of risk at this time of year with so few days left.

Senator McCain and I told the majority leader that we thought we could do it in 3 days, and I want you to know that we did it in 3 days. We don't count half days. If we counted half days, it took us more than 3 days, I must confess to the majority leader. But, nonetheless, the majority leader was willing to let us start down this road. And we did it in a unanimous way. I think it is only the second time in 51 years that there has been a unanimous vote on a Defense authorization bill, and it is because of the willingness and determination of our leadership that we proceed with this bill and that we allow the kind of process to occur that we did and to take the time we did, and I am very grateful.

Mr. President, first let me thank the majority leader while he is still here on the floor for the support he has given to Senator McCain and myself and all of us who are working so hard to get a Defense authorization bill passed for the 52nd straight time, I believe. We haven't missed a year in 51, and I think this will be the 51st and 52nd.

I want to thank Senator McCain and his staff and all of my staff for the extraordinarily hard work they have put in on the bill, both in committee and here on the floor. I thank all of my colleagues for the cooperation which has been shown to allow us to dispose of somewhere now in the area of 100 amendments.

There will be even more amendments that can be cleared this afternoon. We, I believe, have a package that is ready, or almost ready, of amendments. I believe that after that, this afternoon there could be a second package of amendments which has been cleared for action by the body.

We will be here this afternoon. I haven't had a chance to talk yet with Senator McCain today, but I am sure it is his plan, as it is mine, to be here with our staffs this afternoon to work with colleagues to see if we can't clear additional amendments.

The cloture vote is scheduled. There has been more than adequate time. I want to thank the leader, again, for giving this time. We are now into our fourth day where we are able to address the issues on this bill.

I hope cloture will pass this afternoon when the vote is taken, and that early tomorrow, since I am hopeful there won't be a need for postcloture time, we can perhaps adopt even a third package of cleared amendments tomorrow morning at some point, and then move to final passage at some time as determined by the leader, of course.

I want to again urge colleagues who have amendments that we have been working on to keep working with our staffs so we can hopefully clear as many amendments as possible prior to cloture. I think that would be beneficial to all of us. We have worked together well as a body.

There have been a number of accommodations which have been made by many of our colleagues to each other and to us as managers which has made it possible for us to have a smooth passage at least until this point.

With that, again, I give thanks to my ranking member.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first of all, let me tell my dear friend from Arizona that I am sorry to hear about that objection that apparently is going to be placed against the unanimous consent agreement to adopt amendments which had been cleared by both sides. But perhaps during the afternoon we could hear from the Senator from Kentucky. Perhaps he can come over and talk to us about what the problem is. But in the meantime, we are going to continue to try to line up cleared amendments in the chance he will relent from his position.

Sometimes with these packages, when they are put together and someone says they object at the last minute, that objection can be addressed in some way or another. So I hope our staffs will continue to try to find ways to clear amendments--subject, of course, to there being an objection. If there is an objection, then that, of course, given the fact that we are late in the day here now and having a cloture vote late this afternoon, would be able to thwart the will of the rest of the body.

But I hope the Senator from Kentucky can personally come over and let us know what the problem is. Perhaps my friend from Arizona knows what it is, but I don't. I would like to get involved in it.

I yield.

The floor is open.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I now call up a list of 20 amendments which have been cleared by myself and Senator McCain: Begich amendment No. 2954; Inhofe amendment No. 2978; Blumenthal amendment No. 3015; Cardin amendment No. 3022; Cardin amendment No. 3024; Tester amendment No. 3028; Collins amendment No. 3042, as modified by the changes at the desk; McCain amendment No. 3054, as modified by the changes at the desk; Toomey amendment No. 3066; McCain amendment No. 3091, as modified by the changes at the desk; Brown of Massachusetts amendment No. 3160; Levin amendment No. 3164; Rubio amendment No. 3176, as modified by the changes at the desk; Warner amendment No. 3188; Bingaman amendment No. 3208; Snowe amendment No. 3218; Conrad amendment No. 3227; Hatch amendment No. 3268; Coons amendment No. 3289; and Paul amendment No. 3119.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider that vote.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the adoption of the Blumenthal amendment No. 3124, as modified, the amendment be modified further with the changes that are at the desk.

Mr. President, we are making some very important progress. We are hopeful there may be another package of cleared amendments even before the vote on cloture later this afternoon. If not, we will nonetheless be offering that list of cleared amendments postcloture.

I join in Senator McCain's thanks to our staff, which he invariably remembers, because they are critically important. They are helping us to clear additional amendments, and the progress is real. I think we are right at just about 100 amendments now that have been either adopted by rollcall vote, voice vote or by cleared unanimous consent.

So I thank all our colleagues for working so closely with us and for their cooperation.

I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent a vote on or in relation to the Kyl-Kerry amendment No. 3123, as modified, which has been cleared by both managers, will occur at a time to be determined by the managers in consultation with the leaders following the vote on cloture on the bill.

Mr. President I call up amendments en bloc: Pryor No. 3291, Collins No. 3282, Reed No. 3292, and Reed No. 3165.

I know of no further debate on the amendments.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

We hope cloture will be voted now. We have disposed of 119 amendments to this bill. I talked to the majority leader, and if we do vote cloture tonight, which of course Senator McCain and I hope we will, we are still going to try to clear some additional amendments using the same process we have used up to now. We would hope we could clear some additional amendments right up to the time of final passage. Hopefully we can get to final passage tomorrow at some point.

Cloture Motion

Mr. President, I move to reconsider that vote.

Madam President, I call up a list of 13 amendments which have been cleared by myself and Senator McCain: Coats amendment No. 2923, as modified by the changes at the desk; Webb amendment No. 2943; Casey amendment No. 2997, as modified by the changes at the desk; Cardin amendment No. 3023; Wicker amendment No. 3121, as modified by the changes at the desk; Portman amendment No. 3142; Webb amendment No. 3144; Corker amendment No. 3172, as modified by the changes at the desk; Lieberman amendment No. 3276; Lautenberg amendment No. 3298; Blunt amendment No. 3278, as modified by the changes at the desk; Rockefeller amendment No. 2996; and Reid of Nevada amendment No. 3047, as modified by the changes at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider these amendments en bloc, the amendments be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

I yield the floor and thank all our colleagues for their cooperation. We will continue until vote on final passage, which we expect tomorrow, to clear additional amendments.

Mr. President, we would need to see the modification before it is accepted.

We would have to reserve the right--if you could call up the amendment and then hold off on any modification until we can see it.

Amendment No. 3009

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

Mr. President, on these amendments of Senator Sessions and Senator Webb--and, by the way, I thoroughly and totally join Senator Sessions in his commends about Senator Webb. I think he spoke for the entire body when he made those comments.

We had agreed that we would do the following: There are a number of changes which need to be made in this amendment which the sponsors have agreed to. There are some additional concerns about this amendment, which we believe we can take care of in conference. So the suggestion was made to Senator Sessions and Senator Webb that we voice vote this at this time, and we address some of those concerns and modifications in conference, and I would suggest that we do that at this time.

I think the order is that we now proceed to consideration of the Cardin amendment.

Amendment No. 3025

I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to proceed for 10 seconds.

Mr. President, I oppose this amendment. We are cutting military end strength by 5 percent over the next 5 years. In this budget situation, we have no choice but to cut the Defense Department civilian employee and contractor workforces as well. This gives flexibility to the Department of Defense when and where to make the cuts.

We have got to make some reductions in the defense budget. This does it in a way which is flexible and necessary, so I too oppose the amendment.

Mr. President, there is now going to be a 2-minute debate on the Menendez amendment on Iran sanctions.

What Senator McCain and I asked for last night, and we again ask for now, is that the Members let us know which amendments they believe need to be voted on if a rollcall vote and a debate is necessary because we are going to attempt to put together a unanimous consent agreement which will lay out the amendments that would be voted on before cloture next Monday.

It was our expectation by the end of the day that cloture was going to be filed by the leader. We can try to avoid that problem if we can work out a finite list of amendments to put in a unanimous consent agreement so we can work toward the final completion of this bill.

So I urge Members during this period to work with our staffs and let them know what amendments they believe must be disposed of prior to the end of this bill.

Amendment No. 3232

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 30 seconds on this amendment.

I strongly support this amendment. It will continue to tighten sanctions on Iran and to bring into strong participation the international community.

This amendment is a continuing effort. The administration has made major efforts. I commend them for it. But this will add great strength to the existing sanctions which are essential to force Iran to comply with the international community.

The administration has raised concerns--we know that--about some provisions of this amendment. They have indicated that the amendment does not give them sufficient waiver flexibility. The Banking Committee has raised some issues, and we will try to address, if we can, in an appropriate way some of these concerns in conference. But I strongly support this amendment and hope it gets the unanimous support or near unanimous support in this body.

Would the leader yield?

In addition to putting together a finite list, which would be the amendments which would apparently require rollcall votes, we will continue to try to clear amendments which can be cleared on both sides. It is the amendments which we believe would require rollcall votes in order for us to proceed that we are going to put on a finite list. So don't give up on amendments just because they are not on the list. If we indicate to our colleagues that we have a reasonable chance of clearing those amendments today or Monday, we would add those to the possibilities.

Would all Senators please note--I wish to thank the leader

for this--he used the word, referring to Senator McCain and me, as ``seasoned'' Senators rather than older Senators. Thank you.

Amendment No. 3073

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Would the Senator yield, because I want to make sure we are on the same track.

Is this the amendment that has been amended after discussions with Senator Kerry?

Then is it the Senator's intent to send a new amendment to the desk? Is that it?

So, in other words, it would be the same numbered amendment, as modified?

What is the intent of my friend from Arizona to do with that amendment now?

Then have it adopted?

Not to have it adopted at this time by voice vote?

At some point the Senator would be happy to take a voice vote on it?

Let me thank Senator Kyl with the way in which he has worked with Senator Kerry. It is very constructive and very important. I want to tell him how much we all appreciate that working together.

I believe Senator Shaheen is going to want to be recognized for up to 10 minutes to talk on an amendment.

Mr. President, before Senator Shaheen leaves the floor, I want to add my thanks to her and for those words expressed by Senator McCain. Senator Shaheen is, indeed, an extraordinary Member of this body and a great asset for us on the Armed Services Committee. I very much appreciate her work on so many issues including the one she just spoke about.

I so much regret I was unable to be at that event yesterday for Senator Rudman, because my memories of him are warm and I had very much looked forward to being there. I could not be there, but I know that Senator McCain--I don't know who else spoke. I have heard rave reviews about the quality of the speeches.

And I understand that there was a quantity, and there was also a fairly long speech by the Vice President which delayed things on the floor by a few hours--by a few minutes, excuse me. But I hear it was a wonderful tribute. I only wish I could have been there.

I didn't have to be there to know that the Vice President would lose any bet where he is betting anyone that he will be shorter than anybody on any subject.

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

Mr. President, in a moment I am going to call up a list of nine amendments which have been cleared by Senator McCain and myself. We expect that there will be, in perhaps an hour or so, an additional list of perhaps 15 or 20 cleared amendments. Shortly thereafter it would be our expectation to propound a unanimous consent proposal with a finite list of amendments that would be considered before final passage.

At the time we do that, we would give our colleagues perhaps 20 minutes after we read that proposed unanimous consent agreement to come to the floor, if they choose, and talk to us about it or, if they so choose, to object.

We hope that will not happen, obviously. We worked very hard with colleagues. Nonetheless, that is the procedure we are planning on following.

Mr. President, I now call up a list of nine amendments which have been cleared, as I indicated before: McCain amendment No. 3052, Whitehouse amendment No. 3075, Snowe amendment No. 3133, Sanders amendment No. 3182, Sanders amendment No. 3183, Warner amendment No. 3233, Coburn amendment No. 3236, Sanders amendment No. 3248, Rubio amendment No. 3283.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, there will be another hour where people will have an opportunity to come to the Senate floor and check on their amendments. We hope our colleagues will take advantage of that opportunity.

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

Mr. President, we have been working very hard to come up with what we call a finite list of amendments that would be the only remaining first-degree amendments that would be in order to the bill. We are working, obviously, on many other amendments to get them cleared, but this would be the list of the maximum number of first- degree amendments that would be in order.

Twenty minutes from now, I will be asking unanimous consent, as we promised, that these amendments be the only remaining first-degree amendments to the bill. We promised everybody they would have that opportunity, because it is a long list, and we want to keep that promise. But during that 20 minutes, we can reassure folks that if they have a problem, things are the way we said they would be: Bingaman 2984; Brown of Ohio 3216; Kerry and Brown of Massachusetts 3034; Kohl 2887; Lieberman 3167; Lieberman 3276; Mikulski 3217; Nelson of Nebraska 3274, Pryor 2946; Reed of Rhode Island 3014; Reed of Rhode Island 3255; Reid of Nevada 3244; Reid of Nevada 3047; Tester 3028--that is not the sportsmen's amendment, by the way. There was an objection to it and Senator Tester was willing to not have that on the list--Udall of New Mexico 3049; Udall of New Mexico 3150; Akaka 3204; Begich 3194; Bennet 3226; Bingaman 3208; Boxer 3265; Brown of Ohio 3113; Carper 3241; Casey 2997; Conrad 3227; Coons 3289; Hagan 3056; Harkin 3147; Johnson of South Dakota 3100; Kohl 2887; Lautenberg 3288; Levin 3164; Levin 3280; Levin 3284; Nelson of Florida 3267; Reed of Rhode Island 3165; Reed of Rhode Island 3255; Rockefeller 2996; Warner 3145; Warner 3188; Webb 2943; Webb 2957, Whitehouse 3181; Wyden 2959; Alexander 3258; Ayotte 3003; Ayotte 3004; Ayotte 3080; Barrasso 3081; Barrasso 3082; Barrasso 3198; Blunt 3728; Boozman 3221; Brown of Massachusetts 3160; Brown of Massachusetts 3270; Burr 3219; Coats 2923; Collins 3042; Collins 3196; Collins 3259; Collins 3282; Corker 3172; DeMint 3134; Graham 3203; Grassley 2990; Grassley 3079; Hatch 3268; Hutchison 3078; Inhofe 2978; Kyl 2927; Kyl 3033; Kyl 3239; Lee 3185; McCain 3054; McCain 3091; McCain 3247; McCain 3262; McCain 3281; Moran 3285; Murkowski 3135; Murkowski 3136; Murkowski 3156; Murkowski 3197; Paul 3118; Paul 3119; Portman 3142; Risch, 3093; Risch 3094; Roberts 3032; Rubio 3175; Rubio 3176; Sessions 3007; Sessions 3008; Sessions 3013; Shelby 3070; Snowe 3218; Thune 3210; Thune 3277; Toomey 3060; Toomey 3065, with a modification; Toomey 3066; Vitter 3087; Wicker 3000; and Wicker 3002.

Again, the UC will be offered at a quarter to 4. If anyone has questions, please call our staff through the cloakroom. We have done a huge amount of work to get to this point. I emphasize again that many of our colleagues are understanding that we are working through additional amendments that are not on this list, and we would hope they would continue to cooperate with us in that regard.

Mr. President, I extend our thanks to our colleagues and their staffs who are working with us to keep this manageable. It is manageable. I know it sounds overwhelming and it is daunting, but it is manageable, providing understanding is there for this process and what we are doing. I thank the staff who are working so hard. I thank the Presiding Officer, who I know is changing his schedule this afternoon so he can continue to preside.

At quarter-to--when I added up the minutes, at quarter-to, I will put this unanimous consent request. I again emphasize that we are also working on many amendments that are not on this list, and we are still trying to clear them.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, we are going to withhold the unanimous consent agreement at this time. There have been a number of questions raised about it. The time is being well spent actually. Those questions need to be asked, but there are enough of them so that we will pick that up on Monday. But we are making good progress. We are going to have another 17 cleared amendments that will be coming up, we hope, in the next 5 or 10 minutes.

We have already disposed of 77 amendments. I think we have done it in a way which will make this body proud that we are legislating. If people want to filibuster, threaten to filibuster or debate something, we are going to say: Come over and debate--which we have. So we have avoided these long periods of space. We have had no threat of a filibuster that has required a threshold of 60. We have had majority votes, and not the 60-threshold votes except for that one technical budget amendment issue.

We are making great progress. I believe we will continue to make progress. The leader, in a moment, I believe, is going to a file cloture motion which is going to help with progress. But between now and the time we vote on cloture, both this afternoon and on Monday, we are going to continue to work on amendments to try to clear amendments.

I am sure we will voice-vote amendments in the cases that they have been cleared and do not require a voice vote. The leader will, in a moment, again, state what his plans are. But for the time being, I want to thank our leader for the support he has given to the managers. It is essential. We have had that support. We are grateful for it, and to all of our colleagues and staffs working on this bill, which is always complex and always has literally hundreds of amendments.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I call up now a list of 17 amendments which have been cleared by myself and Senator McCain: Wyden amendment No. 2959; Bingaman amendment No. 2984; Grassley amendment No. 3079; Barrasso amendment No. 3082; Vitter amendment No. 3087, as modified by changes at the desk; Klobuchar amendment No. 3102; Klobuchar amendment No. 3105; Murkowski amendment No. 3135; Warner amendment No. 3145; Collins amendment No. 3196, as modified by changes at the desk; Barrasso amendment No. 3198; Klobuchar amendment No. 3234; Reid amendment No. 3244; McCain amendment No. 3247, as modified by changes at the desk; Alexander amendment No. 3258; Levin amendment No. 3280; Begich amendment No. 3290.

I ask unanimous consent that these amendments be considered en bloc, the amendments be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

I thank Senator McCain. He very humorously, with his great, good nature, kind of joshes himself comparing his patience to mine. My standard is not the one that anybody wants to follow around here; We will never get anything done.

He is more than patient, and I am very grateful that he is standing there in that ranking position and sitting right in that ranking position. I hope he stays in that ranking position in some committee at least for many, many, many years--in the ranking position.

I join in that too.

Now, we have to close. I don't know if we have the closing. We do.