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.

Madam President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in executive session to consider the Cole, Monaco, and Seitz nominations. These are all for the Justice Department. The first vote today will be at noon on the confirmation of James Cole to be Deputy Attorney General. We are hopeful that the Monaco and Seitz nominations can be confirmed by voice vote. Following that first vote, the Senate will be in recess until 2:15 p.m. for the weekly caucus meetings. At 2:15, the Senate will resume consideration of the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act. We are working on an agreement to complete action on that bill and the Rules Committee resolution which will follow. Additional rollcall votes are expected today.

Madam President, H.R. 1249 is due for a second reading. I ask the clerk to report.

I now object to any further proceedings on this bill at this time.

Madam President, yesterday I sat down with the President to talk about how to avoid a default crisis that would be a black mark on this country's reputation for generations to come. If we fail to avert this crisis, it would be the first time in our great Nation's history that we have defaulted on our financial obligations and would send shock waves through the global economy. But I am not the only one saying that. The most respected voices in the business and financial community are saying the same thing: Default would be awful. Business leaders, economists, bank executives, credit rating agencies, and even a Republican adviser to Presidents Reagan and George Bush--the same adviser to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush--have used some very serious words to describe the kind of crisis defaulting on our debt would cause. The word many have used is it would be a ``catastrophe.'' The legendary Warren Buffett said a few days ago that allowing the United States to default on its debt would be Congress's ``most asinine act'' ever. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said a failure to avert default would have ``catastrophic economic consequences that would last for decades.''

Failure to avert this crisis would have dire consequences and would result in the most serious financial crisis this country has ever faced. Millions of Americans could lose their jobs, Federal prisons would have to be changed dramatically with their personnel, border security would have to change, and our court systems would likely no

longer be able to have trials. Security checks could stop, and so could paychecks to our troops. That is how desperate it would be.

What could be so important that my Republican colleagues are willing to put our economy at such dire risk? What could be worth walking away from the negotiating table, as they have done? Tax breaks for wealthy oil companies and corporate jets? Republicans have gone to the mat for Big Oil, fighting again and again to preserve wasteful, taxpayer-funded giveaways to companies that made tens of billions of dollars in profits in the first quarter of this year alone. Republicans walked away from the negotiating table to save tax breaks for corporate jets. So which big industries and special interests will they fight for next? Oil companies? To ship jobs overseas? Companies that ship jobs overseas? Corporate jets?

If they were truly serious about reducing the deficit, they would admit this kind of waste must end. Yet some top Republicans say eliminating these subsidies shouldn't even be part of the discussion as we find a way to reduce the deficit and avoid a catastrophic default. Several rank-and-file Republicans have said handouts to oil and gas companies and other wasteful tax breaks should be on the table as we negotiate. These are Republicans. And 34 Republicans endorsed the view that any taxpayer giveaways should be part of the solution when they voted to eliminate subsidies for ethanol. It seems Republicans can't even agree among themselves whether subsidies and giveaways are sacrosanct.

One thing they can agree on, it seems: They are willing to balance the budget on the backs of seniors instead. They are willing to end Medicare as we know it. They are willing to slash Medicaid, jeopardizing coverage for 80 percent of American seniors in nursing homes. Medicaid is for the poorest of the poor, but about 70 percent of Medicaid money goes to people who are in rest homes, nursing homes. Republican priorities, then, are very clear. They are dead wrong, though.

Democrats know we need to make difficult spending cuts to reduce our deficit, but to dig ourselves out of this financial hole, we must also create jobs to spur our economy, and we must break the cycle of wasteful giveaways, not break our promise to seniors.

The junior Senator from South Carolina, a Republican, threatened that any Republican who votes to avert a default crisis will be ``gone''-- those are his words--voted out in a wave of tea party anger. This kind of inflammatory language is irresponsible. There is simply too much at stake.

Also, this same Senator did not mention that 235 Republicans in the House and 40 in the Senate, including my friend from South Carolina whom I have just talked about, have already voted to increase our debt this year. Their ideological budget--it came from the House--that they wanted to support here and did vote for it, would have increased the debt by more than 60 percent over the next 10 years. The so-called Ryan budget would increase the debt by more than 60 percent over the next 10 years. That is about $9 trillion in a decade.

What did Republicans get for their so-called $9 trillion? What would we get? A plan that ends Medicare; a plan that would slash Medicaid, jeopardizing coverage, as I indicated, for 80 percent of American seniors in nursing homes; a plan that protects tax breaks for billionaires and oil companies while putting millions of seniors at risk. That is the choice. The psychologist Alfred Adler once said, ``It is easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.'' Republicans shouted loudly and repeatedly about reducing debt. Then they gave us 9 trillion reasons not to trust this rhetoric.

The time for empty rhetoric is over. Now it is time for my Republican colleagues to put the good of our economy ahead of their own politics.

Madam President, I ask that the time of all the quorum calls during the debate on these important nominations be equally charged to both sides.

I ask unanimous consent that the final 15 minutes for debate on these nominations be set aside for the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I move that the Sergeant at Arms be instructed to request the attendance of absent Senators, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin), the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Kohl), the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Nelson), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Pryor), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Udall), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following pending amendments be agreed to: Akaka No. 512, as modified with the changes at the desk, Carper No. 517, and Paul No. 503; that a managers' amendment which is at the desk be agreed to; that at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, June 29, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the remaining amendments to S. 679 in the following order: DeMint No. 501, Portman-Udall of New Mexico-Cornyn--that is three Senators--No. 509, as modified, with the changes that are at the desk, DeMint No. 511, and Toomey No. 514; further, that the Cornyn amendment No. 504, McCain amendment No. 493, and Paul amendment No. 502 be withdrawn; that no amendments be 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; that there be no motions or points of order in order to the bill or any of the amendments other than budget points of order and the applicable motions to waive; finally, that all other provisions of previous orders with respect to S. 679 remain in effect.

Mr. President, I accept the modification of the request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 185.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid on the table, that there be no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, June 29; that following the prayer and the 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; that following any leader remarks, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business for up to 1 hour, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the Republicans controlling the first half and the majority controlling the final half; that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of S. 679, the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act.

Mr. President, there will be a series of up to five rollcall votes at approximately 11 a.m. tomorrow. We are hopeful a few of the amendments to S. 679 will be agreed to by voice vote.

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 up to 15 minutes of my friend, the Senator from Wisconsin.

Mr. President, following any leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. Senator Sanders will be recognized in morning business at 4 p.m. for up to 90 minutes. There will be no rollcall votes today. The first vote of this week will be tomorrow at noon on the confirmation of James Cole to be Deputy Attorney General. Also on Tuesday, the Senate will resume consideration of the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act. We need to work out an agreement to complete action on that bill as soon as we can. Additionally, we hope to confirm David Petraeus to be Director of the CIA this week.

We have an idea of what we need to get done this week, but it is up to Members as to when we get it done. It is not magic that we finish here Thursday night. We should be able to finish, get all the work we need done, but if we do not, we will have to have this spill over until Friday. We have to finish the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act. We need to do that. We have a number of nominations we have already agreed to that we have to vote on, and we have to do David Petraeus. There is no reason we can't get all of that done, but we need cooperation of Senators.

Mr. President, last Thursday, Democrats sat down with the chief executives of three successful corporations. Their companies are responsible for the jobs and livelihoods of about 100,000 workers. One company makes medications that help Americans live longer, healthier lives. Another invests in entrepreneurship, giving inventors the capital they will need to bring their ideas to the production line. Another employs scientists and engineers to make more efficient the things we use every day, from jet engines to home thermostats.

These three CEOs understand what it takes to create jobs, so we asked them what Washington can do to help. This is what they told us. All Democratic Senators were there.

First, we must improve and reform our education system, from kindergarten through 12th grade, so we produce the skilled workers of tomorrow. Plus we need to train more scientists, engineers, and mathematicians so we do not risk falling behind China, India, and other global competitors.

All three of these executives--all of them--believe we must reform our immigration system to stay competitive. The brightest students from around the globe come to the United States to take advantage of our world-class universities. Unfortunately, our broken immigration system forces most of those students to go back to their home countries, where they compete with American companies. We should be keeping the best here, where they were educated, so they can build companies that employ U.S. workers.

Of course, we must simplify and streamline our broken tax system, lowering rates but eliminating loopholes so everyone pays his or her fair share, including corporations.

This is what three successful CEOs told us we should do to create jobs for American workers. I know these are big issues. They are complicated and politically divisive. We cannot tackle them all at once. But they are not the only solution. These three CEOs we met with last week said there are smaller, more manageable issues we can tackle right now. There are things we can do to help create jobs right now.

Mother Teresa urged us to ``be faithful in small things because it is in them that your strength lies.'' Putting Americans back to work can and should start with the small things.

This is what these three successful CEOs told us we should do to spur hiring:

First, reauthorize a program that gives grants to the technology companies that are inventing new products, such as the electric toothbrush or body armor for soldiers, so these innovators can continue to grow and hire. That is what we tried to do with the small business innovation research legislation. The Republicans stopped it.

Second, they said we should modernize America's air travel system to make it safer and more efficient to fly American skies. That is what we tried to do when we reauthorized the Federal Aviation Administration, which is lost in the Republican-dominated House.

Third, we must reform our patent system and clear a 3-year backlog of applications. The next laptop computer or iPod could be in that pile, just waiting to be taken from the basement to the boardroom. That is what we tried to do with the America Invents Act. The House passed a version of our bill, but the person--for example, Senator Coburn--said he is going to stop this bill because it doesn't have the payment system that was a good idea. We all thought that here. We voted for this 95 to 5. But, again, it has been stopped by the Republicans; that is, our patent system.

That is 580,000 jobs just for patents and FAA, and there are tens of thousands of jobs with small business innovation. These are commonsense steps we can take today. Each would help put people to work across the country. That is not just what the Senate says, that is what business leaders say. Here is the catch. Congress has already taken up, as I indicated, all three of these measures. Not one has become law. Why? Republicans have killed or stalled all three of these important pieces of legislation--legislation business owners say they need to put more than \1/2\ million Americans back to work.

Putting Americans back to work must be our most important debt- reduction strategy. Democrats know it is critical that we reduce the deficit and pay down the national debt, but we will never balance the budget with 14 million people out of work.

Democrats know how to balance budgets. Remember, when Democrats in Congress helped President Clinton balance the budget in 1998, unemployment was 4.5 percent. Now, unfortunately, it is twice that. That is why we must do two things at once: reduce the deficit and do whatever it takes to get American workers back doing what they need to do to bring in a paycheck. The business leaders we spoke with support this two-pronged approach. Democrats and Republicans do not have to look hard to find common ground; we only have to be willing to admit it when we see it.

I met with the President earlier today. We had a productive meeting. My Republican counterpart will meet with the President this afternoon. I hope my Republican colleagues will put the economy ahead of politics and join us to create jobs and set aside their desire to please the tea party and defeat President Obama. This is the way forward. Neither party should confront this crisis alone, and no one will be successful unless we confront it together.

We owe the country our commitment to do at least the small things. Again I repeat Mother Teresa when she said it is in them; that is, the small things, that our strength lies. And they, in turn, will inspire faith that the big things will follow.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that three of Senator Bingaman's interns, Paco Vanneri, Haley Murphy, and Elizabeth Reese, be extended the privilege of the floor during tomorrow's session of the Senate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to H.R. 2279.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 57, S. Con. Res. 15.

I ask unanimous consent that the DeMint amendment to the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the concurrent resolution, as amended, be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record.