Floor Statements

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order, following the remarks of, first, Senator Bennet and then those of Senator Casey.

Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, if there are any, the Senate will be in morning business until 5 p.m.

At 5 p.m. the Senate will resume H.R. 3979, as amended, the unemployment insurance extension, postcloture.

At 5:30 p.m. there will be a rollcall vote and passage of that legislation.

Mr. President, NASCAR fans can easily find their favorite drivers simply by looking at the cars as they fly by because of corporate emblems on the hood of the car. In fact, they are all over the car. For our clothing here in the Senate, we don't bear any commercial logos. Many Republican leaders these days may as well wear the Koch Industries insignia, but as Members of the Senate, there should never be any doubt as to our sponsors--the American people.

We are in the Senate for one reason: To give Americans a fair shot at providing for their families and having their voices heard, but Republicans seem more willing to identify themselves by their billionaire sponsors. While they don't wear Koch Industries ties and jackets, they display their sponsors proudly through their actions in the Senate. So it comes as no surprise Republican Senators stood on the Senate floor and voiced their support for Charles and David Koch. Senate Republicans depend on the Koch brothers to make their job easier.

I appreciate the forthrightness of those who expressed their support of the Koch brothers. The chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee came to this floor praising the richest brothers in the world. If Charles and David Koch helped Republican Members in this Chamber, they should not be ashamed to defend the Kochs' power. If the Koch brothers have bankrolled efforts to keep Senators in their seats, those Members should publicly acknowledge their providers.

If my Republican colleagues find my criticism of the Kochs' shadowy influence unjust, they should take their case to the American people. Senate Republicans should come to the Senate floor and take up the cause of the persecuted multibillionaires, but Senate Republicans shouldn't expect Americans to be easily fooled into ignoring the fact that the Koch brothers are trying to sweep middle-class families under the rug.

Regardless of the words Charles Koch espouses, for example, in his Wall Street Journal op-ed last week, he and his brother don't have the interests of average Americans in mind. They have in mind increasing their wealth and hiding their efforts behind words such as dignity, respect, equality, and freedom. That ran throughout the column they wrote.

Dignity? What about the dignity of struggling, long-term unemployed families? The Koch brothers continue closing plants and laying off employees in Alaska, Arkansas, North Carolina, and other places, devastating the economies in those communities. Americans need a fair shot at getting back on their feet and finding work, but Koch-backed groups are actively opposing the extension of benefits for the long- term unemployed.

What about the dignity of a single mother from Las Vegas, Christina, who is stuck living in her elderly grandmother's living room because she and her son were evicted when Christina's benefits were cut off? Perhaps Charles and David Koch should spend their nights sharing one air mattress, as Christina and her son do, and see what dignity there is living as Christina and her boy do. The Koch brothers want Americans to be dignified as they lose their cars and homes and security.

The Koch brothers hide behind words such as ``respect.'' What about treating the American voter with respect? Instead, the Koch brothers have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars in dishonest ads about health care reform, trying to fool American families into thinking that affordable health care is bad for them. It is good for them. If the Affordable Care Act was so awful, why did Koch Industries use it to their advantage? Koch Industries applied for and participated in the temporary program called the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program, part of the Affordable Care Act. This program helped the company Koch Industries pay health insurance costs to retirees who were not covered by Medicare. In other words, the government helped subsidize health care which Koch Industries promised to its retiring employees. So it is OK for Koch Industries to save money through ObamaCare, but if an American family wants a fair shot at health care, they risk being labeled as collectivists. That was all through the article, the op-ed piece, ``collectivists.'' Is that the new rightwing buzz word for Communists? That doesn't sound like respect to me.

The Kochs throw around phrases such as ``equality under the law.'' What about equality for hard-working American women? Yet the Republicans in Congress who carry water for the Kochs are actively campaigning against legislation that will ensure that women are paid equally with their male counterparts for doing the exact same work.

I have a daughter. I have four sons. My daughter, if she does the same work as any of my four boys, should be paid the same as they are, but that isn't how it is in America. She is paid only 76 or 77 cents on the dollar for what men make doing the same work.

One of the Koch organizations is ironically called the Independent Women's Forum. They do this all the time. They fund money for the Chamber of Commerce, many other organizations, but one of their organizations is called the Independent Women's Forum, which is making the argument that the disparity between men's and women's salaries is a myth. But this tactic shouldn't surprise anyone, given the Republicans' utter disregard for women that is on display here in Washington.

We are going to vote on Wednesday on a fair pay piece of legislation, simply saying women should get the same amount of money a man does doing the same work--not too absurd, not too radical. That is what we are trying to do. I repeat. This tactic shouldn't surprise anyone, given the Republicans' disregard for women that is on display here in Washington.

For example, on one of the Sunday shows yesterday comments were made by former Director of the CIA Michael Hayden, who was there for a long time. In responding to the Senate Intelligence Committee's attempts to shed light on the CIA's questionable interrogation methods, General Hayden condescendingly accused Dianne Feinstein of being too emotional. How about that--Dianne Feinstein being too emotional. This woman has been an outstanding leader of the Senate Intelligence Committee. She has been fearless. She has been thorough and fair. For this man to say that because she criticizes tactics led by General Hayden as torture she was too emotional--I don't think so. Does this sound like a person or a party who respects women? So much for equality under the law as seen by the Koch brothers.

Finally, the Koch brothers claim they are fighting to restore a free society--also some buzz words: ``Free society.'' Free in what way? They single-handedly turned the American electoral process into a pay-to- play scheme. The Koch brothers' endgame is to elect officials, to elect people who will help overhaul our system of government and replace it with something more to their liking to increase their wealth. Even though they are the richest people in the world, they want to be richer.

So I again extend the invitation to my colleagues, if you bear the logo of the Koch brothers, come on down and announce your affiliation openly. The Koch brothers' agenda is an agenda that is not my agenda, it is not our agenda, but is it your agenda, my Republican friends? If it is, come and tell your constituents that is the case. Let this Nation know where you stand. As for we Democrats, we will continue to defend American families from these oil baron bullies who want nothing more than to enrich themselves. We will continue to oppose their efforts to buy our democracy because we work for America, not just rich Americans.

Would the Chair announce the business for today.

I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 345,

Mr. President, I have a cloture motion at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum required under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor and recognize the 50th anniversary for the League of Women Voters of the Las Vegas Valley. On May 7, 1964, the league held their first meeting, which was attended by just a handful of women in Las Vegas. Fifty years later, because of the hard work and relentless service of its founding members and their predecessors, the league today continues to be a resounding voice for Southern Nevadans on issues that matter most to women, families, and communities.

Upon the league's inception and formal recognition from the National League of Women Voters in 1965, the group began organizing around issues such as school integration, open housing, environmental conservation, and education. By coming together, league members found great success on many of the issues they championed. Today, the league remains a vital force in the Las Vegas Valley around similar, important social causes. Some of the league's earliest members included distinguished Southern Nevadans, many of whom are personal role models of mine, like Flora Duncan, Margaret Quinn, and Jean Ford. Over the years, countless others began their path to leadership with the League.

As I stand to honor the league on this special occasion, it is also important to recognize that this year we celebrate the 100th anniversary of women having the right to vote in Nevada. In 1920, the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was passed to prohibit any United States citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of sex. I am proud that in my home State, we had already recognized women's right to vote 6 years earlier.

Nevada was a leader among States in the fight for women's suffrage-- undoubtedly, this achievement was due to the remarkable and pioneer- like spirit of those Nevadans behind the movement. This spirit still exists today among organizations like the league and its members.

Across the U.S. and in every State, women have had the constitutional

right to vote for just short of a century. It is important that citizens, both women and men, do not take for granted their right to be heard. For this reason, it is fitting that we honor the League of Women Voters of Las Vegas Valley as their work offers each new generation the reminder that civic engagement has been, and continues to be, one of the most important rights we have as we strive to make our community and our country a better place to live. I applaud and celebrate with the League of Women Voters of Las Vegas Valley on their 50th anniversary.

Mr. President, every time I see the Presiding Officer introducing the prayer and directing the attention of the Senate to follow the Presiding Officer in reciting the pledge of allegiance, it brings back to me a lot of memories.

When I first came to the Senate, we had several of Members of Congress who had been to war. Now that is not the case. We all look at John McCain with such idealism of what he did in the Vietnam war. There are others but there aren't many, and to have now the Presiding Officer having not only been to war but being a general and having led hundreds of people from Montana to war, I am sure when that Pledge of Allegiance is said by the Presiding Officer, your feelings are a little different from anyone else's because during those bitter battles in Iraq, members of your unit were killed and injured.

So even though we don't say much publicly about the new addition to the Senate, I want the record to reflect that the people of Montana are so fortunate to have this patriot here in the Senate.

We will miss Max Baucus tremendously. He was my friend. But I am really impressed with the Presiding Officer and--I repeat--his having been not only a warrior but a general who led a lot of warriors in war.

Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 3979, which is the legislative vehicle for the unemployment insurance extension bill.

We are working on an agreement on the unemployment insurance bill as well as some executive nominations. Senators will be notified when we are able to arrange those votes.

Talking about the military, as I just did, we have to reflect on what took place at Fort Hood yesterday--another tragedy. We have just a general understanding about the motives. But our hearts are all broken as a result of another tragedy at this great military training facility. It was just a few years ago that there were mass murders on that military base.

Our Nation mourns every casualty that befalls our brave servicemembers. These seem so unnecessary and such a sad event. Fort Hood has seen more than its fair share of tragedy in the last few years. We know this community of warriors and their families are grieving and questioning this latest act of senseless violence.

As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, GEN Martin Dempsey, put it, ``This is a community that has faced and overcome crises with resilience and strength.'' That is true.

We stand with the people of Fort Hood today. We stand with all of our military wherever they are situated in the world, admiring their strength and resilience.

Mr. President, no one can dispute that Winston Churchill was a statesman and the most famous in the history of our world. This is what he said:

Of this I am quite sure, that if we open a quarrel between

the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the

future.

Why do I say that? Even though those remarks were made more than 70 years ago, I believe there are many in Congress who should focus on what Winston Churchill said because it is true. For far too long Republicans have obsessed over the Affordable Care Act--ObamaCare. The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It has been for more than 4 years.

From the very day this law was signed, Republicans have zealously worked to undermine it in so many different ways. Day in and day out they have clamored for repeal of this bill. House Republicans have voted more than 50 times trying desperately to cripple ObamaCare. They shut down the government trying to defund health care reform. And how has that worked? While they have obsessed over the past, the country has moved forward.

Now Republicans have to face the fact that millions of their own constituents, millions of Republicans are benefiting from health care reform in record numbers. But my Republican friends still insist on nothing short of repeal. So I ask my Republican colleagues, what would they like to repeal? What would repeal look like?

Because of the Affordable Care Act, millions of Americans can no longer be denied health insurance because of preexisting conditions. What are some of the preexisting conditions that caused so much trouble in the past? Diabetes. How about this one: You are a woman. Many insurance companies considered women having a preexisting disability because they were women. Millions of young adults are now able to stay on their parents' policies until age 26. That is more than 3 million. Millions of seniors are saving huge amounts of money on prescription drugs because we are in the process of filling the doughnut hole. This year alone millions of Americans will receive maternity coverage. Repealing the Affordable Care Act would be repealing many of these and many more. I could spend a long time talking about what would be repealed.

My counterpart, the Senator from Kentucky, will probably address the Senate after I finish. In his home State of Kentucky, 360,000 people have signed up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Kentucky is not New York; it is not Texas; it is not California. It is a sparsely populated State, somewhat like Nevada. Yet 360,000 people have signed up for coverage. Of those, 75 percent were previously uninsured. That is approaching 300,000 people. Over a quarter million Kentuckians who did not have insurance now have health coverage under the Affordable Care Act. In other words, ObamaCare has reduced the uninsured population of Kentucky by 40 percent.

I wonder when my friend from Kentucky will explain to the 270,000 Kentuckians how he plans to repeal the law without stripping the new health benefits. How exactly will he and his Republican colleagues guarantee that their newly insured constituents have no lapses in coverage? Remember, they want to do away with 270,000 people who didn't have insurance. They want to do away with 360,000 people in Kentucky who are signed up for insurance. So I await their answer.

In the meantime, Democrats will keep looking to the future, and the future of the Affordable Care Act is bright. Every day more and more Americans are getting health coverage under the law. On Monday we learned that 7,045,000 people had already signed up and about 1 million people on the State exchanges--370,000 in Kentucky, for example. We know there are more than 3 million young people on their parents' insurance because of that. We know there are millions of people who are now covered because of their ability to become part of Medicaid. So we are talking about a lot of people.

Health reform is working, and the law is here to stay. The more Americans see the law is working, the more they want it to stay. The time of fighting over the past is over. Remember what Winston Churchill said:

Of this I am quite sure, that if we open a quarrel between

the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the

future.

I say this very seriously: I invite my Republican friends to look to the future. Put this obstruction behind them. Work with us to make the Affordable Care Act even better for their constituents and our constituents and Americans generally. Together, we can help millions more Americans get the health coverage they deserve.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:30 p.m. today all postcloture time on the Reed of Rhode Island amendment No. 2874 be considered expired; that the following amendments be withdrawn: Nos. 2875, 2877, 2878; that Senator Sessions or designee then be recognized to raise a point of order against the Senator Reed of Rhode Island amendment No. 2874; once the budget point of order is raised, Senator Murray or designee be recognized to make a motion to waive; the Senate then proceed to vote on the motion to waive; if the motion to waive is agreed to, the Senate then proceed to vote on adoption of the Reed of Rhode Island amendment No. 2874; that upon disposition of the Reed amendment, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on H.R. 3979; that if cloture is invoked on the bill, no other amendments or motions be in order to the bill; that at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, April 7, all postcloture time be considered expired and the bill as amended, if amended, be read a third time and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended.

For the knowledge of all Members, we are going to have one more vote today and the next vote will be Monday at 5:30 p.m.

I just want to tell everyone, sometimes people get upset at Senator McConnell and me because we don't know what is going on. Well, I hate to admit this, but sometimes he and I don't know what is going on. It is hard to get, sometimes, where we are. So I appreciate that even though Senator McConnell and I have a few little dustups on the floor in front of everybody, whenever we are in private we work well together to try to do the best things for this body.

To get to where we are today wasn't easy, and we should have a good week next week. I know there is a lot of angst on both sides with the things they want to get done, but everyone should be patient. We are trying to work through the process.

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

I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be auhorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirsken Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Sente Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 10 a.m., to hold an East Asia and Pacific Affairs subcommittee hearing entitled ``Evaluating U.S. Policy on Taiwan on the 35th Anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 2 p.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Closed/TS/SCI: Russia Briefing.''

President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting.

President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 3, 2014, at 2:30 p.m.