Floor Statements

Mr. President, there will be a rollcall vote on Monday at approximately 5:30 p.m. on the motion to proceed to S. 1323.

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

There being objection, the Senate, at 5:51 p.m., adjourned until Monday, July 11, 2011, at 2 p.m.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, following any leader remarks, the Senate will resume the motion to proceed to S. 1323, which is a bill to express the sense of the Senate on shared sacrifice in resolving the budget deficit. The time until 12:30 today will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. The Senate will recess from 12:30 until 2:15 for our weekly party caucuses. The time from 2:15 until 6 p.m. is also equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees.

Yesterday, I filed a cloture motion on a motion to proceed to S. 1323. This vote will occur tomorrow.

S. 1326 is at the desk. It is due for a second reading.

Madam President, I object to any further proceedings with respect to this matter.

Madam President, yesterday my distinguished Republican counterpart said the debate over how to avert the looming default crisis is really a debate over what kind of a country we are going to be. I agree. That is certainly true. So will we be the kind of country that protects tax breaks and giveaways for the richest people and corporations while sacrificing seniors and the middle class? That is the America my Republican colleagues have proposed, and those priorities are simply backwards.

Democrats, on the other hand, believe that in a nation where half the country's wealth is controlled by probably less than 1 percent of its people, perhaps that 1 percent should not be exempt from the sacrifices asked of everyone else. If these negotiations will determine what kind of nation we are going to be, they will also determine the character of the Republican Party as well.

Will they be the party who came to Washington to help govern, to craft solutions to the difficult issues facing this Nation in cooperation with patriots on both sides of the aisle or will they be the kind of single-issue, ideological party that walks away from reasonable compromise for the sake of politics? That is the question.

David Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times, was

hired for that reason, that usually liberal editorial page. They wanted someone who wrote well and was a certified conservative. David Brooks is who they chose. David Brooks believes it has obviously turned into an ideological party that walks away from reasonable compromise for the sake of politics. This is what he said yesterday--not me. Conservative columnist David Brooks said it yesterday, about the illogical and ideological Republican Party that has emerged.

Here is what he said:

If the debt ceiling talks fail, independent voters will see

that Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans

were not.

He said: If we default, it will be the fault of the ``Republican fanaticism.'' That fanaticism is making compromise impossible no matter how much Democrats are willing to give. Independent voters, Brooks says, ``will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern. And they will be right.'' David Brooks, conservative columnist, said this. The Republican Party has been taken over by ideologues devoted to or terrified by Grover Norquist and his no-tax pledge. These Republicans refuse to believe countless respected voices that have said over and over how serious a crisis we face if we fail to avoid default.

They have refused a deal that Brooks called the ``mother of all no- brainers'' because it violates an arbitrary pledge. Never mind that the deal is in the best interest of the country and gives the Republicans much of what they say they want. They walked away from the table.

The statesman, Dean Acheson--and he was one of our great diplomats and, certainly, a statesman--said negotiating ``assumes parties more anxious to agree than to disagree.'' It is no wonder, then, that Republicans have refused to negotiate. They will not even admit to supporting their own long-held positions if Democrats also support those positions.

We should all be able to agree we need to reduce the deficit and get the fiscal house in order. Democrats and Republicans alike have said that. We should all be able to agree we need to avert the global economic disaster the American default would cause. Business leaders and economists alike have said that exact same thing.

We should all be able to agree millionaires and billionaires, oil companies and the owners of yachts and jets don't need special tax breaks the rest of Americans don't get. Yet Republicans have defended those tax breaks again and again. They claim Democrats want to raise taxes on shipbuilders and airplane manufacturers. That couldn't be further from the truth.

In fact, Democrats want to end special tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires who are lucky enough to be able to afford private jets and yachts. We are happy that we stand in that way politically. These tax breaks aren't available to middle-class Americans. They can't write off the family station wagon or the rowboat they take fishing with the grandkids or the motor boat they go out with every week to see if they can catch a bass or trout. These breaks are available for multimillion-dollar toys that only a handful of Americans can afford.

I repeat: I am proud that Democrats are standing up for America's middle-class families instead of the richest of the rich. As my Republican colleagues defend tax breaks for special interests and the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, I ask them again what kind of political party they want to be. They must ask themselves whether they want to be the kind of party that David Brooks, a conservative, described--a party of unreasonable fanatics who don't want to compromise, no matter how sweet the deal for their side might be and no matter how grave the consequences for our Nation if they don't agree.

Mr. President, following any leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 20. At 5 p.m. today the Senate will vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the Libya resolution. This vote will be longer than usual to accommodate Senators returning after the holiday which occurred yesterday, but that doesn't mean it will be open forever. I will be happy to be a little lenient, but we will do the best we can.

In one of his poems, T.S. Eliot wrote, ``Hurry up please. It's time.'' He could have been writing about us in the U.S. Senate.

Yesterday, this great Nation celebrated its 235th birthday. In those 235 years, we have accomplished many admirable things, and we have done it together. We have landed on the Moon, invented new ways to save lives, and fought for democracy and freedom all around the world. Now we stand poised to make a different kind of history.

For the first time, the United States of America stands at the brink of defaulting on our financial obligations. The Chief Economist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said allowing America to default on the debt ``would be tantamount to writing a bad check.''

Unless we take action, tarnishing this great Nation's sterling reputation will be the least of our concerns. We also risk the very fate of this country's economy and the world's economy along with it. The last time this country was plunged into a major recession, just 3 short years ago, we took the world with us.

When Wall Street greed caused the financial collapse of our financial system, Americans across the country lost their jobs, their homes, and their savings, and so did people across the globe. This country is only beginning to recover and the world with us. But the crisis we now face is one of even greater proportion without exception. The most respected business economists and business minds of our time have said if America defaults on its debt, it will have dire consequences here and around the world. ``Catastrophe,'' they called it.

That same U.S. Chamber of Commerce economist said a failure to avert this crisis ``is not a possibility.'' He could not even conceive the Republicans in Congress could shirk their duty. Defaulting on our debt would risk millions of American jobs, halt tax refunds, Social Security checks, Medicare payments, and even paychecks for our troops. The depression it would cause at home would ripple around the globe. Some have suggested instead of getting Social Security checks, Social Security recipients would get an IOU from the Federal Government.

This default crisis is not a new problem. It has been around for months. But we no longer have months or even weeks to avert this catastrophe. We have days. Yet my Republican colleagues have walked away from the negotiating table when we were nearing a solution--and so close to disaster. Why? To protect oil companies, to protect the owners of yachts and corporate jets, to protect corporations that ship jobs overseas, to protect millionaires and billionaires from paying their fair share.

Twenty percent of all the income earned in this Nation is earned by less

than 1 percent of its citizens. It is this top approximately 1 percent the Republicans are determined to protect. Republicans walked away from the negotiations to protect them. Meanwhile, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, and all that the middle-class Democrats have worked to make stronger is disappearing. Middle-class families are struggling to make ends meet.

That is why I brought to the floor legislation demanding millionaires and billionaires contribute their fair share to this crucial deficit reduction struggle. When Republicans talk about shared sacrifice, they mean the sacrifice should be shared by those who can least afford it. Democrats believe that sacrifice should be shared by the richest 1 percent as well. The others have all sacrificed too much already.

As we debate in the Senate this week, negotiations with the Vice President and the President should continue. The invitation to Republicans to help prevent a catastrophic default remains out there. To become part of the solution rather than part of the problem, all Republicans have to do is accept our invitation. The time is here for my Republican colleagues to put politics aside. Simply put, we are out of time. But Democrats cannot negotiate with ourselves. When one side comes to the table and the other refuses, it is impossible to negotiate. So this week we will debate the solution to this crisis with the Republicans, like it or not.

Democrats will be clear about what is at stake: the fate of our country and the global economy. We will be clear about our priority: to avert a catastrophic default and protect our fragile economic recovery. We will be clear about the middle ground we have already found: We must cut the deficit in order to get our fiscal house in order.

Democrats are willing to compromise, but compromise does not mean allowing our Republican colleagues to put the wants of a few millionaires and billionaires ahead of the needs of the Nation and the world.

I repeat the words of T.S. Eliot: ``Hurry up please. It's time.''

Mr. President, I understand the clerk is about to report a motion to proceed.

Mr. President, I withdraw my motion to proceed to Calendar No. 88, S.J. Res. 20.

I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 93, S. 1323.

I have a cloture motion at the desk in that regard.

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

I now withdraw my motion to proceed to Calendar No. 93, S. 1323.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 88, S.J. Res. 20.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time until 5 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and that any time spent in a quorum call be equally divided. There is already an order in effect that Republicans will be limited to 10 minutes each.

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

Mr. President, the Senate was scheduled today at 5 p.m. to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the bipartisan Libya resolution, which is sponsored by Senators Kerry, McCain, Levin, Kyl, Durbin, Feinstein, Graham, and others. I spoke with the Republican leader just a short time ago, and we have agreed that, notwithstanding the broad support for the Libya resolution, the most important issue for us to focus on this week is the budget. So we will work to set up the vote on the sense-of-Senate resolution that I have offered on shared sacrifice and perhaps a Republican alternative as well. Meetings are in process now and will continue on the debt limit and on larger budget matters throughout the Capitol and I am confident everyone knows the White House is involved.

I ask unanimous consent that the cloture motion, with respect to the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 88, S.J. Res. 20, be vitiated.

I withdraw my motion to proceed to Calendar No. 88, S.J. Res. 20.

I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 93, S. 1323.

Mr. President, there will be a vote at 5 p.m. today on a motion to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to notify Senators of their need of attendance in the Senate at this important time in our country's history.

I would note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I appreciate my friend's advice. We are working to make sure the week is spent relating to the No. 1 issue facing the country today; that is, how to make sure we get a handle on deficit spending.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to request the presence of absent Senators, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that John Daley, who is detailed to the Foreign Relations Committee from the State Department, be granted privilege of the floor for the duration of the debate on S.J. Res. 20.

Mr. President, following any leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until noon. The first hour will be under the control of the majority, and Republicans will control the second hour. Following morning business, the Senate will be in executive session to consider the nomination of David Petraeus to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

At about 2 p.m., then, there will be a vote on the confirmation of David Petraeus. Additional rollcall votes are possible during today's session of the Senate.