Floor Statements

Mr. President, we are going to do the farm bill today. I have gotten a number of inquiries about why did we stop the farm bill from going forward when we did. At the time that occurred, we had 26 pending amendments. Christmas is 1 week from Tuesday. We have to finish our work. We have, even today, a heavy burden having to short circuit this a little bit.

We have the Defense authorization bill; that is something that is essential. In that Defense authorization bill are many things, not the least of which is the wounded warrior aspect of it that Patty Murray worked so hard on.

We have the pay raise for the troops. The troops cannot get the pay raise until we do the Defense authorization bill, even though we have sent to the President and he has signed the Defense appropriations bill.

We are going to come in probably at 11 o'clock on Monday. There will be a cloture vote an hour after that on FISA. People have said: Well, why did you not move? I have gotten some inquiries, especially from some of the blogs saying: Why did you not rule XIV it or something that would make it easier and allow people who do not like the bill to make their position known?

I have stated on the floor--this is the third time--the reason we are going to cloture is because Senators Feingold and Dodd want a 60-vote margin on proceeding to the bill.

One of the things I have worked very hard to do in the 3 years I have been Democratic leader, the 1 year I have been the majority leader, is to make sure the committee structure of the Senate is sound and the committee chairs and the committees do their work.

It brings stability to this body. Now, I think what we have to do in regular order, unless I try to short circuit this in some way--and I think it would be not looked upon favorably by the Senate and, frankly, by the American people if I tried to short circuit this. We have a procedure--it does not happen very often--where you have a joint referral. In this instance, on the FISA bill, the controversial but important FISA bill, there are two committees that have jurisdiction, the Intelligence Committee, and after that it is referred to the Judiciary Committee.

They both have done their work and they have done good work. But what some wanted me to do is take the best out of one and the best out of the other and bring it to the floor. I cannot do that unless I trample the system.

Under regular order, I will bring the Intelligence bill to the floor. The first operative action after that is the Judiciary Committee. Senator Leahy is an experienced, veteran legislator. He has been here longer than I have been here. He certainly knows what to do. The Senate will work its will as to what needs to be done with FISA.

I will guarantee you right now one thing that is going to occur: not everyone will be happy. But people have the obligation to do what they think is right, and I have an obligation to move the bill to the floor. It is important we have a debate, and that debate will start on Monday.

I also am concerned that not everyone is happy they did not have the opportunity to offer their farm bill amendments. That is always a problem, and certainly there were no individual Senators in mind, Democrats or Republicans, who did not have the opportunity to offer their amendments.

But the culminating factor is when we had an objection to the managers' amendment, with the 26 amendments we had to start dealing with at 8:30 last night, we could not get from here to there.

So I think we are doing the right thing this morning, moving forward to completing FHA today, the farm bill, and Defense authorization; starting on the important FISA bill on Monday and then doing everything within our power to fund the Government for the next year. And we are going to have a debate on war funding. That will take place next week.

So we have our hands full. But I wanted to lay out everything this morning, where we are headed and why we are in the position we are in now.

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

Mr. President, it is my understanding that the time has expired on the debate relating to this matter, the FHA Modernization Act.

I will use my leader time to speak, and I rise to express my optimism for the bill we are about to pass--and it will pass--and my appreciation that we have reached the point that we can get this done for the American people.

Mr. President, every day the mortgage crisis grows worse. We have reached a point where hundreds of families have either lost their homes or may lose them, and soon that will be in the tens of thousands. As bad as the crisis is now, there is reason to believe we are only in the early stages.

Some may say: If a borrower gets into financial trouble, it is their obligation, and their obligation alone, to find a way out. But that isn't the way it works. The cost of a foreclosed home has an impact on all of us--not just the borrower but all of us. Families lose the roof over their heads and the equity they have gained. Neighborhoods suffer the loss of property values. Cities and towns lose taxes. Lenders and their shareholders lose too. And it is no exaggeration to say the entire national economy is put at risk.

We are seeing those effects in Nevada, with the number of foreclosures since August of 2006 up by more than 200 percent, and another 21,000 homes at risk by 2009. We have been working hard to alleviate this problem at home. Last month, I organized a roundtable discussion in Reno with lenders, mortgage services, housing counseling agencies, and other Federal and local officials. And we followed that up with mobile resource centers to bring foreclosure information into the neighborhoods where people need them.

Taking these steps is a crucial part of the solution, but we need new laws at the Federal level to give lenders the tools and flexibility to help people find ways to keep their homes. As grim as things look today, they could get far worse. That is why it is important we act now.

I am glad to see my Republican colleagues have finally heard the call and joined us to support this legislation. Let's be clear. The Government can't solve this problem alone, but we certainly can help. When this bill becomes law, it will accomplish two main things: It will increase FHA loan limits on both the high and low ends, and it will reduce downpayment requirements. The result will be better loan options for families who are having trouble keeping up with their exploding mortgage payments resulting from teaser rate mortgages. They will have the option of refinancing through an FHA bank loan, with the peace of mind that comes with it.

For future home buyers, a fully backed FHA loan with honest, upfront terms, will help prevent a crisis like we now face and ensure that more American families will experience all the safety, comfort, and stability that comes with home ownership. The past decade has seen remarkable growth in American home ownership. What is more, these gains have been enjoyed from coast to coast and among groups that have traditionally been shut out. The bill we are about to pass will help ensure this progress continues. It is an accomplishment for the Senate and an important step forward for the American people.

Finally, Mr. President, during this vote I hope we can clear a consent request that I will offer to go forward on the Defense authorization bill. It is late in the year, and the President can't pay the troops the pay raise they deserve until we pass this bill. Waiting until next week will not do the trick. We must finish this today.

I certainly hope we can work this out in the next few minutes to go forward on this as soon as we complete this bill. Senator Levin and Senator Warner have worked very hard on this legislation, as have many others, and I hope we can move forward on it very quickly.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that upon disposition, which it has been disposed of, this bill, S. 2338, the Senate proceed to the conference report to accompany H.R. 1585, the most important Department of Defense authorization bill; that it be considered under a limitation of 60 minutes for debate with respect to the conference report, with the time equally divided and controlled between the chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee; that upon the use of yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote on adoption of the conference report; that upon adoption of the conference report, the Senate proceed to H. Con. Res. 269, a correcting resolution; that the concurrent resolution be considered, agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table; all the above occurring without intervening action or debate.

Madam President, we are going to then move and complete work today on the farm bill. We hope the two managers can work through whatever minor problems exist. The sooner people determine what they want to do, the more quickly we can dispose of the bill.

As I indicated earlier, we are going to file cloture this evening, this afternoon, on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It is an extremely important piece of legislation. There are some strong feelings on both sides of the issue. We are going to come in around 11 o'clock on Monday morning. There will be a vote around noon on Monday. The managers of this bill, this important bill, should be ready to start legislating Monday afternoon. We do not have a lot of time.

This is an important piece of legislation. There are a significant number of amendments people want to offer. A week from Tuesday is Christmas. So I would hope we can work our way through this. We hope there are some other issues we can complete. Late in the session like this, they have to be agreed upon.

Senator McConnell and I have had a number of conversations the last couple of days on the way we are going to end the session regarding funding, other issues relating to funding. The one good thing is both my office and his office have kept quiet about it. As a result of that, things are moving fairly quietly.

That is the way we want it. No one will be surprised about anything. Everyone will know exactly what is going to happen. At this stage, it appears the House will take up the spending matter, the omnibus, on Monday. They will send it to us on Tuesday. That is the glidepath we have now. The path we hope is a smooth one, but in this world we live in, you never know, but it is looking pretty good.

Mr. President, in the proud history of America's Armed Forces, I fear that the Bush years will be known as a rare, even a dark time.

At a time when we call upon our troops to face new challenges and great dangers, our President stretched them thin and neglected their protection and care, in many instances. Military readiness levels have dropped to levels not seen since Vietnam. Tours of duty keep getting extended. We are so bogged down with over 160,000 troops in Iraq that we cannot adequately respond to the grave and growing challenges elsewhere, such as bin Laden, who remains free to taunt and threaten us; his al-Qaida network, which is more powerful than ever; like Afghanistan, where the gains of the past are now backsliding, the drug trade is rampant, and violence is on the rise; Pakistan, where the path toward democracy is wavering significantly.

It will take years to recover from the mismanagement of the military in the

past few years by our Commander in Chief.

Today, we can take steps that will make our country safer, aid the fight against terrorism, and provide our heroic troops with the care and support they deserve.

Mr. President, my ability to express my appreciation, admiration, and affection for Senators Levin and Warner--I am incapable of doing that.

To me there are no two finer Senators whoever served this body. There are no two Senators who have done more for our armed services. They not only take care of those who are now fighting for us, they take care of those who have fought for us in wars passed.

I certainly am going to miss Senator Warner. He has another year with us. That is good for Nevada, it is good for Virginia, and it is wonderful for our country. He will contribute significantly to the well-being of the Senate and our country during the next year. Senator Levin is someone I lean on all the time. He is a person who understands what legislation is all about, probably more than most all of us. There is no one who can look at a piece of legislation and make an analysis of what is good and bad about that legislation. It doesn't matter if it is a matter dealing with our military or a matter dealing with something important to his State or, as far as that goes, if there is something important dealing with my State and I want a real good analysis of it. I don't turn to my staff; I turn to Carl Levin. I say to these two fine gentlemen that I speak not only for this Senator, but I speak for all Senators.

They, and all of us, understand rebuilding our Armed Forces must begin with a sufficient number of troops, but today the military is struggling to meet its recruiting goals. We are taking people into the military when we would not have thought of taking them into it a few years ago--people not graduating from high school, people with criminal records. That is why this Defense authorization bill provides funds to speed the growth of the Army from 512,000 to 547,000, an increase of 35,000, which is so important, and the Marine Corps, from 180,000 to 202,000, an increase of 22,000, both of which are significantly above the goals set by President Bush.

We also go beyond the President's request for $1 billion for the strategic readiness fund and add $1 billion to replace equipment for Guard and Reserve that has been sent to Iraq. Every natural disaster exposes the depleted capacity of our Guard and Reserve, and this bill begins to make that right.

This Defense bill also refocuses our military by saying there will be no permanent bases in Iraq. We need not be seen as an occupying force in Iraq. In a couple months, we will begin the sixth year of that war. We don't need permanent bases in Iraq.

This legislation has important language addressing potential waste, fraud, and abuse by establishing a Commission on Wartime Contracting. This is so important.

It beefs up our counterterrorist operations along the Afghan- Pakistani border to help fight al-Qaida and capture bin Laden, an effort that has been abandoned, it seems.

Last, but not least, it honors our brave troops who have given so much and receive sometimes so little in return. We start by giving everyone in uniform an across-the-board 3.5 percent pay increase. Those in uniform did not join to get rich; they joined to serve our country.

This pay increase, as I said, will not make them rich. They did not enlist to get rich. They joined the military to serve this great country. Though a 3.5-percent increase certainly will not make them rich, it will help them make ends meet and help their families to do the same as they face the burden of a husband, wife, mother or father serving an extended tour of duty someplace in the United States or around the world.

This pay raise didn't come from President Bush. He opposed it, or I should say part of it. It comes from Congress. We provide care and support for our troops when they are back home because our commitment to them must not end when their combat tours end.

The Wounded Warrior Act is in this bill which will improve health care and benefits for recovering veterans, servicemembers, and their families.

Senator Patty Murray directed me and a number of other Senators to go to Walter Reed. She knew what was there. It was early in the morning, but it was a trip that any time of the day would have been beneficial. What we learned there was the basis of the Wounded Warrior legislation led by the Senator from Washington, Patty Murray.

The American people will, for many years in the future, be indebted to her for this legislation, and I appreciate very much the managers of this bill placing this important legislation in it.

I am especially pleased this bill has two provisions I have worked on for years. These two fine managers continue the improvement. The first will expand eligibility for combat-related special compensation for disabled veterans whose combat wounds force them into medical retirement before attaining 20 years of service. The three of us have worked on this issue for many years. This is very important. Current law requires these wounded veterans to fund their own disability compensation. We end that practice and do right by these heroes.

The second provision will restore equity for disabled retirees that the VA has rated as unemployable. This is the only group of 100 percent disabled retirees who still suffer the unfair disability offset from their retired pay. This legislation will right that wrong.

I would be remiss if I did not express my disappointment that there were not enough votes in the House to pass the hate crimes portion of the bill. There is a longstanding history of addressing hate crimes and actually hate violence in Defense authorization bills. It was only right and proper that we again did it this year.

The hate crimes portion would have made America a safer, better place. It would have given State and local law enforcement agencies the tools they need and want.

At a time we fight for equality across the globe, we ought to ensure equality in America. This issue will not disappear. We will keep fighting to give all Americans protection from hate violence.

Despite this setback, this is a bill that all 100 Senators can proudly support. At times of unprecedented challenges throughout the globe, this legislation will make us safe. At a time when we see a lot of waste, mismanagement, and misplaced priorities on the part of this administration and the people with whom they choose to do business, it reaches for a higher standard of integrity. That is what this legislation does.

At a time of tremendous strain on men and women in uniform, this legislation sends a strong message that we honor them, we respect them, and will always stand by them. I urge all my colleagues to send that message today by overwhelmingly passing this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all time consumed today be counted postcloture. I thought consent was ordered last night that took care of this issue. If not, I hope can have this approved.

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

Madam President, as I have announced several times in the last few days, I am going to shortly move to proceed to S. 2248, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This is such an important piece of legislation. I spoke briefly on this subject earlier, but I want to provide a more complete explanation of the process by which the Senate will consider this vital piece of legislation.

Earlier this year, the Director of National Intelligence came to Congress and alerted us to what he described as a significant gap that had emerged in our Nation's foreign intelligence-gathering capacity. Members on both sides of the aisle and from all sides of this important debate became convinced that this problem was real and that we had an obligation to address it. Although many of us differ on the solution, all Senators without exception, both Democrats and Republicans, want to ensure that intelligence professionals have the tools they need to keep our country as safe as possible. We all worked in good faith with the administration through July and August to provide those tools in a way that protects the privacy and liberties of law-abiding Americans.

Unfortunately, the bill signed by President Bush fell well short of that goal. I and many other Democrats opposed the so-called Protect America Act. That is why we made sure it had a 6-month sunset, so we could come back and do a better job of ensuring judicial and congressional oversight of these sensitive activities. As we all know, had the President been operating as we have always operated in the past, he would simply have come to the Intelligence Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and told them the changes that were necessary. But they didn't do that.

As my colleagues know, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Intelligence Committee share jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. As a result of the President not asking us to act in a timely fashion, we find ourselves in a difficult position. But in spite of that, both committees have worked diligently over the past few months. This hard work has resulted in two different versions of legislation to improve FISA, S. 2248, reported out of the committees.

I consulted extensively with Chairmen Rockefeller and Leahy about the best way for the Senate to consider this delicate subject. I have determined that in this situation it would be wrong of me to simply choose one committee's bill over the other. I personally favor many of the additional protections included in the Judiciary Committee bill. I oppose the concept of retroactive immunity in the Intelligence bill. But I cannot ignore the fact that the Intelligence bill was reported favorably by a vote of 13 to 2, with most Democrats on the committee supporting that approach. I explored the possibility of laying before the Senate a bill that included elements of both committee bills. Earlier this week I used Senate rule XIV to place two bills on the calendar, first S. 2440, consisting of titles I and III of the Intelligence bill, but did not include title II on retroactive immunity. The second bill, S. 2441, consists of title I of the Judiciary bill and titles II and III of the Judiciary bill. Senator Leahy and I favor the second bill, S. 2441. But for me to override Senate precedent and rules in this case would be wrong and unfair. After consulting with Chairman Rockefeller and Chairman Leahy, we recognized--these two veteran legislators--that the best thing to do would be to follow regular order. It is the right thing to do. It is not right for me to pick and choose. After the committee structure has been established--and I believe in it--to simply say it doesn't matter in this case, it matters in every case. If it doesn't matter in one case, then it doesn't matter in any case. We have to follow the rules we have here; otherwise, it becomes very unfair, and it becomes a situation where I am the one picking and choosing. That isn't the way it should be. Both chairmen, with their experience, agreed that this was the right approach, even though, as I repeat, Senator Leahy and I would rather have the Judiciary Committee bill that we believe strengthens the position we had initially and not have to try to put them in at a subsequent time.

Under regular order, under the rules of the Senate governing sequential referral, I will move to proceed to S. 2248, the bill reported by each committee. When that motion to proceed is adopted, the work of both committees will be before the Senate, all elements of both pieces of legislation. All Senators will then be involved in the process. That is how it should be--all members of the Intelligence Committee, all members of the Judiciary Committee, and all Members of the Senate, Democrats and Republicans.

Because of the order in which they considered the bill, the Intelligence Committee version will be the base text. The Judiciary Committee version will be automatically pending as a substitute amendment.

I admire and respect the work done by these two committees on a bipartisan basis. Senators Leahy and Specter work extremely well together. Senators Rockefeller and Bond work extremely well together. These are the two committees that will have matters before this Senate. In the weeks since the two committees acted, Senators Rockefeller and Leahy have been working very hard to narrow the differences between their two versions of the bill. The ranking Republicans, Senators Bond and Specter, have been included in these conversations and deliberations. I expect that when we begin debate on the bill there will be amendments to incorporate many of the Judiciary Committee provisions into the Intelligence Committee text. In my view, that will make the final product stronger.

There is one issue that cannot be resolved through formal negotiation. As some are aware, the Intelligence Committee bill provides the telephone companies with retroactive immunity for lawsuits filed by customers for privacy violations and other aspects of the law. For me and many Members, there is a belief that such a grant of immunity is not wise. Others disagree. We saw what happened in the Intelligence Committee. That is a committee that the Republican leader and I worked very hard to get people on that committee who are going to work long hours. No committee in the Congress works longer hours than the Intelligence Committee. They work in anonymity. They don't have public hearings very often. Most of the time they are secluded in the Hart Building in that confidential space they have alone. The press doesn't know what is going on there. Staff, except for a few exclusive staff members, have no idea what is going on in there. These people on the Intelligence Committee work very hard and out of the purview of the public. That is the way it has to be. I expect there will be full debate on this subject of immunity next week as there should be.

Senators Specter, Feinstein, Whitehouse, Wyden, and others are working to craft a compromise that might give the phone companies some relief but would allow the lawsuits to go forward in a manner that would preserve accountability. In one way or another, we must ensure that President Bush is held accountable for his actions. Some people believe his actions were unwise and misdirected. It is important for the Senate to complete work on this bill next week to allow time for the Senate and House to produce a final product in conference. Our ultimate goal is a bill that commands broad bipartisan support in the Congress and in the country. The process I have outlined offers us the best opportunity to do so. It is going to be difficult, it is going to be time consuming, and it is going to be important. It is for the safety and security of our Nation.

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

Madam President, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 512, S. 2248, and I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum be waived that is required under rule XXII and that the cloture vote occur at 12 noon, Monday, December 17.

Madam President, I now withdraw the motion.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar Nos. 395, 396, 407, 410; that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate return to legislative session.

Madam President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate considers Executive Calendar No. 373, the nomination of John Tinder to be U.S. circuit judge, there be a time limit of 30 minutes for debate, equally divided, between the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Senators Leahy and Specter; that at the conclusion or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the confirmation of the nomination, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration S. 2488.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to Calendar No. 543, S. Res. 396.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be considered and agreed to; that the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; that the amendment to the preamble be agreed to; that the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; that the title amendment be agreed to; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; and that any statements relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of S. 2400.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I understand that S. 2483 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

Madam President, I object to any further proceedings with respect to this legislation.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Executive Calendar Nos. 2 and 5, the Tax Convention With Belgium and the Protocol Amending the Tax Convention With Germany; that the Treaty and Protocol be advanced through their various parliamentary stages up to and including the presentation of the resolutions for ratification; and that there now be a division vote on the resolutions en bloc.

I ask unanimous consent that the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.