Floor Statements

Mr. President, from now until 11 a.m., there will be conversation on the floor. At 11 a.m., we will have six rollcall votes. The first vote will be 15 minutes and after that the votes will be 10 minutes each, as we said yesterday, and I enforced it. When the time is up, we are closing the vote. If the Republicans are not here, too bad; if the Democrats are not here, too

bad. We are going to have a lot of votes today, so everyone should make sure they are here. Understand if you are not here in time, the clerk has been asked to turn the vote in.

After we complete the six rollcall votes starting at 11 a.m., there will be 2 hours of debate remaining on the resolution. Therefore, unless something untoward happens, the vote-arama is expected to begin at 3 p.m. this afternoon. I hope everyone will understand we have had about 400 amendments that have been filed. We are not going to vote on 400 amendments. The average is usually between 25 and 35 votes. So everyone should understand that is about where we should wind up.

Everyone is going to be tired. The two managers have worked very hard on this for a long time, so be considerate of their time, their thoughts, and their efforts also.

Measure Placed on the Calendar

Mr. President, S. 649 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

Mr. President, I object to any further proceedings with respect to the bill.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 439

Mr. President, we finalize these amendments, and we will have disposed of 41 amendments. Senators are going to have to understand that this is not going to go on forever. The average is about 30 or 35 votes. After we finish, it will be 41. Everyone should understand that we had 400 amendments that had been offered, and we are not going to do that.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, a lot of progress has been made. We are doing extremely well. I admire the progress made by the two managers of this bill.

Over the last two decades, after the expiration of debate time on those budget resolutions, the Senate has offered and the Senate disposed of an average of 35 amendments. Today, since the expiration of that debate time on this resolution, we have now disposed of 33 amendments. We have considered and disposed of 44 amendments on the resolution in total, counting those we did yesterday.

We need to continue working. There are a lot of things that people want to have offered. But, you know, there are 400 amendments that have already been filed. Senator Byrd, whom we all revere, said, and I will quote:

I once described vote-aramas as pandemonium, which was the

Palace of Satan in Milton's Paradise Lost. But that term

fails to describe the ignominy of the Senate when it becomes

engulfed in these budget vote carnivals.

So we are doing fine. We are not at the carnival stage yet. Let's proceed and try to finish this with a lot of dignity. I again tell Senator Murray and Senator Sessions what a good job they have done. We need to proceed to see what else we can get done.

Amendments Nos. 366, 213, 455, and 597

Mr. President, I ask that the chairman be recognized. She tried to get recognition, and she couldn't.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that on the next block of amendments--we have talked to everybody who was talkable--we would vote from our desks. There would be no recapping of the votes by the tally clerks, and that they be 7 1/2-minute votes.

I object.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Thanking the Senate Pages

Mr. President, first of all, over the last two decades the average budget resolution considered 78 amendments. We have done 101. The average vote-arama is 35 amendments. We have done 70--twice as many. Doing this has been a Herculean feat, but it has been done by the leadership of Senator Murray, with Senator Sessions. I think we all should recognize how hard this has been for Senator Murray.

(Senators applauding.)

Yes, of course. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. President, we don't have to have a quorum call. We are not going to be voting from our desks, so everybody can go back to regular disorder.

Mr. President, will the Chair report the business of the day.

Mr. President, as we just heard, the Senate has resumed consideration of the budget debate of S. Con. Res. 8, the budget resolution. We will continue debate during today's session. Senators will be notified when votes are scheduled, of course.

The budget has 34 hours left, and then following that, we will have some votes. It is up to the two managers of this bill if we have votes before the 34 hours expire. These are two experienced Senators and they know how to handle this budget, but it would seem to me that we should move as quickly as we can to debate these issues. I hope Senators come and offer their opinions as to the budget that Chairman Murray has brought to the Senate floor. Maybe some people will want to talk about what passed in the House yesterday, the Ryan Republican budget.

Everyone should understand that this time will run out at the latest at 7 p.m. tomorrow night. It seems to me the two managers could reduce that time somewhat. If they don't, it doesn't matter; we will be here until we finish this budget. If we are here all night Friday, we will be in all night Friday. I spoke to Senator Murray, and she was willing to be in all night last night; she is willing to be here all night tonight and all night Friday night until we finish this. We are going to move forward and finish this budget.

affordable care act

Mr. President, three years ago this coming Saturday was a historic time in this country and in the world, actually, because the Affordable Care Act passed. It was a very wintry night when it passed-- very cold. It was the greatest single step in generations to help the American people.

This was unique because for the first time--going back to the days of Harry Truman where he talked about a health care bill for the country, to Eisenhower, who talked about a health care bill for this country--we were finally able to accomplish it. We ensured access to quality, affordable health care for every American with ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act.

Millions and millions of Americans, as we speak, are benefiting from this legislation. Insurance companies can no longer arbitrarily place lifetime caps on insurance policies during someone's care. No longer can they suddenly say: Sorry, you have cancer or had that bad accident, but you reached $1,000--or whatever limit they set, $10,000--and you are through. Go get help someplace else because insurance is over. That arbitrary lifetime cap by insurance companies put Americans just a car accident or an illness away from doom.

Today children are no longer denied insurance because they were born with a disease, disability, or some other problem. They no longer are denied insurance. And being a woman, like my daughter, is no longer a preexisting medical condition. Before ObamaCare passed--and everyone needs to understand this--my daughter Lana had a preexisting condition; she was born a girl. That is gone.

In less than a year, about 130 million Americans with preexisting conditions such as high blood pressure or diabetes can rest assured they will have access to affordable insurance and lifesaving care regardless of their health and how much money they make.

In Nevada alone--a sparsely populated State of some 3 million people--tens of thousands of seniors have saved tens of millions of dollars because 3 years ago we filled the doughnut hole. What that means is they don't have to pay exorbitant prices for their prescription drug coverage.

Health care reform is not only saving money, it saves lives. In Nevada there are thousands of examples, but I will give one about a 26- year-old woman named Sarah Coffey Kugler, a native of Gardnerville, NV. Gardnerville is a beautiful place next to the Sierra Nevada mountains.

Well, this young lady, who was very smart--and still is--was half way through her first year of law school at the University of Connecticut when she was diagnosed with stage 4 Hodgkin's disease. Not stage 1, 2, or 3, but the worst, stage 4. She had done everything right. She knew she needed insurance, so she went to the University of Connecticut and bought the best plan she could for students so she would have health insurance. Due to her cancer and the difficult treatment to fight it, she had to drop out of school. She had no insurance because insurance would not cover her.

As I said, she was no longer a student and, as a result, no longer qualified for student health insurance. What was she to do? She needed a bone marrow transplant. She and her family thought there was a very strong possibility she would pass away.

Before ObamaCare, Sarah would have been one of tens of millions of Americans who desperately needed lifesaving care but didn't have insurance to take care of it. Before ObamaCare, Sarah might have even become 1 of the 45,000 Americans who die each year because they lacked health insurance. But thanks to the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, Sarah was able to sign on to her parents' insurance policy.

Sarah is 1 of 3.1 million young people in America--approximately 35,000 in Nevada--who have benefited from a law that allows children to stay on their parents' health plans until they are 26 years old.

Sarah's story has a happy ending, as so often happens in America where we can get health care. She got the treatment she needed. Her most recent PET scan was clear, and she plans to return to school this coming September and finish law school.

Her mother Sue sent me a letter. She wrote that ObamaCare and the dedicated doctors who took care of her daughter saved her life. There are so many legacies of this landmark legislation. No American will end up in an emergency room because they have no insurance. No American will live in fear of losing his or her insurance because they don't have a job. And in the richest Nation in the world, no insurance company ever again will put a pricetag on a human life.

Long, long ago Thomas Jefferson wrote: ``The care of human life and happiness . . . is the first and only object of good government.''

I am gratified that the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, meets Thomas Jefferson's standard. I am so happy this law came into being. For all of us who participated in that, we will always remember that cold winter when we were in session longer, I am told, than any other time in the history of the country to pass this legislation. We worked hard to pass it. It is already insuring the care of human life, which remains the first object of government, as Thomas Jefferson said it should.

Mr. President, would my friend yield for a unanimous consent request?

I do appreciate the courtesy. Members are waiting all over the Capitol and maybe a few other places.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending motion be set aside and the following amendments to S. Con. Res. 8 be called up:

Murray No. 433, Hatch No. 297, Stabenow No. 432, Grassley No. 156, Mikulski No. 431, Ayotte No. 158, Cruz No. 202, Murray No. 439, Crapo No. 222, and Shaheen No. 438; that the time until 8:10 p.m. be equally divided between the two managers, or their designees, prior to votes in relation to the Sessions motion and the first four amendments listed; that all after the first vote this evening be 10-minute votes; that there be 2 minutes equally divided in the usual form prior to each vote; that no amendments be in order to the motion or any of the amendments prior to the votes in relation to these items; that following votes this evening, the remainder of today's session be for debate only on the concurrent resolution; further, that when the Senate convenes at 9 a.m. on Friday, March 22, the Senate resume consideration of S. Con. Res. 8 with the time until 11 a.m. equally divided between the two managers or their designees; that at 11 a.m., the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the remaining amendments listed above; that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to each vote and all after the first vote in this sequence be 10-minute votes; that upon disposition of the last amendment listed, there be 2 hours equally divided between the two managers or their designees remaining on the concurrent resolution; finally, the next amendment in order be an amendment from the majority side to be followed by a Republican alternative to Shaheen No. 438.

Mr. President, I have been in consultation with Senator McConnell today. We believe this is an appropriate way to go forward. I appreciate very much the work of the two managers on this legislation. This is noteworthy legislation. Debate at this point has been courteous and strong. There are feelings on both sides, and that is what this body is supposed to be.

So I am grateful to the two managers of this bill, and I again appreciate my friend from Alaska yielding.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay the motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, while I have everyone's attention, today, this evening, and tomorrow, we are going to have a lot of votes. Everyone should understand they are not going to have time to spend a lot of time with constituents, to make phone calls. When the time is up, we are turning it in--Democrats or Republicans. There are no excuses. We have a lot to do and we are determined to get these votes in very quickly.

Amendment No. 433

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the continuing appropriations legislation. The time until 11:15 a.m. today will be divided and controlled equally between the two leaders or their designees.

At 11:15 a.m. there will be three rollcall votes in relation to the continuing resolution: the Toomey amendment, which is a 60-vote threshold; adoption of the Mikulski-Shelby substitute amendment; and a cloture vote on H.R. 933, the underlying bill.

Budget Debate

Mr. President, for the last few years my Republican colleagues have been hollering, yelling, and screaming that the Senate has not passed a budget. They have done so in spite of the fact that Republicans in both Chambers voted for the Budget Control Act which set spending levels for the last 2 years. It was a law. Every reasonable political observer admits that the Budget Control Act, which had the force of law, was a budget, period. No, it was not a resolution. It was a law, which is much stronger than any resolution we do here.

As I indicated, they have yelled and screamed. Still, Republicans pine for the days of the so-called regular order when the Senate would vote on a budget resolution that would set spending priorities for the fiscal year. Republicans--we were told, we heard, we saw--were desperate to have a budget debate. They were desperate. They have had charts out here. They were desperate for an amendment. They wanted a vote-arama. They had charts, speeches, and demonstrations to prove it.

They have had press conference after press conference after press conference. They even had a calendar they brought out almost daily tallying the days since the Senate passed a budget resolution--not a law, which was already in effect, but a resolution.

Yesterday I was amazed, flabbergasted, and stunned when Republicans blocked attempts to begin debate on the budget resolution. In fact, the ranking member of the Budget

Committee said: Let's put it off for a while. Let's wait until after Easter.

Can you imagine that? They have been pining for regular order, and we now have a chance to have a debate. They said: No, we can't do that. Can't do it. There was a chance, and they were not interested in doing it.

My friend, the junior Senator from Kansas, objected to a request debating the budget unless we vote on his proposed amendment to the continuing resolution. He is concerned about air traffic towers in Kansas because of these across-the-board cuts.

I say to all of my colleagues--I say to the Senator from Kansas--we are all concerned about the impact of these budget cuts. They are senseless, they are ridiculous, and we should do away with them. We have already cut $2.5 trillion from the debt. We can continue to do it but do it in a responsible and reasonable way, not a meat-cleaver way.

More than 100 families in Nevada--almost immediately--are going to lose access to low-income housing because of the sequester. I met with the housing authority people yesterday. Some might say: Oh, that is not such a big deal. It is a big deal for those 100 families. Nationwide, 70,000 little boys and girls are going to lose their ability to go to Head Start. Some may ask: What is that? Head Start will allow them to get started in life.

These cuts--and I have only mentioned a few of them--are painful for millions of Americans, and it is only going to get worse. They are arbitrary.

We are all concerned. The concern for the sequester is not focused on the Senate delegation from Kansas, it is all over. Instead of whining about it, let's do something about it. Let's get rid of it. That is why the Senate Democratic budget proposal actually reverses the sequester. That is one way of doing it, but there are other ways.

The policy outlined in Senator Murray's budget will save hundreds of thousands of jobs, safeguard communities by keeping police, air traffic controllers, and meat inspectors on the job. Reversing the sequester would alleviate Senator Moran's concern about air traffic controllers in Kansas. The Senate cannot debate a thoughtful way to replace the sequester if the Republicans will not even let us debate our budget proposal.

We know Republicans and Democrats will not agree on every aspect of the budget which sets priorities for how the government spends money and how it saves money. Republicans have one plan for Medicare. Their plan is to turn it into a voucher program which will change Medicare forever. Democrats have another plan. The Democrats' plan is to preserve and protect Medicare for our children and grandchildren.

Republicans have a plan for taxes. Listen to this one: They want to lower taxes for the rich and let the middle class foot the bill. Democrats have another plan. We believe the wealthiest individuals and corporations should contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit. Surprisingly, the intelligent American people agree with us--Democrats, Independents, and Republicans--by almost a 60-percent margin. The only Republicans in America who disagree are those who serve in Congress.

Republicans have one plan to reduce the deficit which will rely on harsh austerity that shortchanges the elderly, veterans, middle class, poor, and others. The Democrats have another plan. We have a balanced approach that couples smart spending cuts with new revenue from closing loopholes that benefit the wealthiest Americans.

We have our differences, and that is fine. But Democrats are willing to discuss these differences; we are willing to debate the issues. Let's debate the issues. The Republicans have said for months and months: Let's debate the budget. Why can't we debate the budget? Because they will not let us.

This is senseless. We have 60 hours of doing nothing--nothing. The American people are on our side. This is a debate we can win, but at least let's have the debate.

Will the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. President, we are not in a quorum call, are we?

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be equally divided.

Madam President, I object.

Madam President, before the Senator leaves the floor, I have listened to most of her speeches, and she has been very articulate. I appreciate how she feels. There are some Democrats who agree with her, but the problem is it is hard to arrive at a list of amendments. I appreciate her intensity, and I certainly do not in any way denigrate what she has been trying to do, but this is the situation in which we find ourselves.

I reluctantly object.

I object.

Madam President, I note the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I withdraw that. My understanding is the Senator from Montana has a brief statement to make regarding a big event in Montana.

Reserving the right to object, I understand how the Senator feels. Over the years I have served with him, he has always made his opinions very clear. We had his amendment in the list of amendments we were going to do before, with some modifications that my friend wouldn't agree to. So I understand his feelings about this, but the good news is that within the very near, foreseeable future--hopefully, I can start it in the next work period--we are going to start immigration legislation here on the floor. We are finally going to be able to move to something that will include issues people have wanted to deal with for a long time.

So I say to my friend, I object, but I understand how he feels about the issue.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding cloture having been invoked, the following amendments be in order to the Mikulski-Shelby substitute: Coburn No. 69; Coburn No. 93; Coburn No. 65, as modified; Coburn No. 70, as modified; Inhofe-Hagan No. 72, as modified; Mikulski-Shelby No. 98, as modified with changes that are at the desk; Leahy No. 129, as modified with changes that are at the desk; and Pryor-Blunt No. 82; that no other first-degree amendments to the substitute or the underlying bill be in order; that no second- degree amendments be in order to any of the amendments listed above prior to the votes; that the time until 2:15 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with 30 minutes of Republican time under the control of Senator Moran prior to votes in relation to the amendments in the order listed; that upon disposition of the Pryor-Blunt amendment No. 82, the Durbin second-degree amendment to the Toomey amendment No. 115 be withdrawn; that it be in order for the Toomey amendment to be modified with the changes that are at the desk; that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Toomey amendment No. 115, as modified; that upon disposition of the Toomey amendment, the Senate proceed to vote on the Mikulski-Shelby substitute amendment, as amended; that all amendments, with the exception of the Mikulski-Shelby substitute, be subject to a 60-affirmative-vote threshold; that upon disposition of the substitute amendment, as amended, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the underlying bill; that if cloture is invoked on H.R. 933, as amended, all postcloture time be yielded back and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of H.R. 933, as amended; and, finally, that all votes after the first vote be 10-minute votes and there be 2 minutes equally divided in the usual form between the votes.

Mr. President, I appreciate everyone's understanding on both sides. This is going to allow us to get to the issue at hand very soon, and that is the budget, with Senators Murray and Sessions leading us on that issue.

Also, we were able to get a number of these amendments that people have been wanting very badly to get. So I appreciate everything people have done to this point.

Amendment No. 72

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask the time be equally divided.

Mr. President, this amendment could have a profound impact on our Nation's energy security by reducing funding for efforts that support finding clean energy replacements for oil.

High oil prices and tensions in the Middle East could not present a better national security case for moving quickly away from our military's overwhelming dependence on oil, especially as currently supplied to critical operations and facilities in the Middle East, the Pacific, the Indian Ocean, and elsewhere. The military's dependence on oil is one of its most significant vulnerabilities; as a recent Army release noted, our Nation loses one soldier for every 20 convoys transiting through Afghanistan; fuel comprises 50 percent of the load carried by these convoys.

Last year, the Department of Defense used 4.3 billion gallons of petroleum, and spent about $20 billion on fuel. I encourage the Department of Defense to continue to support efforts that will lower the risks and future costs to our armed forces by supporting technologies like solar energy at forward operating bases, the production and procurement of advanced biofuels and other clean alternative fuels, and improved energy performance of materials to lighten and improve the capability, load, and endurance of our troops.

I will continue to do everything that I can to help move the Nation toward a safer, cleaner, and more secure energy future.

Following the statements of Senator Mikulski and Senator Shelby, I would ask to be recognized.

Mr. President, the week before last, the House of Representatives sent us this important bill to prevent a government shutdown, to fund the government for the next 6 months. I have said it before, I say it again: I commend Speaker Boehner for giving this bill to us at a time where we could do some constructive work on it. The House did their work on time. We are going to do our work on time.

I applaud and commend my counterpart, Senator McConnell. When that bill came from the House, he sat down with me and the two managers of this bill. He said: The House did their work, now we need to do ours. We could not do all the remaining 10 appropriations bills, but we added three. That was good. It would not have happened but for Senator McConnell acknowledging that we needed to get some of this work done. It could not have happened even though Senator McConnell and I thought it was a good idea but for the work of Senator Mikulski and Senator Shelby. They are veteran legislators. They are people who believe in this institution. They know this institution needs to get back where we are doing things the way we used to. The way we used to do things was fund the government in a timely fashion. We have the opportunity to do that now. We are taking care of the next 6 months.

During this 6 months, the government will be functioning because of what we have done here. They will work on having 12 appropriations bills that we will bring to the floor. Everyone should know we are not going to be able to spend a week on every appropriations bill, but we need to do all 12 appropriations bills. That is our goal. It is the goal of the two managers of this bill, it is the goal of the Republican leader, and it is my goal. We need to do this.

I so appreciate--I say it again--the work done by the two managers of this bill. They worked in good faith. They both gave up things they believed in for the greater good. They produced a substitute amendment. We had added a few things to it. I know people are disappointed because they wanted to rearrange things differently. I would like to have rearranged things differently. There are things that are happening in Nevada because of the sequester that I would like to have taken out of this bill. They are not good things that are happening either.

I hope this practical, commonsense leadership will be a good sign for our regular appropriations bills and other work in the future. The work done by these two managers should be and is exemplary for what needs to follow. And what is going to follow immediately is our budget. We are going to have a budget debate. It is going to be a good debate.

We have two differently opposed views as to what should happen to this country economically. But that is what the Senate is all about, to allow us to do that. So I say to Senator Murray--everyone has heard me talk about how good she is, and I really do believe that--I hope she and Senator Sessions are looking at what was done by these two Senators. Senator Mikulski and Senator Shelby have totally different views about how government should operate, but they also have views as to how the legislative process should operate. Legislation is the art of compromise. Everybody here has to understand, you are not going to get everything you want. You cannot throw a monkey wrench into everything just because you do not get what you want on one issue.

We are going to move to the budget. There will be no votes tonight. We have a lot of debate time on this bill, and the two managers are going to determine when the votes will start.

Again, this is a very good day for the Senate. I am very happy we reached this point.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read the third time.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 933, the continuing appropriations legislation. The Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. today for our weekly caucus meetings.

We are going to continue to work to see if we can get these amendments in order. We wanted to vote on them last night, but we hope to complete the CR very quickly.

I have not had an opportunity yet to speak to the Republican leader this morning, but very shortly I am going to move to begin work on the budget. Senator Sessions and Senator Murray are anxious to move forward on that.

I had a long conversation with Senator Sessions last night--and I speak to Senator Murray quite often--and there is no reason that 30 hours postcloture should be wasted. A Senator who doesn't like what went on before can have 1 hour, but we should not waste our time as we have done so often by killing 30 hours. We should start the budget.

If people decide they are going to use the 30 hours and then another 30 hours--we have to have cloture not only on the substitute but on the bill itself, it is 60 hours--that would mean we would start on the budget sometime Thursday morning. We are going to do it. The 60 hours will be eaten up sometime Thursday morning. I hope we don't have to waste that time, but we are going to finish the budget before we leave here.

We have had conversations on both sides of the aisle about how we need a budget. Because we had the Budget Deficit Reduction Act, which set our 302(b)s, we didn't need to do our usual budget because we had one signed into law by the President. Regardless of that, there will be no more talk about not having a budget. We will have a budget. No matter how long it takes, we are going to do that before we leave for the Easter break.

As everyone knows, there is 50 hours under the budget act, which is statutory, and then afterward there could be a lot of amendments. So everyone should be aware we should start using some of this time to work on the budget, and we will do that. I will come and propound my consent shortly.

Mr. President, in the late 1920s, there was a violent explosion in New Jersey at an ammunition depot of our military. Basically, it was the Navy at that time, and it was a very bad explosion. After that explosion, there was a decision made that storing our ammunition should be someplace else. After some work done by relevant committees in the House and Senate and working with the President, it was decided the best place to do that was in Nevada near a place called Hawthorne.

Hawthorne is, frankly, in a kind of remote place. That base has been there since about 1930. It was originally a naval ammunition depot where most of our ammunition was stored, and it is still there. It survived base closings--the BRAC work--and it was determined it was essential for the security of this Nation.

Anyone who flies over that area will see miles and miles of bunkers where ammunition is stored. Some ammunition is stored there from World War II. It is a wonderful place for storing ammunition because it is so dry so stuff can stay there for long periods of time.

I just met with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. They were very impressed with this. It has also become a terrific place for tearing down ordnance--demil, they call it. In recent years, it has also been used as a training facility. The terrain is much like a lot of the desert in Afghanistan and Iraq and places such as that. We have had training exercises there for some time. It is very valuable.

Late last night, seven of our marines were killed in Hawthorne, and many others were injured in an explosion during a training exercise near the ammunition depot in Hawthorne, NV. We don't know exactly what happened, but we know it was a violent explosion. My thoughts are with those who were injured and, of course, the families of those who lost loved ones.

Marines all over the world are now focusing on the loss of their fellow marines. They are grieving their loss. Details are emerging, but at this time we don't know everything. The area has been blocked off. As I indicated, it was quite a big explosion. We will follow this news very closely. I will do whatever I can going forward to support the U.S. military and the families of the fallen marines.

It is very important we continue to train our military--it is so important--but one of the things that has happened due to the sequester is we have cut back on our training and maintenance. That is the way the sequester was written. The bill that is on the floor--we hope to pass today--helps that a little bit. At least for the next 6 months it will allow the military some degree of ability to move things around a little bit. We call it flexibility, which is good. But we have to be very vigilant. This sequester should go away.

We have already cut huge amounts of money in deficit reduction, which is not appropriate. Our military cannot train and do the maintenance that is necessary. These men and women are marines who are training in Hawthorne, and with the sequester, it is going to cut stuff back. I hope everyone understands the sacrifices made by our military. They make significant sacrifices by being away from home, their families, and their country. The sequester needs to go away.

Mr. President, for 4 years, the first priority for the country and Congress has been to improve the Nation's economy and strengthen the middle class. Our efforts have paid off. It has pulled us out of the great recession; however, unemployment is still too high. Over the last 36 months, businesses created 6.4 million new jobs--good new jobs--but the economy is not back to full strength.

During the Bush years we lost a lot including our Treasury. When he took office, we had a surplus over 10 years of $7 trillion. The 10th anniversary of the war in Iraq is today. That war cost us more than $1 trillion, and we are paying for the loss of life and all the injured in many different ways. We cannot take chances with our recovery. We are pulling out of the mess economically that the President created by all the taxes and a war that was not paid for. We must renew our investments that have always made America strong, such as innovation and job training, education, preventive health care, new roads, bridges, dams, water systems, sewer systems.

To meet our country's long-term economic goals--including the deficit--we must enact policies that support a strong and growing middle class, and that is why this week the Senate will pass, as I indicated earlier, a budget, crafted by one of the most wise Senators ever to serve in this body, Patty Murray of Washington. ``Wise'' is the word I chose perfectly for her because it does fit. The work she and her committee have done fully replaces the harmful sequester cuts I have just talked about with balanced and responsible deficit reduction.

The policy outlined in her budget--our budget--will save hundreds of thousands of jobs and safeguard communities by keeping police, air traffic controllers, meat inspectors, and firefighters on the job, but first we must avoid self-inflicted wounds so we can build on the success over the last 3 years. The Senate budget will continue the progress by creating new jobs, repairing crumbling roads, bridges, and train workers for high-skilled jobs. These investments are paid for by eliminating the loopholes that benefit the wealthy of America and the most profitable corporations.

I had the fortune to serve in the Senate with a man by the name of Bill Bradley, who is one of America's great alltime basketball players. I, of course, always wanted to be the athlete he was. I admired him so much and enjoyed my friendship with him. He came out today--this Rhodes Scholar and brilliant man--and said we need to eliminate $1 trillion in taxes that are unfair and unnecessary. He said that. In addition to that, our budget also makes nearly $1 trillion in responsible spending cuts across the Federal budget. Meaningful deficit reduction requires shared sacrifice which includes contribution from the wealthiest among us.

If someone owns a profitable corporation that ships jobs to China or India, Democrats in Congress cannot stop them. Go ahead and ship them. But we can keep them from getting the tax break for outsourcing, and that is what we want to do. If they are successful enough to own a second home or yacht, more power to them. That is wonderful. That is an American success story. But Democrats in Congress do not feel we should subsidize these tax breaks for their vacation home or their boat. Ending these wasteful giveaways makes sense to most people. An overwhelming majority of Americans--including a majority of Republicans--support this balanced approach.

In the last 2 years, we have reduced the deficit by $2.5 trillion. The Senate budget continues this effort without jeopardizing our economic recovery or breaking our promises to seniors and veterans. This budget keeps Medicare strong for today's seniors and preserves it for our children and grandchildren.

Patty Murray is qualified to be budget chair for a number of reasons, not the least of which she was the chair of the supercommittee. She had 12 Members of Congress--6 Republicans and 6 Democrats--arrive at a grand bargain. She was pulled back because a week or so before they were ready to make their decision--which would have been spending cuts and revenue--we got a letter from virtually every Republican saying: No thanks. No revenue. So that failed.

She is qualified in many different ways to lead this committee. Her budget reflects Democratic values, and it honors the belief that success doesn't trickle down from the top; it grows out in the middle class. The Ryan Republican budget introduced earlier this week reflects an entirely different set of priorities--skewed priorities Americans have rejected time and time again. This is the third go-round. President Obama was reelected basically for a number of reasons but not the least of which is the Ryan Republican budget. They are at it again.

The Ryan budget would hand out more budget-busting tax breaks for the wealthy to pay for these wasteful tax breaks. It would end the Medicare guarantee. It would rob 50 million Americans of affordable health insurance. It would raise taxes on middle-class families. To appease the tea party, the Ryan Republican budget would risk lives and risk the recovery, and that is just too high a price to pay.

I was stunned this morning. A Republican Congressman writes an op-ed piece--I don't know if it was in the Times or the Post--saying that the Ryan Republican budget isn't good enough for the tea party and that it should be even more stringent. That is what we are faced with.

The work done by Chairman Murray reflects the priorities of the American people, not the wackos referred to also in the op-ed page of the Washington Post today by a person who has won a Nobel Prize for economics.

Would the Chair announce the business of the day.

Madam President, yesterday the Senate invoked cloture on the appropriations bill we have been working on for several weeks. Now what we are doing is burning, wasting 30 hours postcloture. During the postcloture time, each Senator has the right to speak for 1 hour. It is obvious there are 100 of us, so we all can't speak. Senators who do not like the bill and want to express their views as to why it is a bad bill, they get 1 hour.

This is truly a waste of time. It always is a waste of time, but it is a waste of time now because we have so much important work to do. Next in line is the budget resolution. We have heard speeches over here. Oh, gee, have we heard speeches. We need the Democrats to do a budget. No one mentions, but that is OK--no one mentions we did not have a budget resolution; we had President Obama sign a law that took care of our budget problems. But we want to satisfy the Republicans and we want to get to that budget debate.

I talked this morning about what a terrific job Chairman Murray has done on this bill. It has been outstanding. But the budget is here by virtue of a law that was passed. There is 50 hours permitted for debate on the budget. Then we can have a lot of amendments after all debate time is over.

Republicans said let's do the budget debate and we say let us do it. Why should we sit around here and look at each other and do nothing? My friend, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, the junior Senator from Alabama, said let's do it after Easter. We are going to do this. We are going to do this before we go home for Easter. If we want to use the whole 60 hours, we will start the debate on the budget sometime Thursday morning and we will have 50 hours and a lot of votes. If that is what they want to do, we can do that, but why put the Senate through that? Why put the Senate through wasting 60 hours?

I wish to make clear to all Senators that we are going to continue working on this, the CR and the budget resolution, until we complete them. When we come back, we have lots of stuff to do. We have gun legislation. We have the WRDA bill, which I am told is going to be reported out of that committee, Environment and Public Works, on a bipartisan basis led by Senators Boxer and Vitter.

That is a strange, unusual marriage, but I am happy to hear that. It is an important bill.

We have to do immigration. We have to do appropriations bills. We have a lot to do. The Senate will not leave--the third time I am telling everyone here--for Easter-Passover recess until we complete the budget. If that means because of the delay in this bill we wasted 60 hours, we will be voting here Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday-- whenever we have to do it. My hope would be that we can complete this appropriations measure and move on to the budget resolution this afternoon. But the least we should be able to do is begin debate on the budget. The least we should be able to do is the debate. We have been through these lots of times, some of us, and a budget.

During the first 50 hours, not much is going to happen unless there is an agreement that the time for voting will not be counted against 50 hours. If there is no agreement there, there will be no amendments. What I would like to do is have amendments offered during the 50 hours and have whatever the time is for voting, which is usually 10 or 15, sometimes 20 minutes, that will be counted against the 50 hours. But if we do not do that, then what we will have is just 50 hours of Patty Murray and Jeff Sessions talking to each other and whoever wants to join in the conversation.

I hope we can begin debate on this. I have a couple unanimous consent requests. I have alerted the Republicans I would be doing this.

I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding cloture having been invoked on the Mikulski-Shelby substitute, the following amendments be in order: Mikulski-Shelby No. 98, as modified with the changes that are at the desk; and Pryor-Blunt No. 82, this deals with food inspectors, meat inspectors, an important amendment that these two Senators feel strongly about as do a number of us; that no other first-degree amendments to the substitute or the underlying bill be in order; that no second-degree amendments be in order to any of the amendments listed above prior to the vote; and that there be 30 minutes equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to votes in relation to the amendments in the order listed; that upon disposition of the Pryor-Blunt amendment No. 82, the Durbin second-degree amendment to the Toomey amendment be withdrawn--that is amendment No. 115; that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Toomey amendment, No. 115; that all amendments, with the exception of the substitute, be subject to a 60-affirmative-vote threshold; and upon disposition of the Toomey amendment, the Senate proceed to vote on

the Mikulski-Shelby substitute amendment, as amended; that if the substitute amendment, as amended, is agreed to, the cloture motion on the underlying bill is withdrawn and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill as amended.

That is my request.

That is correct.

I am glad the Senator clarified that because it sounded as if he did not have an objection to this, and I was going to say he could still have his 30 hours, but I got his objection.

I ask unanimous consent notwithstanding cloture having been invoked, at 4 o'clock today it be in order for the Senate to begin consideration of S. Con. Res. 8, the budget resolution for fiscal year 2014; that any time used for consideration of S. Con. Res. 8 during the postcloture period on H.R. 933 also count toward postcloture time on H.R. 933; further, that on Tuesday, March 19, at a time to be determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 933.

Madam President, this is one of the amazements of the American people. There is nothing--nothing going to happen during how many hours is left in the 30 hours--nothing. Why, logically, would anyone have an objection to going ahead with the budget resolution? We are looking at each other--not very often, because nobody is on the floor. It is things such as this that are going to cause the Senate to have to reassess all these rules. Right now we accomplish so little. I am disappointed in my friend, for whom I have the greatest respect, my friend from Kansas, whom I know and knew in the House very well. He is a fine person. I like him a lot. I know how strongly he feels about this. But strong positive or negative feelings should not stop the progress of what we are trying to do to help the country.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11:15 a.m. tomorrow, all postcloture time on the Mikulski-Shelby substitute amendment be considered expired, the Durbin second-degree amendment to 115 be withdrawn with no other second-degree amendment in order; that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Toomey amendment No. 115; that upon disposition of the Toomey amendment, the Senate then proceed to vote on the Mikulski-Shelby substitute amendment, as amended; that upon disposition of the substitute amendment, the Senate proceed to the cloture vote on the underlying bill; finally, if cloture is invoked, the 30 hours postcloture begin to run as if cloture were invoked at 1 a.m. on Wednesday, March 20.

Madam President, I note the absence of a quorum.

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

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. Res. 81 submitted earlier today.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 20, 2013; that 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 until later in the day, and that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 933, the continuing appropriations bill, with the time until 11:15 a.m. equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees.

Madam President, there will be three rollcall votes in relation to the CR tomorrow at about 11:15 a.m.