Floor Statements

Madam President, I wish to use leader time to say we know the Republicans don't like disclosure. We can tell that from the person they are going to nominate for the President of the United States.

Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 446, S. 3369, the DISCLOSE Act.

Mr. President, the next hour will be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half.

Last evening I filed cloture on the Landrieu substitute amendment to S. 2237, the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act. Under the rule the cloture votes would be on Friday. I will work on that with the Republican leader--we already have a general agreement--and we will try to schedule the vote sometime today.

Tax Rates

Mr. President, this week Republicans continued to make the case that millionaires and billionaires cannot afford to pay even a penny more in taxes. Meanwhile, a new report shows average tax rates are at the lowest level in decades.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported this week that in 2009 rates fell to their lowest level in more than three decades, 30 years. Much of that decline is thanks to President Obama, who has consistently fought to lower taxes for middle-class families over the last 2\1/2\ years.

The average tax rate in this country fell to the lowest rate since 1979--17.4 percent. Of course, that is still higher than what Mitt Romney paid in the only year for which he has been willing to disclose his tax return. I am confident the reason he hasn't disclosed his tax returns in the years people want to know--remember, he disclosed 1 year. His father George Romney set the precedent that people running for President would file their tax returns and let everybody look at them. But Mitt Romney cannot do that because he has basically paid no taxes in the prior 12 years.

Again, the average tax rate in this country is the lowest it has been since 1979--17.4 percent. But I repeat, that is still much higher than what Mitt Romney pays.

Most Americans don't have the benefit of Swiss bank accounts or tax shelters in the Cayman Islands or Bermuda and who knows what else. We cannot see those tax returns.

As our economy continues to recover, it is critical we keep tax rates low for the middle class people who are struggling to pay their mortgage, send their kids to college, and save for retirement.

That is why President Obama and Democrats in Congress want to extend tax cuts for 98 percent of American families.

But there is one group that is not struggling: Mitt Romney and the rest of the top 2 percent of Americans.

My Republican friends can come out and talk and say it is terrible and all we are trying to do is raise taxes on small businesses. The President's legislation raises taxes on 2 percent of wealthy people and about 2.5 percent of businesses. This is no crush for small

businesses. It seems to me the 2 percent at the top can contribute a little bit more to deficit control.

Yet Republicans are prepared to block tax cuts for 98 percent of families, unless Democrats agree to even more giveaways for the richest of the rich.

As Republicans continue to argue that the wealthiest 2 percent cannot contribute even a little more, I urge them to talk to the three- quarters of Americans who disagree. I urge them to talk to the almost 60 percent of Republicans who believe the wealthiest Americans should shoulder their fair share of the responsibility for getting the deficit under control. Almost 60 percent of the Republicans agree with what the President is doing; that the top 2 percent should pay a little more.

I urge my Republican friends to talk to a few of the more than 135 million taxpayers who are waiting to see whether Republicans will continue holding hostage their tax cuts.

Reservation of Leader Time

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now resume consideration of S. 2237, the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act; that the time until 2 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that at 2 p.m. the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to amendment No. 2524; that immediately following the disposition of amendment No. 2524, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the substitute amendment No. 2521; that if cloture is not invoked on the substitute amendment, the Senate then proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S. 2237; that if cloture is invoked on the substitute amendment, all postcloture time be yielded back, the substitute amendment be agreed to, and the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S. 2237; that if cloture is invoked on the bill, all postcloture time be yielded back and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended; that if cloture is not invoked on S. 2237, the bill be returned to the calendar; further, that there be no other amendments or motions in order to the amendments or the bill prior to the votes other than motions to waive or motions to table; that there be 2 minutes equally divided between the votes and all after the first vote be 10- minute votes; and finally, that the Senate then resume the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 446, S. 3369.

I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask unanimous consent that the time be charged equally against the proponents and opponents.

Mr. President, I yield to my distinguished colleague. Mr. McConnell.

Mr. President, this is a remarkable accomplishment. I hope I do not get her into trouble with her colleagues, but I truly like her. I appreciate her capability to work with us, work with everybody. She is somebody whom we never have to guess where she stands on an issue and I admire and appreciate her so much for that. I have worked with her on issues going back for many years and I again say I appreciate what she has done.

She has great genes. Her mother and father each served as mayor of a small town in Maine, a place called Caribou. I don't have fond memories of Caribou because in my, I think, 1998 race, there was a great mailing we did. One of my consultants from--not from Nevada, that is for sure-- instead of having deer, they had caribou on my campaign literature. It took me a while to figure that one out. I am sure the town of Caribou was bigger than my campaign spot.

Her family ran a lumber business. Her father was also a State senator.

I am confident Susan has learned to be the Senator she is because of Bill Cohen. I had the pleasure of serving with him. He is a good man-- from Maine. I served as a junior Member when he was chairman of the Aging Committee and he was such a wonderful man. I still talk to Bill Cohen. She has many of his traits. As we know, she worked for him. He has been a great Secretary of Defense. He has just been a good person, and I am confident her ability to be the legislator she is, a lot of it is attributed to him.

She has always been known for her ability to compromise. Legislation is

the art of compromise, and she works with all Members.

I think the tone she has set working with Joe Lieberman is magnificent. They have run that committee with dignity and on a totally bipartisan basis.

Five thousand votes--frankly, a number of us have cast 5,000 votes, but it is ridiculous, the example she has set, never missing a vote. I wish her the very best and many years to serve in the future of the Senate.

(Applause.)

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Monday, July 16, at 5 p.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 662; that there be 30 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate proceed to a vote with no intervening action or debate on the nomination; that 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.

Mr. President, the Senate is currently on the motion to proceed to S. 3369; is that correct?

That being the case, I have a cloture motion at the desk on the motion to proceed to that matter.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum required under our rule XXII be waived, and that on Monday, July 16, following the vote on the McNulty nomination and the resumption of legislative session, there be up to 10 minutes of debate, equally divided between

the two leaders or their designees prior to a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to S. 3369.

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

Mr. President, I recognize and honor William H. Meadows for his long and successful service from 1996 to 2012 as president of The Wilderness Society. Bill came to Washington, D.C. with his wife Sally to lead The Wilderness Society after years of working as a volunteer and then as a professional staff person for the Sierra Club. Since then, he has neither lost the passion that first made him a conservation activist nor the gracious Southern charm that came from his Tennessee upbringing.

Under his leadership, The Wilderness Society has maintained its focus on their core mission of protecting wilderness and inspiring Americans to care for our wild places. During his tenure, The Wilderness Society has had substantial success, helping Congress expand the National Wilderness Preservation System by nearly 6.5 million acres and establish the National Landscape Conservation System to increase protection for Bureau of Land Management lands. In that time, the organization has nearly doubled in size and they provide sound scientific, legal, and policy expertise on major issues relating to our Federal public lands better than ever.

I have had the good fortune of working with Bill and The Wilderness Society on legislation that impacts our Federal wild lands heritage. He and The Wilderness Society have been important partners in successful efforts to protect millions of acres of Nevada's finest wilderness in Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine counties, as well as establish the Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails National Conservation Area and Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area. I am tremendously proud of that legacy and Bill played a critical role in that effort. He never failed to understand the need to work closely with local communities and key stakeholders to find areas of common ground and to reach shared solutions. He brought to these conservation efforts a level headed, reasonable, thoughtful approach that helped move all the parties beyond the type of knee-jerk ideology that too often results in gridlock.

Bill has also been an important ally in many national debates about Federal public lands ranging from our energy policy to management of healthy forests to the protection of iconic wild lands like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He and his organization were influential in the Clinton Administration's establishment of the Roadless Rule, which helps protect nearly 60 million acres of our most pristine national forests.

He has always been willing to meet with his opponents. At a time when many conservationists were at odds with the George W. Bush administration, Bill was able to establish and maintain a working relationship with the Undersecretary for Natural Resources in the Department of Agriculture. This big tent approach to conservation is one of the things that make Bill exceptional. He is further distinguished by his ability to clearly understand the dynamics of national and local politics without becoming cynical or losing his integrity. Thank you, Bill, for your tremendous service as an extraordinary conservation leader.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consideration of Calendar No. 448.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to passage of the bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2527 and the Senate proceed to its consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that a Gillibrand substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, there is a bill at the desk due for its first reading.

I now ask for a second reading, but in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate

completes its business today, it adjourn until 2 p.m., Monday, July 16, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; at that time that I be recognized; that at 5 p.m. the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. President, there will be two rollcall votes on Monday evening. Beginning at 5:30, there will be a vote on the McNulty nomination. Following that vote, there will be 10 minutes of debate and then we will vote on cloture to S. 3369, the DISCLOSE Act.

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

Madam President, what is the matter now before the Senate?

Madam President, the next hour will be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. The Republicans will control the first half, the majority will control the final half.

We are hopeful we will be able to agree to the motion to proceed to S. 2237, the Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act, today.

Measure Placed on the Calendar--S. 3369

Madam President, I am told that S. 3369 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

I object to any further proceedings with respect to this bill at this time.

Madam President, over the last few years Americans who are very wealthy have taken home a greater share of the Nation's income since the 1920s. That is 90 years. A larger percentage of what is out there the rich are getting. The rich are getting richer and the poor are being squeezed, as are the middle class. The rich are doing well.

But while the bank accounts of a few fortunate Americans have grown, their tax bills have not. The wealthiest Americans now pay the lowest tax rates in more than 50 years.

While this generous Tax Code has been good for their bottom lines, it hasn't been good for America's bottom line. Hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts--some say more than $1 trillion--have been handed out disproportionately to the rich by the previous administration, fueling skyrocketing deficits and a growing national debt.

Democrats and Republicans alike agree that we have to reduce the deficit and rein in the debt. Unfortunately, the same Republicans who say we have to get our fiscal house in order also claim millionaires and billionaires cannot afford to contribute even a tiny bit more and share the effort that is before this country.

These same Republicans say multimillionaires such as Mitt Romney need lower taxes--even lower than the only tax return we have been able to see of Governor Romney, which showed his rate at 16 percent. We don't know what is in the other tax returns he should have made public. Tax returns were made public by his father, who started it, and everyone who has run for President since then has followed him. George Romney set an example that his son should follow. We want to know what is in those tax returns he refuses to show the American public. Did he pay any taxes?

Well, I suggest to everybody that Mitt Romney doesn't need another tax

break. In fact, he has so much money that he doesn't even know where it is all located--Switzerland, Cayman Islands, Bermuda? No wonder he doesn't want America to see his tax returns.

Mitt Romney is doing fine, and so are the other millionaires and billionaires. It is the middle class I am worried about, not the very wealthy.

We all know times have been tough the last few years for ordinary Americans who are struggling to keep a roof over their head and food on the table. That is the literal truth. The last thing they can afford now is a tax increase. That is why Democrats want to keep taxes low for 98 percent of Americans, including almost 98 percent of small businesses--everyone making less than $250,000 a year. But while Democrats are focused on how we can help 98 percent of Americans, Republicans are focused on how they can help Mitt Romney and the rest of the top 2 percent. They are willing to hold tax cuts for everyone hostage to protect tax breaks for that top 2 percent.

Democrats don't agree the top 2 percent of wage earners can't afford to pay the same tax rate they paid when Bill Clinton was President. Remember, that was when the budget was balanced and we were paying down the debt. Some claimed they were paying down the debt too quickly. The years of the Bush administration took care of that, when the $7 trillion surplus over 10 years was wiped out.

Still we are willing to debate that with our Republican colleagues, and we are willing to discuss it reasonably. But we don't believe middle-class families should wait and wonder, watch and worry whether their taxes are about to go up while Congress has that conversation. We should not wait until the last second to act.

Here is what one major newspaper wrote yesterday about the need to act:

The majority of Americans, and the broader economy, should

not be held hostage again to another debate over the merits

of tax cuts for the wealthy. . . . There will never be

consensus for solving our nation's budget problems without

first ending the lavish tax breaks at the top.

I call on my Republican colleagues to help us give 98 percent of American families the certainty and the security they need, and to do it now, right away. I call on them to help us pass a tax cut that will benefit the middle class without bankrupting our Nation.

It is time we faced facts. If we are serious about reducing the deficit, we cannot keep handing out more tax breaks to the richest of the rich. We will have to make difficult decisions about where to cut and invest to keep our Nation strong.

But whether we keep taxes low for middle-class families should not be one of the difficult decisions we make. I haven't heard one person-- Democrat, Republican, or Independent--say we should raise taxes on middle-class families. This is an area where we can easily find common ground. So what is stopping us from doing what is right and doing it now? I hope it won't be more Republican hostage-taking on behalf of the top 2 percent.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

Madam President, reserving the right to object, we have been here before. We try to legislate here, and the program of the Republicans in the Senate has been to divert, deny, and obstruct.

I asked the Chair when we started what we were doing here, and we are on a small business jobs bill. It is extremely important legislation. It would give small businesses across America--small businesses with less than 500 employees--and that is where most jobs are created--a 10- percent tax credit for hiring more people, and it would also give them the ability, this year, to purchase equipment and write that off. It would be great for the economy.

We are told by outside experts that it would create about a million jobs. What we have before us is something that the Republicans in the House have sent us. It is their version of this. It is the ``help Paris Hilton'' legislation. It would give people like her a tax break for doing nothing--$46 billion of the American people's money to help Paris Hilton and others. It would give people a tax break for doing nothing-- nothing. And for my friend the Republican leader to talk about small businesses being hurt with the proposal of the President--that is not true. As I said in my opening statement, 98 percent of the American people would have the benefit of that tax benefit, and 97\1/2\ percent of small businesses would benefit.

So we are in the situation where my friend talks about the fact that we have not had enough job creation, and I acknowledge that. Certainly that is true, and the President acknowledges that. But you see, we have kind of a hole to pull ourselves out of. During the prior 8 years, 8 million-plus jobs were lost, and we have filled that hole more than halfway, with 4\1/2\ million new jobs being created. We have had 28 months of private sector job growth--28 months in a row. So we are making progress, but we have a long way to go.

Madam President, I object.

Madam President, the American people are seeing again-- again and again and again--the scores of times during the last 18 months that we have engaged in a filibuster. As I said earlier, it is a way to divert attention from what we are doing today--to obstruct. As is indicated in the Oxford English Dictionary, a filibuster is an act which obstructs progress in a legislative assembly; to practice obstruction. That is what is going on today.

Now, why shouldn't we pass this bill that is before the body today? It would create 1 million jobs and give small businesses--not Paris Hilton but small businesses--across America today a tax credit for hiring more people and allow them to write off what they purchase, which would create more jobs.

So we have here a big Las Vegas neon sign flashing on and off saying: Grover Norquist has won again.

To the people out there watching who might be wondering who Grover Norquist is, remember, he is this guy who goes to the Republicans and asks if they would be kind enough to sign a pledge for him that does what he wants them to do and not what the American people want, which is that they will not tax the rich at all, not even a tiny bit. He says: Sign this pledge, will you? Of course they all sign. But the American people--Democrats, Independents, and Republicans--agree that the richest of the rich should pay a little bit more.

But we are now involved in a filibuster to divert attention away from an important piece of legislation. Let's pass this legislation. We will have this tax debate. We will be happy to do that, but let's get this done first. As most people know, I appreciate my friend the Republican leader. I know he has a job to do. But let's get away from this pledge, and let's start legislating and not have to break filibusters on virtually everything we do.

Madam President, when I came here this morning--I repeat for the third time--I asked what the business was before this body. It is the small business jobs bill. Of course, there has been a direct attack on that legislation by saying: Let's do something else. Let's not do this right now. Let's do something else.

I understand the definition of a filibuster. I understand it very clearly--from the Dutch, a ``free booter,'' one of a class of piratical adventurers who pillaged the Spanish colonies in the West Indies during the 17th century; one who engages in unauthorized and irregular warfare against a foreign state. They go on to say, in the United States, to obstruct progress in a legislative assembly; to practice obstructionism.

Yes, they are trying to, as the ``free booters'' here, steal legislation and move to something else. They will do anything they can, as my friend the Republican leader said at the beginning of this Congress, to divert attention from the fact that President Obama should be reelected.

Madam President, I will end this debate soon. There will be other times to do this. But if Governor Romney came before this body to be a Cabinet officer, he couldn't get approved. He won't show anybody his income tax returns. So if he doesn't qualify to be a Cabinet officer, how could he qualify to be President? So let's debate the issues before us. We will get to the tax issues, and that way we will be able to talk in more detail about Governor Romney's taxes. But right now, before this body is the small business jobs bill.

Reservation of Leader Time

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all remaining time postcloture be yielded back and the Senate adopt the motion to proceed to S. 2237.

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Landrieu, I have a substitute amendment at the desk I wish to have reported.

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

Mr. President, I now have a first-degree perfecting amendment which is also at the desk.

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

I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.

Mr. President, I have a cloture motion on the substitute amendment which is at the desk.

Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk to the language proposed to be stricken.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on that amendment.

I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.

I have a motion to commit the bill with instructions. The clerk has that.

I ask for the yeas and nays on that motion.

Mr. President, I have an amendment to the instructions at the desk.

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

Mr. President, I have a second-degree amendment at the desk.

Finally, Mr. President, I have a cloture motion on the bill which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum requirement under rule XXII be waived for the cloture motions just filed.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 442, S. 3364.

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

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

Mr. President, right now the Senate is considering the small business jobs bill, a very important proposal that was part of President Obama's package to increase employment in this country. It will create a million jobs. This legislation will give tax credits to businesses that grow and hire. Yet Republicans are looking for any excuse to vote down the proposal for two reasons: No. 1, it has the support of President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. Second, it would strengthen the economy, which would help President Obama.

We know Republicans will not do anything that helps President Obama, even if it is good for the economy, because their No. 1 goal is to defeat the President. My friend Mitch McConnell has said that. So Republicans are hiding behind their usual procedural trick, filibustering with unrelated amendments. If there is any doubt about Republicans' motivation to kill this legislation, take a look with me at the amendment proposed today by Senator Hatch of Utah.

The first thing Senator Hatch's amendment would do is eliminate all the tax cuts, every tax cut we have in this proposal, every one of them, the one that is now before the Senate, to create a million jobs. The Hatch amendment would literally eliminate every provision in the bill designed to create jobs.

Senator Hatch's amendment eliminates the 10-percent credit for employers to hire additional workers or increase their payrolls, a provision that would create--that part alone--a half million jobs. It strikes another deduction for businesses that invest in machinery and equipment which would create another half million jobs.

But the Republican amendment does not stop there. It goes on to increase taxes for 25 million American families. The Republican amendment, I repeat, increases taxes for 25 million American families. Senator Hatch's amendment would extend tax breaks for the top 2 percent of Americans, but it fails to extend a number of tax cuts that help middle-class families get by in a very tough economy. For example, Senator Hatch's amendment, a Republican amendment, would increase taxes by $1,100 for 11 million families trying to pay for college--11 million families, in effect an increase of their taxes by $1,100.

The Republican amendment would make it harder for 12 million large families to put food on the table. It would increase taxes by $800 for families that have three children or more. Senator Hatch's amendment, the Republican amendment, fails to extend the full childcare tax credit for 6 million families, increasing their taxes by $500 each.

So no one is fooled by the Republican amendment. We see it for what it is, more Republican obstruction that comes with the added bonus of sticking it to the middle class. If that were not enough political theater for 1 day, my Republican colleagues also claim they are anxious to vote on President Obama's plan to cut taxes for 98 percent of American families. Once again, no one should be fooled. Republicans know very well the Senate will vote on the President's proposal to give middle-class families the certainty they will not be hit with a tax increase. We will vote on it this work period. I have already said so. They say they want a vote sooner, so let's lock in an agreement sooner. The President's plan to give 98 percent of Americans certainty their taxes will not go up and Republican plans to raise taxes on 25 million American families--Democrats are ready to have those votes right away and we will do it with a simple majority. Then we can get back to the task at hand, cutting taxes for millions of small businesses that want to expand and put Americans back to work.

I have a consent agreement that I will go through with you.

Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2237

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that cloture be vitiated with respect to the substitute amendment on S. 2237, that the motion to commit be withdrawn and amendment Nos. 2525

and 2522 be withdrawn; that at 2 p.m. tomorrow, Thursday, July 12, the Senate vote in relation to the following amendments: amendment No. 2524, which is the Cantor language; substitute amendment No. 2521; that there be no other amendments or motions in order to the amendment to the bill prior to the votes other than motions to waive or motions to table; that upon disposition of the two amendments the Senate proceed to a vote on passage of S. 2237, as amended, if amended; further, that at a time to be determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Republican leader the Senate proceed to consideration of a bill to be introduced by Senator Reid or designee, extending the 2001, 2003, and 2009 tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans and 96 percent of small businesses as outlined by President Obama; that the only amendment in order to the bill be an amendment offered by Senator McConnell or designee, which is identical to the text of amendment No. 2491, as filed by Senator Hatch; that the amendment not be divisible; that there be 4 hours of debate on the amendment and the bill, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to a vote in relation to the McConnell or designee amendment; that upon disposition of the amendment the Senate proceed to vote on the passage of the bill, as amended, if amended; that there be no motions or points of order to the amendment or the bill.

Mr. President, I will be very brief. My friend the Republican leader said this morning, and I quote directly: I am trying to get a vote, a vote on what he says he's for, on what the President says he's for, and what the Republicans say they are for. That is what this consent agreement does.

I am happy to let the Republican leader read the exact language. But let no one be fooled by this. The Hatch amendment does not do anything to protect small businesses. It does everything to protect Grover Norquist and his pledge; that is, make sure the American people are not satisfied. They believe--Democrats, Independents, and Republicans--that the top 2 percent of income earners in this country should contribute to solving the problems we have with the deficit and the debt in this country. That is what this is all about.

I look forward to working with my friend the Republican leader to see if we can come to a position here where we can vote on the bill that is before us. I am concerned because the Hatch language eliminates our bill, but I am happy to have staff, during the night, look and see if we can arrive at some way to move forward. But I think I made my point clear.

Mr. President, I am only trying to do what they said they wanted to do this morning. Senator Hatch came and gave a big speech: This is what they want to do. If they have something else they want to propose, I am happy to take a look at that, but I only am trying to do what they said they wanted to do this morning.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum unless my friend has more to say?