Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn and convene for pro forma sessions only with no business conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Friday, August 2 at 11:45 a.m.; Tuesday, August 6 at 10:30 a.m.; Friday, August 9 at 12 p.m.; Tuesday, August 13 at 12 p.m.; Friday, August 16 at 12 p.m.; Tuesday, August 20 at 11:00 a.m.; Friday, August 23 at 12 p.m.; Tuesday, August 27 at 9 a.m.; Friday August 30 at 2 p.m.; Tuesday, September 3 at 9:15 a.m.; and Friday, September 6 at 5 p.m; and that the Senate adjourn on Friday, September 6, until 2 p.m.; that on Monday, September 9, 2013, unless the Senate receives a message from the House that it has adopted S. Con. Res. 22, the adjournment resolution, and that if the Senate receives such a message, the Senate adjourn until 12 p.m. on Monday, August 12, for a pro forma session only with no business conducted, pursuant to S. Con Res. 22, and that following the pro forma session, the Senate adjourn until 2:00 p.m. on Monday, September 9, 2013; that on Monday, following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following any leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m. with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar Nos. 184 and 185, under the previous order.

The next rollcall vote will be 5:30 p.m. on Monday, September 9, 2013.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. President, just a brief word or two about the Presiding Officer. When he took the oath to become a Senator, we had a lot of things going on here. I did not have the opportunity to say as much about him as I would have liked because we were in the thralls of a real battle that we seem to have resolved.

I do not know if there is anyone in my 31 years of Congress who has been better prepared to be a Senator than the Senator from Massachusetts who now is the Presiding Officer. His stunning record has already been established with his work in the Senate. I have, from afar, admired this good man and for 4 years up close when I served in the House with him. His work for the environment has been unparalleled. His is one of the rare voices that have for many years understood the dangers of nuclear waste. He has been aware of the benefits of nuclear power but also the dangers.

There is a long resume the Presiding Officer has. I want the record to reflect that I am terribly impressed with the work he has already done in the House and will be even more impressed with the work he will do here in the Senate. The people of Massachusetts are very fortunate in having the Presiding Officer from Massachusetts.

Following leader remarks the Senate will resume consideration of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill. At about 10:45 there will be a rollcall vote in relation to the Paul amendment. As I have indicated to him and others, we will probably move to table that. That will be up to the two managers of the bill, but I understand that is what they are going to do--or someone will do.

Following disposition of the Paul amendment, the Senate will proceed to executive session to consider the Jones nomination to be Director of the ATF. We will do this vote just as quickly as I can work out an appropriate time with the Republican leader.

Yesterday I filed cloture on the THUD bill. As a result, the filing deadline for all first-degree amendments on that bill is 1 p.m. today.

I am told S. 1392 is at the desk and due for a second reading. If that is true, I ask the clerk to report the same.

Mr. President, I object to any further proceedings on this bill at this time.

Mr. President, when President Obama proposed a plan yesterday

to simplify our corporate Tax Code and lower rates for businesses, I expected Republicans all over the country but especially here in Congress to jump for joy. I think there are many people around the country who were satisfied and happy, but the Republican leadership in the Congress surprised me and I think a lot of people by their reaction. Just a few months ago Leader McConnell signaled he would be open to a plan to reform the Tax Code. This is what he said:

I'm told President Obama is going to come out for lowering

the corporate tax rate. To the extent he wants to do some of

these things, our answer is going to be yes.

It is amazing how quickly his answer went from yes to no, no. Republicans have favored corporate tax reform for decades. We have heard them say so. This was one of the mantras during the Presidential campaign. But now that President Obama is proposing it, Republicans are opposing it.

The President's thoughtful approach would couple lower tax rates, corporate tax rates, with investments in job-creating measures, such as roads and bridges and dams, worker training programs, and manufacturing incentives.

He was in the State of Tennessee when he made this announcement. They are a picture book as to how corporate interests there can really move on. They have done a great job in Tennessee, and I would bet that at every corporation in Tennessee they were elated to hear what President Obama had to say yesterday.

It is going to take a balanced approach and include smart spending cuts, closing wasteful loopholes and asking corporations that will benefit from lower tax rates to contribute their fair share. Even Speaker Boehner supported this approach in the past. This is what he said just a short time ago:

If we want to put Americans back to work, I think lowering

the corporate tax rate is critically important. And to do

that, I think we have to look at the tax-expenditure side,

the deductions, credits, and other gimmicks that may be in

the tax code and that have accumulated over the last 30

years.

I do not say this very often, but Speaker Boehner was right.

This is the kind of balanced approach to deficit reduction the American people favor--a simpler tax code that lowers rates, makes our businesses more competitive, but also raises new revenue to invest in job creation. We have learned that the sequestration has already cut 1.6 million jobs, so we need job creation. We need to help the middle class by creating jobs. As President Obama said, if we are going to give businesses a better deal, we need to give workers a better deal also. We can use the money we save by simplifying the Tax Code to create jobs now, right away, jobs that can never be outsourced. Both Democrats and Republicans can get something they want, and the economy gets the shot in the arm it needs.

We have already cut the deficit in half over the last 3 years--that is the yearly deficit--and we have already saved $2.6 trillion from the accumulated debt. Democrats know there is more to be done. We certainly do. But we will not agree to any plan that balances the budget by killing jobs even more than already and whacking the middle class, and that is while holding the richest individuals and corporations harmless.

Democrats believe we must offset the harsh spending cuts of the last few years with job creation that puts the middle class back on track. To get the economy back to full steam, we should be making targeted investments in areas such as infrastructure and education--things that have always helped America grow and succeed.

Mr. President, I have a couple unanimous consent requests. I would also say this: This is an important debate, and I ask unanimous consent that--on the floor now we have Corker, we have McCain and Graham--I ask unanimous consent that if they use more than the allotted time here they be allowed to use that, and whatever time goes over that allotted time we have in the existing order would also be given to Senator Paul.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 1 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 201, Todd Jones, to be Director of ATF; that there be 1 hour for debate equally divided in the usual form prior to a vote on cloture on the nomination; that if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be deemed expired and the Senate proceed to vote on the confirmation, with no intervening action or debate, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that upon disposition of the Paul amendment, the Senate recess until 1 p.m. today; further, that the filing deadline for first-degree amendments to S. 1243, the transportation bill, be 1:30 p.m. today; finally, that when the Senate resumes legislative session following consideration of the Jones nomination, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business for 1 hour equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the exception of Senator Inhofe, who is to be recognized for up to 30 minutes; that following the period of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the Power nomination under the previous order.

Mr. President, what this means is we will vote on the Paul amendment, give or take, in a half-hour, at around 11 o'clock, or shortly thereafter, whatever time the order allows, and we will then recess until 1 p.m. Then we will have the debate on the Jones nomination from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m., then the cloture vote at 2 p.m. If cloture is invoked, we will immediately vote on confirmation. We could have two votes at 2 p.m. We will have morning business from around 2:45 p.m. to 3:45 p.m., and then the Power nomination--to be U.N. Ambassador--debate from about 3:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m., and then the vote on confirmation at around 5:45 p.m.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period for morning business following the consideration of the Jones nomination be extended by 40 minutes, with the additional time being equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the exception of Senator Inhofe for 30 minutes and Senator McCain for 20 minutes.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11 a.m., Thursday, August 1, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 96; that there be 60 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form; that following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote with no intervening action or debate on the nomination; the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, August 1, 2013, at 2 p.m. the Senate consider Executive Calendar No. 220, the Samantha Power nomination under the previous order.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, August 1, upon disposition of the Chen nomination and the resumption of legislative session, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S. 1243, the THUD appropriations bill; further, that following the cloture vote, the Senate recess until 2 p.m. for the bipartisan caucus meeting we are having tomorrow.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that two fellows from Senator Brown's staff, Andrew Steigerwald and Katherine LaBeau, be granted floor privileges for tomorrow.

Mr. President, following the remarks of Senator McConnell and me, the Senate will proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 223, the nomination of Kent Yoshiho Hirozawa, of New York, to be a member of the National Labor Relations Board and immediately have a cloture vote on that nomination.

I am told H.R. 2218 is at the desk and is due for a second reading.

I now object to any further proceedings at this time.

Mr. President, for the first time in 3 years the Senate is poised to confirm members of the National Labor Relations Board. Although too few Americans are aware of the important job this Board does, the NLRB looks out for rights of millions of U.S. workers every day and remedies unfair practices by private companies. This Board is an important safeguard for workers in America, regardless of whether the employees are union or nonunion. Without the work of the NLRB, employees who have been cheated and treated unfairly would have no entity to address the wrongs. Union elections would be meaningless to employers and employees. Labor abuses and unfair employment practices could go unchallenged.

I am glad the Senate is moving forward as agreed under this process, set forth at the beginning of this Congress, to confirm five nominees to the NLRB, two Republicans and three Democrats.

The Senate will consider three Democratic nominees and two Republican nominees for the NLRB today. Once they are confirmed, the NLRB will have five Senate-confirmed members for the first time in a decade.

The five nominees are all eminently qualified.

For example, Mark Pearce has served on the National Labor Relations Board for 3 years, since 2010. He has served as chairman since 2011.

Mr. Pearce was a founding partner of a Buffalo, NY law firm, where he practiced employment law.

He previously worked in the Buffalo, NY regional office of the NLRB.

Mr. Pearce received his Bachelor's degree from Cornell University and his law degree from SUNY Buffalo.

Kent Hirozawa, whose nomination we will also consider today, is currently chief counsel for the National Labor Relations Board.

Before joining the NLRB staff in 2010, Mr. Hirozawa was a partner at a New York law firm, where he worked on Federal and State and labor and employment law.

Mr. Hirozawa also served as a field attorney for the NLRB from for 3 years prior to entering private practice.

He received a Bachelor's degree from Yale and his law degree from