Floor Statements

Will the Senator from Delaware indicate how much more time he needs?

I yield the Senator 3 minutes.

Mr. President, how much time did the Senator from Delaware use?

Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy.

Mr. President, how much time remains?

Does the Senator from Massachusetts need time?

Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts.

There is a definitive set of books written about this time period by Taylor Branch. When I read the first volume, I went over to the office of Congressman John Lewis because his name was mentioned in that book so often that a number years ago when the book was published, I talked to John Lewis about his valiant efforts to allow us to be in the place we are today. I mention that because after having read the third volume of Taylor Branch's book, ``At Canaan's Edge,'' which I completed a week ago, I was stunned by many references to Senator Ted Kennedy.

One full page talks about a time that Senator Kennedy made his first trip to Mississippi. His brother had been assassinated. He went with Dr. King to Mississippi for the first time. There were 150 pounds of nails, an inch and three-quarters long, dumped in the pathway, three police cars with nails in their tires and were unable to continue. There were threats made on Senator Kennedy's life. I was so stunned by reading that that I called Senator Kennedy and read that to him and asked if this brought back memories of his first trip to Mississippi.

I mention John Lewis and Senator Kennedy because they are only two of the many who made significant sacrifices to get us to the point where we are today. On March 15, 1965, Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol to address a joint session of Congress. He spoke to a House, a Senate, and a nation that had been rocked by recent violence, especially in Selma, AL. President Johnson's purpose that night was to spur Congress to finally move forward on the Voting Rights Act, the legislation whose authorization we are going to vote on today. That Congress, in 1965, like this Congress in 2006, was slow to pass voting rights legislation. So President Johnson came to the Hill to remind everybody what was at stake. Here is what he said:

This time, on this issue, there must be no delay, no

hesitation, and no compromise with our purpose. We cannot and

we must not refuse to protect the right of every American to

vote in every election that he may desire to participate in.

And we ought not, and we cannot, and we must not wait another

8 months before we get a bill. We have already waited a

hundred years or more, and the time for waiting is gone.

Mr. President, once again, in our country, at this time, the time for waiting is gone. The Senate cannot and we must not go another day without sending the Voting Rights Act to the

President. We have already waited too long. I, like many others, expected this legislation to be passed months ago. I remember months ago standing on the Capitol steps with Senator Frist, House leaders, chairmen and ranking members of the Judiciary Committees from both bodies, and civil rights leaders, to announce the bipartisan-bicameral introduction of this bill. It seemed that this act would move forward in swift bipartisan fashion. But it has not.

How long must we wait? How wrong that perception proved to be. In the House, consideration was delayed for weeks and weeks. It was only recently passed over the objections of conservative opponents. In the Senate, we saw similar delay. In fact, as recently as last week, the majority leader was not sure he would even bring this bill to the floor before the August recess.

In the House, consideration was delayed for weeks. It recently passed over the objections of conservative opponents.

Thankfully, he listened to Democrats. Thankfully, everyone listened to what we had to say, including our distinguished majority leader. Obviously, from last Friday to today, he had a change of heart and brought this bill before the Senate.

The Voting Rights Act is too important to fall by the wayside like so many other issues that have fallen by the wayside, I am sorry to say, in this Republican Senate. Remember, the Voting Rights Act isn't just another bill. It is paramount to the preservation of our democracy, literally. As we have seen in recent elections, we remain a nation far from perfect. The fact is, we still have a lot of work to do, but in the last 40 years, thanks to the Voting Rights Act, we have come a long way.

Before this Voting Rights Act became law, African-Americans who tried to register to vote were subject to beatings, literacy tests, poll taxes, and death.

Before the Voting Rights Act, over 90 percent of eligible African- American voters in Mississippi didn't and couldn't register to vote, not because they didn't want to, they simply were unable to, they were not permitted to.

Before the Voting Rights Act, it would have been unheard of to have 43 African-American Members of Congress as we have today.

In the Senate, we cast a lot of votes, but not all of them are for causes for which Americans just a few decades ago were willing to risk their lives. It is a sad fact of American history that blood was spilled and violence erupted before the Nation opened its eyes to justice and the need to guarantee in law everyone's right to vote.

It is important that all of us remember the sacrifice of those Americans, and to make sure we do, after this bill becomes law, I will seek to add the name of John Lewis to this bill. I already talked about his being one of my personal heroes. I understand Senators Leahy and Salazar are doing something similar with Cesar Chavez. I support that. Heroic actions of men such as John Lewis and Cesar Chavez are shining examples of the heroic actions of so many during the fight for equal rights.

Congressman Lewis is a civil rights icon. He has given his entire life to the causes of justice and liberty. As I have said, he was a key organizer of so many things, not the least of which was the 1963 march in Washington. I was here. I saw it. He was in Selma when the billy clubs, police dogs, and fire hoses were used on that bloody Sunday, and he had his body beaten on many occasions. But he hasn't given up the fight, even to this day.

Similarly, during his life, Cesar Chavez was a champion of the American principles of justice, equality, and freedom. He fearlessly fought to right the wrongs literally of those injustices inflicted on American farm workers and brought national attention to the causes of labor and injustice.

America is a better place because of John Lewis and Cesar Chavez. By placing their names on this landmark legislation, we can be sure Americans will always remember the sacrifices made in the name of equality.

I began by quoting Lyndon Johnson's speech in 1965. There is another excerpt from that speech which I will read, and it is as follows:

In our time we have come to live with moments of great

crisis. Our lives have been marked with debate about great

issues; issues of war and peace, issues of prosperity and

depression. But rarely in any time does an issue lay bear the

secret heart of America itself. Rarely are we met with a

challenge, not to our growth or abundance, our welfare or our

security, but rather to the values and the purposes and the

meaning of our beloved Nation.

This same challenge--a challenge to the values and the purposes and the meaning of our Nation--is now before the Senate. In just a few minutes, we are going to pass overwhelmingly the Voting Rights Act of 2006. It is a challenge which this body has met. We have done it purposefully and rightfully, and history books will indicate that we have made a significant step forward. There is more to do, but this is a big step forward.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the majority leader should be here momentarily. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I withhold, of course.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, the Senate is about to take an important step to improve the safety of our Nation's children. Very shortly, we will pass the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, also known as the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this significant legislation.

The Senate passed an earlier version of this bill by unanimous consent on May 4, nearly 2 months ago. Since then, Senators Specter and Leahy have conducted bipartisan negotiations with the House, which had passed a different version.

Today, I am pleased to say that negotiations have resulted in a strong bill that will soon pass both Chambers and become law. I appreciate the willingness of all Members to put aside unrelated controversial issues so that we could focus on the core purpose of this bill--protecting children.

Next Thursday, the 27th of July, is the 25th anniversary of the abduction and murder of 6-year-old Adam Walsh. Since then, the work of Adam's father, John Walsh, demonstrates that a single person can make a difference in our country and our world.

Following the tragic event involving their son, John and Reve Walsh founded the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. John Walsh's TV program, ``America's Most Wanted,'' has led to the apprehension of thousands of criminals. And now John Walsh has been the driving force behind this bill.

The legislation establishes a national sex offender registry which will make it easier for local law enforcement to track sex offenders and prevent repeat offenses. The bill also authorizes much needed grants to help local law enforcement agencies establish and integrate sex offender registry systems.

My home State of Nevada has been a leader in this movement. Our State recently made changes to improve the accuracy and reliability of the Nevada registry requirements. This Federal bill will strengthen those efforts.

Donna Coleman, past president of the Children's Advocacy Alliance based in Henderson, NV, was instrumental in getting our State laws changed. She is another example of how one person can make a difference, and I applaud her work.

Not all States have been as vigilant as Nevada, and that is a problem when sex offenders cross State lines. The bill before us will establish uniform rules for the information sex offenders are required to report and when they are required to report it. It will also give law enforcement agencies the tools they need to enforce these requirements.

A number of Senators have been leaders in this legislative effort. In addition to Chairman Specter and Ranking Member Leahy, I appreciate the hard work of Senators Biden, Dorgan, Hatch, Kennedy, and others. I thank the majority leader for making this bill a priority. I hope the House will follow suit and send this bill to the President for his signature without delay.

Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to commend Sharon Daly for her more than 30 years of service to those in need. Through her tireless advocacy, she has truly made an important contribution to the well-being of real people and has improved the character of this Nation.

Most of those who have benefited from her efforts will never know her name or the impact that she had on their lives. That is because Sharon wasn't one to seek the limelight or publicity for herself. Instead, she has quietly but determinedly dedicated herself to helping the most vulnerable among us--including those with disabilities, the homeless, victims of domestic violence, disadvantaged and abused children, and immigrants. Sharon's leadership and commitment truly exemplifies what it means to ``love you neighbor as yourself.''

Through her service at the Children's Foundation, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Children's Defense Fund, and most recently as vice president and then senior public policy advisor at Catholic Charities USA she has worked to make Federal programs, including the Food Stamps Program, Medicaid, the earned-income tax credit and many others, more responsive to the needs of those facing significant challenges in their lives. She helped Members of Congress and our staffs understand how the support provided by these programs helps low- income families and children address the ravages of poverty.

Sharon worked successfully on bipartisan efforts to enact the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. She also played a lead role in the enactment of a 1993 package of benefits for low-income families with children, including major expansions in the earned-income tax credit, food stamps, immunization, and family preservation/child welfare services.

Mr. President, Sharon Daly is retiring from Catholic Charities USA. She will be deeply missed for her thoughtful guidance and leadership. I have confidence, however, that she will remain an inspiration to those who will follow in her footsteps.

Mr. President, with respect to the debate time today regarding the stem cell legislation, I ask unanimous consent that the Democratic time be controlled as follows: From 10:30 to 11 a.m, Senators Lautenberg, Clinton, and Mikulski each controlling 10 minutes; from 11:30 to 12 o'clock noon, Senators Kohl and Lincoln each controlling 5 minutes, and Senators Carper and John Kerry each controlling 10 minutes; from 12:15 to 12:30, Senators Feingold and Schumer each controlling 7\1/2\ minutes; and from 2:45 to 3:15 p.m, Senator Menendez, 3 minutes, Senators Feinstein, Kennedy, and Harkin each controlling 8 minutes.

Mr. President, it is my understanding that I have 15 minutes. Am I correct?

Mr. President, for those of us who are fortunate to represent our States in the Senate, it is a high honor and a privilege, but we tend to not understand sometimes the eyes that are watching what we do. Today, the eyes of millions of people are watching us to see what is going to happen in the Senate as it relates to H.R. 810. Many of these people, who are afflicted with dread diseases, having had perhaps serious accidents, are personally concerned about what we do here today. But in addition to those people who are personally concerned as a result of the maladies that afflict them, there are millions of us--fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, aunts, uncles, neighbors, friends, brothers, sisters--who are all also watching and hoping that their loved ones someday will be better.

What is hope? What do you say about hope? If you had to put the words in a dictionary for hope, what would you say? I looked in the dictionary under ``hope.'' There is a very simple definition: to cherish the desire with anticipation. That is what this is all about: people who cherish, desire, and anticipate that we will do something to make their lives better.

Shortly here in the Senate we are going to vote on a measure that will allow those people to have hope. It is called the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, a piece of legislation that keeps hope alive for millions and millions of people in America--hope for a 17-year-old, almost 18-year-old, Molly Miller. I have followed her disease since she was a little girl. She is a twin. The sister Jacki and herself as twins tended to go every place together. One is sick, one isn't. One feels the pain personally, one feels the pain emotionally.

This legislation gives hope to Molly and Jacki Miller of Las Vegas, a pair, a team, twins, who suffer from juvenile diabetes.

What is a twin? I guess the best way to describe a twin is when I was flying to Las Vegas on a very crowded airplane, I was in one seat and there were two little girls in the middle seat and the window seat. I began to sit down. I looked at the girls. They looked alike. I said, Are you sisters? One girl looked at me very directly and said to me, No, we are twins.

Jacki and Molly have suffered and suffered together because they are more than sisters, they are twins.

This legislation will give hope to a man by the name of Robert Alfertelle of Boulder City, NV. He is confined to a wheelchair because of Parkinson's disease.

We all know friends and neighbors who have diseases who have hope of being cured as a result of what we are doing here on the Senate floor today. These diseases can be cured. We are told they can be cured.

You have heard the recitation of these difficult diseases that people have with the hope that they can be cured if we do the right thing here today. For too long these good people have been denied hope because we in the Senate haven't acted. The House passed this bill 14 months ago. Unfortunately, until today it has been stalled here in the Senate.

The Americans who would benefit from cures offered by stem cell research have been forced to wait. They have waited through weeks dedicated to issues such as the definition of marriage. They waited through weeks of ideological debate dedicated to the well-off, connected few. In fact, we spent weeks here on issues that would affect less than .02 percent of Americans to repeal the estate tax. We spent time here on flag burning. We have waited through a health care week that had nothing to do with getting America help. We have all waited too long--so long in fact that on May 1 former First Lady Nancy Reagan was so baffled and disappointed by the continued delays in the Senate she wrote a letter, which I quote:

For those who are waiting every day for scientific progress

to help their loved ones, the wait for United States Senate

action has been very difficult and very hard to understand.

I too am disappointed that we have had to wait 14 months for this vote. I am grateful the wait is over. I believe that because of the persistence of Democrats in the Senate, we will thankfully finally vote on the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, H.R. 810. This legislation provides a rare opportunity for this Congress--some say this ``do- nothing Congress''--to consider legislation about curing disease and saving lives, not partisan politics.

This body needs to pass this legislation because the President's current stem cell policy is hindering promising medical research that could lead to treatment and cure for diseases and conditions. Under the President's stem cell policy, Federal research funds can be used on only a small number of chronic stem cell lines, most of which are contaminated, and that were created before August 9, 5 years ago.

Under this policy, only 21 stem cells qualify, many of which are contaminated and are certainly inferior to new and more promising stem cell lines. I have heard people come to this floor and say why should the Federal Government get involved? We are spending $3 billion a week in Iraq. I think we can get involved. We have gotten involved in a lot of things dealing with medical research, as well we should.

We have worked for years spending Federal taxpayer dollars on doing something about AIDS research. Last week it was announced that instead of having to take as many as 36 pills a day, there is now one pill for people who are HIV infected--one pill that does the same as 36 pills did, and in fact probably better. People have had to get up in the middle of the night to take medications.

All of that research is funded by the Federal Government. New drugs for epilepsy were started by Tony Coelho who was a whip in the House, and who was an epileptic. He led the charge. We spent lots of Federal dollars on epilepsy, and we have made great progress.

Gene therapy involved the fragile X syndrome. We spent millions of Federal

dollars on stroke prevention, screening for Downs syndrome. We have spent hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars on cancer research, on digestive bowel disease, lupus, and diabetes.

These are dollars well spent. We have made progress. But the most eminent scientists in the world tell us that they need this legislation passed. Our Government is needlessly impeding the work of our Nation's top scientists who cannot use Federal funds on research, on new and more promising stem cell research that does not pose the risk of contamination that the eligible stem lines do.

This legislation would solve this problem by expanding the number of human embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federally funded research to include new stem cell lines that would be derived from any of the more than 400,000 surplus embryos from fertility clinics that will never be used to create a pregnancy and would otherwise be thrown in the trash.

Just as important, this legislation would ensure that stem cell research is conducted under ethical guidelines that are more strict than the President's current policy.

In short, this legislation would allow our Government to do everything it can under strict ethical guidelines and oversight to develop treatments for a wide range of diseases and conditions.

That is why this legislation is supported by 41 Nobel laureates, virtually every major medical, scientific, and professional association, major research universities, and patient advocacy organizations.

Before we vote on the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, the Senate will first consider two other measures. Neither one of these measures is a substitute for H.R. 810. The only reason they are here is to provide political cover for the political opponents of this legislation. The opposition knows that their opposition to stem cell research is outside the American mainstream, so they want to give themselves political cover by voting for two meaningless bills. It is playbook straight from the Republican Orwellian world of politics. Neither one of these bills would do any harm but neither would have any impact at all. There is nothing included in S. 2754 which cannot already be accomplished without this legislation. The National Institutes of Health Director has told the Judiciary Committee this exact thing. It doesn't do anything that can't be done now.

The second bill, the Fetus Farming Prohibition Act, bans activity that no scientist is currently doing or wants to do. I will vote for both of them. They are meaningless.

While I support all three of these bills, there is only one that matters, H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act which will clear the way for research that can lead the way for treatments and cures for a wide range of diseases and conditions.

Don't take just my word for it. Hundreds of patient advocacy groups, health organizations, research universities, scientific societies, religious groups, and other interested organizations, representing millions and millions of patients, scientists, health care providers and advocates, wrote the following in a letter to the Senate:

Of the bills being considered simultaneously, only H.R. 810

will move stem cell research forward in our country . . . The

other two bills . . . are not substitutes for a yes vote on

Mr. President, America needs a new direction not only in what is going on in Iraq but what is going on with medical research. We will take a step in that direction by passing H.R. 810.

A vote against H.R. 810, regardless of how Members vote on the other two measures, is a vote against research and cures. A vote for it is a vote for millions of Americans who are looking to us right new for help. A vote for H.R. 810 is a vote to keep hope alive. Let's keep hope alive.

Reserving the right to object, first, I want the Record spread with the fact that the Senate can work together. This is an example of that. Senator Boxer and Senator Inhofe are polar opposites politically. I don't know if we could find two stranger people to work together on a bill than the two of these Senators. But this is a bill that takes cooperation and building consensus. That is what they have done.

This is not a Republican bill, it is not a Democratic bill, it is a bill for the Senate. I also want the Record to reflect that Senator Feingold, who has three amendments on here, is a person who is dedicated to looking at the substance of legislation. I express publicly my appreciation for his cooperation and for allowing us to get to this point. I object.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, the Republican leader came to my office a few minutes ago and indicated he had some family situation that he needed to attend to. It was no emergency or anything, but it is late. It is a quarter to 8.

On WRDA, we have cleared that on our side. And we have some nominations we have also cleared on our side. I am confident that WRDA--which we were planning to go to that Tuesday night after we finished the stem cell legislation--I am very confident we can work that out.

As I indicated, we are set mechanically to go forward on WRDA. It has been cleared on both sides, even the time on the amendments. We thought we had the nominations worked out dealing with a very important agency of our Government.

I am confident, I repeat, that we will be able to do that as soon as people are back in their offices.

So I do not in any way retract my statements about how it is possible to work on things together around here. This was shown with the difficult time that Senators had working on the request that was brought before the Senate just a half hour ago or so.

It is a very important bill. I have been chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee on two separate occasions. It is very difficult to get things out of that committee because of different feelings people have on issues. But Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer worked very well and got it to the floor.

So I am hopeful that even maybe tomorrow we can do the unanimous consent request that has been laid before the Senate and have that approved. If not, we will do it Monday. I am hopeful and confident we can do that.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, what is the status of morning business, comparing majority and minority?

That time would begin now?

Mr. President, yesterday was a day where we did not accomplish much on the Senate floor. But we haven't accomplished much the entire congressional session. We have 22 days left to do business until the adjournment date announced by the distinguished majority leader--22 days. We have so much to do and we have done so little.

It is not me, the Democratic leader, who is saying this is a do- nothing Congress. This is what all the pundits have written about. We have wasted time on a political agenda.

What is a political agenda? We have spent days and days on an estate tax repeal that has no bearing on 99.8 percent of all the American people. It affects less than two-tenths of 1 percent of all the people in America, but we have spent days of our time here on the Senate floor dealing with this issue.

Flag burning--it doesn't matter how you feel about flag burning. Is it the right thing to do, to take up precious days of the Senate time on flag burning? In the little town where I was born and I still have my home they are patriotic people. On the Fourth of July, I was there. The flags were flying in that little town. But flag burning doesn't have direct bearing to their lives.

The marriage amendment--I believe in the sanctity of marriage, but is it something we should spend time on with a constitutional amendment? During the time we have been a country, there have been more than 11,000 attempts to amend the Constitution. In the last 12 years, we had 1,000 amendments to the Constitution filed. One we have spent a lot of time on, unnecessarily, is the marriage amendment. We have spent days of our time here in the Senate on this issue. The people in Searchlight, NV, would rather that we dealt with things that are important, not flag burning, not gay marriage, not the estate tax. With the limited amount of time we have left, we, the minority, the Democrats, believe we have to do some things and do them before the August recess--things that affect people in my little town, Searchlight, NV.

Stem cell legislation--it is difficult to watch, before your eyes, someone who deteriorates with Parkinson's disease. You can see it happen. No matter

how often they go to the physician, the ravages of that disease go forward. How many times does a little child have to be pricked with a needle before the majority over here understands that we have to do something about Parkinson's disease, juvenile diabetes, adult-onset diabetes? We have to do something about Lou Gehrig's disease, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis. These diseases have some bearing on what people are hoping for--that we will do here in the Senate.

I had the opportunity when I was home this past recess to visit Danielle DeLee, from Searchlight, NV. She is graduating from high school this year. The reason I wanted to see this young lady is she is going to go to Yale next year--a girl from Searchlight. It is the first time in the history of that little town that someone can go to Yale. That is because she is a brilliant young lady. They saw when she was a little girl that she had academic talent which that little town couldn't handle. This young lady, because she is so smart--do you know what she is going to study at Yale? Math. Math. From Searchlight, NV, she is going to go to Yale and study math.

Because of her brilliance, she will be fine. There are scholarships that will take care of her. But that is not the way it is with most people. Most people are not as smart as Danielle DeLee, and they need help. But not with this Republican-dominated Congress. They have taken away, not added to, the ability to go to school. Tuition deductibility from parents' income tax is not available. A child's ability to go to college should not be dependent on the fact that they are a brilliant person like Danielle or on how rich his or her parents are. The rest of us, people like me, who are average, should be able to go to college if we get some student loans and work a little bit. But that is not the way it is. This Republican-dominated Congress, this do-nothing Congress, is preventing people from going to college.

In Searchlight, because Las Vegas is 60 miles away and Boulder City is 43 miles away, the one thing everybody in that town is concerned about is gas prices. Frankly, if you listed in Searchlight what was important to them, where would flag burning be? Where would gay marriage be? Where would estate tax repeal be? It is not in their vocabulary. But how much they pay for a gallon of gas--which, by the way, in Nevada is over $3 now. Gas prices in the last week have gone up 11 cents a gallon. In Reno, they are even higher than in Las Vegas. People there care about gas prices.

They care about what is going on in Iraq. Today on the morning news I heard that the Comptroller General of the United States now says the war is costing $3 billion a week. People care about that war. On the way back to Searchlight one night last week, I stopped in a restaurant--Evans Grille in Boulder City--and a young man came up to me and said: It is nice to see you. I went to his son's funeral. He was a Navy SEAL. He was killed--21 years old, killed. He cares about the war and how long it is taking and what we are accomplishing there.

Maybe the fifth thing we want to deal with here before the August recess is the Voting Rights Act renewal. Maybe people in Searchlight don't care about that as much as they do about stem cell research, college affordability, gas prices, the war in Iraq, but if they really thought about it, the Voting Act's renewal would be important.

What people went through to have that law passed.

I just finished reading a wonderful book when I was home entitled ``Water's Edge.'' To have the Voting Rights Act passed, of course, you had the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, which was as strong a leadership as you will ever see. But we see his leadership. But what we tend to forget are the deaths--plural--such as Ms. Liuzzio from Detroit, a white woman who came down. She was so concerned that she told her husband she wanted to come and her children. She came and participated in the Selma march. When it was all over, she was giving some people a ride back to Selma from Montgomery. A Klu Klux person shoots her in the head and kills her. Pastor Reeb, who came from California to participate, walked away from the crowd and they bashed him in the head. Another Klansman killed him.

These are just two examples of death and destruction--not hundreds of people being beaten, dogs sicced on them, but thousands had been beaten.

We want to renew this. We are having it held up here and held up in the other body. The Democrats want these issues to go forward, and we want it done before the August recess.

The distinguished assistant minority leader, Senator Durbin, and I, along with Senator Schumer and Senator Stabenow, signed a letter to Senator Frist, saying after we finish homeland appropriations, let us do the stem cell research. That is the least we can do.

I would be happy to.

For 13\1/2\ months.

I am sorry to reflect on what we have done. We have begged. I don't beg people for much of anything, but we have begged. I have been part of the begging in this body for the majority leader to move this matter forward because people at home are crying for hope. That is all they have left when they are sick.

It is not a Democratic issue. We have had people of good will work together on this. We have had Democrats with a lot of seniority, Republicans with a lot of seniority, and clear down to those with little seniority, Democrats and Republicans, wanting to get this done.

Absolutely. We have done everything we could, as I have mentioned, including begging to get this matter before the Senate.

I mentioned this yesterday, and I will repeat.

I went to church last Sunday. A man tapped me on the shoulder. I looked behind me. He was in a wheelchair. I couldn't understand him at first because he doesn't speak well. He has advanced Parkinson's disease. As we listened closely--H.R. 810, could we do something to get it passed?

Mr. President, the people whom we visit in Nevada and Illinois and other places who have these problems are not Democrats only. They are Republicans. They are Independents. They want this Senate to do something to help us.

That is why I am so disappointed that we have been literally wasting our time on issues that have no relevance.

Remember the months and months we spent on that fictitious issue that we should not have dealt with about uprooting the foundation of our country, to change the quality of the Senate, to make it a unicameral legislature--so-called nuclear option--because they didn't get all the judges they wanted. They were willing to throw this Senate into something it had never been before. We spent all of that time, when we could have been doing stem cell research legislation; we could have been doing something about gas prices and the other things we have spoken about.

Let me recount, briefly, the ups and downs--mostly downs-- of this legislation. I can remember months ago when my friend, Dr. Bill Frist, majority header of the Senate, stood right there and stunned me and most of America by saying: I support H.R. 810, stem cell research. That made me feel so good. I thought that we were going to see the end, we are going to see the light at the end of the tunnel. But I am sorry to say nothing has happened since then.

We finally got a unanimous consent request before we had the Fourth of July recess. As the leader said, he would bring it up. And I understand he told the press on Monday he would be willing to do it sometime this work period. I hope that is the case.

But no, the answer is we do not have a time yet to debate this legislation. It is not going to take a lot of time. It isn't a bill that is going to take days and days. We have 12 hours of debate. We could do it all in 1 day. I am willing to do it all in 1 day.

The Senator from Illinois and I came to Washington together. We were so proud. In 1982, we finally made it to Washington,

Mr. President, I certainly hope not. This is an intractable war. We have seen the valor of our fighting forces. We have the finest military in the history of the world. They have shown that in Iraq, fighting in situations that have never been fought in before, not in the deserts of Iraq but in the cities, the slums, where snipers exist, where bombs are.

We need to have the President do what we tried to do when we offered an amendment on the Defense authorization bill to say that the year 2006 is a year of significant transition, that is the law of the land. Let's start redeploying our troops by the end of the year. We need to do that.

I say to my friend, changing the subject a little bit because we all need good news, here is some good news: I indicated that Dr. Bill Frist stepped forward when he said he would support stem cell research. It was a big day for our country, to have a prominent transplant surgeon, someone who is imminently qualified in the medical field. Now his legislative valor on this issue, even though it is not as quick as I would like, has come to the forefront.

I just received a press release from the leader's office, majority leader Bill Frist's office. This is something we need to celebrate. This is from Senator Bill Frist:

The Senate will take up the three stem cell bills on

Monday, July 17, and will complete all action by Tuesday,

July 18. There's tremendous promise in stem cell research . .

.

That is really good news. I compliment and applaud the majority leader for allowing next week to go to stem cell research. To those people watching in America, it is good news. These people who have been hopeful--like the man who tapped me on the shoulder in church--we are going to do everything we can to get the 60 votes necessary to get this sent to the President's desk.

The Senator from Illinois and I served in the House with Jack Kemp. Jack Kemp was an all-star: a great quarterback in college, a great quarterback in the professional ranks, and a very good Member of Congress. He speaks the truth.

The Republicans need to get on the right side of history. Holding this up is not good for them. It is not good for our country.

I ask for the regular order with respect to the Feinstein amendment.

I make a point of order against the Cornyn amendment. It is legislation on an appropriations bill.

Mr. President, I was not planning on speaking today, but I must respond to the distinguished majority leader's comments about what is happening to our economy.

One need only look at a newspaper. It doesn't matter which newspaper one picks up. The one I picked up in the cloakroom is the Washington Post business section. The headline of the Washington Post business section reads:

Tax Cuts Credited; Long-Term Outlook Still Seen as Bleak.

And you flip down through the article, it says, among other things:

But the favorable news about the money rolling into the

Treasury stems largely from shifts in the economy, including

fatter corporate profits, executive bonuses and stock market

gains, that reflect growing inequality, the administration's

critics contend. And even the White House acknowledges that

in the long run, the nation's fiscal outlook [seems very]

bleak.

We need only look on the next page where the story is carried over:

The administration's estimate was widely derided at the

time; budget experts said aides to President Bush were

overestimating the red ink so they could claim credit later

when the actual figures came in below forecast.

This is what they did. Earlier in the year, they talked about how big the deficit would be, and they planned that because everyone knew the deficit would be smaller than that. Smaller? Mr. President, $300 billion--is that anything to brag about? I think not.

The news article further says:

But revenue often soars or plummets unpredictably with the

stock market, and a troubling story emerges from a look at

the main sources of the latest revenue bonanza, according to

the administration's critics.

``This all relates to the widening income disparities

between high-income individuals and the rest of the

population. . . .''

Our economy is not in good shape. The distinguished majority leader brags about 5.5 million jobs having been created. During the administration of President Clinton, 23 million jobs were created. We went months during this administration when no new jobs were created. During the years of President Clinton, 23 million new jobs were created, and they were high-quality jobs.

During the last 3 years of the Clinton administration, we didn't have a $300 billion deficit that people are bragging about today on the Senate floor. We paid down the debt. We spent less money than we were taking in. We brought down the national debt by about a half trillion dollars.

So, please, let's not boast about a $300 billion deficit. Any statistic one looks at recognizes the rich in America are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the middle class is being squeezed. I hope some reality will come to the situation we find now on the Senate floor where the majority leader is bragging about how great it is that we have a $300 billion deficit. I don't think that is good news. I think it is bad news.

Mr. President, I yield whatever time he consumes to the distinguished Senator from Illinois.

Mr. President, in Roll Call today, we learned that the Republican majority is going to attempt to finish earlier than we anticipated. In fact, the quote is that the majority leader and the majority whip have ``scrapped plans to keep the Senate in session through the beginning of October, and will instead look to wrap up work on as many appropriations bills and other must pass measures before September 27.''

This new adjournment date means the Senate has only 8 more weeks in which it will be in session, 40 business days. If we subtract Labor Day, that makes 39 days. If we subtract Mondays and Fridays--which seem to be what we subtract on a weekly basis--there are 23 legislative days left in the 109th Congress--23 days and so much to do.

For months, this what others have deemed the do-nothing Republican Congress has wasted time on issues such as the nuclear option, the marriage amendment, drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, flag burning, bankruptcy class action, and, of course, time and again, the estate tax repeal.

As a result, here we are with only a handful of weeks remaining--in fact, a handful of days, 23--to do so much and to address the priorities of the American people.

I had a wonderful week last week in Las Vegas, in Searchlight. I traveled the State. I spent it all in southern Nevada. The concerns I heard from my constituents are the same concerns this Republican Congress has been ignoring for the last 18 months.

For example, I traveled a few miles out of Las Vegas. Years ago it seemed as though it was a long way out of Las Vegas. From downtown Las Vegas, it is less than an hour to a place called Coyote Springs. It is partially in Lincoln County and partially in Clark County. We were there talking about a new development. At that place in the desert, they are going to build 159,000 new homes--159,000 new homes--creating half a million jobs. Those people who are going to be living in those homes and building those homes are concerned about the price of gasoline, as well they should be.

The price of gas this past week has gone up 11 cents a gallon. The average price now in Nevada is over $3 a gallon, more than 50 cents a gallon than it was just a year ago. Families are pouring their savings into their gas tanks, but this Republican Congress has done nothing to help them--and I mean nothing.

While they have been quick to address nonissues that the far right wants--and these issues have no hope of passing--they spend valuable time on the Senate floor sending a message to their base, is what we are told.

For example, have we done anything about alternative energy? Nothing--nothing to harness the sun, the wind, geothermal.

Have we done anything to look at global warming? No, nothing.

Today in Nevada and across the West and, in fact, across the world, really, people are talking about how the weather has changed. In the West, in Nevada, we are concerned about early wildfires burning hundreds of thousands of acres already. New research seems to link these to the change in climate patterns. But has the administration or this Republican Congress taken steps to reduce the risk of global climate change? No. This administration doesn't even acknowledge it exists.

When the documentary ``Inconvenient Truth'' came out, which is a tremendous movie showing the problems we have with global warming--ice caps dropping into the ocean, weather patterns that have changed significantly, and they are documented--when the President was asked if he was going to watch the movie, he said: Doubt it. In a cavalier fashion: I doubt it. No, not ``I doubt it,'' ``Doubt it.''

As I have indicated, they are more than willing to debate pet issues of the far right, such as the definition of marriage--afraid, I guess, of angering their White House or political base by investigating and taking action on global warming.

These are tough issues relating to global warming. We have to do something. It is not going to be easy.

Health care is the same story. Today in Nevada there are almost 450,000 individuals without health insurance; more than 100,000 of them are children. Has this Republican Congress done anything in the last 18 months to help? No. We had Health Week that really wasn't a health week.

We have 23 legislative days remaining and a list of items we need to accomplish that is a mile long. To say we need to get to work is an understatement.

It is my hope that the majority will make time for these important issues before we adjourn. But this afternoon, I want to focus on just two issues that must come to the floor this month: the Voting Rights Act and stem cell legislation.

There is no reason we have not dealt with these issues already. The House passed H.R. 810, the stem cell research bill, more than a year ago. The original timetable for extending the Voting Rights Act was May, the majority leader telling us he would bring the stem cell bill before the Senate came more than a year ago. But here we are with 23 days left, and there is still no specific date set for debate on either issue.

I understand we left for the recess with a stem cell agreement saying we would debate three stem cell measures, but when is not clear. We want to do it this month. That is July, finish the stem cell legislation in July. We can do it. There is 12 hours for each piece of legislation. We can do it in a few days, certainly in a week. We need to do this.

I am told that the Judiciary Committee is going to schedule markup on the voting rights legislation on Thursday. That is good. That is progress. But we need more. We need the majority leader to schedule a specific date in July for each of these issues to come to the floor. Each day these bills are delayed, the majority is withholding hope from the American people.

As to the Voting Rights Act, President Johnson came just a few feet off the Senate floor to the President's Room to sign the Voting Rights Act. People gave their lives, Mr. President, so the Voting Rights Act would pass; they literally gave their lives. I just finished reading a wonderful book called ``At Canaan's Edge'' by Taylor Branch. It is 800 pages all about the last year or two of Dr. King's life and what these people went through to have civil rights legislation passed and the Voting Rights Act passed. Literally, they let their blood. They were beaten, stomped, kicked, shot, stabbed, and killed.

We need to pass this Voting Rights Act. We need to move it on. It is going to expire. We need to pass it now. Reauthorizing it will help ensure that every American citizen has the ability to cast their ballot regardless of the language they speak or the color of their skin or where they live.

This legislation should be above politics and partisanship. It is about living up to our founding creed of equality and justice for all. The Voting Rights Act needs to be extended, and there is no reason for us to wait.

There is no reason for us to wait on stem cell research. Stem cell research holds promise for medical breakthroughs.

I was in church a week ago Sunday. I am not going to mention his name, but he is there every Sunday I go. When we are home in Searchlight, we go to Boulder City to church. He is in a wheelchair. He tapped me on the shoulder. I turned around, and he said: H.R. 810.

It took me a while to think what it was, and then I remembered. He has Parkinson's disease. He has hope that this will help him, as do people who are inflicted with diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease, and Alzheimer's.

In 23 days we need to do this. This has to be part of our program this month, July: the Voting Rights Act and stem cell legislation.

So I hope my friend, the distinguished majority leader, in scheduling legislation for this month, when we get past the Homeland Security appropriations bill, will go to one of these two bills and then go to the other one and finish them. It will be a good day for the Senate and a really good day for our country.

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