Floor Statements

Mr. President, I understand that S. 953, introduced earlier today by Senator McConnell, is at the desk and I ask for its first reading.

I now ask for its second reading but object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until tomorrow, Thursday, May 12, at 9:30 a.m.; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, 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 debate only until 1 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the first hour divided and controlled between the leaders or their designees, with the Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes; and that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. President, there will be a rollcall vote around 2 p.m. tomorrow on confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 47, the nomination of Michael Urbanski, to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Virginia.

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

I note the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m. today. The majority will control the first 30 minutes and the Republicans will control the next 30 minutes. The Senate will recess from 12:30 until 2:15 today for our weekly caucus meetings.

We are working to set up the debate and vote on the nomination of Edward Chen to be a district judge from the State of California. Senators will be notified when that vote is going to be scheduled.

Madam President, briefly, first to comment on immigration reform, we have spent a great deal of time on the Senate floor the last two Congresses dealing with immigration reform. We worked hard in coming up with a solution, and we have a solution. We were working with President Bush toward coming up with a solution to immigration reform. The problem was that even President Bush--even President Bush--could not get his Republican colleagues to join with us in doing something about immigration reform.

Our immigration system is broken, and it needs to be fixed. But it is so important that the President in El Paso today talks about the need for immigration reform because he knows and we all know, as even President Bush knew, that immigration reform is necessary. The problem is that we can't get Republicans here in the Senate to help us. It is quite simple.

We know we have to do something about border security. We have done a lot in that regard. Have we done enough? No. There is more that can be done, but we have done a lot in that direction, and rightfully so. Just within the last year or so, we provided $650 billion for more border security. That was on a bipartisan basis. We passed that. That was important.

We also have to do something about our guest worker program. At any one given time, we have thousands and thousands of guest workers here. Why? Because it is necessary, and it has been for a long time. Take the Chesapeake Bay. We have learned that we have people who come in-- seasonal workers--who can do the work on the clams and the stuff on the great Chesapeake Bay. We have about 1.5 million agricultural workers in our country, and we have a system that doesn't work even for them. We have to do this. Our agricultural industry depends on it.

We also have in our country today 11 million people who are undocumented. There isn't anybody with an ounce of common sense who thinks we can deport 11 million people. We can't do it fiscally, and we can't do it physically. Therefore, we should do something about the 11 million people who are here. How should we do that? Put them on a pathway to legalization. It doesn't mean amnesty. It means that they would pay penalties and fines, that they would go to the back of the line, not the front of the line. They would have to learn English. They would have to stay out of trouble. They would have to pay taxes. There are certain things they would be required to do.

Finally, we have to do something about the unworkable employer sanction provision that was put into the 1986 law. It hasn't worked. Prior to that time, the burden was on the government to make sure people who came to work throughout America were legal. We shifted that responsibility to employers. They can't do that. It is a catch-22 now. The way the law is set up now simply doesn't work. We have, since 1986, computerization which has taken over much of the world, and through that we can work toward having an employer sanction program in our country that will work.

My point is that President Obama should be commended for talking about immigration reform. It is necessary.

My friend the Republican leader should also understand that we have tried, and for our Republican people to talk about immigration reform and not vote accordingly is something the people of America have witnessed now for many years.

Madam President, saving money requires a lot of very difficult choices: Which programs do we cut in these tough times? Which priorities are more important than others? As we have seen in the Senate and across the country over the last few months, a lot of people have a lot of different answers to these questions.

Democrats believe we have to get our spending under control, and we have to look at what needs to be cut. But we need to have a fair program, one that looks at what we are going to do long term with the equities of our spending programs. We have to look at what we do with revenues to make sure they are fair and balanced. So there are a lot of choices.

My friend, the Speaker of the House, gave a speech last night in New York. He talked about raising the debt limit and some of the things he thinks would be necessary in order to get that done. But I would direct the attention of my friend, the Speaker, to one way it would go very quickly to solving some of these problems. We know there is waste in the Federal budget and the Tax Code, but what I want to direct the attention of my friend, the Speaker, to is these five big oil companies.

We, as taxpayers, are giving billions and billions of dollars every year to these companies--billions every year. Every cent of it is taxpayer money to oil companies that already are more than successful.

These oil companies made $36 billion in profits during the first quarter of this year. I repeat that: $36 billion in profits during the first quarter of this year. ExxonMobil alone made 70 percent more this year than they did last year. Exxon holds the record for making more than any corporation in the history of our country in years past. These oil companies, I repeat, made $36 billion in the first quarter.

The industry's $36 billion in quarterly profits means they are making about $12 billion a month or $4 billion a week, and yet the U.S. Government is giving these companies billions of dollars in corporate welfare every year. That is unnecessary. Why are taxpayers on the hook for oil companies that are doing just fine on their own?

If we are serious about reducing the deficit, what an easy place to start, I say to my friend, the Speaker of the House of Representatives. It is a no-brainer. Let's use these savings from these taxpayer giveaways to drive down the deficit, not drive up the profits of oil companies.

We need to make one thing very clear: Wasteful subsidies have nothing to do with gas prices. These oil handouts have existed for decades. Prices have continued to rise. Oil executives' paychecks have also continued to rise.

In the State of Alaska they are paying $8 or $9 a gallon for gasoline. In the State of California, there are places where you pay as much as $5 a gallon for gasoline. Here at an Exxon station along the waterfront, I looked out the other day, and the gas prices there were within a few cents of being $5 a gallon. That is in our Nation's Capital. So that money Americans are paying at the pump is not related to those subsidies I have talked about, but those profits are proof enough they do not need them. The companies do not need those subsidies. Even big oil CEOs, such as the head of Shell, and Republicans in Congress--even my friend, the Speaker--have said on occasion these subsidies are not necessary.

Some of our conservative colleagues have a hard time stomaching giving a hand to those who need it the most. But we should all agree-- in the interest of fairness, common sense, and saving taxpayer money-- that we cannot continue with this corporate welfare to those big oil companies that need it the least. That is a good place to start.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:15 today the Senate proceed to executive session and begin consideration of Executive Calendar No. 61, the nomination of Edward Chen of California to be U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California under the previous order.

Madam President, there will be 3 hours of debate on the Chen nomination beginning at 2:15 p.m. today. Senators can expect a rollcall vote on the Chen nomination at approximately 5:15 p.m. today.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business for debate only until 7 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2 p.m. tomorrow, May 11, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 44; that there be 1 hour of debate, equally divided, in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of time the Senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on Calendar No. 44; 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 to the nomination; that any statements related to the nomination 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, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Reviewing the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission's Final Report.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011, at 10 a.m., in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Perspectives on Deficit Reduction: Social Security.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled, ``Steps Needed for a Successful 2014 Transition in Afghanistan.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011 at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 10, 2011, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia and Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate

on Tuesday, May 10, 2011, at 2:30 p.m. to conduct a joint hearing entitled ``Roadmap for a More Efficient and Accountable Federal Government: Implementing the GPRA Modernization Act.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on May 10, 2011, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Protecting Mobile Privacy: Your Smartphones, Tablets, Cell Phones and Your Privacy.''

Mr. President, following the ceremony that will take place very shortly, and following any leader remarks, the Senate will be in morning business until 4:30 p.m. At that time there will be 1 hour of debate on the nomination of James Cole to be Deputy Attorney General. At approximately 5:30, there will be a cloture vote on the Cole nomination.

Last week, we were able to enter into a consent agreement on the nomination of Edward Chen. We expect to vote on this nomination sometime this week.

I note the absence of a quorum.

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

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

Mr. President, I am told that H.R. 3 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

Mr. President, I would now object to any further proceedings at this time.