Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning, Sunday, July 27, for a pro forma session only; that following the pro forma session, the Senate adjourn until 3 p.m., Monday, July 28; 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, and the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3297, a bill to advance America's priorities, and that the time until 4 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees.

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, Senators should be prepared to start voting at about 4 p.m. on Monday. In fact, it will be 4 p.m. Monday because any--we have the prayer time. I ask the Chair, are the prayer and the pledge counted as part of the hour before the cloture vote?

So I would say to everyone, they should be pretty well informed that we will vote at 4 o'clock. Unless something comes up that I do not foresee, we will start voting at 4 o'clock.

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

Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on the bill, S. 3268.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3186, the Low- Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

I ask unanimous consent that following leader time, the time until 10:30 be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees.

As previously agreed to, the time from 10:30 until 5:30 will be equally divided and controlled by the leaders in 30-minute alternating blocks, with the majority controlling the first 30 minutes and the Republicans controlling the next 30 minutes.

As a reminder to all Senators, there will be a moment of silence at 3:40 p.m. today in remembrance of Officers Gibson and Chestnut. They were murdered

10 years ago today in the Capitol. All Senators are encouraged to be on the floor for this moment of silence.

Mr. President, it is my understanding and I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Florida, Mr. Nelson, be recognized to make remarks regarding our guest Chaplain.

Mr. President, it appears that our Republican colleagues think they finally found a way. They think, with Americans from coast to coast facing huge gas prices, up to $4.70 a gallon in some places, they can score some easy political points off the energy crisis. They say that all we need to do is open our coasts for oil companies to drill and gas prices will go down. I should say that is what they did say. Now they say that is not enough. They say the energy crisis is so important that the Senate should stay on the issue and do nothing else until this problem is solved. We all know actions speak louder than words, and the Republican rhetoric has no basis in reality.

This is not the first time Democrats have tried to address energy. We have tried on many other occasions. We have worked to try to lower gas prices before this latest energy crisis hit. In fact, Democrats have proposed plans to lower gas prices six times in the past few weeks. Six times, Republicans have blocked us, just as they are blocking us now on the speculation legislation. What has happened over those weeks? Gas prices have broken one record after another.

Democrats proposed legislation to extend tax credits for innovators who are researching and producing clean, renewable energy to decrease our consumption of oil. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation to roll back tax breaks on the oil companies--remember, last year they made $250 billion, oil companies that are making record profits while we pay record prices--and invest that money in renewable energy. But the Republicans said no. Democrats proposed a cap-and-trade system that would address global warming and provide billions of dollars of alternative energy and create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation to protect consumers from price gouging of already record-high prices. Republicans, of course, said no, because this would have been an opportunity to have the oil companies pay back some of the obscene profits they are making. Democrats proposed a renewable electricity standard which would save consumers billions of dollars through energy savings. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation to go after OPEC for collusion and price fixing. But the Republicans said no. Democrats proposed legislation that would curb the excessive speculation of Wall Street traders who artificially bid up the price we pay at the pump. Republicans said no. Democrats proposed improvements to the LIHEAP program which helps senior citizens and the disabled with assistance to pay the cost of heating and cooling their homes. Republicans said no. Democrats even offered the one thing they have been talking about: drilling. Let's vote on drilling. But the Republicans said no. They didn't take our offer, yet they claim it is the panacea for the problems facing America today. They said no.

The game they seem to be playing is this: Make the American people think they are willing to grind the Senate to a halt to deal with gas prices. The American people obviously can see the record.

Republicans are having trouble finding out what they really want. Yesterday, out of the blue, came a new one. After all these years, they decided they wanted to drill in ANWR again, even though their Presidential nominee, John McCain, has said no on the drilling they have said they want to do. Maybe the one reason they have been a little hesitant is because their Presidential nominee, John McCain, has said it is only psychological; it is not going to help anything.

The American people can see the record. We have tried. Democrats have offered a comprehensive set of solutions for the short- and long-term, and Republicans have offered nothing but talk. They have talked more about drilling. What they don't say is that their drilling bill wouldn't put a drop of oil in the marketplace for at least 12 to 15 years. Even the Republican nominee for President, John McCain, has called the Republican drilling plan purely psychological. Democrats believe in increased domestic production through responsible drilling, but the American people deserve solutions a lot quicker than 12 to 15 years.

If Republicans truly believe their drilling legislation would solve the problem, why would they say no to an offer to have a vote on it? It doesn't add up. Or maybe it does add up.

Fortunately, the American people are seeing clearly exactly what is going on. That is why a moderate columnist like David Broder today said that he has never seen a worse month for a Presidential candidate than what we have seen with John McCain this past month.

It appears there is a lot of desperation going on here. While the Republicans keep talking--we have three filibusters going on as we speak--Democrats are trying to address a critical problem the American people are facing every day. Republican strategists have called the disingenuous Republican strategy a Hail Mary for the fall elections. Perhaps a 2-year Republican strategy of nonstop delay, obstruction, and slow-walking has put them in such electoral peril that a Hail Mary is all they have left. Their strategy is bad for the American people. I have no doubt that the American people will see what they are trying to do and, come this November, will reject it.

Madam President, some may know that when I attended George Washington Law School many years ago, I worked full time on the swing-- or night shift--as a Capitol police officer.

My service as a Capitol policeman was not one where I did anything courageous or notable.

But even then, before the heightened awareness to threat we have today, we police officers knew if the call came to sacrifice to protect this U.S. Capitol, our jobs meant answering the call.

Ten years ago, two officers did just that.

Special Agent John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut were stationed near the east entrance on the House side, mere steps from where we stand.

When a gunman attempted to bypass metal detectors, Officer Chestnut answered the call of duty and blocked his path.

The gunman shot Officer Chestnut point blank.

Hearing shots, Special Agent Gibson also answered the call of duty.

He warned nearby staffers to seek cover and confronted the attacker. They exchanged fire.

Despite valiant efforts to keep both heroes alive, including efforts by my predecessor, Senator Frist, Special Agent Gibson and Officer Chestnut died from their wounds.

I knew Agent Gibson. During a congressional retreat to Virginia, he came to care for my wife when she became ill during the night. I remember how he ran to her side. I will never forget how kind and gentle he was with her.

I knew Officer Chestnut only by face and in shared greetings whenever we passed each other.

But I do know he was a veteran of the Vietnam war, had given 18 years of service to the Capitol Police, and heartbreakingly, was just months away from a hard-earned retirement.

We are honored to have Agent Gibson's wife Lyn and their children, Kristen, Jack, and Danny; Officer Chestnut's wife Wen-Ling and their children, Will and Karen; and their many cherished friends and family.

We hope that it has been some comfort to you--the ones they loved most--to know that in the 10 years since that terrible day, some measure of you burden has come to rest upon all of our shoulders.

So today we plant a tree in the name and memory of John Gibson and Jacob Chestnut.

The tree is small now, but every day it will grow taller, stronger, and broader. Its roots will grasp ever deeper for the American soil that lies below, the American soil that both men defended so heroically.

As this tree takes root and grows and flourishes, it will remind us always of these two brave men.

And though it will shed its leaves in the fall, it will always bloom when spring arrives again.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3268, the energy speculation legislation. The time until 11 o'clock will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the Republicans controlling the first half and the majority controlling the next half. Then the time from 11 until 4 p.m. will be controlled in 30-minute alternating blocks of time, with Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes. At 11 a.m. today, in the Rotunda, there will be a congressional ceremony commemorating the 60th anniversary of the integration of the U.S. Armed Forces. There will be a classified briefing for Senators in S-407 from 4 until 5:30 p.m. today with National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.

Order of Procedure

It is my understanding that there is an agreement--and if not, I ask unanimous consent that it be so--that time postcloture will continue to run during that time.

Tomorrow, July 24, there will be a 10th anniversary commemoration of the murder of U.S. Capitol Police Officers Chestnut and Gibson. As I indicated yesterday, there will be a moment of silence throughout the Capitol at 3:40 p.m. in remembrance of the fallen officers. That was the time they were killed. Senators are encouraged to be at their desks in the Senate Chamber for that moment of silence.

Mr. President, S. 3297 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

I object to any further proceedings with regard to this legislation.

Mr. President, the House is going to vote, probably sometime shortly after lunchtime today, on the comprehensive housing legislation. I have spoken during the last month or so to Secretary Paulson several times. Each call he places to me--I don't call him, even though I feel comfortable in calling him--is because he is very concerned about what is going on with the American economy. He recognizes that there are deep problems, but one of the problems is housing.

People understand more every day that it is more than just the person losing their home that is a concern to us with foreclosures. There are 8,500 new foreclosure notices every day. It is more than just that person or that family in that home. It affects the neighborhood. It affects the government entity where the home is located

because their taxes are no longer coming in. And, of course, it also has a dramatic effect on the servicer of these loans and the ultimate lender of these loans. It is a situation where, if there is a homebuilding turndown or cessation of homebuilding, it has a tremendous impact because so many different items go into a home--carpeting, appliances, brickwork, landscaping. It has a tremendous pyramid effect. Secretary Paulson recognizes that.

The package that has been put together by Senator Dodd and the distinguished Senator from Alabama, Mr. Shelby, working with their counterparts in the House, is a piece of legislation imperfect in nature but a very good piece of legislation. The package basically keeps the Senate-passed bill intact but includes a variation of the proposal made by the administration to shore up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

I am happy to report to everyone that the Bush administration has reversed its veto threat on this legislation. That is really good news for the American people. But we still see, even in today's press, there are some Republican Senators threatening to delay and possibly try to derail this legislation. I have had conversations with Senator McConnell, and I don't think it can be derailed. They can slow it down a little bit. We are going to do everything we can--I am confident that is the case--Senator McConnell and I, to get this done just as quickly as we can. I hope we can finish it today. That would be great, if it could go to the President today, because now that President Bush has joined our call to pass this crucial legislation into law, I would hope those few stragglers who have said in the press they will do what they can to slow this down would understand that if we have to invoke cloture, because it takes a couple days, it would mean another 17,000 foreclosures. I hope that is not necessary. The Senate doesn't need and our country cannot afford another filibuster on this matter.

Let me briefly say on the package of bills we have put together because of the obstruction of mainly one Senator, I was disappointed to read in this morning's press that a Republican Senator held most of these up, saying: I am going to do everything I can to stall this legislation, to prevent it from passing. He may be successful. If we don't get enough support from our Republican colleagues, that, in fact, will be the case. But I hope everyone understands that this has some extremely important measures in it.

This package we have put together has the Christopher and Dana Reeve paralysis legislation. It is so important. From the time we started moving forward on this legislation until today, they are both dead. One experienced the paralysis; the other experienced taking care of Superman, the man who was Superman and was injured in that very terrible accident where he was thrown from a horse.

We are trying to establish with this legislation a registry for people who have Lou Gehrig's disease. This is a terribly difficult disease. From the time one is diagnosed with it until you die is an average of 18 months. We will never, ever get ahold of this disease unless we pass what we are trying to do in this bundled legislation. We are simply trying to establish a registry so that for someone in Baltimore, MD, who has this disease--there are about 6,000 people who get this disease, and then they die--someone in Las Vegas, someone in Louisville, someone in Chicago, there is a registry where physicians can put it all together, start computerizing it so that scientists trying to get ahold of this disease can look at the histories of these patients from around the country. That is the beginning of every successful scientific conclusion to these diseases, so that something can be done to alleviate the pain and suffering and hopefully arrive at a cure.

Those are just two examples. There are many others. There are 40-odd bills. There is the Emmett Till bill which directs the Federal Government to do something about these unsolved murders. There is legislation in here dealing with child pornography.

I would hope people don't look at this as taking away Senators' rights. This doesn't take away Senators' rights. I saw in this morning's press one Senator said: Well, I don't like to start taking away Senators' rights. In fact, it is just the opposite. When 98 Senators think something should happen, why should 1 or 2 Senators prevent for months and months our moving forward? We had to do it once before, bundling a bunch of bills from the Energy Committee that had already passed the House. These bills have all passed the House of Representatives. They have all been reported out of the committees overwhelmingly. I would hope that when we get to this, it can end very quickly.

We have, as Democrats, made it clear that we will consider responsible solutions or a solution to energy policy that would help alleviate the price of gas. We would hope we can do something that would deal with energy supply, do something to reduce demand and ultimately lower prices for American families.

Earlier this week, we offered a comprehensive proposal to address the energy crisis. As a first step, though, we have offered a proposal to stem excessive speculation of Wall Street traders who buy and sell oil futures with the click of a mouse. They have only been able to do that for 8 years, but now they are doing it in huge numbers. What they do is they bid the price higher and higher and leave the American people to pay the money they are putting into their pockets.

I am somewhat disconcerted. We have had on this Senate floor 47 of 49 Republican Senators come to the floor and talk about speculation being a real problem with America, and gas prices. As part of their package of doing something about the energy crisis, they had in that speculation. So we have a measure on the floor now, and they don't want it. They don't want to do that. It is very hard to comprehend that.

We know speculation is not the problem, but we do know it is a problem. We know there are experts who have said that speculation has raised the price of oil from 20 to 50 percent. So it seems that it is something we should address and address very strongly, and that is what our legislation does.

Now, I said this is not the entire solution. Of course, not. It is a problem but not the only problem. We Democrats believe there should be more domestic production, and we have said that day after day after day. We are willing, as Senator Bingaman has so directed in public forums and privately--we have legislation we believe will increase significantly domestic production.

Right now, oil companies hold leases to 68 million acres of land on which they could be drilling but are doing nothing. It was less than 2 years ago that we worked with our Republican colleagues to increase the ability of oil companies to move into the Gulf of Mexico, which they said was the best place they wanted to go. We were generous; 8.3 million acres are now available off the coast that were not before, but in the 2 years the oil companies have done nothing.

Again, you do not have to take just what I say. Time magazine yesterday said if you go through all the steps for offshore drilling, it will take 13 to 15 years. Once you decide you are going to go out and take a look at it, it would take 13 to 15 years before a drop of oil would come out under the best of circumstances.

So the American people obviously cannot wait 13 years for solutions to high energy prices. We have heard day after day, now week after week, the Republicans saying the panacea, the silver bullet, is to allow Governors to decide where drilling should take place off the Outer Continental Shelf. So we have said: Fine, if you want to vote on that, let's have a vote on that. We would have Senator Bingaman's proposal as a so-called side by side. We would vote on both of them. I do not understand why now we hear from the Republican whip that the Republicans want to offer 28 amendments. I have heard the statements. I have heard the statements: On other bills, we have offered more than one amendment. We have spent days debating this.

We are where we are. We are here. We are going to be out of session, hopefully, by a week from Friday. So we do

not have 3 weeks to do on this Energy bill, and we cannot do everything that needs to be done with energy. But it would seem to me if we did something about speculation and solve the domestic production problem, as the Republicans have said they want to do--let's vote on their issue and let's vote on ours--it seems to me that is a pretty fair way to go. But Republicans will not take yes for an answer.

The oil companies run full-page ads saying: Please let us drill off the Outer Continental Shelf more than what we do now. Please let us do that. They pay for these full-page ads. For the Republicans, that is part of their playbook. They go along with what the oil companies want. We are saying: Go ahead. We will have a vote on that. You said for weeks now that is what needs to be done. In fact, they had a term that said: Talk less, drill more. So let's have a vote on their proposal.

But as of a short time ago, we had no one agreeing to do that. If they choose to reject a vote on their drilling amendment, it will be left to the American people to clearly decide--and I think it would be pretty easy--as to who is serious about addressing the energy problems we have.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time be yielded back and the Senate adopt the motion to proceed to S. 3268; that once the bill is reported, the only amendments in order be one amendment for each leader, or designee, on the subject of drilling and that these amendments be subject to an affirmative 60-vote threshold; that if the amendments do not achieve that threshold, then they be withdrawn; that debate on each amendment be limited to 2 hours each, to be debated concurrently, equally divided and controlled in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the majority amendment first in the sequence; that upon disposition of both amendments, the bill be read a third time, and the Senate then proceed to Calendar No. 864, H.R. 6377, the House companion; that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 3268, as amended, if amended, be inserted in lieu thereof, the bill be advanced to third reading, and the Senate then vote on passage of H.R. 6377, as amended, without further intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, for the American people here, let's check this out and understand the Republicans are not even now wanting to maintain the status quo. They want to go backward. They want yesterday forever. We are not back when we were debating other energy bills. We are debating today's energy crisis, and that energy crisis is pretty significant.

We have two issues before this body today that we should resolve. No. 1, all experts, with rare exceptions, say the runup in prices is caused by speculation--20 to 50 percent. The American people could stand a break at the pump. If we pass antispeculation legislation, let's say it is the lower number--we only lessen gas prices by 20 percent--that is pretty significant. Let's do simple math: $4--20 percent--that is 80 cents a gallon. It is then $3.20 a gallon rather than $4 a gallon. Pretty good. That is what we are being called upon to do here today. The Republicans do not want to do that.

In addition to that, get this picture: For weeks, the Republicans-- weeks--the Republicans have been talking about they want to have Governors decide what should happen off their coasts. Let's have a vote on that. If they think that is the crucial thing to do rather than speculation--drilling is their deal--let's vote on their proposal, and anytime we will take that as a debate we would love. We will take theirs. We will have a counterproposal. We will debate those two issues. That is what we should do. But instead of that, the Republicans are running as they have done all year, dodging and feinting and saying: Well, not today. Later. Later. We are saying: It is time to do this now.

There is no question this energy thing is extremely important, and we should do something about it. We say: Let's do it. Let's get the domestic production thing done. Let's have a vote on that. We believe our proposal is extremely important, and it will certainly do a great deal to affect the price of oil, not the least of which in our proposal is telling President Bush to do something with the huge multimillion gallon reserve we have, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and start drawing some oil out of that. His dad did it, and it lowered prices some 10 or 15 percent. So we have speculation at 20 percent minimum. We will do that. We have another 10 percent. That is 30 percent. We are willing to do that debate. That is a pretty significant debate.

We have a lot of other things we have to do--maybe not as important as gas prices but pretty important. Housing we have to work in here sometime. We have to do something with old people, senior citizens, people who are infirm and disabled who benefit from LIHEAP. We want to do that legislation. That is important, and that is also energy related. But we are being prevented from doing that because the Republicans

want to live yesterday again. We want to look to the future. That is why we believe speculation is where we should be. We should also do something about domestic production.

Finally, there are other things. We are going to have a recess. The national conventions are coming. We have to come back in the fall and complete our work and that could take a significant period of time. But we also have to do something with renewable energy. That is one of the main things pending--renewable energy--and we have been prevented from doing that.

Why? Listen to this one. Because the Republicans do not want to pay for it. They want to continue, as we have done with the Iraq war, spending $5,000 every second in borrowed money. We have been told by the House of Representatives--and I have a letter with 218 signatures on it--saying: Send us the bill for renewables, and send it quickly, but you cannot have it not paid for. You have to pay for it. We have two pay-fors. We are going to tax the hedge fund companies, but they agree it should be done because they are manipulating the system by going offshore playing around with their taxes. Even the hedge fund operators say: That is right, we should not be able to do that. But the Republicans are holding that up.

In answer to the energy problems of this country, Sun, wind, geothermal, biomass, that is where the future of our country is, as indicated by a staunch lifetime Republican by the name of T. Boone Pickens. Eighty-one years old, and he has suddenly become bipartisan. I am happy about that. I have great admiration and respect for T. Boone Pickens. T. Boone Pickens has said: I have made my fortune in oil, and that is not where it is. His words were: I don't want to leave this Earth thinking all I was interested in was making money. I want to change this country. What he wants to do is have a few years--5, 6 years--where there would be a bridge using natural gas, and then it would all be done with renewable energy. That is T. Boone Pickens, and he is putting his personal fortune on the line to do that.

Al Gore has done a wonderful job presenting the problem. T. Boone Pickens has done a wonderful job of pointing out to the American people what the solution is. That is what we should be doing--not debating how many amendments will be offered. We want to do something on speculation. We want to do something on domestic production. That is a pretty good step forward for the American people.

The Senator was not talking.

Mr. President, what the American people are now watching is what has been taking place for 18 months. The Republicans said they wanted a vote on drilling. We offered them a vote on drilling. They cannot take yes for an answer.

We have had statement after statement by people who say drilling is important. But remember what Senator McCain said. The Republican nominee for President, John McCain, said drilling wouldn't make any difference; it is only psychological. Think about that. They have been talking for weeks about drilling.

We say: OK, let's have a vote on drilling.

They say: No, we don't want a vote on drilling, we want the open amendment process.

That is a buzzword for: Folks, we are not going to do anything.

If they want a vote on shale, I thought that would be part of their amendment. If they want a vote on shale, we will give them a vote on shale. They want a vote on nuclear. We could limit the time on those three amendments. We are happy to do that if they want a vote on drilling, shale, and nuclear.

Of course, Mr. President, everybody knows, as Senator McCain has said, these are only psychological things. We know that shale would take at least 15 years, even if we started doing something about it yesterday. We know that, regarding nuclear, there hasn't been a new nuclear plant built in 40 to 50 years, and there likely would not be in the near future.

These are only ploys by the Republicans to avoid voting on what they said is the best thing. They go through all this stuff about the appropriations process. The appropriations bills are going nowhere because of George Bush, the President. Remember, last year, he had us where he wanted us. We had to do everything he wanted because, otherwise, we would have to deal with him in January after a CR. Well, we will not have to deal with this guy anymore; after January 20, he is gone.

To suggest that in some way I have said we are only going to have one amendment--I didn't say that. We made a unanimous consent request asking them to do what they said they wanted. They said they wanted drilling. OK, drill. Vote on that. We believe our domestic production is much better than theirs.

Now, let's talk about a few other things, Mr. President. These are the words of my Republican counterpart: ``Timid, half-hearted, bobbing and weaving.'' Talk about bobbing and weaving--we give them what they want and they say no.

Now, on speculation, we have done this before, and we will do it again.

Economist Mark Zandi said speculation is driving up oil prices.

Gary Ramm of the Petroleum Marketers Association of America blamed speculation for driving up oil prices. He did that less than a month ago.

The Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission said the oil markets are ``ripe for those wanting to illegally manipulate the market.''

The former Director of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's Trade Division, Michael Greenberger--

now a professor at the University of Maryland Law School--said speculation is one of the big problems with the energy problem. He also said the price has gone up 20 to 50 percent because of speculation.

The Japanese Government said speculation added $30 to $40 to the cost of each barrel of oil last year.

Consumer advocate, Mark Cooper, testified that speculation on energy has cost the American people $500 billion in the last 2 years.

Now, let's take one of the pals of the Republicans. ExxonMobil Senior Vice President Stephen Simon testified that ``the price of oil should be about $55 a barrel.'' It is speculation, Mr. President.

So the Republicans are where they have been for 18 months. They still have their nose out of joint because we are in the majority. It is a slim majority. They have done everything to slow down, stop, or disguise their stalling.

We have said we think we should do something about speculation. Now they say it is no big deal. We are willing to vote on what they think-- and they have been saying it for a month--is the most important thing to do: drill off the Outer Continental Shelf. We are saying: Good, draw up your amendment and let's vote on it.

Now they say oil shale, and now--it is remarkable--they are back- talking about nuclear. If you want to talk about the only thing that uses more water than coal, it is nuclear. There isn't enough water in Nevada to have a nuclear powerplant. It is in the West. That is why they are usually on oceans or rivers because they need huge amounts of water.

Yes.

Mr. President, I say to my friend, they are not seriously trying to solve the problem. They are stalling, as they have done for 18 months. My friend, the Republican leader, said--to answer the question of the senior Senator from Illinois, the assistant leader-- that no serious person has suggested that speculation has anything to do with the price runup.

Talk about a serious person. Glenn Tilton is running a company that we have all heard of, United Airlines. United Airlines is trying to hang on without going bankrupt. Is this just some corporate executive who has an idea that the price of oil is too high? He is also a former president of Texaco and formerly the vice chairman of Chevron, so he has a little background.

He said speculation is a big problem. My friend, the Democratic whip, attended a meeting where he desperately told us we needed to do something about speculation. Does he remember that meeting?

We have been saying that for weeks. Certainly, since our bill has been on the Senate floor, it has been clear--and I have said it on the floor many times--if they don't like our speculation bill, come up with a better one.

I say to my friend that we have not stopped them from doing anything. We have oil shale as part of our proposal. Senator Bingaman put that in as part of his bill. So I relish the debate of our proposal and theirs. I suggested 2 hours. If they want more time, that would be fine. But they want to live yesterday. They want to live yesterday forever. The status quo isn't even good enough for them now.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Democratic whip--the Republican leader took a lot of time, and I have no problem with that. So I ask unanimous consent that the Democratic whip be allowed to finish his question.

Mr. President, I say to my friend, that is what they want, and in the process housing is gone, it is a casualty; the Lou Gehrig registry is gone; the Reeve paralysis bill is gone; we don't do anything about LIHEAP to help the disabled and old people who are going to freeze this winter, and we don't do anything about renewables. But this would be in keeping with the 83 filibusters that have taken so much time, 83 Republican-led filibusters.

They are not serious about this. We have tried. We have told them: Here is what we will do. They cannot take yes for an answer.