Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask the Senate to join me in honoring the 10th anniversary of Missouri River Relief and their dedication to preserving Missouri rivers.

As a lifelong Missourian, I have visited and enjoyed the natural beauty and recreational opportunities along the Missouri River. These riverbanks and waterways are treasured attractions throughout Missouri. The Missouri River enjoys over 1 million visitors from across the Nation each year who have the opportunity to experience the splendor and excitement these natural resources provide for our state. That is why I am so thrilled to acknowledge the work of the Missouri River Relief program.

Founded in 2001, Missouri River Relief began with just a few Missouri River enthusiasts dedicated to cleaning up our State waters. Ten years later, 12,000 Missourians have joined their communities in fighting for this cause, removing over 1 million pounds of trash and debris, making our waters safer for all to enjoy. In 2010 alone, over 1,100 student and teacher volunteers helped clean over 70 miles of river.

Missouri River Relief has contributed to promoting river education throughout the State. By sponsoring recreational activities and festivals that incorporate the arts alongside river education, this organization has made it their mission to teach Missouri families about our local rivers and how the rivers contribute to our environment.

This project has received an outpouring of State and corporate sponsorships that have made this growing cause a reality. Neighboring States have also included their support, cleaning up almost 400 miles of the Missouri River. The trash gathered from these clean ups have included recyclable and environmental friendly particles that have been turned into useful resources.

Working to preserve one of our country's most affluent and beautiful rivers, this organization deserves our gratitude and commemoration. Missouri River Relief is committed to water safety and education and its service to the community stands as an inspiration to all Missourians and a strong signal of our State's continued growth and success.

Mr. President, I ask that the Senate join me in recognizing the 10th anniversary of the Missouri River Relief.

Mr. President, like my colleague, I appreciate the work he has done on this issue. We have been talking about this for a number of weeks. Our staffs have been hammering out the details.

I will be candid. As I left my office, some members of my staff said: OK, good luck walking that plank. We will see how it works out for you. Because this is politically risky, what the Senator and I are trying to do. As I was riding over here on the tram to make this speech, I got a text message from one of my kids. All of a sudden it became clear to me what this is like. This is like saying no when you are a parent. It is so easy to say yes to your kids. When they want something, when they want to do something we think is risky, the easiest thing in the world to do is to say yes.

When they want money, when they want to have a new car, when they want to borrow your car, when they want to go spend the night at a friend's you do not know very well, when they want to stay out later, when they want this, that, when they want to go to the mall, it is so easy to say yes. It does not take a lot of time. It makes them happy. You feel good. But there is always that voice in your head that says: If I am going to be a good parent, sometimes it is more important to say no.

Well, we have a bunch of people in Congress who have made a lifetime career of saying yes. I understand it. We run for office around here. We want everyone to be happy with us. We want everyone to love us. We do not want to disappoint anyone. We do not want there to be controversy about the decisions we make. So how do we avoid the controversy? We say yes. We say yes. And we have said yes and yes and yes until we find ourselves at this point in our history where our unwillingness to say no, our unwillingness to embrace controversy and political risk, has led us to an economic brink, a place where if we do not do something that is going to make some people angry, that is going to cause some negative ads to be run against us, then we are not doing our job as stewards. That is all we are here. We are passing through. We are not entitled to these jobs. We borrowed these jobs. They belong to the American people, and we have a responsibility as stewards to say no now, to say no.

I remember when I used to tell my kids: It is so much easier for me to tell you yes. And they would say: Well, it is easier for you. It was easier for me. I would say: The right thing to do is for me to say no. And they would say: Well, that is not easier for us.

That is beginning to be what is happening around here. I have noticed some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle saying: We are going to cut, cut, cut, cut. Now it is all bubbling up, with all the people saying: No, you can't cut our subsidy; No, you can't cut the oil company subsidy; you can't cut a farm program; you can't cut this; you can't cut that. Everyone is coming out of the woodwork to protect the spending that is embraced by our bad habit of saying yes.

So that is why this bill is necessary. This is like telling Congress: You have to be better parents, and if you cannot muster the courage to say no, these cuts are going to happen anyway. It is like a discipline for us. And I do not go here lightly. I do not go here without understanding the political risks involved. But I go here because I deeply believe it is necessary for our country. We cannot get control of the deficit if we do not control spending.

Let me talk for a minute about debt and deficit because as I go out and talk to people, there are a lot of people who use those two terms interchangeably. They do not understand. There is a big difference between the debt and the deficit. The deficit is like your monthly budget and not having enough money to come in to meet your monthly expenses. We talk about the deficit on an annual basis: How much money is the government bringing in and how much money is going out. When more is going out than coming in, we have a deficit.

What happens to that deficit every year? It goes on our debt. It is like a family's mortgage. But instead of us paying down the mortgage every year, we keep adding to the mortgage every year. That is why we now have a $1.4, $1.5 trillion deficit this year. We are going to spend that much more than we take in this year. We have $14 trillion in debt. That is the long-term mortgage our country has right now that we owe someone that we have to pay. So we have to get hold of this debt.

I want to compliment the President of the United States because the short-term spending stuff is important. And I want to compliment Senator Sessions. He and I have worked on short-term spending caps for over a year. But now it is time for us to look at long-term discipline and what we can do to get our country on a glide path where we no longer are precariously on the edge of not being the strongest economic power in the world.

Our deficits are unsustainable and our debt is out of control. This bill takes a very measured approach, gives us time to figure things out. It is not like the ridiculous proposal over in the House where we are going to cut $2.5 trillion this year. Anybody who thinks that is going to happen, I have a tutu you need to wear down the hall tomorrow. That is a ridiculous proposal. That is impossible to do. But this bill is possible and responsible. This puts us on a glide path to say to the American people that our spending is going to be capped at a certain percentage of our economic activity in this country. That is possible, and it is responsible, and we should do it.

Who is to blame? Let's be honest about how we got here. The biggest factor in our deficits the last 2 years is our poor economy. I know, I know; you would think it is the stimulus. You would think it is TARP. It is not. Political cheap shots but not true. The biggest fiscal hole we are facing is because of the poor economy.

The biggest increase in spending in the last 2 years? You would think it was the auto bailouts or you would think it was the bank bailout or you would think it was the stimulus. It was not. Do you know what the biggest increase in spending was over the last 2 years? Unemployment benefits because of our bad economy. That was the biggest increase in spending over the last 2 years. Our fiscal hole has grown primarily because of a bad economy over the last 2 years.

But there also have been bad decisions by both parties over the last decade. When Clinton left office, our debt--he may have been running a surplus in terms of the deficit, but our debt was $5.7 trillion. When Bush left office, he had doubled it from $5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion. And today it is $14 trillion.

Over the past decade, we have had two wars we did not bother to pay for, a brandnew Medicare entitlement--brand spanking new--that was not means tested. We are buying Warren Buffett's prescription drugs. Go figure. Like we are busted and we are buying multihundred-million- dollar billionaires prescription drugs, and we did not bother to pay for it. We have had increases in discretionary spending by both parties that increased our deficit and exceeded inflation.

I want to talk a minute about the boogie man of the TARP and the stimulus. I am so sick of that being blamed. It is so wrong and factually incorrect. We have tax cuts that go on forever that have contributed to this. We have wars that we are fighting that have contributed to this. We have entitlement programs that are not paid for. But the stimulus was a one-time expenditure. It is not something that goes on. It has no tail.

Anyone who understands economics and understands the balance sheet of the U.S. Government knows this problem was not the stimulus. One-third of the stimulus was tax cuts. The last time I looked, unpaid-for tax cuts were the way of the world. One-third of the stimulus was tax cuts. Another third of it, almost, was unemployment benefits. That is not the problem. And TARP? Let's be honest. It was a genius decision in many ways because it stabilized our financial sector, and it has cost us a mere fraction of the money that was used on a temporary basis to make sure our economy did not twist down the drain, as it was likely to do had President Bush not intervened with his economic team to ask us on a bipartisan basis to do something that was in the best interest of our Nation.

We can move on as to who is to blame because now we have to talk about tomorrow's problems. I am proud the President is dealing with short-term spending by his freeze. I am proud he is working on earmarks and all of the other things that are a symptom of the disease around here. But our challenge is long-term spending. In the long term, spending is going to drive the debt up even higher. Medicare and Medicaid cuts are going to double by 2021. Social Security is going to increase by 70 percent by 2021.

We have to look at those issues and make sure on a bipartisan basis we do what is responsible. We have to make sure these programs-- Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security--are stable and secure for my children and their children. If we cannot agree even on the modest measures such as the 3-year discretionary spending cap Senator Sessions and I have been pushing for over a year, I question whether we have the discipline to do the hard work. Getting control of spending is very hard, but we have to do it, and we have to do it now.

First and foremost, we need to focus on eliminating the waste and mismanagement. That is what drives Americans crazy. It drives people crazy that we are spending money on duplicative programs and we are not even checking to see if they work. It drives them crazy when the Federal Government runs huge deficits and we are paying out $55 billion in improper payments at Health and Human Services and $12 billion of improper payments by Treasury to people who do not even qualify.

It drives Americans crazy when we do not make the reforms our auditors recommend. The Defense Department has 1,200 suggestions that have been made by our government auditors about how it can manage its money and its programs better, and they have not acted on almost 1,200 of them. It drives people crazy we are running deficits when we have Departments such as the Agriculture Department and Homeland Security that get failing management grades for 8 straight years. And it drives people crazy when we are running deficits and we are passing appropriations bills with $15 billion worth of earmarks.

I have been working hard to try to clean up all this waste. We have been working on contract management. I have never requested an earmark. I voted against every omnibus appropriations bill that has come to the floor since I have been a Senator, and I have worked hard for the last year with Senator Sessions to cap spending. Now I look forward to working hard with Senator Corker and many of my friends in the Republican Party to work on the Corker-McCaskill bill to put a cap long term on spending in the Federal Government.

As I say, this is a bold step. It has risks. And if this bill is distorted and twisted, it could cost me my Senate seat. I will say that again. If this bill is distorted and twisted, it could cost me my Senate seat. But it is a price I am willing to pay. It is a price I am willing to pay for my country and, more importantly, it is a price I am willing to pay for my grandchildren.

Mr. President, like my colleague, I appreciate the work he has done on this issue. We have been talking about this for a number of weeks. Our staffs have been hammering out the details.

I will be candid. As I left my office, some members of my staff said: OK, good luck walking that plank. We will see how it works out for you. Because this is politically risky, what the Senator and I are trying to do. As I was riding over here on the tram to make this speech, I got a text message from one of my kids. All of a sudden it became clear to me what this is like. This is like saying no when you are a parent. It is so easy to say yes to your kids. When they want something, when they want to do something we think is risky, the easiest thing in the world to do is to say yes.

When they want money, when they want to have a new car, when they want to borrow your car, when they want to go spend the night at a friend's you do not know very well, when they want to stay out later, when they want this, that, when they want to go to the mall, it is so easy to say yes. It does not take a lot of time. It makes them happy. You feel good. But there is always that voice in your head that says: If I am going to be a good parent, sometimes it is more important to say no.

Well, we have a bunch of people in Congress who have made a lifetime career of saying yes. I understand it. We run for office around here. We want everyone to be happy with us. We want everyone to love us. We do not want to disappoint anyone. We do not want there to be controversy about the decisions we make. So how do we avoid the controversy? We say yes. We say yes. And we have said yes and yes and yes until we find ourselves at this point in our history where our unwillingness to say no, our unwillingness to embrace controversy and political risk, has led us to an economic brink, a place where if we do not do something that is going to make some people angry, that is going to cause some negative ads to be run against us, then we are not doing our job as stewards. That is all we are here. We are passing through. We are not entitled to these jobs. We borrowed these jobs. They belong to the American people, and we have a responsibility as stewards to say no now, to say no.

I remember when I used to tell my kids: It is so much easier for me to tell you yes. And they would say: Well, it is easier for you. It was easier for me. I would say: The right thing to do is for me to say no. And they would say: Well, that is not easier for us.

That is beginning to be what is happening around here. I have noticed some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle saying: We are going to cut, cut, cut, cut. Now it is all bubbling up, with all the people saying: No, you can't cut our subsidy; No, you can't cut the oil company subsidy; you can't cut a farm program; you can't cut this; you can't cut that. Everyone is coming out of the woodwork to protect the spending that is embraced by our bad habit of saying yes.

So that is why this bill is necessary. This is like telling Congress: You have to be better parents, and if you cannot muster the courage to say no, these cuts are going to happen anyway. It is like a discipline for us. And I do not go here lightly. I do not go here without understanding the political risks involved. But I go here because I deeply believe it is necessary for our country. We cannot get control of the deficit if we do not control spending.

Let me talk for a minute about debt and deficit because as I go out and talk to people, there are a lot of people who use those two terms interchangeably. They do not understand. There is a big difference between the debt and the deficit. The deficit is like your monthly budget and not having enough money to come in to meet your monthly expenses. We talk about the deficit on an annual basis: How much money is the government bringing in and how much money is going out. When more is going out than coming in, we have a deficit.

What happens to that deficit every year? It goes on our debt. It is like a family's mortgage. But instead of us paying down the mortgage every year, we keep adding to the mortgage every year. That is why we now have a $1.4, $1.5 trillion deficit this year. We are going to spend that much more than we take in this year. We have $14 trillion in debt. That is the long-term mortgage our country has right now that we owe someone that we have to pay. So we have to get hold of this debt.

I want to compliment the President of the United States because the short-term spending stuff is important. And I want to compliment Senator Sessions. He and I have worked on short-term spending caps for over a year. But now it is time for us to look at long-term discipline and what we can do to get our country on a glide path where we no longer are precariously on the edge of not being the strongest economic power in the world.

Our deficits are unsustainable and our debt is out of control. This bill takes a very measured approach, gives us time to figure things out. It is not like the ridiculous proposal over in the House where we are going to cut $2.5 trillion this year. Anybody who thinks that is going to happen, I have a tutu you need to wear down the hall tomorrow. That is a ridiculous proposal. That is impossible to do. But this bill is possible and responsible. This puts us on a glide path to say to the American people that our spending is going to be capped at a certain percentage of our economic activity in this country. That is possible, and it is responsible, and we should do it.

Who is to blame? Let's be honest about how we got here. The biggest factor in our deficits the last 2 years is our poor economy. I know, I know; you would think it is the stimulus. You would think it is TARP. It is not. Political cheap shots but not true. The biggest fiscal hole we are facing is because of the poor economy.

The biggest increase in spending in the last 2 years? You would think it was the auto bailouts or you would think it was the bank bailout or you would think it was the stimulus. It was not. Do you know what the biggest increase in spending was over the last 2 years? Unemployment benefits because of our bad economy. That was the biggest increase in spending over the last 2 years. Our fiscal hole has grown primarily because of a bad economy over the last 2 years.

But there also have been bad decisions by both parties over the last decade. When Clinton left office, our debt--he may have been running a surplus in terms of the deficit, but our debt was $5.7 trillion. When Bush left office, he had doubled it from $5.7 trillion to $10.6 trillion. And today it is $14 trillion.

Over the past decade, we have had two wars we did not bother to pay for, a brandnew Medicare entitlement--brand spanking new--that was not means tested. We are buying Warren Buffett's prescription drugs. Go figure. Like we are busted and we are buying multihundred-million- dollar billionaires prescription drugs, and we did not bother to pay for it. We have had increases in discretionary spending by both parties that increased our deficit and exceeded inflation.

I want to talk a minute about the boogie man of the TARP and the stimulus. I am so sick of that being blamed. It is so wrong and factually incorrect. We have tax cuts that go on forever that have contributed to this. We have wars that we are fighting that have contributed to this. We have entitlement programs that are not paid for. But the stimulus was a one-time expenditure. It is not something that goes on. It has no tail.

Anyone who understands economics and understands the balance sheet of the U.S. Government knows this problem was not the stimulus. One-third of the stimulus was tax cuts. The last time I looked, unpaid-for tax cuts were the way of the world. One-third of the stimulus was tax cuts. Another third of it, almost, was unemployment benefits. That is not the problem. And TARP? Let's be honest. It was a genius decision in many ways because it stabilized our financial sector, and it has cost us a mere fraction of the money that was used on a temporary basis to make sure our economy did not twist down the drain, as it was likely to do had President Bush not intervened with his economic team to ask us on a bipartisan basis to do something that was in the best interest of our Nation.

We can move on as to who is to blame because now we have to talk about tomorrow's problems. I am proud the President is dealing with short-term spending by his freeze. I am proud he is working on earmarks and all of the other things that are a symptom of the disease around here. But our challenge is long-term spending. In the long term, spending is going to drive the debt up even higher. Medicare and Medicaid cuts are going to double by 2021. Social Security is going to increase by 70 percent by 2021.

We have to look at those issues and make sure on a bipartisan basis we do what is responsible. We have to make sure these programs-- Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security--are stable and secure for my children and their children. If we cannot agree even on the modest measures such as the 3-year discretionary spending cap Senator Sessions and I have been pushing for over a year, I question whether we have the discipline to do the hard work. Getting control of spending is very hard, but we have to do it, and we have to do it now.

First and foremost, we need to focus on eliminating the waste and mismanagement. That is what drives Americans crazy. It drives people crazy that we are spending money on duplicative programs and we are not even checking to see if they work. It drives them crazy when the Federal Government runs huge deficits and we are paying out $55 billion in improper payments at Health and Human Services and $12 billion of improper payments by Treasury to people who do not even qualify.

It drives Americans crazy when we do not make the reforms our auditors recommend. The Defense Department has 1,200 suggestions that have been made by our government auditors about how it can manage its money and its programs better, and they have not acted on almost 1,200 of them. It drives people crazy we are running deficits when we have Departments such as the Agriculture Department and Homeland Security that get failing management grades for 8 straight years. And it drives people crazy when we are running deficits and we are passing appropriations bills with $15 billion worth of earmarks.

I have been working hard to try to clean up all this waste. We have been working on contract management. I have never requested an earmark. I voted against every omnibus appropriations bill that has come to the floor since I have been a Senator, and I have worked hard for the last year with Senator Sessions to cap spending. Now I look forward to working hard with Senator Corker and many of my friends in the Republican Party to work on the Corker-McCaskill bill to put a cap long term on spending in the Federal Government.

As I say, this is a bold step. It has risks. And if this bill is distorted and twisted, it could cost me my Senate seat. I will say that again. If this bill is distorted and twisted, it could cost me my Senate seat. But it is a price I am willing to pay. It is a price I am willing to pay for my country and, more importantly, it is a price I am willing to pay for my grandchildren.

Mr. President, very briefly, I am proud to join Senator Grassley and Senator Wyden in their long crusade on this issue. I am giddy, frankly. I cannot believe it. I cannot believe we are this close to amending the Senate rules by a wide margin. I will predict this will be a very lopsided vote, which is ironic. I do not think there has ever been anything that has taken as long as this has that is going to win by as big a margin as this is going to win because people were stubborn about holding on to their secrecy. It is a lot easier to do business, a lot easier to get your deals if you do not have to be public about it.

So there are very few things that you can grab a hold of in the Senate and actually see to the finish line, and I believe this will be the finish line. But let me say one warning. If anyone thinks they can figure out a way around this, all of us who have worked on this are not going to give up. So 6 months from now, if something is not moving and no one knows why and we figure out that one person has decided to own the holds, such as the minority leader--I will just own all the holds-- that is not going to work, because we will come right back and we will point out to the American public: Believe it or not, they are trying to get around this rule.

So a warning to everyone: If we are going to amend the rule, be prepared to live by it because it is the right thing to do. I think our stock will rise with the American people. I think the transparency is essential.

I am very proud that it appears--I will keep my fingers and toes crossed because it has not happened yet--we have bipartisan agreement that this nonsense is going to end.

I wish to thank my colleague from Tennessee, Senator Alexander, because I think he has been essential in these negotiations as it has related to an amending of the rules as it relates to the secret holds.

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Madam President, when I arrived in this Chamber 4 years ago at this time, I had no idea what the ways of the Senate were. I had an idea

that this was a place where people came to debate and to have a collegial relationship with fellow Senators across the aisle. There had been a lot of problems with ethical issues in the Capitol. So one of the first things that happened to the class of 2006 was S. 1, and S. 1 was a far-reaching ethics bill that included things such as no more free flights on corporate jets. It included new requirements in terms of gifts from lobbyists, and it also included a provision that I did not know at the time had been worked on by Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley for many years.

That provision said we were not going to have secret holds anymore. So imagine how great I felt on January 18, 2007, that we had done this comprehensive ethics bill that was going to clean up our act, and that we were not going to have secret holds. Well, I find it ironic that Senator Alexander says: Well, just use the rules. Just use them.

Well, so when I started figuring out that the game around here in the last 18 months had developed into a game of secret holds, I asked my staff: Hey, did we not have something in S. 1 about secret holds? Not knowing really the relationship that language had to Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley.

So my staff pulled out the legislation and we looked at it. I said: Well, right here it says they cannot do it. So I began coming down to the floor and using the law.

I did exactly what Senator Alexander recommended. I came down here and began making motion after motion, which under the language of that statute would seem to indicate all of the Senators supported--except for a handful--that once you made these motions people would have to come out of the shadows and claim their holds.

Well, that is when I discovered the people who voted for this, or a bunch of them, did not mean it. They did not mean it. It was window dressing. They were not sincere about ending secret holds because we discovered, when we started trying to use that language, some of the folks who voted for it were doing the old switcheroo. When they were called upon under the law to reveal their holds, they would just hand their hold off to someone else.

That is when I began getting frustrated with the games that were being played. I thank Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley and others who have worked on this, but I will tell you what is the most depressing thing I have heard today: that this is something that has been worked on for 15 years.

Now, seriously, think about that. We have allowed people to secretly hold nominations and the people's business, and there have been Members trying to clean it up for 15 years. We wonder why we are having trouble with our approval ratings.

Nothing is more hypocritical than all of the sanctimonious stuff I am hearing down the hall about the new era, no more business as usual, no more. We are going to have accountability and transparency. But yet we seem to be embroiled, down at this end of the hall, with not even being able to get beyond a secret hold. This should not be hard; this should be easy.

Now, some of the other provisions that are being debated today, I understand there is concern about the power of the minority in the Senate. I think those concerns have been addressed in the resolution that has been presented by Senator Merkley and Senator Udall and Senator Harkin from Iowa.

But if we cannot get 67 votes to end secret holds and amend the rules, how seriously can we take anybody who claims they want accountability and transparency in government? I mean, this is the hall of fame of hypocrisy. This is not just hypocrisy, it is the hall of fame. So that is why I think we have to get busy and get the secret hold provision done.

I would like to see us get all of these reforms done. I wanted to spend a second on what Senator Alexander's suggestion was. His suggestion was to use the rules. Well, honestly, does he think the way to solve this problem is to force the majority to stay here all night, with staff, spending the taxpayers' money to force someone over and over again to say, ``I object''?

We cannot make the minority talk. So that means the majority, whether it is Democrats or Republicans, has to stay all night and call the question. They do not have to have--I mean, we could do live quorum calls, but that is what we need to do to make this place work? That is his suggestion, to force the people who are objecting and the staff and the people around here to stay here all night every night until someone breaks? That is a good idea?

I think that means someone has probably been around here too long. It does not sound like a good idea, that it is not a commonsense idea that we would be promoting on Main Street in Missouri. I think it makes more sense, if you are the minority and you want to block legislation that you own it. Just own it. Block it. That is what the Senate is about. The minority can continue to block legislation whether the Democrats are in the minority or the Republicans are in the minority. They can block all the legislation they want. They just have to own it. They have to be willing to say they are blocking this for the following reasons--because we think it is important--and let the people decide.

Same thing with holds. You want to hold something, hold it. But let the people decide whether you are being reasonable or whether you are-- really what I was disgusted to learn is how many people were using secret holds. In fact, they brag about it. They are using secret holds to get something else. I am going to hold this nominee in this department because I want money for a community center in my town. If you do not give me money for a community center in my town, you cannot get the Deputy Secretary of the Interior through. I mean, I am making up this example, but this was actually going on. It is like you secretly hold something so that you can get them to give you something else. That is the essence of the backroom dealing that people are disgusted with. Own it. Be proud of it. Defend it. Debate it. But do not hide it. That is what this is all about.

I thank all of my colleagues who have worked on this. I just want to close with this comment: Bad habits have consequences, and if we do not take this opportunity to fix what is going on in the Senate--this is not the way the Senate has operated for hundreds of years. If we do not change this path, then we are going to be on this path forever. And if the minority now does not think that when the time comes they may not be in the minority anymore, if we do not think we have not learned from them--seriously?

This place is going to be dysfunctional as far as the eye can see because they will fill the tree and we will just block everything. Then they will block everything and we will fill the tree. This is going to go on forever until there are enough people around here who are willing to set aside the political maneuvering and do what is right for the future of deliberations in a body that we all want to be proud of. But right now we cannot be so proud of the way we operate.

I thank the Senator from Oregon and all of the Senators who have worked on this issue. I hope we can pull back from the brink because that is where we are. We are about ready to institutionalize a way of operating around here that is not something that any of us should be proud of.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Senator Barbara Mikulski for her trailblazing career in the U.S. Senate. As we begin the 112th Congress today, Senator Mikulski will begin her fifth consecutive Senate term making her the longest serving female Senator in American history. She joins legendary Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith in the history books today. This accomplishment is a testament to her dedication to the State and the people of Maryland, and a commitment to serve which I aim to emulate with my constituents in Missouri. She is, quite simply, a remarkable, dedicated, focused and perseverant woman and these attributes have led to this wonderful moment in her continued service.

Starting out as a social worker in Baltimore, and later becoming a member of the Baltimore city council, Senator Mikulski went on to become a U.S. Representative for the Third Congressional District of Maryland for 10 years. In 1986, she was elected to the U.S. Senate where she has served ever since.

Barbara Mikulski has continuously broken barriers for women and made history in her over 40 years as an elected official. And yet, in this 112th Congress, even as we mark this historic moment for women in the Senate, Senator Mikulski carries on her career in such a way that sets aside the pomp and circumstance of making history and instead remains focused on the most basic, pure and selfless form of public service.

In closing, although Senator Mikulski's tenure in the Senate as a woman is an important milestone, I believe that it will ultimately be the Senator's leadership fighting for women, children, seniors and veterans which will be her lasting legacy in Congress. I have had the fortunate opportunity to work with Senator Mikulski on some of this historic legislation for women and families, including the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act to protect against pay discrimination, and the TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act which expanded health insurance for military families.

I want to congratulate Senator Mikulski on her pioneering career in civil service and on making history in the U.S. Senate today; I am humbled to be working on historic legislation alongside my colleague from Maryland.

Madam President, I think that every Senator is understandably proud of their own State, but today I have special reason to be proud of Missouri. Just last week, Vice President Biden awarded the 2009 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards to five different companies and three of those five companies hailed from the great State of Missouri. The Baldrige Award recognizes only the highest performing companies in the U.S. in terms of quality and performance, and the fact that three out of the five awards went to Missouri companies is a testament to the spirit and work ethics of Missourians.

Heartland Health is a health system based in St. Joseph, MO, that has an extraordinary commitment to improving their patients' health rather than just treating patients' sicknesses, as is all too often seen in the healthcare community. The staff at Heartland Health recognizes that while providing world-class treatment for acute illnesses is vital, it is equally important to understand why individuals become ill, and they do everything possible to prevent those patients from ever needing hospital care in the first place. Their mission is: ``To improve the health of individuals and communities located in the Heartland Health region and provide the right care, at the right time, in the right place, at the right cost with outcomes second to none.'' This is not just a catchy slogan, but instead it is a commitment that has yielded results. Heartland Health is among the top 15 percent of all U.S. hospitals in patient safety; they have achieved 90 percent patient satisfaction, and they have done all this while at the same time saving millions of dollars by realizing efficiencies. As our entire country struggles with providing quality healthcare at affordable prices, I invite anyone to visit the ``Show Me'' State, where Heartland Health stands as an example for how a commitment to quality can yield the best care available affordably. They have been appropriately recognized with the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, joining a select group of companies that are the best of the best, and I applaud Heartland Health and all of the great men and women who make up its team for their achievement and their work.

Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies in Kansas City, MO, plays an integral role in the underappreciated work of keeping our Nation's nuclear arsenal in working order. The Kansas City Plant works to provide the National Nuclear Security Administration with electrical, mechanical and material components manufactured to exacting quality specifications to help meet key national security objectives. Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies uses a Six Sigma Plus

Continuous Improvement Model and it has resulted in an unmatched level of customer satisfaction. Honeywell has also been a key partner in the transition to the new state-of-the-art Kansas City Responsive Infrastructure, Manufacturing and Sourcing, KCRIMS, facility, which officially broke ground in September. They have been a steward in ensuring safety, quality and efficiency in all areas of their work, especially with respect to the production of the nonnuclear components for the Nation's nuclear weapons with NNSA. Honeywell's outstanding work has also provided an essential foundation for a continued partnership at the new KCRIMS facility and the company's ongoing role as a strong member of the local Kansas City community. I am deeply proud of the work the men and women on the Honeywell team carry out at the Kansas City Plant and of its central importance to our Nation's national security and I could not be more pleased to see them recognized for their work with this preeminent award.

MidwayUSA is a family-owned business located in Columbia, MO, that has been providing shooting, hunting and reloading supplies for over 30 years. The company, started by Larry Potterfield and his wife Brenda, exemplifies the ``Made in America'' motto by employing hundreds of Missourians who are themselves passionate about hunting and shooting, two activities that are centerpieces of Missouri's rich sportsman culture. The passion of Larry and Brenda shows in the quality of the work of their entire team. MidwayUSA has earned 98 percent customer retention, and a 93 percent customer satisfaction rating, both remarkable achievements. While MidwayUSA has progressed over time from taking orders by mail, then phone, and now via the internet, one thing that has not changed is its mission, ``To be the best-run business in America, for the benefit of our Customers.'' They are doing a great job accomplishing just this. In pursuit of that goal they have become ISO 9000 certified, won the Missouri Quality Award for Performance Excellence, and now they have been recognized with the 2009 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. In growing from nothing more than a simple idea to one of the leading shooting supply retailers, MidwayUSA has shown what dedication to quality and performance, coupled with building an exceptionally committed, dedicated and skilled workforce, can produce in a business. I would like to congratulate the entire MidwayUSA team on their success.

These three companies, which are not just among Missouri's finest, but, as we now know, among our Nation's very best, have so much to be proud of. They embody the ``Show Me'' spirit when it comes to showing how a business should operate. Congratulations Heartland Health, Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies in Kansas City and MidwayUSA on winning the 2009 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. I look forward to seeing what these companies and their employees accomplish next. I know it will be something great.

Mr. President, I----

Mr. President, I agree with my colleague from Arizona on many things when it comes to appropriations, including that I have made a decision that earmarking is not a process that I think is the appropriate way to spend public money. But I am a little confused about some of the righteous indignation coming from the Republican side of the aisle about this bill.

The omnibus 2010 they have sitting out there--they are wanting the American people to think this document came from Democrats. They want the American people to think that omnibus 2010, all of those pages sitting there, were done by Democrats. They weren't done by Democrats. Those pages were done by Democrats and Republicans. Every bit of that document was drafted by Republicans and Democrats, right down to the earmarks. And for the minority leader to stand here and act as if this document is something that is the fault of the Democratic Party when he well knows he has been involved--I have been involved in terms of trying to get the number down, and I am glad we succeeded in getting the number down, as has been referenced, to the Sessions-McCaskill number, but this was a bipartisan effort to get the number down.

The irony is, guess who has earmarks in there. The minority leader, who just voted on a moratorium for earmarks 10 minutes ago. Did he pull his earmarks out? No. Did any of the Republicans who voted for a moratorium on earmarks pull their earmarks out before this bill came to the floor? We could have eliminated a few pages. So I just don't think the righteous indignation works.

This was a bipartisan effort, drafted by Republicans and Democrats. It came to the floor after months of work by Democrats and Republicans. It was presented to this body in a bipartisan way to vote on. I wasn't going to vote for it. I am against it. So I think I have a slight bit of credibility to call these guys on this notion that this is something that sprung from nowhere out of some back room on the Democratic

side of the aisle. This sprung from a bipartisan effort of the Appropriations Committee, and every Member on that side of the aisle knows it. They know it. And they know the earmarks in there--there are almost $700 million of earmarks in there from people who voted on a moratorium on earmarks. That is like being half-pregnant.

They should have said, before this bill ever came to the floor--and they were asked: Would you like your earmarks pulled out? No, no. They were perfectly willing to vote no and take those earmarks home.

So, on one hand, I would have voted no had we had the vote, and I said that from day one. I voted no on the omnibus last year. I voted no on another omnibus because I don't think it is the right way to appropriate. But this is an equal-opportunity sin. The problems with this process don't lie on one side of the aisle; they lie on both sides of the aisle. And the notion that the Republicans are trying to say this is just about the Democrats is the kind of hypocrisy that gives us the lowest ratings we have in terms of confidence of the American people.

We need to own up here. This is not about the Democrats. This is about both sides of the aisle and a flawed appropriations process that couldn't get to the floor because of a lot of obstructionism, and when it finally did get to the floor, it came in one package. But it is not fair for the Republicans to act as though all those pages came from the Democratic side of the aisle. They certainly did not.

I yield the floor.

Let me just say that had the tone of the minority leader's remarks been the same as the Senator from Tennessee, I probably wouldn't have felt as passionately as I did. I agree with the Senator from Tennessee about the vote on this bill. I have publicly said I wouldn't support it. I didn't support it for a number of reasons. But if we want to work together, then we have to quit trying to score cheap political points.

The notion that the minority floor leader tried to give to the American people that this bill was somehow concocted in some back room by Democrats--everybody knows that is not true. Everybody knows that until about 8 hours ago, there were a bunch of Republicans voting for this. Now, am I glad they are not voting for it? Candidly, I am. I am glad you guys managed to get everybody to not vote for it because I am opposed to it. But what I think was most offensive was trying to trot this bill out here and put a label on it and try to say to the American people that this was something that was done at the eleventh hour to be jammed down people's throats. This was something done in a bipartisan way. Thad Cochran had a huge role in that bill, as did every other ranking member on all of the subcommittees on appropriations. So it is offensive to me--it is not that we are defeating the omnibus. I like that. But what is offensive to me is that we have gotten into this bad habit of trying to score cheap political points. And for Senators to come to this floor and say ``we won'' and do this kind of stuff when you know how many Republicans worked hard on provisions in that bill-- and, in fact, Republicans worked hard--frankly, harder than our side did on McCaskill-Sessions.

We had 17 Democrats supporting it. You had unanimous support. I was pleased that we came together in that bipartisan way to bring the number down. We won in bringing the number down to the level Republicans wanted, along with 17 Democrats. That is what Sessions- McCaskill was. I think if we can go forward in the manner the Senator from Tennessee has spoken of, then it is important that we quit trying to mislead somehow the American people that the bill we were going to consider was the product of the Democratic Party, because it wasn't. That is what causes frayed feelings.

You know, the Senator from Tennessee and I have had long discussions. He was surprised to hear about how angry we were on this side and some of the tactics that were being used. I was surprised to hear about how angry some of the Senators on the Republican side were at some of the tactics that were being used. If there is going to be a moment that we come together, then we need to work a little harder at not scoring cheap political points such as were scored a few minutes ago by the minority leader.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Friday, December 17; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the New START treaty.

Mr. President, the START treaty will be open to amendments tomorrow. Senators are encouraged to come to the floor to offer and debate their amendments. Rollcall votes are possible to occur throughout the day.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a joint statement by myself and Senator Hatch regarding the Porteous impeachment be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I think it goes without saying there are things Senator Bond and I might disagree on, but today is not a time to talk about those things. I rise for a few minutes to talk about Senator Bond and the things I most respect and admire him for. It could be a very long list, and I don't want to take too long, but I am going to hit the high points of the things I think demand that anyone who has paid attention to Missouri needs to respect and admire this man for.

For 42 years, he has served the State of Missouri. Let us start there. He loves the State we call home. I would say that he knows it better than any living person in the world. He understands it, he is dedicated to it, and he has made Missouri his life's work. For that, he deserves my respect and admiration.

Secondly, he has made major sacrifices to serve. As the leader said, he graduated first in his class from the University of Virginia Law School; a graduate from Princeton. I don't need to explain to anybody in the Senate what that could mean in terms of one's career, in terms of making money. Christopher Kit Bond could have been wealthy beyond anyone's imagination. He had the intellect, he had the personality to succeed in any business that he decided to engage in, and certainly in the practice of law.

I think in today's world there is so much cynicism about the people who choose a career of political service. This is a great example for civics classes throughout this country, to see that this is what we are talking about--someone who chose not to make big bucks, not to travel the halls of power in the private sector, but to toil in the fields of being a public servant. Yes, there are many things about being a public servant that are grand and glorious, but there is a lot that is not.

I would challenge anyone to go to as many farm bureau picnics as my colleague has gone to and not admit a little bit of fatigue. I would challenge anyone to have attended as many State fairs as my colleague has attended and not confess a little fatigue. I would challenge anyone to go to what my dad used to call the ``slick ham suppers'' in small communities across the State after a long week of work, because he knew there were people there who were going to be rewarded by his presence and that it was part of his job. He realized that was very important. So I am very respectful and have great admiration for the fact that he has toiled in the field of public service for all these years.

The third thing I respect and admire about him is how proud he is of his family and how devoted he is to his wife. It is wonderful to behold when someone exudes love and admiration and devotion to those people who are most important to all of us--our families. I have watched Senator Bond as he began to immerse himself in foreign policy, and I know it was because he went to bed every night and woke up every morning thinking of Sam, and Sam's service and what Sam was doing and feeling, that compelled him to do as much as he could in the Halls of Congress to help men and women such as Sam Bond throughout our world.

Fourth, and maybe this is the best one, Senator Kit Bond is not afraid of a fight. I think that is terrific. You know, Missouri is a tough State. It is a tough State in that anybody who tells you their reelection is certain does not know or understand Missouri. Every election is a battle in Missouri. He has a record of nine and two in those elections. And for our beloved team, the Missouri Tigers, he and I would take that record any year in football. He has

had three campaigns for Governor and four campaigns for the Senate from the State of Missouri, and his record is nine and one in those elections. Let me tell you, that is one remarkable achievement because in Missouri we have some strong-minded folks. We have a bunch of folks on one end who are very loud and very opinionated, and they are not going anywhere, and we have a bunch of folks on the other end who are just as loud and just as opinionated, and they are not going anywhere. But in the middle we have a grand and glorious group of very stubbornly independent people.

I like to point out to people that the State of Missouri elected John Ashcroft Governor and Harriett Woods Lieutenant Governor in the same election. Now, many of you may not know who Harriett Woods is, but I can assure you my colleague and I both know these two people--John Ashcroft and Harriett Woods--and they had absolutely nothing in common. They had completely divergent ideological views of the world, yet Missourians elected both of them. Why? I will tell you what that grand and gloriously stubborn streak of independents want in Missouri--they want someone with a smile.

Check for Kit Bond. When you think of Kit Bond, you think of him smiling. Even if his teeth are gritted, and he is telling you something you don't want to hear or you can tell he is angry at you, he is still grinning. They appreciate his intellect. He has always been an intellectual giant, and that is important when you are toiling the fields of public service. His integrity. There was never a doubt in all of these years of Kit Bond's service that this was not a man of the very highest integrity. And finally, a work ethic. And gee howdy, Missourians want a work ethic. They want somebody who understands that they are working hard and they want to see you working hard, and that is exactly what Senator Bond has done for these 42 years. He has worked very hard, even down to planting his chestnut trees himself on the farm in Mexico.

So the magic formula of a ready smile, intellect, integrity, and an amazing work ethic has put him in the same category as some of Missouri's very greatest. From Thomas Hart Benton to Senator Christopher Kit Bond, he has shown the world and shown our country what hard work, what somebody who loves the middle of America and all that it represents can do in the Senate.

He has been a wonderful role model for many of us in Missouri, even if we don't always agree on every issue. And by the way, I will tell this story today: When I took my desk in the State auditor's office, there is a tradition in the State auditor's office in Missouri that all the previous State auditors' pictures are around your office on a photo rail at the top. I sat down at my desk on the first day having been elected State auditor, and I looked up and who was directly across from me--Kit Bond and John Ashcroft. I will confess I moved the order so I didn't have to look at both of you every single day. But you were a reminder to me that there are many different ways to serve.

It is with a great deal of reluctance that I say farewell to Senator Kit Bond in the Senate. He has served here well, he has served his State well, and I hope he remains a colleague and friend of mine for many years to come.

With the utmost admiration and respect, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, our Constitution is a glorious thing. It is in fact the envy of the world. One of the most effective and elegant elements of the foundation of our government is the provisions that provide for the checks and balances of our three branches of government.

It has been an incredible honor to participate in the impeachment process that was devised by very wise people very long ago, which actually provides the American people the reassurance that the Constitution is working the way it was designed to work when it comes to the checks and balances of the three branches of government.

The responsibilities of the modern Congress, both the House and Senate, are extensive. I don't need to spend much time talking about how busy we are right now. But the fact that we set aside everything that we were doing and came together and sat as a Senate and listened to the arguments and deliberated extensively about this impeachment should be reassuring to every American. I think the results are interesting in that it reflects that each Senator made an individual decision about the Articles of Impeachment. There was some unanimity on some of the counts, but on others it was Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and progressives, on both sides of the question. I think that shows the extent to which everybody made an independent judgment and took their responsibility very seriously.

I want to take a few minutes now to thank some people who are unsung heroes. Obviously, I thank the distinguished vice chairman, the Senator from Utah, for his support, experience, and wisdom in discharging the committee's duties. He was essential to this process and a great rock for me to lean on at many turns during this process. I also thank the 10 other members of the Impeachment Trial Committee for their devotion and diligence and commitment to this important work.

Then I want to take a couple of minutes to talk about the staff. I want to begin with Derron Parks, who is seated with me on the floor of the Senate. Derron walked into my office and was hired to be a legislative assistant for health care, in the middle of some pretty difficult times on health care. Then I said to him, ``By the way, can you run an impeachment of a Federal judge, also?''

As a brandnew member of my staff, he took on incredible responsibilities. All of the thanks I have received belong to him because he worked hard, he worked smart, he was a great leader, and he did a remarkable job of marshaling a bunch of Senators, a bunch of staff, a bunch of witnesses, a bunch of evidence, a bunch of legal research, and he did it in a way that I think the Senate can be very proud.

Also, I thank Tom Jipping, Senator Hatch's staff person, who helped with this as the deputy staff director for the Impeachment Trial Committee. He also put in an incredible amount of work and gave a very valuable contribution.

Justin Kim, counsel, was very important because whenever there was a disagreement about what was the right road to take in terms of historical precedence, rule of law, decisions on motions, he was always a good sounding board. There was always more than one smart lawyer in the room so that the ideas could be bounced back and forth and somehow we could come up with the right answer based on the law, the Constitution, and historical precedent.

Rebecca Seidel was also very valuable to the committee. She is another counsel who was essential in this process.

Erin Johnson, deputy counsel and chief clerk, did, frankly, some of the most difficult work, and that was making sure we had a quorum during the trial, which was hard, as you can imagine. Keeping Senators in one seat for

an extended period of time is tough. She managed to make sure that we always had the quorum the law demanded.

Lake Dishman, another member of the staff, did a wonderful job.

Susan Navarro Smelcer, an analyst on the Federal judiciary, CRS, did wonderful work for us in terms of allowing us some help on the research of the historical precedence and decisions that guided our way.

Morgan Frankel, Senate legal counsel, was on the floor for the conclusion of this impeachment matter. Like Senator Hatch, this wasn't his first time to deal with impeachment matters, so he was a wealth of information and wonderful help to us.

Pat Mack Bryan also did great work.

Grant Vinik and Tom Cabayero were also from the Senate legal counsel staff.

All of the committee members had staff people who helped. I will not put all of their names on the record now, but they will be made part of my entire statement. I will have more comments on the impeachment proceedings that I will insert in the Record.

I will conclude by saying that I am very proud to be a Senator today. There are days when that is not as easy to say. There are times when this place is pretty dysfunctional. But I am very proud of the Senate and how we conducted ourselves during this very important and grave proceeding. I think the responsibility was handled as the Founders would have wanted us to handle it, and I think we should all be proud of that.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 8, 2010, at 3:30 p.m., to conduct a joint hearing entitled ``Examining the Efficiency, Stability, and Integrity of the U.S. Capital Markets.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 8, 2010, at 10 a.m. in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting.