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 Senator Schumer, for not to exceed 8 minutes.

Mr. President, New Years Eve is fast approaching and for decades and decades the American people have watched the ball drop in Times Square. It is the countdown to midnight, the start of a new year.

This year the American people are waiting for the ball to drop, but it is not going to be a good drop because Americans' taxes are moving in the wrong direction. Come the first of this year, Americans will have less income than they have today if we go over the cliff--and it looks as if that is where we are headed. The House of Representatives as we speak, with 4 days left after today to the 1st of the year, is not here, with the Speaker having told them he will give them 48 hours' notice. I can't imagine their consciences. They are out wherever they are around the country and we are here, trying to get something done.

They are not in Washington, DC. The House of Representatives is not here. They could not even get the Republican leadership together yesterday. They had to do it with a teleconference.

If we go over the cliff, we will be left with the knowledge it could have been prevented with a single vote in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Prior to this session starting today, the Presiding Officer and I had a conversation about how things have changed around here. I served in the House of Representatives. There are 435 Members of the House. What goes on in this country should not be decided by the majority, it should be decided by the whole House of Representatives. Everyone, including the Speaker of the House of Representatives, knows that if they had brought up the Senate-passed bill that would give relief to everyone making less than $250,000 a year, it would pass overwhelmingly. Every Democrat would vote for it and Republicans would vote for it. But the Speaker, he says: No; we cannot do that. It has to be a majority of the majority. So we have done nothing.

He even tried to bring up the bill last week to show they could defeat it. They could not do that even. They could not defeat the bill that passed in the Senate.

I don't think the American people understand the House of Representatives is not operating as a House of Representatives. It is being operated with a dictatorship of the Speaker not allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they want. If the $250,000 threshold would be brought up, it would pass overwhelmingly, I repeat.

On any given day for the last 5 or 6 months, since July 25, Speaker Boehner could have brought the Senate-passed middle-class tax cut legislation to a vote in the House and it would have passed. But he has made the decision he is not letting us have a vote on that because if he let it be voted upon, it would pass. I have said it is not too late for the Speaker to take up the Senate-passed bill, but even that time is winding down. Today is Thursday. He is going to give 48 hours' notice to the House before they come back. So 48 hours from today is Saturday. With just that one vote, middle-class families would have the security that taxes would not go up by at least $2,200 on

New Year's Day. That is the average. Some would go up more, some less, of course.

Speaker Boehner should call Members back to Washington today. He should not have let them go, in fact. They are not here. John Boehner seems to care more about keeping his speakership than about keeping the Nation on a firm financial footing. It is obvious what is going on around here. He is waiting until January 3 to get reelected as Speaker before he gets serious with negotiations because he has so many people over there who will not follow what he wants. That is obvious from the debacle that took place last week, and it was a debacle.

He made an offer to the President. The President came back--they are just a little bit apart--and he walked away from that and went to Plan B. All that did is whack people who need help the most--poor people. He could not even pass that. Remember, he is not letting the House of Representatives vote. He is letting the Republicans vote. It was so bad, and he was in such difficult shape there he would not even let a vote take place with his Republicans because he knew he would lose. For months, he has allowed House Republicans to hold middle-class taxpayers hostage to protect the richest 2 percent, and the funny thing about that is the 2 percent do not want to be protected. The majority of people in our great country are willing to pay more. The only people who disagree with that are Republicans who work in this building.

The Speaker just has a few days left to change his mind, but I have to be very honest; I don't know, timewise, how it can happen now. Everyone knows we cannot bring up anything here unless we do it by unanimous consent because the rules have been so worked the last few years that we cannot do anything without 60 votes. There are 53 of us. After the first of the year, there will be 55 of us.

I hope the Speaker and the Republican leader in the Senate would come to us and say here is what we think will work. Let's find out what that could be because the Speaker cannot pass, it seems, much of anything over there. On the Sunday shows they had Republican Senators and they were asked on the FOX network--pretty conservative, and that is probably a gross understatement--would you filibuster the President's bill? They refused to answer. We don't make that decision. We can't answer that. A filibuster is over all our heads.

That is why we have to look seriously next year at changing the rules around here. The bill that has passed the Senate protects 98 percent of families and 97 percent of small businesses. They passed a bill in the House, that we defeated, that extends the tax cuts for everybody. That was voted down over here. The President said he would veto it. So this happy talk--the Republican House leadership said yesterday: Let them take our bill. That bill was brought up and it was defeated.

I repeat, the American people do not agree with the Republicans in the House and Republicans over here. The way to avoid the fiscal cliff has been right in the face of the Republican leaders, both McConnell and Boehner, for days and days, going into weeks and months, and it is the only option that is a viable escape route and that is the Senate- passed bill. It would not be hard to pass. I have talked about that at some length. Every Democrat in the House would vote for it, a handful of Republicans would vote for it, and that is all that would be needed. But Grover Norquist is standing in the way of this--not the rich people but Grover Norquist, the man who says what the Republicans can do. I say to the Speaker: Take the escape hatch we have left you. Put the economic fate of the Nation ahead of your own fate as Speaker of the House. Millions of middle-class families are nervously watching and waiting and counting down the moment until their taxes go up. Nothing can move forward in regard to our budget crisis unless Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell are willing to participate in coming up with a bipartisan plan.

Speaker Boehner is unwilling to negotiate, we have not heard a word from Leader McConnell, and nothing is happening. Democrats cannot put forward a plan of their own. Without the participation of Leader McConnell and Speaker Boehner, nothing can happen on the fiscal cliff and so far they are radio silent.

We are going to work in the next couple of days to get the most important legislation done on FISA. There should be a good debate. We have people who are interested in changing what we have on the floor. There have been a series of amendments on trying to change FISA--the espionage legislation that guides this country. It should be a good debate.

We have to finish the supplemental appropriations bill that is so important for the people in the Northeast. We have a lot to do. There could be as many as 28 votes in the next few days. We are in Washington working while the Members of the House of Representatives are out watching movies, watching their kids play soccer and basketball and doing all kinds of things. They should be here. They should be here urging the Speaker: Let's bring up the $250,000 bill. Let's not have middle-class Americans and small businesses get hurt.

What is the business?

Mr. President, will my friend yield for a question?

The distinguished Senator from Oregon and I served together in the House of Representatives. Does the Senator remember the days when the House voted not as a majority but as a body to come up with how legislation should be given to the American people? Does my friend remember that?

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

Mr. President, I have in my hands a letter from Brian Schatz, the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Hawaii, and that letter is a resignation letter.

I ask unanimous consent the resignation letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, on behalf of the entire Senate, I welcome Senator Brian Schatz to the Senate. I congratulate him on his appointment to fill the seat of the late Senator Dan Inouye who, as we all know, was an institution in and of himself.

Senator Schatz is now one of the youngest Senators in this body. Nevertheless, he has a long history of serving the State of Hawaii. Prior to entering politics, Senator Schatz served for 8 years as the CEO of Helping Hands Hawaii, one of Hawaii's largest nonprofit social services organizations. He also served four terms in the Hawaii House of Representatives and served until just a few minutes ago as the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Hawaii.

Having been a Lieutenant Governor he has experience as a legislator, and then as one of the presiding officers of the entire Senate, speaks for itself in helping to prepare for the job he has here. I expect he will build upon the foundation laid by Senator Inouye in the Senate. While no one can fill the shoes of our friend Senator Inouye, Brian Schatz is a young man with a future full of promise and opportunity.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Akaka, now be recognized.

Mr. President, before my friend from Hawaii leaves the floor, we have all come and given speeches--a lot of us, at least-- about Senator Akaka, but we have not had a lot of people on the floor when we have done that.

The presentation just now is typical for Dan Akaka: never a word about himself, always about somebody else. If the new Senator has Senator Akaka's qualities--the kindest, gentlest person I have ever served in this body with--it is something for which he should strive. The shoes he has to fill, we all know--Akaka and Inouye--are significant to fill, but he can do that.

For you, Senator Akaka--with these people on the floor--we are going to miss you so much. You are a wonderful human being and have been a great Senator.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, we are going to have two or three votes at 5:30. A number of the Senators who have amendments dealing with the supplemental have agreed to come at that time as soon as the votes are over and start debating those amendments tonight. We would like to get as much of that debate out of the way tonight as possible so we can start voting at a reasonably early time tomorrow.

The debate today on FISA has been stimulating, has been very thorough and good. As I understand it, there are three FISA amendments we are going to vote on tonight. That will still leave Senator Wyden's amendment, and we will worry about taking care of that tomorrow sometime.

I ask unanimous consent that at 5:30 any remaining debate time on the pending amendments--Leahy, Merkley, and Paul--be yielded back and the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the pending amendments in the order provided in the previous agreement; that there be 2 minutes, equally divided, prior to each vote and that all after the first vote be 10-minute votes.

We don't have the intelligence to do that right now.

We have two very important measures to finish. I appreciate the collegiality of the Senators on this most important piece of legislation dealing with the espionage on our country part, and we should be able to work it out tomorrow. But we have 21 amendments we have to dispose of dealing with the supplemental. Some of those will be agreed to and would not need votes, but we have a lot of debate time on that in addition to votes. If we just did the votes alone, it would be 8 hours of voting.

We hope to be able to narrow that down, as soon as we have something more definite, so the Senator and Senator Wyden and others can complete the time, and set up a time that is appropriate for Senator Wyden's amendment.

It would be very important to do that. I don't want to press the Senator from Oregon. He has been very good and flew all night from his newborn to get here from Oregon, and he was here at 10 a.m. I don't want to press him anymore.

I say, through the Chair, to my friend from Oregon, how does he feel about finishing the debate tonight?

I would suggest this. When we come in, in the morning, why don't

we have this the first order of business. We would have the half hour evenly divided, vote on the Wyden amendment, and then final passage. That way we could devote the rest of the day and tonight to the supplemental.

I ask unanimous consent that be the case in addition to what I just did here.

Mr. President, I am not sure my distinguished Republican counterpart has followed what has taken place in the House of Representatives. In the House, as reported by the press and we all know it, one of the plans--it did not have a name, it was not Plan B, I don't know what plan it was because they had a number over there--but this plan was to show the American people that the $250,000 ceiling on raising taxes would not pass in the House. Why did they not have that vote? Because it would have passed. They wanted to kill it. The Speaker wanted to show everybody it would not pass the House, but he could not bring it up for a vote because it would have passed. A myriad of Republicans think it is a fair thing to do and of course every Democrat would vote for that.

The Republican leader finds himself frustrated that the President has called on him to help address the fiscal cliff. He is upset because ``the phone never rang.'' He complains that I have not delivered the votes to pass a resolution of the fiscal cliff, but he is in error. We all know that in July of this year we passed, in the Senate, relief for middle-class Americans. That passed the Senate.

We know Republicans have buried themselves in procedural roadblocks on everything we have tried to do around here. Now they are saying we cannot do the $250,000 because it will be blue-slipped. How do the American people react to that? There was a bill introduced by the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee in the House, Sandy Levin, that called for this legislation. The Speaker was going to bring it up to kill it, but he could not kill it. Then we moved to Plan B, the debacle of all debacles. It is the mother of all debacles. That was brought up in an effort to send us something. He could not even pass it among the Republicans it was so absurd--``he'' meaning the Speaker.

It is very clear now that the Speaker's No. 1 goal is to get elected Speaker on January 3. The House is not even here. He has told them he will give them 2 days to get back here--48 hours; not 2 days, 48 hours.

They do not even have enough of the leadership here to meet to talk about it. They have done it with conference calls. People are spread all over this country because the Speaker basically is waiting for January 3. The President campaigned on raising taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year. The Bush-era tax cuts expire at the end of this year. Obama was elected with a surplus of 3 million votes. He won the election. He campaigned on this issue.

Again, the Speaker cannot take yes for an answer. The President has presented him something that would prevent us from going over the cliff. It was in response to something the Speaker gave to the President himself. But again, I guess, with the dysfunctional Republican caucus in the House, even the Speaker cannot tell what they are going to do because he backed off even his own proposal. The House, we hear this so often, is controlled by the Republicans. We acknowledge that. I would be most happy to move forward on something Senator McConnell said they would not filibuster over here, that he would support and that Boehner would support, if it were reasonable. But right now we have not heard anything. I don't know--it is none of my business, I guess, although I am very curious--if the Republican leader over here and the Speaker are even talking.

What is going on here? You cannot legislate with yourself. We have nobody to work with, to compromise. That is what legislation is all about, the ability to compromise. The Republicans in the House have left town. The negotiations between the President and the Speaker have fallen apart, as they have for the last 3\1/2\ years. We have tried mightily to get something done.

I will go over the little drill, to remind everyone how unreasonable the Republicans have been. Senator Conrad and Judd Gregg came up with a proposal to pattern what they wanted to do after the Base Closing Commission. The Commission would be appointed, they would report back to us, no filibusters, no amendments, yes or no, as we did with the base closings. We did a great job there. We closed bases over two different cycles, saving the country hundreds of billions of dollars. We brought that up here--I brought it up. We had plenty of votes to do it, except the Republican cosponsors walked away and wouldn't vote for it. That is where Bowles-Simpson came from.

Again, people talked about why don't we do Bowles-Simpson? One problem: The Republicans appointed there would not vote for it, generally speaking.

Then we went through the months and months of talks between the President and Boehner. Both times Boehner could not deliver because they refused, because of Grover Norquist, to allow any tax revenues whatsoever. We had meetings with Vice President Biden and Cantor. Cantor walked out of those meetings. He is the majority leader in the House. We had the Gang of 6, we had the Gang of 8, we had the supercommittee. They were doing good things dealing with entitlements and revenues. One week before they were to report by virtue of statute I get a letter signed by virtually every Republican: Too bad about the supercommittee, we are not going to do anything with revenues.

This is not a capsule of a couple days. This has been going on for years. They cannot cross over the threshold that has been built by Grover Norquist. People who are rich, who make a lot of money, they are not opposing raising the taxes on them. The only people in America who do not think taxes should be raised on the rich are the Republicans who work in this building. Any-time the Speaker and the Republican leader come to the President and say we have a deal for you, the President's door is always open and mine is too.

Mr. President, we are going to have to decide, my friend says, how we are going to move forward on a bipartisan basis. Even on the Sunday shows we have just completed, with FOX network, Chris Wallace pushed one of the Republican leaders very hard: Would you filibuster something the Democrats brought to the floor? He refused to answer the question. He would not say, and he kept being pressed.

We are in the same situation we have been in for a long time here. We cannot negotiate with ourselves because that is all we are doing. Unless we get a signoff from the Republicans in the House and the Republican leader, we cannot get anything done. For them to talk about a bipartisan arrangement, we have done that. The President has given them one, given them two, given them three, and we cannot get past Grover Norquist. We tried hard, but when there is no revenue as part of the package, it makes it very hard. John Boehner could not even pass a tax proposal that he suggested over there where he would keep the taxes the same for everybody except people making over $1 million a year. No. Grover and the boys said, no, can't do that. He didn't even bring it up for a vote.

I am here. I am happy to listen to anything the Speaker and the Republican leader have. They have a way of getting to the President. They don't need my help. I am happy to work with them any way I can, but the way things have been going it is not a good escape hatch we have. They are out of town now for 2 days, 48 hours. That is where we are.

Mr. President, we are going to have two more votes tonight. They will both be 10 minutes in duration in addition to the debate time that has already been established. Then we are going to move in a very direct way to complete as much of the debate time as possible on the amendments on the supplemental. It is extremely important that we get this debate completed tonight so we can start voting in the morning. We have already set up that we will have some votes in the morning. We are going to come in probably about 9:30 and start voting. We have a lot to do.

It would really be good if people who have amendments on the supplemental use their debate time tonight. We are going to have no more votes tonight, but tomorrow there will be a limited amount of debate time. Senator Mikulski will be here tonight, Senator Schumer will be here tonight, and Senator Menendez will be here tonight to help move this, in addition, of course, to the managers of the bill on the other side. We hope people will work hard to get debate out of the way tonight so we can vote tomorrow. We have a lot of votes tomorrow. I am led to believe there are a number of amendments the managers of this bill will pass either by voice or some other quick fashion.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, last night the House of Representatives proved what we have known for quite a while: Speaker Boehner's plan to raise taxes on 25 million middle-class taxpayers while handing out $50,000 bonuses to millionaires and billionaires was dead on arrival. We said that yesterday. We knew the so-called Plan B was no plan at all. It couldn't pass the Senate. It turns out it couldn't pass the House either. It is too bad Speaker Boehner wasted 1 week on this futile political stunt, and that is all we can call it.

But at least now House Republicans have gotten the message loudly and clearly that any comprehensive solution to the looming fiscal cliff will need to be a bipartisan solution. No comprehensive agreement can pass either Chamber without both Democratic and Republican votes, which means any solution will have to ask the most fortunate among us to pay a little more to reduce the deficit and ensure partisanship doesn't take the Nation to the brink of default.

Nothing that has passed the House of Representatives fits that test-- nothing. A few days ago President Obama and Speaker Boehner appeared poised to strike a grand bargain, but we have heard that before. Instead of making hard choices of compromise, as President Obama has been willing to do, the Speaker retreated to his corner and resorted to political stunts, but that stunt fell flat.

It is time for the Speaker and all Republicans to return to the negotiating table. We have never left. It is time for Republicans to work with us to find the middle ground. That is the only hope of averting the devastating impacts of the fiscal cliff. The fiscal cliff needs to be avoided.

In the meantime, the Speaker should bring the middle-class tax cut passed by the Senate 5 months ago to the floor of the House for a vote. We know it will pass. All he has to do is let Democrats vote with some Republicans and it will pass. The clock is ticking until the Nation goes over the fiscal cliff and taxes go up for every family in America. But there is still time for the Speaker to hit the brakes and avoid that cliff. We don't need the ``Thelma and Louise'' projection over that cliff.

The Senate-passed bill would protect 98 percent of families and 97 percent of small businesses from crippling tax hikes while President Obama and the Speaker work toward a compromise agreement. That agreement should be comprehensive. If Republicans truly want to ensure American families' taxes don't go up on January 1, they should simply pass the Senate bill. The only reason Speaker Boehner hasn't brought our bill to the floor sooner is

he knows it will pass. He worked for a day or two seeing if he could bring that up so it wouldn't pass. That didn't work either.

Americans are not fooled by the Speaker's phony procedural excuses for failing to bring this solution to a vote. They are tired of excuses. They expect action.

Let me be very plain. There is nothing preventing the Speaker from taking up our bill and giving middle-class families certainty. I say to my friend, the Speaker: This isn't a game. It isn't about scoring political points or putting wins on the board. There will be very serious consequences for millions of families if Congress fails to compromise, and there will be very serious consequences for our country if Congress fails to compromise.

It is time for the Speaker to return to the negotiating table ready to compromise, and it is time for the House--especially House Republicans--to remember what is at stake.

I repeat, the $250,000 program would pass overwhelmingly in the House. It is up to the Speaker to let that vote occur.

Mr. President, if this weren't such a serious situation we face ourselves, it would be laughable.

Can anyone imagine saying we should defeat a bill we have already defeated? We voted on the proposal at the same time we voted to pass that protecting middle-class Americans. That passed the Senate--one to give the richest of the rich a continuation of the tax breaks they get. As I indicated, the proposal they had for about another $50,000 for each of them was defeated here. It was defeated in the Senate.

So my friend--and he is my friend--the Republican leader is struggling to find a way to blame Democrats, and it is a struggle, trying to blame us for the failure of the House to pass the Speaker's bill. The House is led by the Republicans. Their narrowed margin will be better for the country after the first of the year, but right now he controls the House by a wide margin.

I have served in the House. The Speaker is all powerful in the House. To blame us for the travesty that took place over there is pretty incredible. As I tried to say in my remarks, couldn't we at least protect the middle class?

My friend complains the President hasn't done enough. He put forward a proposal that has received criticism from Democrats because he was too generous with Speaker Boehner. But the President believes, as he said several times, both sides might have to make hard choices.

The President released a balanced $2.4 trillion program. That is pretty good. It would alleviate the fiscal cliff, it would allow the SGR to continue so doctors get paid and patients have a doctor to go to. It extended unemployment benefits for people who are desperate.

It is true that there is a crisis here, but it is because the House Republicans refuse to pass the Senate-passed tax bill. It is because the Republicans in the House are fighting among themselves.

The Republican leader seeks to pass the House-passed bill, but we have already turned that bill down. The real answer lies in the Speaker, who controls the House of Representatives, talking to the President and working things out.

Mr. President, I hope we can too, but this is really quite remarkable. I am told that Members from this body went and talked to the Republican caucus yesterday saying: Send us your plan B, and the Democrats will take care of it and send you back something you will like better.

We can all see what has happened in the press. I like John Boehner, but gee whiz, I mean, this is a pretty big political battering he is taking. What he should do is allow a vote in the House of Representatives on a bipartisan bill. It will pass. Democrats will vote for it. Some Republicans will vote for it. That is what we are supposed to do. But he is trying to pass everything with that majority he has that cannot agree on anything among themselves. Bring in the Democrats. That is what the country was set up for. Our Founding Fathers set it up that way. But he wants some other method where everything is done by the slim majority they have.

This is absolutely incredible. We believe the Speaker should be concerned. I am confident he is, but maybe he is more concerned, as some have said, about his election to be returned as Speaker. He should be more concerned about what is going to happen to the country. If he showed leadership and walked out there and said: This is the right thing for the country, we are all going to vote on this, Democrats will vote for it and enough Republicans will vote for it to pass something that will take us away from that fiscal cliff. But this brinkmanship and this silliness that is going on over there you would not do in an eighth grade government election.

Would the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. President, I have a unanimous consent agreement. If everyone would be patient, we have two votes.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with Senator McConnell, the Senate proceed to the cloture vote with respect to the substitute amendment to H.R. 1; that if cloture is not invoked, the majority leader be recognized; that if cloture is invoked, Senator Toomey or designee be recognized for the purpose of raising a budget point of order against the pending substitute amendment; that if the point of order is raised, Senator Leahy or designee be recognized to move to waive the budget point of order; that there be 10 minutes of debate prior to a vote in relation to the motion to waive; that no other budget points of order be in order to the substitute or the underlying bill; that not withstanding rule XXII, the following amendments be in order: Cardin No. 3393; Grassley No. 3348; Feinstein No. 3421, as modified; Harkin No. 3426; Landrieu No. 3415; Leahy No. 3403; McCain No. 3384, as modified; Bingaman No. 3344; Coburn No. 3368; Coburn No. 3369; Coburn No. 3370, as modified, with two divisions; Coburn No. 3371; Coburn No. 3382; Coburn No. 3383; Tester No. 3350; Paul No. 3376; Paul No. 3410; McCain No. 3355; Merkley No. 3367, as modified; Lee No. 3373, as modified; and Coats No. 3391; that no amendments be in order to any of these amendments prior to votes in relation to the amendments; that the amendments be subject to a 60- affirmative-vote threshold; that there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form on each of the amendments, with the exception of the following: 20 minutes equally divided on each of the Coburn amendments or divisions and the Lee amendment; and 40 minutes equally divided on each of the Paul amendments; and 1 hour equally divided on the Coats amendment; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to votes in relation to the amendments in the order listed; that there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided between the votes; that all after the first vote be 10-minute votes; further, that upon disposition of the pending amendments listed, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the pending substitute amendment, as amended, if amended; that upon disposition of the substitute, the cloture motion on the underlying bill be withdrawn, the bill be read a third time, and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of H.R. 1, as amended, if amended.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this vote and the next vote be 10 minutes.

Mr. President, we have a lot more work to do. This will be the last vote of the day, the one coming up.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding cloture having been invoked, at a time to be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 510, H.R. 5949; that the only first-degree amendments in order to the bill be the following: Leahy, Merkley, Paul, Wyden; that there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided between the proponents and opponents on each amendment; that there be up to 5 hours of debate on the bill equally divided between the proponents and opponents; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the amendments in the order listed; that there be no amendments in order to any of the amendments prior to the votes; that upon disposition of the amendments, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the request be modified--I reluctantly do this--to set a 60-affirmative-vote threshold on each of the amendments and passage of the bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be withdrawn: Nos. 3396 and 3398.

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

Mr. President, I rise to recognize with great appreciation one of my longest-serving and loyal staffers, Marge Van Hoove. It is hard to imagine that this day would come, but she has earned a restful retirement from public service.

In January 1987, I had just been elected to serve my first term in the U.S. Senate, when Marge asked to work with me. Even before this meeting, she had been involved in my prior campaigns. Marge's 25 years of service in my Las Vegas office unlocks many wonderful memories.

Marge has always been the first to arrive and last to leave. She never missed a deadline and was always ready with her quick wit. One night, I phoned the office and asked her why she was there so late. She responded, ``Because you are calling me so late.'' Her unyielding dedication to give each task her best is exemplary.

Ms. Van Hoove was the matriarch of my Las Vegas office. She trained staffers and made sure the office ran properly. As the manager of the front desk and scheduling, she saw the process evolve from a pen and paper operation to the modern electronic process that exists today. She also made sure the office maintained the highest level of integrity and ethical standards. She would joke, ``I'm not going to the Federal prison in Lompoc for anybody.''

Despite Marge's many responsibilities, she never forgot a single assignment. No matter what task was assigned to her, she would see it through to its successful completion. Marge never had a sick day until her recent health battles. And even during that difficult time, she worked from home and always staying abreast of all office business.

Marge has a wonderful, engaging sense of humor and accompanied with a memorable laugh. She would pick out quirks among staff and with good nature poke fun at them. She also knew every member of my security detail by name and would charm them during their State visits. To her, everyone was, ``Jose'' or ``Lucille.'' She would always say, ``Ok, Jose'' or ``Here's the deal, Lucille.''

Marge was not only a leader in my office, but a woman of great faith and strength at home. She was born in Santa Fe, NM, but grew up in the San Francisco area, which explains her adoration for the San Francisco Giants and 49ers. She was married to her husband John Van Hoove for 33 years, and they raised two sons John Jr. and Steve. Marge is a proud grandmother of three grandchildren.

Marge's departure into retirement leaves behind a void, but I know that she has instilled many of her strong values and tireless work ethic into the staff she trained. Marge's country western music and cowgirl boots will be out of sight, but she will not be out of the minds of those she worked with. Landra and I will miss our forever friend, Marge, and extend to her our heartfelt love.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate following a vote on the Senate Floor on December 21, 2012.