Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, April 21; that following the prayer and the 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; the Senate then resume executive session in consideration of the nomination of Christopher Hill to be Ambassador to Iraq; that the Senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons; further, that all time in adjournment, recess, and morning business count postcloture.

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.

We have had a number of votes that indicated what we should not do as it relates to a climate change policy. This is about what we should do. I believe, just as with any piece of legislation, if it is done right, it can be very positive.

I believe it can be about creating jobs and revitalizing the economy. I would like to thank Senators Brown, Boxer, and Shaheen for supporting this amendment which lays out a framework for a balanced climate change policy to create jobs and a clean technology economy, strengthening manufacturing competitiveness, diversifying domestic clean energy supplies, protecting consumers, including policies that address regional differences, provide incentives for cost savings achieved through energy efficiencies, and allowing voluntary opportunities for agriculture and forestry to participate in this process of lowering greenhouse gases.

I ask for support from my colleagues.

My question, I guess, through the Chair would be, is Senator Bond also willing to take a voice vote on his amendment?

Mr. President, just 3 days ago, President Obama released a bold new plan to revitalize the American auto industry. We need to give this plan a chance to work. There are two or three different outcomes. But they are in the middle of the boldest restructuring of the American auto industry we have ever seen. This would cut the legs out from under that.

Our President has made it clear that we are not going to walk away from the people, the communities or the businesses--the thousands of businesses that depend on the auto industry.

I would finally say that all around the world countries such as Japan helping Toyota, Germany, Korea, China, France--around the world, other countries understand the critical nature for their own national security in terms of the auto industry; their economic security in terms of building a middle class, and they have stepped forward in this global credit crisis to help their auto industries.

We are now in the middle of a plan to save jobs in communities and restructure. I urge strongly a ``no'' vote.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, I wish to speak this evening about an amendment I have filed. Do I understand it is not actually in order to offer amendments at this time; is that correct?

Madam President, before talking about a very important and serious amendment I will be offering, I wish to take a point of personal privilege to speak about my alma mater, Michigan State University, that is in the final four. I have to say for the record, I knew they would get there. The final four is in Detroit. We are thrilled at Ford Field, a state-of-the-art facility. They play on Saturday night, and I am saying ``go State'' right now. For all those listening who are Michigan State fans, let's root them on because it is a point of terrific pride for Michigan State University, after a hard- fought year with, I think, the best coach in the league, Tom Izzo, who is now going to represent us in the final four. I appreciate that.

Amendment No. 879

Madam President, I have an amendment I will be offering that has been filed, amendment No. 879. I will be offering it tomorrow. I wish to read it briefly because I think it is important to read what this is. This is about climate change and it is about being for something and not just against something, and we have had a lot of amendments doing that.

The amendment says we will decrease greenhouse gas emissions with a policy that will invest in energy technologies, reduce greenhouse gases, create new jobs, strengthen the manufacturing competitiveness of the United States, diversify the domestic clean energy supply, protect consumers and regions, and include opportunities for agriculture and forestry.

This is the text of the amendment. As I indicated before, my amendment is about what we should be for. We have seen a number of amendments on the floor saying what we shouldn't do and what we can't do. This is about what we can do and what we should do.

This budget is about investing in America's future. Our policy on climate change must do the same thing. As will the budget, if it is done right--and I believe we can do this right--climate change legislation will create new jobs in the great State of Michigan, in the great State of New Hampshire, and all across this country and revolutionize and revitalize our economy if this is done right.

Coming from a Midwestern State where economic troubles are not new-- in fact, we now have 12 percent unemployment. I could spend a lot of time, as I have in the past on this floor, talking about what is happening to our families. I understand the risks associated with poorly designed climate policy, but I also understand that our economy--Michigan's economy, the U.S. economy--cannot go forward with the same old policies, dependent on foreign oil and pollution, that harms both our health and our economic interests. Climate change legislation, if designed right, will be a significant opportunity for new jobs and an economic transformation for our country.

Climate change can and must look out for working families and businesses, whether it be a farmer, a manufacturer or a cleantech engineer. That is why I propose this amendment, so the budget instructs the future of climate policy to be well balanced, so it creates new jobs, strengthens manufacturing, and breaks America of our dangerous addiction to foreign oil.

We can no longer rely on the same old technologies and the same old fuels. With new energy solutions come new jobs and new industries. America has always led the world in innovation and invention, and we can do it again with green energy. With or without a climate policy, energy companies, industries, and entrepreneurs must make investments for the future. This amendment will ensure that a cap-and-trade policy will provide direction for future investments. This amendment will direct us toward a smart climate policy that will protect and strengthen manufacturing.

First, we can ensure a level playing field in the world economy by bringing other countries into an international agreement and ensuring that jobs remain in the United States by preventing rising energy costs from being a factor. Second, new manufacturing opportunities will arise. For example, to meet the needs of new clean energy production, new technologies must be produced. The massive scale of this need will create new markets for American manufacturers.

Recent history has shown what happens when we rely primarily on foreign sources of energy. We subject ourselves to less than friendly international governments that can leverage unstable supplies and higher prices against the people we represent. This amendment will take us steps further to reducing our dangerous addiction to foreign oil.

Furthermore, our domestic energy needs will increase over time, and all sources of clean energy should be added to our portfolio. Good investing, wise investing always requires diversification, so we must bring new clean sources of energy into the mix.

This is a national and international problem, and we have to solve this together. Our President now has been spending time with global leaders talking about issues we know we need to be working together on. As he is reaching out to them, we must do that as well. But we know that through this amendment, we will ensure that all regions contribute equitably and help each other as America transitions to a clean energy future.

A successful climate policy also has to include all stakeholders. Agriculture and forestry can make significant contributions to greenhouse gas reductions--as much as 20 percent--with the right incentives. This amendment will provide clear and certain opportunities for landowners as to how they can achieve emission reductions and benefit from doing so.

Overall, this amendment is the road map, I believe, to a reasonable, balanced climate policy. With policies that meet these objectives, we can ensure the American public that greater economic opportunity lies ahead. We can do this while meeting the ambitious emission reduction targets set by President Obama.

Instead of arguing about what we can't do, I urge the Senate to embrace what we can do and what we must do to create jobs for the future, to get us off our dependence on foreign oil, and to improve our environment. This is about the future of the country. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment that gives us a road map on how to get there.

Thank you very much.

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 have just come from an all-day session with the Budget Committee. I am very pleased that we have voted it out to the floor, and we will be taking up next week President Obama's budget, his priorities. Certainly the chairman of the committee, Senator Conrad, gets tremendous credit for his hard work, as usual, and his expertise, and his staff's expertise as well.

Particularly, on a personal level, since it is such a difficult time for those Senator Conrad loves in North Dakota, we know his heart and mind has been there, as well as shepherding this budget through. We appreciate his diligence in this very challenging time.

What was clear from the budget debate not only in the committee yesterday and today but in the comments that have gone on in the last couple of weeks from Republican colleagues is that they have dusted off a 15-year-old set of arguments about the budget, which is in front of us. You could use the headline: GOP Dusts off, Reuses 15-year-old Message of ``No.''

We have heard no on equal pay and from too many people around here on health care and on protecting public lands. The issues go on and on-- whether it has been slow walking, filibustering, or just plain saying no.

So when we look at what is happening, I think it is important to put it into context. This year, 2009, we saw multiple headlines. One was: ``GOP Warns About Budget Hardball.''

We know they are going to come to the floor and play hardball on the budget next week and fight us every step of the way on our priorities and the President's vision for education, health care, and energy independence. They clearly have indicated that.

If you roll back the clock, this is not a new message. It is very much recycled. This was a headline in 1995: ``GOP Plan For Budget To Take No Prisoners.''

They took on President Clinton and his priorities of investing and creating children's health insurance and focusing on jobs and on ways to bring down the deficit, which, by the way, created 22 million jobs in this country.

I can tell you coming from a State with now 12 percent unemployment, we would be happy to have taken the Clinton budget and the era of creating jobs. I know the Presiding Officer comes from a State also hard hit. When we talk about what is best for people, people in this country would love to go back to an era of creating 22 million jobs.

President Obama is focusing on getting us back to that point by moving forward to invest in jobs, invest in the economy and what people care about.

But all we are hearing over and over again is how we are going to have a fight, it is going to be tough. One more time it is no.

1993: ``GOP's Politics of No.'' ``One-word vocabulary hobbles GOP.'' Sound familiar? ``Republicans grouse as Senate takes up budget bill.'' This was back in June 18, 1993. At that time, we had a Democratic President putting forward priorities for the American people--not the wealthiest in the country but middle-class families working hard every day, playing by the rules, who wanted to know their country was focused on them and their families.

We fast forward to today, and in the Budget Committee and on the floor, what do we see? We see a Republican repeat: Same old politics, same old policies that have gotten us to where we are, that have gotten us into this crisis.

The debate in the Budget Committee was very much about going back to the policies that did not work, that have created such financial chaos and job loss in this country. Whether to move us forward, that is what we are talking about, changing course, moving us forward, a different set of values and priorities, a different vision about what is important for America.

The American people have rejected the same old politics and the same old policies. But yet every day we see the same old politics, forcing us to go to 60 votes rather than working together to move legislation forward.

H.R. 1388 is a terrific bill on community service, the national service bill. Rather than being able to move it forward every step of the way together, there was constant effort to force cloture votes, to move in a way that has slowed it down, even though we know the majority of people were supporting it.

So we see the same old politics over and over again and the same old policies. When you listen to Republican colleagues over and over again, their mantra is always about tax cuts for the wealthy, we will solve great problems for everybody else. I can assure you the 11 million-plus people in this country who are unemployed right now are not concerned about another supply-side tax cut. They were waiting a long time, for the last 8 years, for it to trickle down to them, and all that trickled down to them was job loss, home loss, health care costs up, education costs up, energy costs up, food costs up.

This budget goes in a different direction. We reject the same old policies that got us where we are, that got us into this crisis.

Instead, we have put forward under the President's leadership a budget that is investing in America's future, investing in jobs. I am very proud to have led an effort in the committee to make sure we are focused on manufacturing, to focus on jobs in our budget resolution. I know our Presiding Officer shares my deep concern about those issues, and I am proud to partner with him on so many initiatives around manufacturing and jobs.

Health care: to make sure we have put in place the ability to tackle health care costs and health care access. We are in a unique position in health care. It is one of those rare situations where the more people are covered, the more you provide health care, you actually bring the cost down because you have fewer people using emergency rooms inappropriately, fewer people unable to go to the doctor before they get very ill, being able to get preventive care. This budget focuses on health care.

This budget focuses on energy independence. I am very proud to have authored in the bill a clean energy fund. This is based on work we are doing in the Energy Committee. I am so appreciative of the leadership and commitment of the chairman, Senator Bingaman, to work with us on manufacturing and energy independence, focusing on green technologies, focusing on a clean energy fund that will help us invest in those technologies and create great new manufacturing jobs. This is a part of the budget, energy efficiency efforts, creating the opportunity for us to work

together to address climate change in a way that is responsible and allows us to focus on jobs and creating new opportunities in the green economy.

Finally, and certainly not least, education. In terms of access to college or whether it is preschool and Head Start or whether it is funding our K-12 system, it is critically important that we not forget education and job training for the future. We have a lot of people who are going through transition today from one job to another, and job training is particularly critical.

In the Obama budget, we are investing in America's future: jobs, health care, energy independence, and education.

I am also very proud of the fact that we make a strong commitment again this year. For the last 2 years, with our Democratic majority, we have made veterans a priority, veterans health care a priority. It is so terrific to see the commitment of President Obama and his administration, the commitment they put in the budget that we have sustained a strong commitment to keep the promise of America for our veterans and their families, those who have served us, are serving us now, and come home and expect us to keep our promises as well.

There are many important values reflected in this budget, from focusing on veterans, focusing on jobs, as well as addressing what happens when a plant closes. I am very pleased to have put language in to increase money for communities, where there are closed plants, to create new opportunities for jobs and economic development.

There are a lot of different strategies that are represented and funded in this budget.

Again, it all comes down to how we view America, what are our priorities, what are our values, whom do we represent? Do we have a budget for American families? Do we have a budget for the middle class of this country which, by the way, gets significant tax cuts? We have significant tax cuts in this bill as well. The difference between the tax cuts in this budget and in budgets when our friends on the other side of the aisle were in the majority is these tax cuts go to the middle class. These tax cuts go to working families.

We also in the committee under Senator Cardin's leadership have increased the dollars going to SBA, for small business, because we understand small business is an engine of this economy.

This budget does reflect jobs, strengthening manufacturing, support for small business, addressing job training, and where we go in the new green economy around jobs and energy independence. It focuses on health care. It focuses on education. We are keeping the promise that has been made by this country to our veterans.

I am very proud of this budget. I am very proud of this President for submitting this budget to us. It is different. We will hear honest disagreements about philosophy and how we stimulate the economy, differences in how we put together a budget and whether we invest in people or whether we continue the ways of the past that have gotten us where we are today.

This budget is a change. This budget is a commitment to the American people, a commitment to families, a commitment to communities, American businesses, keeping our jobs here at home. That is what this budget is about. Yes, it is different. Frankly, we tried it for 8 years under the philosophy and the direction that came from former President Bush and colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and it did not work. We cannot sustain having the same old politics and the same old policies if we are going to move America forward. We cannot sustain that any longer.

I urge colleagues to come together on a bipartisan basis and stand for the values and the people represented in this budget.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, we know our planet is in danger, and later this year we will be debating a climate bill to address our environmental challenges. I am glad to see my colleagues from the other side of the aisle are doing their part for the environment by recycling 15-year-old talking points on the budget.

President Bush left us a terrible mess: high unemployment, high deficits, millions without health care. I am referring to the first President Bush and the mess inherited by President Bill Clinton. One of my colleagues at the time said Clinton's budget would ``destroy the economy.'' Well, I think everyone knows the Clinton years did not destroy the economy. In fact, they created about 22 million new jobs.

Let's look at some of the newspaper headlines from back then. First of all, just this week, Politico's banner headline was: ``GOP Warns About Budget Hardball.'' That is what we have been hearing on the floor--hardball, people coming down time after time attacking President Obama's budget.

But back in 1995, we heard the same thing: ``GOP Plan for Budget to Take No Prisoners.''

In 1993: ``GOP's Politics of No.'' Sound familiar? GOP's politics of no.

In 1993: ``One-Word Vocabulary Hobbles GOP. Republicans Grouse as Senate Takes Up Budget Bill.'' You could recycle and, in fact, that is what they are doing, every single one of these comments and every single one of these headlines.

The American people voted for change last November. They are tired of all of this. They are tired of the nay-saying, the doom and the gloom. They deserve better than a Republican repeat, and that is, unfortunately, what is happening: a Republican repeat, same old politics, same old politics of no, slow-walking, filibustering; same old policies; every problem should have a tax cut for the wealthy. That is what got us into this mess.

We hear the same old thing from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. We hear no to health care reform and the budget, no to creating 3.5 million new jobs through the recovery plan. We hear no to increasing oversight of our financial sector. We hear no to extending unemployment for those most in need. Certainly, in my great State of Michigan the answer has been no. To a commonsense budget that provides middle-class tax cuts and will cut the deficit in half in 4 years, what do we hear? No.

The budget we are working on now focuses on the real problems affecting American families, the things that people sit down with their families and struggle over every day. The Obama budget invests in America's future by focusing on jobs, by focusing on health care, by focusing on energy independence, and education. That is what our families are concerned about as they are trying to juggle what to pay first amidst the crisis they feel today.

This is a budget we need to do right now. We need to move past the politics of no and start working together to do what is right for American families. I urge my colleagues to look past the next election cycle and to pass this budget to get America back on track again.

I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. President, before the Senator from Tennessee leaves, I wish to say how much I enjoyed his comments, and I think no matter which side of the aisle we are on, we get up in the morning wanting to try to make a difference. So I appreciate his sentiments and I appreciate his comments very much, as it relates to what we hope we will all instill in our students and teachers and those who love our country. I appreciate his comments.

Mr. President, I wish to speak a little bit today about a subject near and dear to my heart, and that is our American auto industry.

Before the global credit crisis happened, our American auto industry was undertaking ambitious restructuring plans. I know there are those who haven't been aware of that up until now but in fact it is true.

For the past decade, our American auto industry has been moving toward improved fuel efficiency, improved quality, and advanced technologies. I am very proud of what the men and women in our country do in terms of building our American automobiles. This was clearly shown as the auto industry laid out the plans before Congress last December. The companies and the workers have been making tremendous sacrifices even before they were asked to do so, to level the playing field with foreign competitors. The idea of cutting, restructuring, layoffs, plant closings are not new. They are, unfortunately, a way of life at the moment in Michigan and other manufacturing States where there have had to be major sacrifices, particularly for workers and their families.

By the end of the current 2005 and 2007 contracts for workers, the labor cost gap between domestic and foreign automakers would have been largely eliminated. They also eliminated 50 percent of the companies' liability for retiree health benefits, and that is before any of the current debate. It was also before the global credit crunch happened. The global credit crunch has hit everybody--every business, large and small, every consumer, every family, every homeowner.

Certainly our auto industry has seen the brunt of the inability to get capital, the inability of people to get a car loan, our auto dealers and the challenges they have had, our auto suppliers, as well as the OEMs.

The failure of our auto industry, if we allow them to go down because of a global credit crisis, would mean a loss of over 400,000 supplier jobs and over 450,000 jobs in the service sector, national deficits, and reductions in personal income. It would be a huge catastrophe if we were to allow the global credit crisis to create a situation in which we would no longer have an American auto industry.

It is important for us to understand that this crisis has similarly affected

the foreign automakers, forcing them to request help from China, Canada, Japan, Spain, Great Britain, Brazil, as well as numerous other countries.

We find ourselves in a situation where this credit crisis has profoundly affected the backbone of manufacturing in the United States. We have seen firsthand in Michigan the challenges that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have faced. We now have a White House auto task force that has been set up to work with General Motors and Chrysler, which have asked for assistance from us in this global credit crisis.

Today we had a very important announcement to help the industry as a whole. I thank the White House auto task force for understanding that along with our automakers, it is critically important that our suppliers be able to pay their bills, supply the parts, and continue to be a very important part of this industry as a whole.

I very much appreciate the fact that a very positive action was taken today by the auto task force to help make capital available during this credit crisis for our tier 1 suppliers.

Our American auto industry represents about 4 percent of our gross national product and 10 percent of our industrial production value. Our auto industry provides health care and pensions to over a million retirees and their families who live all over the country, by the way, not just in Michigan, although we certainly would welcome them back. But they live all over the country.

Auto parts suppliers provide hundreds of thousands of jobs. They are the leading U.S. manufacturing employer. That, again, is why the decision that was made today to make capital available for our auto suppliers is so important.

In turn, those direct jobs contribute to 4.5 million--4.5 million-- private industry jobs across the country. That is an additional 5.7 jobs for every single direct supplier job. We are talking in general about an industry that touches every State--not just Michigan, not just Ohio, not just Indiana, but every single State.

The domestic auto industry comprises more than 10 percent of the high yield bond market and is one of the largest sectors in leverage finance for the banks. They spend over $12 billion a year on research and development. Without this funding, our country would become dependent on foreign ideas and foreign technology that would threaten our role not only in innovation and in the global economy but in our national defense as well.

I come today to say that failure is not an option when it comes to the viability and support for our American auto industry. Right now, if one or more of the American auto companies is allowed to fail, then we can expect as many as 3.3 million lost jobs in the next year. When we think about what we are doing in the stimulus package, in the recovery package, and we think about 3.3 million jobs that would be lost in the auto industry alone, it is stunning.

Think about the recovery plan and the fact we are talking about creating or saving 3.5 million jobs--3.5 million jobs lost if one of the companies went down. This is a big deal. This is a huge issue for us. That is why I have fought so hard, along with Senator Levin and other colleagues, to make sure we are doing everything possible to create a level playing field for the American auto industry so we can maintain these jobs and the strong role--the vital role--they play in this economy.

It is not only about workers--direct workers or indirect workers. The fallout, if we were to see a company fail, would hit thousands of businesses that depend on the auto industry, from parts suppliers to dealers to service industries, body shops, consultants, advertisers, janitorial services--all kinds of other jobs, not counting the restaurant across the street from the plant. When the plant closes, the restaurant goes or the shoe store down the street goes. The drugstore goes. These are basic jobs, huge parts of the economy of thousands and thousands of communities across this country.

Also, let me be clear that the foreign automakers would be hurt as well because manufacturers share so many suppliers. Without the business from Detroit, those suppliers would fail. Many dealers own U.S. and non-U.S. dealerships, and they would not be able to keep operating without the American brands in the mix. That is why I am very pleased that the leadership of Toyota met with the auto task force to urge them to support the American auto industry through this global credit crisis because they know better than anyone that they share the same suppliers.

Again, that is why the decision today by the auto task force is so important, to support tier 1 suppliers because this supports the automakers, foreign and domestic, all over America. This is very important. It would have catastrophic effects on several States already suffering from some of the Nation's highest unemployment rates if, in fact, we would see one or more of these companies go down.

Let me show some of the numbers when we talk about what happens in terms of unemployment and the devastation across the country--people are out of work right now--and what would happen if our American automakers were not supported so they can continue. We would see a shutdown that would increase unemployment levels to over 10 percent in Indiana, Ohio, Rhode Island, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, California, Oregon, North Carolina, Mississippi, Nevada, Alabama, Missouri, Illinois, and Georgia.

My home State of Michigan already suffers from 11.6 percent unemployment. I understand how painful that is for communities. Rhode Island could lose over 9,000 jobs if we were to see one of our American automakers go under--9,000 jobs. Kentucky could lose 75,000 jobs and go to 11.9 percent unemployment. South Carolina could lose over 58,000 jobs and go to an unemployment rate of 11.9 percent.

To continue, Tennessee could lose over 106,000 jobs as a result of one of our three domestic automakers going under, which would bring their unemployment rate to 11.8 percent. California could lose over 300,000 jobs.

My point, whether it is Tennessee, California, Oregon, North Carolina, Mississippi, or other States is clearly what happens in Detroit does not stay in Detroit. That is the point. What happens in Detroit affects automakers and Americans all over the country, families who depend on a paycheck from a direct job in the auto industry or a supplier or some other small business. Others would be forced in a recession to find work that is not there. People are barely making it as it is.

My message overall, again, is that what happens in Detroit doesn't stay in Detroit. It goes all over the country. That is why the work of the White House auto task force is so important and why I appreciate so much their willingness to delve deeply into these issues and look at the facts--not the rhetoric but the facts--and determine what is best for the taxpayers, for American families, and for the economy. We owe it to American families. We owe it to the people of Michigan as well.

Part of what they are looking at is the fact that the failure of the American auto industry would put a disastrous burden on top of job loss, a disastrous burden on the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation that already faces massive shortfalls, a burden that could trigger tens of billions of dollars in additional pension obligations.

The reality is, those who say let GM go bankrupt, let Chrysler go bankrupt, the obligation to the American taxpayer from pensions alone would far exceed the relatively small request, certainly compared to AIG or Citigroup or any of the other Wall Street requests, a small request, relatively speaking, to keep over 3.5 million people working in this country in good-paying jobs.

It would have a debilitating ramification for our industrial base which would undermine our military challenges, which I mentioned before. I was at a terrific business on Monday that makes equipment for large trucks, our big long-haul trucks, a great American business called ArvinMeritor. When we look at what they make for those big trucks, the same kinds of brakes, the same kinds of axles, the battery they are developing for a hybrid truck, our largest trucks--all of those are technologies that either are used or will be used by the military, trucks that are being driven in Iraq, military vehicles around the world.

If we lose an American capability to manufacture vehicles, we affect the Department of Defense and we affect

every single man and woman who is serving us today in protecting our country by saying to them: We are going to now rely on foreign companies for our vehicles for the trucks they drive, the cars they drive, the tanks they drive. That doesn't make any sense at all.

We all have a stake in what happens in Detroit. We all have a stake in what happens to our American manufacturers and our American auto industry. We need a 21st century manufacturing strategy that is focused on American manufacturing, advanced manufacturing, as well as national security and energy security. Our automakers are an important part of that, but so are our other suppliers, our other manufacturers.

One of the things I so appreciate about President Obama's vision is that he understands we need to manufacture in this country. The budget he has given us focuses on our ability to create jobs through manufacturing, through manufacturing in the new energy economy, and in the traditional areas of manufacturing. In America, we need a revitalized advanced manufacturing base. That will be a major part of our economic recovery as a country.

Again, none of us can afford for our American automakers to fail. There is not a State represented here that can afford for that to happen. Failure would mean loss of jobs, a loss of capacity for our national defense, and the ability for us to build on an energy independence for the future.

Again, what happens in Detroit doesn't stay in Detroit. It affects every State, every American, and I very much appreciate the commitment of the White House auto task force and President Obama to work with us for a vital and vibrant auto industry for the future.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I left a wonderful meeting with a group of organizations--many of our national faith leaders--from around the country and those who have been deeply involved in the issues around the Federal budget and expenditures and what our priorities should be as a country. There was a new optimism in the room about the direction of the country because for the first time in a long time--certainly since 2001--we have actually been talking about how does a budget reflect what is right for the majority of the American people; how do we address what is happening for children and families; middle-class workers who have lost their jobs and are trying just to put food on the table; people who have been struggling and not doing well even before the recession; the poor who find themselves hit over and over again and need to know there is a ladder out of poverty and into the middle class.

It was wonderful to see the commitment in that room and to see the fact that people around the country are coming together to focus on how we strengthen our country in very real ways. Not what has happened in the last 8 years--where it has been all about tax policies to help the privileged few, spending to help the privileged few--but how do we have a country where everybody has a chance to achieve the American dream for themselves and their families.

We talked about the fact that the budget we will be taking up next week, the week after, and every year is a moral document. It is about who we are as Americans: What do we believe in? What do we care about? I am very proud President Obama has given us a moral document that reflects the values and the priorities of the American people; the fact that he has focused on education, health care, getting us off our dependence on foreign oil so we can bring down the costs of energy and create jobs through the new green economy, and that we are turning the corner as we look at a tax policy to focus on the middle class and to focus on families who are working hard every day or trying to find a job. So these were all positive things.

But I also thought in that meeting this morning--when we were talking about the budget as a moral document--how there has been created in this country a culture of greed. Greed has been rewarded for too long at the expense of the majority of Americans--certainly at the expense of the people in my great State of Michigan. Nowhere is that more epitomized than looking at recent outrages, whether it be Bernie Madoff and what happened with all the people who were victimized and who lost their savings and all the people who have been impacted--wiped out--by a Ponzi scheme and the greed of one individual or a few individuals or turning closer to home and what we have been talking about for the last couple days, which is the outrageous bonuses--$165 million in bonuses-- to a group of people at AIG who actually created the situation we are in today--not only for this country but which has created a ripple effect that has caused a global credit crisis. We look at the morality of that--the morality of $165 million in bonuses.

I am also outraged at the fact that we have put so much money into this company. Taxpayers now own 80 percent of it. Yet we have not seen the oversight, the accountability one would expect, whether it is the bonuses or anything else for that matter. Now, we all know President Obama inherited an incredible mess and is working with all of us to dig our way out, but we have to have accountability with AIG and every other entity that has stepped up to ask for or received taxpayer dollars. Bonuses? They are absolutely an outrage, especially for people who didn't deserve a bonus for their performance. In fact, many left, and should leave, because of what has been done. They should be fired, if they

haven't already left--the people who got us where we are today.

I am amazed when I look at the fact that we are providing such a different standard between those on Wall Street, who got us into this mess--AIG and others receiving taxpayer money--and what I see happening with my own auto industry in Michigan, employing directly or indirectly 3 million people. Where is the equivalent of the auto task force? I can tell you that every single line in every single budget, every single management plan, every part of the auto companies that has received a small fraction of what AIG has received has been gone through and is continuing to receive great scrutiny. I support that. They certainly are willing to do that. But where is the scrutiny on AIG? Where is the scrutiny on the other companies that have taken huge amounts of money from taxpayers?

I find it incredible when they say they can't renegotiate contracts. Somebody should tell that to the United Auto Workers, who are renegotiating contracts right now, who have opened their contracts over and over again, with workers taking more and more cuts, paying more and more in health care. Yet we hear from this company and these executives with AIG that they have contractual agreements and they can't reopen contracts? I don't think there is anybody in my State who believes that is not possible, given what our families have gone through over and over again, with people who thought they had jobs, thought they had contracts but suddenly do not.

Why is it the people who got us into this mess--with their complicated leveraging, the tools they put together that created this house of cards that has fallen and affected not only everyone in America but around the world--can't be asked to step up and reopen contracts? I don't understand that at all.

We are going to do everything we can in order to get that money back for the American taxpayers. We have seen bills introduced, and I am proud to be cosponsoring one of those bills through the Finance Committee. Our leader, Senator Reid, has asked us to move as quickly as possible, and I know the Speaker of the House has as well, as has the President of the United States, and we are going to do everything we can to be able to recoup those dollars.

When we talk about what is moral in this country, whether it is the budget, whether it is bonuses of millions of dollars for people who have hurt so many, caused so much damage, created such a crisis around the world or whether it is looking at what is happening to families every day, this is a moral issue. This is a question of right and wrong. It is a question of our priorities. The budget the President has proposed focuses us back on what is important for this country, and it is critical we get that budget passed. We have middle-class families across the country right now, and really all families, who never thought they would have to worry about trying to decide whether to buy groceries or to buy medicine; worrying about what happens tomorrow-- will there be food tomorrow. People are going to food banks who never thought they would have to go to a food bank. People who used to donate to the food bank are now going to the food bank, and others who have been relying on the food banks for a long time find it is getting tougher and tougher and tougher.

More than 11 percent--in fact, close to 12 percent--of the people in my State do not have jobs right now. They are unemployed. That is only the official number. That doesn't count those who have been long-term unemployed, unable to find work and are no longer counted. It also doesn't count the number of people who are working one, two, and three part-time jobs trying to hold it together. That is a moral issue.

The reason we tackled this recovery plan and so quickly brought it forward--to create jobs that we create in America, jobs in a green economy, focusing on job training and education and health care for people who have not been able to find a job so they will be able to keep health care going for their families--is because we understand what this is all about in terms of our values and priorities. Millions of families are in danger of losing their homes or have already lost their homes which is why we are focused on doing everything we can to help families, neighborhoods, and communities address the housing crisis. We know that education is the key to the future for all of us, for our children and our grandchildren. Keeping education a priority and investing in the future, in education and access to college, is a critical part of our budget because it is a critical part of the American dream.

Yes, I am outraged about AIG giving away millions in bonuses-- absolutely. I am outraged about other injustices going on, about the focus over the last 8 years on those who are doing well and policies that made sure they were doing even better, oftentimes at the expense of middle-class Americans, at the expense of the majority of Americans in this country. I am outraged that billions of dollars are going to companies that do not have accountability attached to them. I know the people in Michigan are as well. But I also believe it is critical that we not only get the money back from these bonuses and provide the accountability but we redirect back to the priorities of the American people. That is what this budget is all about.

We need jobs. We need jobs in this country because, if people have money in their pockets and they can pay their bills and keep that mortgage and invest in their families' education, this country is going to turn around.

The budget the President has proposed, the budget the people with whom I met this morning are so encouraged about, is, in fact, a moral document. It changes the way this country has been operating--from a culture of greed, where somehow bonuses for AIG made sense to somebody somewhere in AIG, to a situation where we are focused again on what is important for the majority of the American people, what will allow us to be strong as a country: putting people back to work; making sure we have access to health care, which is not only the moral thing to do but brings down costs; education and investing in a new energy economy that is not dependent on anybody else but American ingenuity. That is what is in this budget, and it is a budget that reflects the priorities and the values of the American people. We need to come together in a bipartisan way to pass this as quickly as possible.

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

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Would the majority leader yield for a question?

Mr. President, I say to the majority leader, is it not true that if this amendment were to pass on this bill, that, in fact, it would never take effect because it will not be taken up in the House? But if we pass it independently, as our leader has put forward, and we all support it, it would, in fact, pass immediately in the Senate and then go to the House for consideration?

I would like to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the Committee on Finance, Senator Max Baucus. Senator Baucus, I am very pleased to see that the fiscal year 2009 Omnibus appropriations bill corrects an unintended consequence of a provision in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, DRA. Section 6001(d) of the DRA, which is Public Law 109-171, caused family planning clinics that do not receive Federal funding and university-based clinics to sustain increases in the price of oral contraceptives as much as tenfold over the past 2 years. This is because drug manufacturers stopped offering discounts to these clinics in response to changes to the Medicaid drug rebate program made by the DRA. While discounts remained perfectly legal, drug companies were concerned about the impact of their Medicaid rebate liability for the continued offering of discounts to certain family planning and college- or university-based clinics. The price increases have put a terrible strain on our country's first line of defense against unintended pregnancies. We have the highest unintended pregnancy rate of any advanced industrial country.

With enactment of this critical legislation, these clinics will once again have access to nominally priced drugs, should private sector manufacturers choose to provide these discounts. This access should begin immediately upon enactment, and manufacturers should feel confident that they can extend discounts to family planning clinics such as Planned Parenthood and college and university clinics without it affecting the rebates they must provide under Federal law to State Medicaid programs.

I thank the Senator. I hope that the manufacturers will do this and that women will have access to affordable birth control and other critical health services.

Transportation Funding