Floor Statements

I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Thursday, June 25; that following the prayer and the 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, and there be a period of morning business for 1 hour, 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 second half, with Senators permitted to speak during that morning business hour for up to 10 minutes each; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume postcloture debate on the nomination of Harold Koh to be Legal Adviser to the Department of State. Finally, I ask that the time during any adjournment or period of morning business count postcloture.

Mr. President, tomorrow we will resume the postcloture debate on the Koh nomination. If we are required to use the full 30 hours of debate time, we would vote on the confirmation of this good man around 5:30 tomorrow. We are also working on an agreement to consider the Legislative Branch appropriations bill. I hope we are able to yield back some of the debate time on the Koh nomination so we can begin consideration of that appropriations bill.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

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

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period for the transaction of morning business. Senators will be allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each. Republicans will control the first 30 minutes and the majority will control the next 30 minutes. The Senate will be in recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. today to allow for weekly caucus luncheons. We will continue to work on an agreement to consider the legislative appropriations bill today. Senators could expect votes in relation to that bill during today's session.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1777.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 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 that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, before we turn to legislative matters, I wish to express my personal condolences and those of the Senate to the people affected by yesterday's tragedy, and that was a lot of people. That tragedy took place on the Washington Metro system. Nine people were killed and scores more injured yesterday evening as they simply made their way home during rush hour. The accident has shaken this city and this body. Like so many other commuters, many who work on Capitol Hill rely on the Metro system every day. It has been reliable, and it has been safe. My heart goes out to the families who lost loved ones and those who were injured. As we learn more about what caused this terrible accident, we will work to ensure it never happens again.

Mr. President, this new year began with so much hope. When we began the 111th Congress, I had hoped Republicans would leave their Republican games in the 110th Congress. I had hoped they would have listened when the American people reviewed their record and said no to the party of no.

I wrote the following at the time, this past January:

We have no choice but to govern differently. The times

demand it. If we do not govern differently, we will have

taken no good lessons from the bad experience of the Bush

years.

That goes for Republicans and Democrats alike.

In my first address to this Chamber this year, I reminded both Republicans and Democrats that when we retreat to partisanship, when we fail to reach for common ground, we rob ourselves of the ability to create the change the American people demanded.

As the health care debate approached in April, I reached out to our Republican colleagues and wrote this:

Rather than just saying no, you must be willing to offer

concrete and constructive proposals. We cannot afford more of

the obstructionist tactics that have denied or delayed

Congress' efforts to address so many of the critical

challenges facing this nation.

Last week, I reminded the other side that our hands remain outstretched across the aisle. I assured them we still save them a seat at the negotiating table. And just yesterday, I encouraged our Republican friends to join with us to pass an important bill that would promote foreign travel to the United States--creating jobs, reducing our deficit, and strengthening our economy in the process. Everyplace in America, there are hotel rooms and motel rooms that are not occupied as they should be. The legislation killed yesterday by the Republicans would have had more people coming to those hotel and motel rooms.

At the beginning of this year, at the beginning of this Congress, at the beginning of this debate, and even up to the beginning of this week, my commitment to bipartisanship and finding common ground has not changed one bit. Unfortunately, a stubborn group of Senate Republicans has not changed either.

Yesterday, Republicans blocked a bill that had 11 Republican cosponsors. I assumed when they sponsored that bill they were in favor of the bill. That is kind of an idea people get around here. They blocked a bill that would support a trillion-dollar industry in an otherwise slow economy. They blocked a bill that would create 40,000 new jobs right here at home over the next year. It would have cut our deficit by $425 million and helped our economy recover.

Perhaps, though, we shouldn't be surprised. Just last week, a Republican Senator said the following:

Democrats need to know when they bring [bills] up, we're

going to extend the debate as long as we can--even if we

can't win.

That is what he said.

Given their commitment to obstruction, it is remarkable we have gotten anything done this year, let alone such a strong catalog of important accomplishments that have helped us revive our economy, strengthen our national security, protect our environment, demand accountability, promote equality, and ensure progress. But if Republicans are going to stand in the way of a bill that creates tens of thousands of new jobs, cuts our deficit by hundreds of millions of dollars, and helps every single State in the Union, how are we going to do the other important work the American people sent us here to do? What is it they want to do?

As my good friend from North Dakota, Senator Dorgan, said yesterday on the floor:

If we can't agree on a piece of legislation that was

offered by over 50 Senators, Republicans and Democrats,

dealing with promotion of tourism and creating jobs and

promoting this country's economic interests by asking

international tourists to come to America and see what

America is all about--if we can't agree on that, how on Earth

will we get agreements on energy, health care, climate

change, and so on? It is so disappointing.

I don't know if anyone could put it any better than Senator Dorgan did. I couldn't.

Reforming health care and pursuing energy independence are daunting tasks. No one claims it is simple, but nearly everyone knows it is essential. No one claims the answer is obvious, but everyone knows we must work toward one. Yet, if Republicans refuse to find common ground on the easy things, how will we do so on the hard ones?

It is difficult to understand, but it is clear to anyone following this debate that our Republican friends are not interested in making the difficult but necessary decisions to dig our economy out of this ditch and move us further down the path of recovering prosperity. They have said publicly and privately they are waiting on President Obama's failure. At this point, it has been a bad bet because President Obama is still--today in the press, his popularity is approaching 70 percent.

Instead, they like to echo talking points written by pollsters. They like to repeat the tired, trite, and baseless claim that if we reform health care--85 percent of Americans want us to reform health care, but they are saying that if we improve health care, they will be denied and delayed in getting health care. It is absolutely incomprehensible what their reasoning is. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, let me state once again the facts. No matter what Republicans claim, the government has no intention of choosing any part of your medical plan. Remember, we are talking a public option, a public choice. The government has no intention of choosing for you any part of your medical plan or meddling in any of your medical relationships. If you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. In fact, it is the name of a whole section of the HELP Committee's bill. Section 131 is called ``No Changes to Existing Coverage.'' That is what the title of the bill section is. Every time you hear Republicans say otherwise, you know they are not interested in an honest debate.

Second, let me reiterate once again the reality. The only thing being delayed is urgently needed reform that ensures all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care. The only thing at risk of being denied is Americans' ability to stay healthy, get healthy, or care for a loved one. It is being delayed by a party that has made such stalling tactics their speciality, as evidenced last night.

The party of no is showing no interest in sitting down with us at the negotiating table. The party of no has shown no interest in legislating. And I am most concerned that the party of no has shown no interest in helping the millions of people who have no insurance and the 20 million who are underinsured and the millions more who are paying too much for health care they could lose with one pink slip, one accident, or one illness. Millions of people are afraid they are going to lose their insurance. That is what this debate is about. It is not just about people who have no insurance, it is about people who have insurance, to keep it. In the last 8 years, the number of uninsured in this country has gone up by 10 million people--10 million people.

So I remind my Republican colleagues again, this is not about winning and losing. This is not the time for ideology. This is not the place for political games. For the millions of Americans who have paid crushing health care costs or those with no coverage at all, it is about a concrete and critical crisis that children, families, and small businesses feel every single day. It is about the parent who cannot afford to take their kid to the doctor because insurance is too expensive. It

is about the small businesses that have to lay off employees because they cannot afford skyrocketing health care payments. It is about small businesses that have to eliminate health insurance because they cannot afford it. It is about the three in five families who put off necessary medical care because it costs too much.

American families in every one of our States are counting on us to work together in our common interests. They are not counting the political points scored by either party. Senate Democrats want nothing more than to work with Republicans to create a bipartisan health reform bill that ensures quality and affordable help for all Americans. That is why the HELP Committee has held 14 bipartisan roundtables, 13 committee hearings, and 20 meetings of committee members to discuss various proposals--each one with the goal of reaching a bipartisan agreement. Hard-working Americans are too often casualties of our health care system. They deserve better than to also be the casualties of this kind of politics.

It is not too late for Republicans to join us for a serious discussion and sincere dialog about how to move this country forward. As I did at the beginning of this year, this Congress, this debate, and this week, I still have hope they will.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 84, H.R. 2918, which is the legislative branch appropriations bill; that once the bill is reported, the committee substitute amendment which is at the desk and is the text of S. 1294, as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as thus amended, be considered original text for the purpose of further amendment, provided that points of order under rule XVI be preserved; provided further that points of order under the Budget Act and budget resolutions be preserved to apply as provided in those measures.

Mr. President, I say to my colleague, you can offer any amendments you want. We don't care. We just want to get on the bill. And if we can do it, we will be happy to work with the Senator from South Carolina at that time to come up with a list of amendments. The amendments are all governed under rule XVI.

Mr. President, I have a letter here. I have all day held off reading it. It is a letter signed by every Republican Senator, including the Senator from South Carolina. Let me read this letter written to me, dated March 24.

Dear Majority Leader Reid, As you develop the legislative

calendar for the rest of this fiscal year we believe it is

critical to allocate an appropriate amount of time for the

Senate to consider, vote and initiate the conference process

on each of the 12 appropriations bills independently through

a deliberative and transparent process on the Senate floor.

For a variety of reasons, over the past several years, the

Senate has failed to debate, amend and pass each of the bills

separately prior to the end of the fiscal year. Far too often

this has resulted in the creation of omnibus appropriations

bills that have been brought to the floor so late in the

fiscal year that Senators have been forced to either pass a

continuing resolution, shut down government or consider an

omnibus bill. These omnibus bills have not allowed for

adequate public review and have clouded what should otherwise

be a transparent process. As our President said on March 11,

2009, he expects future spending bills to be `` . . . debated

and voted on in an orderly way sent to [his] desk without

delay or obstruction so that we don't face another massive,

last minute omnibus bill like this one.''

The Senate should begin floor consideration of the

appropriations bills during the early summer months to ensure

that an appropriate amount of time is available to examine,

debate and vote on amendments to the bills. We believe the

Senate should pass at least eight of the appropriations bills

by the August recess. In order to press for a more

transparent process, we will consider using all available

procedural tools to guarantee regular order for

appropriations bills.

Noting our intentions, we hope you will plan accordingly as

you work with the leadership of the House to develop the

legislative calendar for the rest of this fiscal year. Thank

you for your time and consideration.

It is signed by every one of the Republicans, including my friend from South Carolina.

I have here the manager of this bill, the wild-eyed liberal from Nebraska, Ben Nelson. If this is not a place to start--there is no one who has a more measured voice than the Senator from Nebraska. He is an experienced legislator. He has been Governor of his State. He understands problems, and he is a fine person. Why can't we move to this bill?

I say to my friend from South Carolina, we are happy to work on a finite list of amendments, but all we want to do is legislate. We want to get on this bill. The manager of the bill is here. This man has been here for days--well, that is not true, since yesterday--to go to this piece of legislation.

I hope my friend will allow us to go to this bill. We will work with him. Senator Nelson is one of the most reasonable people I have ever worked with. I do not see what fear my friend from South Carolina should have going to the bill. We have no games we are playing. We are not going to try to cut anybody off offering amendments. There will come a time, perhaps, when I talk to the Republican leader and say: Have we had enough of this?

I say to my friend, as I told the Senator in my opening statement, the appropriations bills have a little different rules than just a regular bill. But we are happy to work with him. I am curious to find out what amendments he is interested in.

Would you run over them with me?

Just give me the general subject.

I understand that one.

I am sorry, minority powers?

I say to my friend, I served as chairman of the subcommittee for quite a number of years and enjoyed it very much. It appears the GAO one, from the knowledge I have, will be within the confines of this bill very clearly.

Let's see, what else? The CVC, Capitol Visitor Center, I think that would be--I am looking to Senator Nelson. I think the Capitol Visitor Center would be in keeping with what we have in this bill.

The point is, without going into every detail at this time, anything that is not something that is subject to a rule XVI or some other problem because it is an appropriations bill, we are happy to work with the Senator. We have no problem. But as far as guaranteeing votes, I cannot do that because somebody may want to offer a second-degree.

Mr. President, I understand the Senator is going to object. I do say you cannot have--we want to go to the bill. We want to play by the rules. As it says here:

In order to press for a more transparent process, we will

use all available procedural tools to guarantee regular order

for appropriations bills.

I want regular order on appropriations bills.

I think the Senator could check with his own floor staff; I can't guarantee votes. I can't guarantee these matters are germane because we have different rules on appropriations bills.

I think it is another indication of where we are just wasting time, the people's time. I made my case. I will come here tomorrow and try again. We are happy to work with the Senator from South Carolina.

I say to my friend from South Carolina, I understand he is well meaning. I understand that. The Senator is not a sinister person or trying to do something that is evil or bad. But I just think sometimes we would be better off, as indicated in the letter I received from you, just going to the bill and following the regular order. That is what I want to do.

The Senator has every assurance you will have amendments. I repeat, there are certain things I cannot agree to and some may want to file a second-degree amendment to an

amendment that you offer. But I will be happy to have my staff work with you through the evening and see what we can come up with.

Will my friend yield for just a brief comment? I want to go to the bill. I want to follow regular order. That is what I was asked to do. I am happy to have my staff work through the night to see if we can agree on a finite list of amendments. I hope we can do that.

Senator Nelson is the man to do that. He is a wonderful person, as I have already said. I am just disappointed it is such a struggle to get things done.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business for up to 1 hour, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each during that period of time. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1023, the Travel Promotion Act. The time from 4:30 until 5:30 will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. At 5:30, the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Dorgan amendment. The filing deadline for first-degree amendments is today at 3:30 p.m.

Mr. President, later today Democrats will move forward on a bill sponsored by Democrats and Republicans--lots of Republicans--a bill that creates jobs at a time when we need them the most. I encourage the Republicans to join with those of us who want to move forward on this piece of legislation. Democrats will do our jobs--using this great legislative body to legislate--and make life better for struggling Americans. I encourage my Republican colleagues to do the same.

The travel promotion bill is critical for our economy. Tourism and travel generate $1 trillion in economic activity every year--$1 trillion. In its first year, this bill will create 40,000 new jobs.

There isn't a State in the Union that doesn't depend on tourism. I can remember the first time I went to a place where we had a Democratic retreat in Virginia. I walked out of my room and I saw this huge body of water and I thought: Gee, I didn't know we were on the ocean. It was just a huge--must have been a mile at least to the other side of that body of water. It was the James River. It was a river.

The reason I mention that is I have had the good fortune of traveling around Virginia. It is a wonderful place to visit. There are all kinds of tourist attractions in Virginia. But every State is about the same. Every State has its unique possibilities and places to go. I have been to virtually every State in the Union. There are so many wonderful places. I know Virginia better because for quite a long time my non- Nevada home was in Virginia and

three of my five children graduated from schools in Virginia. It is a wonderful place, and tourism is very important to Virginia. This bill is important to Virginia.

Again, travel and tourism generate $1 trillion in economic activity around the country every year, and in its first year, this bill will create more than 40,000 jobs. The bill will cut our deficit. We are not asking for money from the public trough to take care of this. This bill will cut our deficit by $425 million over the next decade. We save money by doing this. We make money by doing this. We will be taking the strategies that have made Las Vegas such a success and bringing them to our entire Nation's tourism industry. It is one of the many ways we are working to create jobs and help our economy recover.

So far, the minority has shown no interest in either creating jobs or in helping our economy recover. I hope that, in this case, past is not prologue.

One of my floor staff here said they saw a Republican staffer just a short time ago and the Republican staffer said: Why won't you let us offer amendments?

That is some kind of game being played. I have had conversations with the Republican leader and with other Republican Senators on this bill, and I have said: Let's move on with this legislation. Under the rules, the amendments ultimately have to be germane, but I have said: I don't care if they are germane or not. If you want to offer amendments, that is what we have done all year and we will do it here.

They wanted to offer four amendments on TARP, and I said: Well, that has nothing to do with tourism, but if you want to do that, go ahead and do it.

In response, Senator Sanders, from Vermont, told me that he had an amendment he wanted to offer. I said: Listen, Bernie, if you want to offer a nongermane amendment, you can do it. If they want to offer a nongermane amendment, they can; otherwise, we are not going to do that.

So we have all these nongermane amendments they want to offer, and he has one he wants to offer. His amendment simply restates the law and makes it a little stronger, and in effect what it does is takes a look at the oil companies to see if they are manipulating prices. So the Republicans said: No, we are not going to agree to that; we want you to take all of our amendments, we will vote on them, and none for you. Well, that is not fair, it is not reasonable, and it is only an excuse for Republicans to again stymie legislation.

So let's get the facts straight. At the start of the debate, we offered Republicans nongermane amendments. They could have more amendments than we could have. We agreed to do that. Not a single one of the Republican amendments was related to this bill, and some of the amendments were even duplicates. But I said: Let's go ahead and do it anyway. Of course, the Republicans said no. They refuse to let us move forward, once again wasting the American people's time and money. They refuse to let us move forward--I repeat--once again wasting the American people's time and money.

It is difficult to watch what is going on here and come away with a sense that the Republicans have even the slightest interest in legislating or that they have the slightest understanding of what families are facing across the country. Just last week, in the Roll Call publication, a Republican Senator said--and it is on the front page--``Senate GOP Still Saying No.'' A Republican Senator said this last week in one of the newspapers that cover Capitol Hill, Roll Call:

Democrats need to know when they bring [bills] up, we're

going to extend debate as long as we can--even if we can't

win it.

So I say to this Republican Senator and all Republican Senators: This isn't a game. I say to those watching and listening today: The next time Republicans trot out their stale standard talking points about congressional approval ratings or the inefficiency of government, pay attention to see whether they also quote their fellow Republican Senator who admits they are not here to work. These partisan tactics have consequences. These consequences will be evident on every kitchen table, every family budget, and every American's peace of mind.

I encourage Republicans to finish this legislation. I have said that if there are nongermane amendments they want to file, even though we have no obligation to do that, we will have those amendments during the 30-hour postcloture time and dispose of them. I don't understand what the deal is here. This is the 18th time we have had to file cloture this year--the 18th time. In spite of that, we have been able to get a lot of work done. But I do encourage Republicans to join with us in moving this legislation forward. It is important.

I look around the floor, and I see Virginia, Nevada, and Arizona Senators here. Tourism is very important. It will create jobs. It will cut our deficit. It is not a bad combination. So I would encourage Republicans to join in this important travel promotion bill and to openly pass it so we can bring jobs home, helping our country prosper once again. We know if we can get past this procedural hurdle where we need 60 votes, all Democrats will vote to move forward. That is the right thing to do. Shouldn't we get even the sponsors of the bill to join in?

We haven't stopped the amendment process. They are going to have to come up with a different reason for voting against it than that because everyone has had an opportunity.

So I hope we can move forward. It was a bill that was originally going to be managed by Senators Dorgan and Ensign. Senator Martinez has been heavily involved. I thought we had things all worked out with him and Senator Dorgan on Thursday, but it all fell apart because of the inability to have Senator Sanders have his amendment.

I simply don't understand what excuse they have for not moving forward with this legislation.

I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on the Dorgan amendment.

I ask unanimous consent the cloture motion on the bill be withdrawn.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I ask the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Madam President, I ask the Senate resume legislative session.

I ask now we proceed to a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Madam President, let me say a brief word on the cloture that was not invoked on the travel bill. I hope everyone understands what obstructionism is. This is obstructionism at its best. It goes along with what the Republicans said they wanted to do and that is stop everything, as indicated in the Roll Call newspaper last week.

This is a bill that saves the government money, almost a half billion dollars over 10 years. It would create, in the first year after passage of the bill, 40,000 jobs.

Republicans killed this over the most fictitious reasoning. They said they were not allowed to offer amendments. That is absolutely false. In fact, we had an agreement that they could offer amendments. There were no restrictions on what they could offer. They wanted to offer amendments regarding TARP. They wanted to offer five of those. Fine, I said, go ahead. We had one amendment we want to offer. They said: No, we just want to offer ours, you can't offer yours.

Every State would benefit from this legislation because tourism is so important and popular in every State, but the Republicans killed this. Is there any wonder they have lost, during the last two election cycles, by election, 15 Republican Senators? Is it any wonder? They are so enthralled with the status quo they want no improvements of anything, including they don't want to save the government a half billion dollars, they don't want to improve tourism because this may be another victory for President Obama.

I am certainly aware of the work done by the committee. The Commerce Committee works so hard. Senator Rockefeller was ill. He badly injured himself. Senator Dorgan stepped forward to get it out of that committee so we could do this. It is good for every State. Tourism is good for New Hampshire, it is good for Nevada, it is good for North Dakota, it is good for Wyoming, and it is good for Idaho. The Republicans killed our ability to save half a billion dollars. They killed our ability to create 40,000 new jobs. Tourism is a trillion-dollar industry in this country. The Republicans killed this legislation.

I would be happy to.

Madam President, if I could respond to my friend, we had, this year, 11 Republican sponsors of this bill. Nine of them voted against cloture, nine of the eleven. That, to me, is hard to calculate as being within the realm of sensibility. What in the world did they accomplish, other than maybe they are following the Senate GOP, still saying no?

But should they say no to things--maybe they should have a better rationale, saying we can't do this, it is a

government program; we can't do this, it costs money; we can't do this, we don't have time to do it.

None of those apply. It does not cost government money. We have time to do it. It is not a government program.

Madam President, the problem we have is one of time now. They have stalled and killed so much time on this bipartisan good piece of legislation. I think they should hear from their constituents. We should go ahead and invoke cloture. If there are germane amendments, we can do them. But I do not think we will go through the kabuki of having TARP amendments and all this.

We have tried in good faith to get this piece of legislation finished. If they want to finish this legislation, they should march up here and invoke cloture, which needs to be done. They can still offer germane amendments.

They may not like this bill. They may want to offer other amendments as they relate to this legislation. Unless I can be convinced otherwise--and I certainly can be, if I can be proven to be wrong; I am happy to be as reasonable as I can be--I think this is such a revolting development in a body that has pledged to do good things for the country. We have done a lot of good things this year. We have done it with little help from the Republicans. We have gotten some but not much. So they are stalling to prevent President Obama from accomplishing anything, even on a bill to save this country money.

Madam President, my father-in-law, may he rest in peace, emigrated from Russia and wound up in Duluth, MN. At that time, it was a booming town, very tough town. I have never been to Duluth. I have been to Minneapolis a few times, but I never had the opportunity to see the Land of a Thousand Lakes--I think that is what they call it.

Ten thousand. Well, in Nevada we do not have many lakes, we do not have five lakes. But I would love to come and spend some time in Minnesota. It is a wonderful tourism destination, in the winter as cold as it is there, and a lot of things to do there, and in the summer.

As Senator Dorgan mentioned, we should be promoting our country so people like my father-in-law from Duluth or Minneapolis or wherever could go visit and have a good time being a tourist.

It is the same in Nevada, New Hampshire, Illinois. Every State in the Union is heavily dependent on tourism, and the Republicans do not seem to much care.

This bill is probably finished for the year, and that means 40,000 less jobs. That means this country will go in the red more for not having the stimulation the economy would get from this bill.

I appreciate very much the subcommittee and the committee getting this bill on the floor. We thought we were going to have this love fest here, because this bill helps every State in the Union, helps every State in the Union create jobs, as the Senator from Minnesota said so rightly, jobs not manufacturing things, which is important; I wish we could do more to help that--not jobs that provide entertainment in the sense of the word of going to watch a ball game or something such as that. That is tourism. My son and the pals he runs around with traveled one summer all around the country watching ball games. That is tourism. And as the Senator from Minnesota mentioned, the reason tourism jobs in Nevada are so important, we have one union that has 60,000 members. Who are those members? They are maids, they are car valets, they are waiters, waitresses.

I think it is a shame that we have, because of the Republicans looking for an excuse to make President Obama look bad--President Obama wants this done. This is part of his program, tourism.

I appreciate the comments of my friend from Minnesota.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Shaheen.) The clerk will call the roll.