Floor Statements

Madam President, with the daunting challenges we face on our road to economic recovery--and that will come; it is a question of when--there is no reason to wait for a new year, a new Congress and a new President. We could vote now. We could take action now. We can't solve our economic challenges with one vote, but we could get started. So I say, why wait. Every day that goes by, thousands of Americans lose their jobs. Thousands of homes are lost. Scores of companies file for bankruptcy. So why don't we staunch the bleeding, stop some of the pain, and begin to turn things around? We have before the Senate a comprehensive economic stimulus plan worked out with the Appropriations Committee, the Finance Committee, and the Agriculture Committee, that we could pass and we should pass. I wish to express my appreciation to the members of the Appropriations, Finance, and Agriculture Committees. They have worked very hard to put this package together under the leadership of Senators Byrd, Baucus, and Harkin.

What do I mean by ``comprehensive''? Instead of addressing just one part of our economic crisis, this legislation takes many steps that economists agree we need.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 1122, S. 3689; that the bill be read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and there be no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, we have a matter on which the objection was made. I did not cover it all, of course, in that matter. We have significant things in that piece of legislation that were objected to dealing with infrastructure; unemployment benefits; FMAP, which is the matter to give some fiscal relief to our States; and it would give help to the auto industry. So this is the type of issue on which I wish we could move forward. I understand my colleagues. They are not going to accept this.

I think the provision we have dealing with taking the money out of the financial bailout that we have, that the White House has, the Treasury Department has--I have talked on the floor over the last 2 days about that. There is no need to belabor that point. But it is too bad we could not move forward on that basis.

It is my understanding Senators Levin and Bond are going to try to come up with some alternative proposal. When they come up with that, I would be happy to see if there is any way we can move procedurally. That is not going to be easy with what is going

on in the House and, actually, what is going on here. But I will confer with my counterpart, Senator McConnell, and we will do what we can to move forward.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that we move forward on this bill, S. 3689--there is a provision in that dealing with what we call FMAP--that the FMAP provision be taken out, that it be considered as separate legislation, be read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and there be no intervening action or debate.

The reason that is so very important is that FMAP is something that every State--every State, all 50--is in desperate need of. No part of our country has proven immune from our economic struggles. We are all sharing the heavy burden of these difficult times. But few places are suffering, though, more than we are in Nevada.

Budget shortfalls in Nevada are causing deep cuts in bedrock programs the Government must provide, programs that help and protect children, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.

The State of Nevada has been forced to cap enrollment in Nevada Check-Up, our form of children's health insurance. The State recently had to institute cuts to provider reimbursement. What is worse, these cuts will not end here unless we act to provide fiscal relief by increasing the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage; that is, FMAP.

What are the consequences of inaction? It was reported in the media this weekend that due to the provider rate cut, University Medical Center in Las Vegas, our public hospital, is discontinuing outpatient cancer treatment. And that is not just for Medicaid patients, it is for all patients. It is not clear if all those patients will be able to afford chemotherapy elsewhere, but it is pretty clear they will not be able to.

Low-income children who need orthopedic treatment will have to leave Las Vegas altogether for services elsewhere. They will likely have to leave the State.

There is more to come. The cuts are not over. This is the way it is in many States around the country. The budget shortfalls are deep. When States have to cut provider reimbursement for some of the things I have outlined, they have real difficulties in making the safety net not be one that has big holes in it. States have found no choice but to look at cutting services such as mental health and cutting actual people from the program, adding to the ranks of the insured at the worst possible time.

We have been working in the Senate to provide help. The stimulus bill we introduced includes a temporary 8-percent FMAP increase to stave off these cuts. It will not fix the problem, but it may make a difference in ensuring that our children are not without the care they need. I hope we can take that step.

Madam President, I have one final consent request on which I would like to move forward. This is the matter dealing with automobiles. We know the issue before this body. There have been speeches given the last several days about where the automobile industry is. We have watched on national TV the congressional hearings that have taken place on this side of the Capitol and on the other side of the Capitol. We need to try to figure out some way to move forward.

We believe the best way to move forward is taking the money, as I have indicated, out of the so-called TARP money. I do not believe we need the legislation. I think--well, I don't know. I have talked to Secretary Paulson twice today. He knows he has authority to take money out of that; he just does not want to do it.

So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of a bill I have at the desk, which is the text of title VI of S. 3689 regarding automotive industry assistance; that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and there be no intervening action or debate.

Reserving the right to object, Madam President, we have had no hearings. We have no text. I know my friend, Senator Bond, is a man of faith. I think I am too. But this is carrying it a little too far. We do not know anything about this. I look forward to a piece of legislation we can look at. Hopefully, it can be done tonight or tomorrow, and we will be happy to look at it.

I have had many conversations today and yesterday with the senior Senator from the State of Kentucky, Mr. McConnell, and we understand the importance of this issue. We will try to work to move forward on it. But I want everyone to understand, no matter how hard we work, how hard we try, the House of Representatives is going home tomorrow. OK. They are leaving.

I understand the importance. But I would hope that in addition to understanding the importance, we have to face reality. The reality is, we have tried a number of different approaches.

I will be happy to look at the approach my friend from Missouri has. He is a hard-working Senator. I understand how hard he works. He is a real advocate for doing what he thinks is appropriate for his State and our country.

Senator Levin and I have had hours of conversation regarding this issue. Every conversation I have with him he mentions the name of the Senator from Missouri. So I understand what this is all about, but, recognizing we have had no hearings, we have no legislation, I object.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that morning business be closed.

Madam President, I ask permission to withdraw the motion to proceed to S. 3297.

Madam President, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 1123, H.R. 6867, an act to provide for additional emergency unemployment compensation and, with that, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

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

Madam President, I appreciate the patience of all my colleagues.

That is right.

Madam President, I certainly think it would be appropriate if we can do that. I will do everything I can to move this forward.

I again say, Madam President, I appreciate the patience of everyone today. A lot of times we do not spend a lot of time here, but it is hard getting here. I appreciate it very much. And we were interrupted by the President of Bolivia.

I should say--and I am sorry I did not to my friend, Senator McConnell--if we do get cloture, then we could even do that, have a 60- vote threshold on that. And if that were done, we would be out of here as far as I know. So we will work together to see what we can get done. We will work to see what we can get done in the next 12 hours.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, following my remarks and the remarks of Senator McConnell, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senators allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I, of course, welcome everyone back for what we hope to be a short period of time before Thanksgiving. We, of course, have completed this election. We still have three Senate contests where we are waiting to get the results. One of them should be decided in the next few days, the one in Alaska; the one in Georgia will be decided on December 2; and the one in Minnesota will take, I am told, a month or 6 weeks. In that race they have 3 million hand ballots, and Minnesota is going to count every one of them. So that is going to take a while.

In the summer of 1858, a young State legislator from Illinois accepted his party's nomination for the Senate with a timeless speech that echoed from coast to coast. That speech has been recited many times. He said:

``A house divided against itself cannot stand.'' . . . I do

not expect the Union to be dissolved--I do not expect the

house to fall--but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

That is what he said. One hundred fifty years later, a young Senator from the land of Lincoln stood on the very same steps on which Abraham Lincoln stood to announce his pursuit of his party's nomination for President by calling upon our country to not just believe in his ability to change Washington but to believe in what we can do together if we set aside what divides us and embrace a common purpose.

Over the past 21 months, Barack Obama has had a message of hope much like Abraham Lincoln's which has spread across this country like a tidal

wave. Two weeks ago tomorrow--it seems like a long time ago; it was less than 2 weeks ago, Mr. President--Americans waited on lines that stretched for blocks to answer Senator Obama's call to cast their vote for change.

Yesterday, Barack Obama officially ended his term in the Senate and traded up to a new title: President-elect of the United States. It has been a pleasure to get to know this fine young man and work with his remarkable intellect during his short tenure in the Senate. His presence in these Halls and on the Senate floor will be missed. But the Senate's loss is America's gain. I look forward to working with President-elect Obama, as we all do, as he concludes one chapter and begins another in his life. But, as no one knows better than the President-elect, our joy in his election is tempered by a sober realization of the challenges, great and grave, that lie ahead.

In the 6 weeks since we have been gone, our economic crisis has deepened. We have seen numerous bankruptcies, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, consumer confidence plummet, and unemployment go up to 6.5 percent. Major companies and some minor companies have gone bankrupt, such as Mrs. Fields cookies, one of my favorite places to go in a busy mall in Las Vegas--because nearly every mall you go to has declared bankruptcy. That is only one example.

This morning we learned that Citigroup intends to cut an additional 50,000 jobs. They have already cut 20,000. We are seeing a potential meltdown in the auto industry, with consequences that could impact directly upon millions of American workers and cause further devastation to our economy. If ever there were a time for working together, this is it. Senators have a choice to make. We can wait until January when we have a new Congress and a new President or we can start trying to work on some of these problems now. If we work together in the coming days, perhaps we can begin delivering solutions for the American people.

Today we will introduce a comprehensive economic stimulus plan worked out with the Appropriations, Finance, and Agriculture Committees. This legislation will invest in infrastructure to create jobs, extend unemployment insurance for those who are out of work, provide food stamps to help those struggling families make ends meet, and provide State fiscal relief to prevent States from being forced to cut services and raise taxes. There are other things in it, and I need not go through all of that. It is a package of some $100 billion.

We also put in aid for the ailing U.S. auto industry. The Treasury Department has acknowledged they could provide the auto companies the temporary assistance to keep automakers solvent by taking money out of the $700 billion we have already provided to the Treasury Department. But the Secretary of the Treasury said he chooses not to do that because all it would take is one stroke of a pen, and that problem would be solved.

We also know that Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke has authority to provide funds to the automobile industry, but thus far neither the Treasury Department nor the Federal Reserve has done so, and from what we have heard, they have no intention of doing so in the near future. But this week we can, Congress can, if we move forward, protect and create American jobs, help working families, and prevent our economy from falling even further into recession. In the event there is objection to passing this important legislation, we will have an opportunity to vote on a second piece of legislation that consists solely of unemployment insurance and relief for the auto industry and the auto industry's workforce. So we have the big stimulus package. If we can't get that, then we will move to the unemployment compensation extension together with the auto bailout.

I ask my colleagues to show the American people in the face of tremendous economic pain and uncertainty we will not have to wait until January.

On another matter, Senator Bennett and I have made a decision that rather than move forward on the lands package, which is hundreds of bills that are so important to a lot of people, a lot of Senators, and certainly a lot of people around the country, we are better off waiting until we come back in January. Senator Bennett and I believe we will have more votes then. It will be easier to do it at that time.

But one of the first things we are going to do is, there will be a bipartisan piece of legislation introduced that will include all the stuff that has been held up these past 2 years, the so-called lands bills. That will be the first or second thing we do when we come back in January. We will move forward on that package by using rule XIV. I think that serves everyone's interests. We have been told that if we bring it up today there would be a requirement to read that bill. It would take more than 24 hours to do that. It is obvious that likely there would not be the votes for that.

So, as I said, Senator Bennett and I believe that is the best way to proceed, and I am convinced that is right. I have spoken to other people here who are very interested in this, Senator Salazar and others who believe this was so important to get done, but I think discretion is the better part of valor and I alert everyone we will do this when we get back.

So I look forward to this week. We have these bright new Senators coming. In just a few minutes I will meet the new Senator from Idaho, whom I have not met. I have heard such good things about him. He has a remarkable record. He served as a Governor of the State of Idaho and then Lieutenant Governor of the State of Idaho and now is the new Senator replacing Senator Craig.

I had the opportunity to meet with Secretary Johanns, the new Senator-elect from Nebraska. What an outstanding person he is. I am sure he will be a great addition to the Senate. And I have had an opportunity to meet some of the Democrats who are coming in.

I think this is an opportunity for us to become closer as a Senate family. I certainly hope we can do that. I hope we can look forward to working together, not as partisans but as public servants, all devoted to delivering the change this country needs and these difficult times demand.

For me personally, I think this is also a time not to look back. This has been a very difficult 2 years that will end come January 1. The Senate was evenly divided. I mean, how much more evenly divided could it be, with Tim Johnson taking ill and the fact that he was not here, able to operate. So we had a Senate where we didn't have a majority. There were other things that came up where we as the majority didn't have a majority.

But there is no need to look back; we need to look forward. There were reasons for everyone doing what they did. We can let the historians write about what took place in the past. Let's look forward to what we can talk about as a better future for our country. With the margin coming in January not being as close as it has been, I want everyone within the sound of my voice to know that we don't know how these three Senate races are going to come out. They are still counting the votes. We don't know what our majority is going to be. But whatever it is, if it is what it now appears to be or we pick up one of the Senate seats or two of them or all of them or whatever it is, I make a commitment to everyone that the only way we can succeed is by working together.

Everyone realizes the House of Representatives has different rules than we have. They can push things through because they have a majority. Perhaps we can push through some things because we have a majority, but I don't want to do that. I want to pass things because it is good for the country and we do it on a bipartisan basis. We need to work together.

We have Senators of goodwill who are willing to set aside their partisan differences and move forward. That is what we need to do. I have said many times, if we are able to accomplish things here there is credit to go around to every Senator. But if we continue to fail in our accomplishments, there is blame to go around for everyone.

I hope we all look forward to the coming year, one of hope and necessity to change things because we obviously have a big hole, and we have to try to find our way out of it. The best way to do that is to have 100 people working in the same way.

Mr. President, let me say through the Chair to my distinguished counterpart, congratulations on your victory. As George Will, the esteemed columnist, wrote over the weekend, he compared your victory to Henry Clay, and I know the Senator is from the State of Kentucky. So I congratulate you on years of hard work.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, this resolution concerns a request for testimony in a civil action in Multnomah County Court in Portland, OR. In this action, the plaintiff, an anti-war protester, seeks damages for an alleged false arrest in March 2007 in the lobby of a private office building housing Senator Smith's Portland, OR office. The defendant owner of the building has requested that an employee in the Senator's Portland office provide in connection with upcoming summary judgment proceedings a declaration concerning relevant communications the employee had with building security officers related to the events in question. Senator Smith would like to cooperate by providing testimony from that employee. This resolution would authorize that employee to testify in connection with this action, with representation by the Senate Legal Counsel.

Mr. President, this morning following leader remarks, we are going to be in morning business with Senators allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each. There will be no rollcall votes today.

Mr. President, I want to spend just a few minutes today talking about Chuck Hagel, the Senator from the State of Nebraska.

I was raised in an environment where things were physical--football, baseball, boxing, fighting, and being tough. That was important. And as I have looked through the Senate over these years, there is no one that fits that bill more than Chuck Hagel. The senior Senator from the State of Nebraska is both physically and mentally very tough.

Senator Hagel is a person who suffered multiple broken noses playing high school and college football and, as we read in his book, an occasional scuffle off the field. Senator Hagel is a man who won a football scholarship to go to college because of his athletic prowess but had to change his plans when injury left him with an uncorrectable pinched nerve in his neck.

Senator Hagel is a man who risked his own life on many occasions, but on one occasion risked his own life and suffered terribly to save his brother's life in the jungle of Cambodia during the Vietnam conflict. Senator Hagel is a man who still carries shrapnel from his heroic uniformed service to our Nation.

Senator Hagel tells the story in his book about his childhood, that when he and his brother Tom were growing up, the Hagel family moved around Nebraska to seven different houses in small Nebraska towns. The seven places he lived formed a loop around the State. So when Chuck first ran for the Senate in 1996, he could go almost anyplace in Nebraska and tell local crowds, ``it's good to be home.''

When Chuck Hagel's draft number was called in 1967, he was given an order to ship out to Germany after being inducted. But he said: I don't want to go to Germany. The war is in Vietnam. So he asked to change his orders to go to Vietnam where the action was. What this young man from Nebraska believed was that fighting a war meant going to the front lines, not someplace thousands of miles away. So that is where he wound up.

Since the Sullivan brothers' deaths in World War II, it was not very often that siblings found themselves in the same combat zone fighting, but that isn't what happened in this situation with the Hagel brothers. No one really knows how--they think it was a stroke of luck, but it remains a bit of a mystery--Chuck Hagel and Tom Hagel wound up in the same infantry, same

fighting unit, fighting shoulder to shoulder in the jungles of Cambodia.

Mr. President, in the span of less than a month, these two brothers each had the chance to save the other's life. Not only did they have the chance, but they took that chance and they were successful. Here is one account:

One of the soldiers . . . hit a trip wire, setting off a

mine that had been placed in a tree so that it would detonate

at face level. Bodies, body parts and shrapnel were blasted

back into the ranks as the squad was crossing a stream. Tom

picked himself up and looked for his brother. What he saw was

a `geyser' of blood gushing from Chuck's chest. Tom, then

only 19, stanched the bleeding and bandaged the wound, only

then noticing that he'd been hit himself in the arm. Twenty-

five days later, it was Chuck's turn to rescue Tom when their

troop carrier hit a hand-detonated mine as it emerged from a

village in the delta. Tom had been in the turret behind a

.50-caliber machine gun. He was unconscious, not obviously

alive, when his brother got to him. The blast had blown out

Chuck's eardrums and severely burned his left side, but

knowing the carrier might soon explode, he worked feverishly

to pull Tom from the wreckage, then threw his body on top of

Tom's as Vietcong fighters in ambush sprayed the area with

gunfire.

For this remarkably courageous service, SGT Chuck Hagel was decorated with the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, the Army Commendation Medal, the Combat Infantryman Badge, and two Purple Hearts.

After the war, Chuck Hagel came to Washington and worked on Capitol Hill. By the age of 26, he was chief of staff to Congressman John McCollister of Nebraska. Within 10 years, he was appointed by President Reagan to be the second highest ranking official in the Veterans Administration. But very typical of Chuck Hagel, after just a few months during his term of service, he spoke out against a cut in benefits to Vietnam veterans and quit the Department in protest. This was not the stepping stone to an impressive career in Washington, as some had thought, because Chuck Hagel spoke out against something he thought was wrong.

When Senator Hagel left Capitol Hill, he scraped together whatever money he could find by selling a car and cashing in life insurance policies to invest in an upstart business that built networks for wireless phones. Within a few years, Chuck Hagel's company was one of the most successful cellular telephone providers in America. He entered the American system of free enterprise and was extremely successful. But after succeeding in business, Chuck returned his attention to politics and won a seat in the Senate in 1996.

I have served with Chuck Hagel in the Senate for 12 years. One would be hard-pressed to find a more conservative Member than the senior Senator from Nebraska. Although our political philosophies differ, I know Chuck Hagel to be one of the bravest and most fiercely independent Members of this legislative body. He has been a deficit hawk when others in his party abandoned fiscal restraint.

He crossed the aisle and worked with my predecessor, Senator Daschle, as well as Senator Kennedy and Senator Martinez on the Republican side, to seek a comprehensive immigration plan that would be both tough and compassionate but, above all, fair.

He served the people of Nebraska well as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, the Banking Committee, the Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, the Intelligence Committee, and the Rules Committee.

I will be forever grateful for the courage Senator Hagel has shown on the Iraq war. He spoke out early against the war, he spoke out often, and he was right. As all Senators know, speaking up against a hallmark policy of one's own party is no easy task. With Senator Hagel's help, we were able to move the debate forward and to finally provide some oversight on the incompetent management of the war. Although Senator Hagel will not see the end of the war as a Member of this body, there is no doubt that his courage has brought us closer to that day.

One of the most remarkable days in my political career was the time when we were working on how to do something to change the course on the war in Iraq. I went and visited Senator Hagel in his office. As you walk in, you see a picture of Tom and Chuck Hagel in a mechanized vehicle in the jungles of Cambodia--or Vietnam. I don't know exactly where it was, but Southeast Asia. He is very proud of his military career. But we visited, and I probably wouldn't be a very good salesman, selling automobiles or a house because it was hard for me to close the deal, saying: Chuck, will you vote with me? At home that night, he called me and said words to the effect: I listened to you; I'm going to vote with you.

His vote made the difference. It allowed us to carry the day and send a bill to the President that the President vetoed. Senator Hagel didn't wait for me to close the deal, he closed the deal. I have great admiration and respect for him and what he did that night. I think he changed the direction of the country and how it felt about the war in Iraq, and it allowed the people in America to know that we could do something, that we are not powerless.

It is well known that Senator Hagel has been considered on more than one occasion as a candidate for President or Vice President. Here is what he said, though.

I don't have to be President. I don't have to be a senator.

I just have to live with myself.

So whatever path Chuck Hagel follows next, he, his wife Lilibet, and their daughter Allyn and son Ziller, should have the deepest pride in the lasting impact of Senator Chuck Hagel's patriotism and service for the betterment of the Nation we love through both the military and the Senate, where he has served so gallantly.