Floor Statements

Mr. President, I think it is so important that we do whatever we can to pass this nuclear agreement that has been negotiated with India. India is the largest democracy in the world and we have had such tremendous relations with them over the last number of years. I think it would send a great sign to the rest of the world that we are able to work on issues of this importance and actually get it done. I surely hope we can do this. I feel confident we can. There are amendments and people can debate them. When the managers of the bill have heard enough, if necessary they can move to table, or whatever it takes to move these along. Senator Biden on Tuesday said there are a lot of these amendments he is aware of that they could work out or accept.

So I am hopeful we can finish today, tonight, or tomorrow, and there is no reason we shouldn't be able to. We have a number of amendments that have been locked in and there is no way this matter should not be completed. I think it is very important that we go into the Thanksgiving period with knowing that we have been able to work out something between two great democracies.

Will the Senator yield for a unanimous consent request?

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

Mr. President, there are a number of amendments that need to be debated. I would hope Senators understand, it is as if it is Friday afternoon at 2:30 and there are 18 or so amendments on here and they have to come and start debating them. We are going to finish this bill before we leave. That is what the majority leader said. I will cooperate with him in any way I can. This is legislation we have been waiting on for a long time. I hope Senators who have amendments will start debating them.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, the majority leader and I have had a number of conversations and we think this should be a productive week. There will naturally be a number of interruptions, but we have our minds on completing the appropriations bill and finishing the very important nuclear agreement with the largest democracy in the world: India. We want to do it now for

a number of reasons, not the least of which is the President is leaving in the next few days for Vietnam and we want to see if that can be completed with a minimum amount of debate and amendments. We are confident and hopeful that can be done.

Mr. President, the elections are over. It is time for us to move forward. It is time to move forward and, in working together, begin the process of moving our great country forward.

Last week the American people spoke for change. In the months ahead, Senate Democrats will fight for change. We are going to focus on three priorities, including bipartisanship. We have to work together. We can't accomplish anything as Democrats standing alone. As has been shown, the Republicans couldn't accomplish anything standing alone. We need to work together to pass legislation on a bipartisan basis and send it to the White House. We must have open government--a new word: ``transparency''--and we have to have results. Bipartisanship is great. But if people don't see what we are doing and there are no results, it is not as it should be.

We have a lot of challenges: health care, energy, the economy, including these deficits we have; Iraq. We need to restore checks and balances. Last Wednesday or Thursday I met a lot of press people in the audience and I said to each of them: I will bet most of you here have never watched a congressional conference in session, a conference committee meeting. It is true. We haven't had one. That is what we used to do here. We used to have them for a couple of hundred years, and for a couple of decades I was involved in them. But during the last at least 6 years, we haven't had any--a conference where we have a House bill and a Senate bill and we have an open meeting, and Republicans make suggestions on how the bill could be made better, and Democrats make suggestions, and there is a vote taken publicly. We haven't done that, and that is not good. We need to do that. That is what I am talking about, open government, these checks and balances our Founding Fathers set forth in that document we call the Constitution, three separate, equal branches of government.

I commend the distinguished majority leader. We worked together here in the Senate to come up with the most significant lobbying and ethics reform in a quarter of a century--since Watergate, actually. We passed that. We passed it on a bipartisan basis. We included not only lobby and ethics reform; we had, as a result of a number of Senators led by Dianne Feinstein, a provision in there dealing with earmarks, to make earmarks more transparent. The bill we passed out of here slowed the revolving door between government employees and lobbyists and eliminated gifts paid for by lobbyists and substantially expanded disclosure by lobbyists. It limited privately funded travel in many instances, and required more disclosure. It stopped dead-of-the-night legislating regarding open meetings. We did this. We should all feel good about what we accomplished in this regard. But, sadly, it went to the House and that was the end of it. So I would hope before the distinguished majority leader ends his career as a Senator, which has been a markedly significant career, that we can do that. It should be the law of the land, and hopefully it will be in the next couple months.

Finally, this Senate and we Democrats will do our very best to focus our energies on the challenges facing our country and take concrete steps to protect our country and help working families get ahead. For too long families have struggled with high health care costs while the big drug companies haven't struggled. I am glad they have not had to struggle, but I think we need to have a more even playing field-- especially with insurance companies. For too long, ranchers in Nevada

and farmers all across this country have struggled to fill their tanks with gas and to have enough money in their bank accounts to do that which they need to do. But they have seen these big oil companies get the tax breaks that I personally do not think they deserve. I don't think the American people believe they deserve them either.

For too long, all Americans have worried about the direction of the war in Iraq only to see Congress refuse to have a real debate on the issues. On a personal basis, I have encouraged the President to listen to what the Baker-Hamilton working group has to say, and I know he will do that. I think it is important that he is willing to meet with those people. They are a tremendous group of very patriotic Americans with significant experience. On the Democratic side, as an example, you have the former Secretary of Defense and former Presidential Chief of Staff. They are good people, Democrats and Republicans, who are going to be talking to the President. If we are going to have a new direction in Iraq, the President must listen to new ideas. This is a step in the right direction.

That is why last week I asked the President to convene a bipartisan congressional leadership group and invite other people, too, if he wants, of course. It is his meeting. But if he wants, to have Secretary Baker, Congressman Hamilton, members of the military. I think if we spent a couple of days doing this--however long the President sees fit--I think it would be helpful to have if he heard what we had to say. If we are going to have a new direction in Iraq, the President must listen to new ideas. That is why I felt comfortable in suggesting this to the President.

We Democrats have some very concrete ideas as to what we think should happen. First of all, again on a bipartisan basis, with 79 votes on the Defense Authorization bill for the previous year, Democrats and Republicans joined together to put a provision in that bill that said the year 2006 will be a year of significant transition in Iraq. The year 2006 is coming to an end. We need to implement that law.

We, as Democrats, also offered an amendment that received 40 votes called the Reed-Levin or Levin-Reed amendment, however you want to look at it, to begin a change of course, to set a framework to change course. For example, in that legislation, we called for responsibly redeploying our troops to transform the mission to training, counterterror, logistics, force protection. Does this mean pulling all the troops out now? Of course it doesn't. But it does say we must start redeploying troops as soon as possible.

Second, the sectarian differences must be reconciled. They are plaguing the country. We have had in the last 2 days, just that we know of, almost 200 Iraqis killed, 3 American soldiers, 4 British soldiers. We must push for changes to the Iraqi Constitution and power and resource sharing.

I believe it is time for our President to call for a regional conference that he participants in. I spoke to the King of Jordan today. He thought it was a good idea to have the President call for a meeting of the leaders of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan--even Syria. It is a regional problem. Let's talk about this regionally. It is more their problem than our problem. They have more to lose or win than we do. So I think a regional conference would be very important to regionalize our strategy.

We must revitalize the failed construction efforts. It was stunning to see in the weekend news how much less oil is being produced there in Iraq than before the war. It was stunning to see how little potable water is being produced there than before the war. And to see that the electricity in Baghdad--as an example, prior to the war it was 16 hours a day, and now it is down to less than 4 hours a day. We have to revitalize our failed reconstruction efforts.

Finally, we have to rebuild our military. We do not have a single undeployed Army unit that is battle ready. Everything is in need of repair or replacement--replenishment. The Pentagon has told us it will cost $75 billion to bring the military up to what it was before the war. We want to work and see if we can accomplish that. Those are our suggestions.

From Iraq to the economy, there is much to do in the next few weeks and then at the beginning of the new year and a new Congress--so much to do. We must take advantage of the next few weeks and get as much done as we can.

There are 55 Republicans, there are 45 Democrats, we understand that--for the next 60 days. After that, it is going to be a very slim majority that we have, but it is one that we believe will open the door for bipartisanship. I hope, for the good of the American people, we can continue to look forward--not dwell on the past but look forward.

I hope very much we can get our so-called tax extenders done. The reason these are important to do is they are critical tax relief for American families and businesses that will expire if we don't do something--a deduction for college tuition, deduction for State and local sales taxes. The manager of the bill on military construction is Kay Bailey Hutchison from Texas. This has been her issue because the large State of Texas is losing those families' tax deductions, deductions for out-of-pocket expenses incurred by teachers and for businesses, the research and development tax credit, the work opportunity tax credits and Welfare-to-Work tax credits. These things are extremely important. Unless we act to extend this relief in the next few weeks, families will be facing a tax increase next year. That is not acceptable and we need to act.

It is a new day in the Senate. Let's work together and move America forward. I offer my hand to my friends on the other side of the aisle. I have reached out to my friend, Senator Frist. We are going to do everything we can to have the country know we are doing good things in the next few weeks. And I reached out to my friend, Mitch McConnell, who I understand will be the next Republican leader, to work together on the issues of the next Congress as we have on many issues in the past.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, while the distinguished majority leader is on the floor, let me make a couple of comments.

First, if I can ask the Parliamentarian: What time will the vote take place on final passage on the border security bill?

That is a fairly good estimate, Mr. President--about 3 o'clock on Saturday morning?

Mr. President, on the bill that is now before this body, I hope that if there are going to be amendments, one of the amendments we need to take into consideration--I am sure the leader has heard from his Members, as I have heard from mine--is disaster relief. I hope we have this vehicle moving through here today and that we do something regarding agricultural disaster assistance legislation. We passed it three times in this body, and it has never made it out of the House.

It is not just the Midwestern States that we know produce a lot of food. We have had natural disasters all over. The State of Nevada has had raging fires. In California, there is one fire that has been burning since the 1st of September and they still haven't put it out. So I hope the leader will consider that legislation.

Also, I wasn't able to respond to my friend, the distinguished majority leader, last night, but on the India nuclear bill legislation, the reason this matter hasn't been to the floor much earlier is there was a provision put in this legislation by Senator Lugar. I agree with it. I support the legislation. But on the majority side, there are people who have held up the legislation because of that provision.

This is important legislation. I have said on a number of occasions that I strongly support this legislation. It is important we find time to consider this bill before this Congress comes to an

end. I think this legislation will be strongly supported by a bipartisan majority in the Senate. It was reported out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in June on a strong bipartisan basis.

We must understand, it has been many months since the committee action took place. I hope we can take a limited number of amendments with very short time agreements and have it set up so that when we get back here, when the elections are over, this would be the first order of business we move to. We could set it up that we can finish the bill--it will be a very long day--but do it in 1 day.

I believe we should do this, this important legislation. Passage means a lot to our vitally important United States--India relationship. I pledge to do what I can to ensure that we do just that. I hope before we leave here today, tomorrow, or Sunday--whenever it might be--that we will have this bill on so-called automatic pilot, that we can take this up when we get back. I hope that will be the case.

Unanimous Consent Request--S. 3994

Finally, on the Iran matter, I hope we can do something on that bill. As the Republican leader said last night, I couldn't think of a worse time for this Iranian matter to lapse. So I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. 3994, a bill to extend the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 until November 17, 2006; that the bill be read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

If we did this, it would put everything in order until that date. It would extend this matter until then. The House has put a lot of other stuff in this bill very recently. There have been no hearings on it. I think it would be in the best interest of the country if we did this. I hope we can. If the leader cannot agree to this request now, I hope we can do it at a subsequent time before we leave in the next few days.

Yes.

I withdraw my request.

Will the Senator yield?

Mr. President, I support, as did the Senator from Colorado, tough border security. I voted, as did the Senator, for an amendment in the context of an immigration reform bill that would have authorized for Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff 370 miles of fence based on what he told the Senate he needed. Building some fencing as part of a comprehensive reform bill makes sense.

Would the Senator agree, we cannot take a piecemeal approach to fixing our borders?

Mr. President, I say my friend from Colorado, we have an important agreement we would like to put before the Senate. I ask the Senator from Colorado allow me to interrupt him.

Yes.

It took 2 minutes to read this but it took a lot longer than that to get the 2 minutes in writing.

I appreciate everyone's cooperation, Democrats and Republicans. This is not a perfect end of this session. However, I think it shows there has been tremendous cooperation today, and we will have more to say at a later time. Thanks, everyone.

Mr. President, I have 3 minutes, and for the benefit of everyone here, I might as well use it now. There is nobody else to speak, is there?

I have time under the order. Please go ahead.

Mr. President, we can build the tallest fence in the world, and it won't fix our broken immigration system. Nor will it strengthen security on the borders. to do that, we need the comprehensive reform that the Senate passed earlier this year. We have been waiting for months for the majority to appoint conferees so we could complete this important legislation, but they have refused to do so.

I support tough border security. I voted for an amendment, in the context of our comprehensive immigration reform bill, that would have authorized Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff's Department to build 370 miles of fencing--based on what he told us in the Senate he needed. Building some fencing as part of the comprehensive reform bill makes sense. As I have said before, we cannot take a piecemeal approach to fixing our borders.

We need to do more. We passed a comprehensive bill. It had strong border security, it had temporary worker program, which is so important with agriculture and the resort industry. We also said that we had to do something to take care of the 12 million people who are living in the shadows. What would they do to get out of the shadows? They would have to pay taxes, get a job, learn English, and stay out of trouble. And we had employer sanctions. Only a combination of all of these elements will work to get our broken immigration system under control.

Nearly half of the undocumented immigrants in this country came here legally and overstayed their visas. A fence or a wall, no matter how high and mighty, will not solve this problem.

I agree with Attorney General Gonzales, Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff, and former Secretary Ridge that a fence is not the most appropriate or effective way to secure our 2,000-mile southern border. As Secretary Chertoff said:

Fencing has its place in some areas, but as a total

solution, I don't think it's a good total solution.

The Department of Homeland Security already has the authority to build fences along our border. This amendment is unnecessary. I believe it is not about securing our border but about election-year politics.

A majority of the Republicans have made very clear that they are not serious about doing anything to get control of the broken immigration system. Where is President Bush? He said he wants comprehensive immigration reform, and he has been silent. The President and the Republicans in Congress have made it clear that they have no interest in going into a conference to enact legislation this year.

I believe we can only secure our borders through comprehensive reform, as I have outlined. No amount of Republican grandstanding on this issue will change that. The Senate has offered a practical, workable, fair solution to fix our immigration system, and I regret we have not been able to move forward.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. By bringing attention to this serious issue, I hope that we can make progress to break the cycle of violence.

Not long ago, in communities across Nevada and our Nation, domestic violence was a problem that was kept silent. Fortunately, by raising awareness of this issue, we are making great progress in breaking that silence. Today, we can see notable progress in recognizing this problem as an epidemic that affects every community. Still, there is much work to do to heal the wounds and end the violence.

Each year, more than 32 million Americans are affected by physical, sexual, or psychological harm. Sadly, much of this harm occurs at the hands of those they should be able to trust the most--current and former partners and spouses. Twenty-nine percent of women and 22 percent of men will directly experience harm from domestic violence during their lifetime. Many experts think that these numbers are drastically underrepresentative as well because many victims do not report these crimes.

That is why we must do more. We can address the problem by supporting shelters and organizations with our financial resources and our time. In Nevada, for instance, domestic violence centers report lengthy waiting lists--for space in the shelter, for treatment programs for batters, and for victim counseling. Many shelters lack sufficient provisions like personal care products, clothing, and children's and medical supplies.

We must also dispel the myths surrounding domestic violence. It does not discriminate. Its perpetrators hide behind many different faces. Its victims answer to many different names. Domestic violence crosses all racial, economic, and societal barriers. It affects the strong as well as the weak.

Of course, my home State of Nevada is not immune from the tragic effects of domestic violence. I would relate the story of Ana Outcalt, who was murdered at the hands of her boyfriend, even after she had obtained a restraining order against him. Ana's sister, Maria, tells this story whenever she gets the chance in the hope that she may be able to help others.

I am proud to report that many other individuals and organizations in Nevada are working passionately this month to increase understanding of this devastating problem. On October 12, 2006, for example, Safe Nest will be holding an interfaith candlelight vigil in Las Vegas to celebrate survivors of domestic violence and remember its victims like Ana Outcalt. On October 21, 2006, the Family Development Foundation will be hosting its Community United for Healthy Families event, which is open to the public free of charge. On October 23, 2006, S.A.F.E. House in Henderson, NV, is holding its annual golf tournament with all proceeds benefiting the organization.

I have been a longtime supporter of legislation aimed at eradicating violence from our Nation's homes, including the Violence Against Women Act. But I encourage Members of this body and Americans nationwide to do more. We should all view Domestic Violence Month as an opportunity to help prevent this problem.

Today, I am pleased to recognize Domestic Violence Month and the efforts of many organizations across Nevada who work to stop the violence in our communities. Together, we can make a difference on this important issue and break the cycle of violence.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the centennial of the Nevada Northern Railway. September 29 marks the 100-year anniversary of the completion of the railway from Cobre to Ely, NV. Numerous events are planned at the Nevada Northern Railway Museum this weekend to commemorate this special day, including a reenactment of the driving of the Copper spike, which originally signaled the completion of the Nevada Northern Railway to Ely, NV.

Nevada's early growth as a State would not have been possible without our Nation's mighty railroads. Towns like Ely changed from sparse camps to real towns when tracks were laid into areas that were previously accessibly only by horse or on foot. In 1904, the Nevada Consolidated Copper Company brought Nevada Northern Railway to life in order to move valuable copper ore that had been discovered in the region. And with that new connection to the outside world, a new chapter began in the life of Ely and of all the communities in eastern Nevada.

During its 77 years of service the Nevada Northern Railway carried ore, passengers and express deliveries between Ely, Cobre and McGill, but in 1983 the operation was closed and the railway stood still. Since that time, the people of Ely have worked to preserve this unique part of their history. Through the efforts of countless volunteers and staff they have turned this once vacated railway complex into a unique enterprise and popular destination for railroad enthusiasts and history buffs alike.

One of the most distinct aspects of the Nevada Northern Railway is that the original buildings, equipment, rolling stock and the majority of the company's early paper records still survive today. Walking through the Machine Shop and Engine House one can still find safety signs and employee notices that were posted on the wall duiing the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

I was so pleased, Mr. President, to see the Nevada Northern Railway designated as a National Historic Landmark this week--just in time for the centennial celebration. This designation is the highest such recognition accorded by our Nation to historic sites and will place the Nevada Northern Railway in distinguished company. This recognition is well deserved.

I thank all those who have made this listing possible--the National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, the staff and volunteers for the Nevada Northern Railway, the people of Ely, Ron James, the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer, and many others.

The Northern Nevada Railway is an incredible asset for Nevada and the Nation. Hundreds of people will gather in Ely this weekend to talk about the past of this great site and to lay plans for the future. I wish them well, and I share their appreciation for this incredible piece of Nevada's history.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize an exceptional member of my community and a close friend, Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert E. Rose. Justice Rose has been a tremendous asset to Nevada as a longstanding member of our legal community and, for the past 18 years, a Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court.

Justice Rose was recently recognized for his outstanding commitment to civil liberties. The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada presented Chief Justice Rose with the Emilie Wanderer Civil Libertarian of the Year Award. The award, named after one of the first women admitted to the Nevada Bar Association, is given in honor of career achievement in the area of civil liberties and reflects the collective decision of representatives of Nevada's criminal defense, civil liberties, civil rights attorneys, and civil rights activists.

Chief Justice Rose is a worthy recipient of this award, and it is fitting that he should be recognized for his accomplishments to promote justice in Nevada. Serving three times as Chief Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court, he has a reputation in the legal community and on the Court as a reformer. Among the ways Justice Rose promoted the rule of law in Nevada, are the Nevada Jury Improvement Commission and the Blue Ribbon Judicial Assessment Commission. The Assessment Commission conducted a broad study of the judicial system and recommended improvements; many of those improvements have greatly advanced the Nevada justice system.

During his legal career in Nevada, spanning from his days as a law clerk for the Nevada Supreme Court to his present position as a three- term chief justice of the court, Justice Rose has had a profound impact on Nevada. He was my successor as Nevada's lieutenant governor, and his work presiding

over the Nevada Senate was outstanding. His efforts as a judge to improve our legal system and his pursuit of fairness and justice have benefited every individual in my State.

In closing, I feel privileged to have Bob Rose as a friend. I appreciate all that he has done for Nevada, and know that he will continue working to protect the rights of the citizens of our State.