Floor Statements

Madam President, today the Senate will conduct morning business for a period of 60 minutes, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 372, the Intelligence authorization bill.

Once the Senate resumes the bill, Senator Rockefeller, the majority manager, will be recognized to offer a managers' amendment on behalf of himself and Senator Bond. A cloture vote on the bill will occur this afternoon at 5:30. That will be the first vote of the week. Members have until 2:30 to file any first-degree amendments.

Order of Procedure

I ask unanimous consent that Members have until 5 p.m. today to file second-degree amendments.

Also, during today's session I will move to proceed to S. 3, the prescription drug bill that was reported by the Finance Committee last evening.

I ask unanimous consent, regarding any germane and timely filed first-degree amendment under rule XXII, with respect to cloture on S. 372, that it be in order for the amendment instruction line to be modified to comport to the managers' amendment.

Before the Chair rules on my request, I make this request since we are in a situation where the managers will offer an amendment at 3 p.m., which must be filed by 2:30, the filing deadline for first-degree amendments, and Members will not have an opportunity to review the amendment prior to the time for filing their amendments.

Madam President, as mentioned in the prayer by Admiral Black, today America suffered a tragedy that defies our ability to comprehend. The news out of Virginia Tech and Blacksburg is still breaking. We don't know yet all the facts except there are 22 dead, at least 28 wounded. But what we do know breaks our hearts and shakes us to our very core. For now, we can only offer our thoughts and our prayers in our individual ways.

One of my good friends is the athletic director of Virginia Tech. He formerly was the athletic director at UNLV--Jim Weaver, a wonderful man. He has done such a great job with that program. The Virginia Tech program has received such notoriety--positive in recent years because of their athletic program. They also have a great academic program.

We all pray for the students, faculty members, and the families of the Virginia Tech community and do hope for a speedy recovery of the wounded.

We pray that America can find the strength, which we will find, to overcome our grief and outrage as we face yet another tragedy.

I think it would be appropriate, Madam President, if the distinguished Republican leader wishes to say something about this tragedy, that after he does, I ask for a moment of silence for the faculty, the students, the administration, and everyone in Virginia Tech--and our country, really. A moment of silence.

Does the Senator wish to speak?

Madam President, in July of 1944, 11 years before Rosa Parks became the mother of the civil rights movement, an African- American second lieutenant of the U.S. Navy was court-martialed on charges of insubordination for refusing to move to the back of a segregated military bus. Three years later, and 60 years ago yesterday, that second lieutenant was insubordinate to bigotry once again--this time by breaking Major League Baseball's color barrier. His name was Jackie Robinson.

When Dodgers owner Branch Ricky brought Jackie Robinson to the Major Leagues, many asked: Why Jackie Robinson? After all, the Negro League was filled with talented players from whom to choose. Many were much younger than Jackie Robinson; some, perhaps, even better athletes. The answer, of course, was integrity, character.

Branch Ricky knew that this trailblazing ballplayer would have to be both an athlete and a role model--a role model for African Americans and for all Americans--and no one was better suited to that great challenge than Jackie Robinson.

When Jackie Robinson crossed the chalk lines at Ebbitt's Field that day, he carried the weight of a nation along with him. On one shoulder were the catcalls, obscene gestures, and even threats from fans, opposing players, and even some of his own teammates. But on the other shoulder were the dreams of Blacks, and all Americans, that our country could one day fulfill its destiny of equality in deeds and not just in words.

Jackie's career accomplishments alone would have been enough to earn our admiration: Rookie of the Year, 6 All-Star games, Most Valuable Player Award, and a World Series championship.

Yesterday, I was visiting my daughter, and especially my grandchildren, here in the Washington, DC, area. I have three grandchildren here. My 16-year-old grandchild, Mattie, was going to have to give a talk to a group of young people. She said she only needed to talk for a couple of minutes. What could she talk about?

I said: Mattie, why don't you talk about Jackie Robinson? Tell them what a great athlete he was. But he isn't known today because he was a great athlete and stole home more than any other baseball player and did all the great things athletically; he is famous today because of his integrity. So that is what Mattie spoke to her friends about.

Jackie Robinson is now a legend. He taught a generation of African- American children that they, too, must be, on occasion, insubordinate to injustice whenever they find it, whether on a bus or on a ballfield or in a board room. Sixty years later that lesson still rings true, from Brooklyn to Los Angeles and every town and city in between.

America is a better place because of the integrity of Jackie Robinson.

Madam President, would the Senator yield to me for a unanimous consent request?

I ask unanimous consent that upon disposition of S. 372, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 118, S. 3, the prescription drug legislation.

Madam President, I now move to proceed to S. 3 and send a cloture motion to the desk.

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

I now withdraw the motion to proceed.

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

Mr. President, my distinguished counterpart, the Senator from

Kentucky, Senator McConnell, held a press conference at 2:30, talking about what the Senate has not accomplished this year. I, of course, am very disappointed in that because I thought we had done a lot. I believe we have produced.

The minority talk a lot about their desire to see this Congress pass meaningful legislation. They talk a lot about supporting our troops. We have heard a lot from them about the need to defeat terrorists and make the country more secure. Their actions do not match their rhetoric. In far too many instances, our Republican colleagues say one thing and do another.

Last week, the 110th Congress reached its 100th day. In that time, the Senate has passed a series of bills that would move our country forward. With bipartisan support, we passed the toughest lobbying ethics reform legislation in the entire history of our country. With bipartisan support, we voted to give working Americans a much deserved and long overdue raise in the minimum wage. With bipartisan support, we passed a continuing resolution that enacted tough spending limits and eliminated earmarks for this year. With bipartisan support, we passed every single recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, after it languished in the Republican-controlled Congress for 2\1/2\ years. With bipartisan support, we passed a responsible, balanced, pay-as-you-go budget that reduces taxes for working Americans and invests more in education, veterans, and health care. With bipartisan support, we passed legislation that would fully fund our troops while forcing the President to change course in Iraq. And, last week, with bipartisan support, once again, we passed legislation to open the promise of stem cell research in a responsible and ethical way.

The American people want Congress to put petty bickering aside. This is exactly what I believe this Congress has done. It has not been easy. My Republican colleagues have, time and time again, allowed a small minority in their caucus to block progress that the American people, and a bipartisan majority of the Senate, demand. On every piece of legislation I mentioned, we have had to file cloture.

Sadly, on the most important issue facing our country, national security, this has been especially apparent. The minority forced us to come up with 60 votes to pass the 9/11 Commission recommendations. They required the same for the Iraq supplemental bill.

Now it appears this same group of Republicans will attempt to block passage of the Intelligence Authorization bill, the bill they wrote when they were in the majority but failed to pass for 2 years. As everyone knows, the Intelligence Authorization bill funds the operation of 16 agencies of the U.S. intelligence community, including the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency, the Defense Department, and all the critical work they do in fighting the war on terror. We are so fortunate that we have bipartisan cooperation of the management of the Intelligence Committee. Senator Rockefeller and Senator Bond have worked closely together. They want this legislation to move forward.

This should not be a partisan issue. We had to vote to get 60 votes to proceed to the legislation. I said at that time, if you want to offer amendments while we are in the 30 hours postcloture time, do it. Now I am told the ability for us to get on the bill is going to be thwarted by not allowing us to have 60 votes.

I was upstairs this afternoon in room 407, getting a briefing on issues that are important to our country. It is so important that we move forward on this legislation and support our people who are making America safe and secure and protecting our interests all around the world. Sixteen agencies, I repeat, of the U.S. intelligence community want this legislation passed.

We are in a battle around the world on terrorism. Shouldn't our intelligence community be able to move forward with this legislation? I repeat: It was written by the Republicans. Why would they not let us go forward on this legislation? Is it because--I don't know. Is it because Vice President Cheney thinks he is going to lose a little of his power directing everything covert that goes on in the intelligence community? Is he the one stopping this? Why? Why can't we pass legislation that was written by the Republicans to improve our intelligence operations?

This legislation includes essential initiatives that would improve our efforts to fight terrorism and control weapons of mass destruction, enhance our intelligence collection capabilities, and strengthen intelligence oversight. Does anybody dispute that? For 27 years, since we first started doing an Intelligence bill, we passed it every year. But not the last 2 years. Blocking passage of the bill leaves Congress silent on these important matters, dealing with terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, intelligence collection capabilities, and intelligence oversight. It is so important to pass this bill. This is not a partisan issue. I don't think there are political points to be scored on either side.

I hope my friends on the other side of the aisle will let this legislation go forward. We have a managers' amendment that Senator Rockefeller and Senator Bond worked on that would be accepted. I cannot imagine why we would be stopped on an Intelligence authorization. I have been told that the word is out, the Republicans are not going to support cloture on this most important bill.

My friend, the distinguished Republican leader, pointed out this afternoon that we filed cloture a number of times this year. We surely have. We surely have, because there has been a minority of people on the other side who forced us to do this. The bills we passed have been bipartisan: Ethics/lobbying reform got a big bipartisan vote; minimum wage, big bipartisan vote; the continuing resolution, a big bipartisan vote--we had to do that to fund the Government--the 9/11 Commission recommendations, big bipartisan vote; stem cell, big bipartisan vote; the supplemental, a bipartisan vote. Sure, we have had to file cloture because there has been a minority of Senators on the other side who forced us to do that on these bipartisan bills.

My friend, the minority leader, is right, we have filed cloture a number of times. The fact is, his side forced us to do so rather than let us proceed directly to these bills--and this bill. We have been forced to jump through a number of procedural hoops designed to block legislation that enjoyed bipartisan support.

I will continue to do that. I understand the rights of just a few Senators and if a few Senators want to stop us from moving forward, that is fine. But to think that we couldn't get 10 Republicans to support us on a motion to invoke cloture on an Intelligence authorization bill? That is beyond my ability to comprehend, why the Republicans would stop us from moving forward on an Intelligence authorization bill. I have said they can offer amendments to the bill. Even though I thought it was absolutely wrong that we had to vote cloture on the motion to proceed, I said, during the 30 hours, if you want to offer amendments, go ahead and do so. ``No.''

This is not ethics reform, it is not minimum wage, it is not stem cell research, it is not the continuing resolution--it is the ability of our intelligence agencies to do their work: the CIA, FBI, NSA, Defense Department. I urge the minority to not stop this bill from going forward. The vote is at 5:30. But that is what I am told is going to happen. Their actions, if in fact they follow through on this, are not in the best interests of the American people. Anyone who has been told that they are being stymied from offering amendments is not being told the truth.

We will continue to work in a bipartisan manner to move our country forward. The bills that passed this body so far this year have been bipartisan, with overwhelming support, and, yes, we did have to file cloture because a small number of people held us up from moving on this most important piece of legislation.

I hope there will be people who will move away from this madding crowd who will not allow us to help these agencies do their work.

Madam President, the distinguished Republican leader is not on the floor, so I move to proceed to S. 378, and I send a cloture motion to the desk.

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

Madam President, I now withdraw the motion to proceed.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I came here earlier today anticipating there would be Republicans who would rise above the partisan clamor. I looked, as the vote was being cast: no, no, no, at the people I thought could do this.

Sixteen agencies are all responsible for gathering intelligence information for our country.

Mr. President, let's call it the way it is. Vice President Cheney runs the intelligence operations of this administration. He has for 6 years. It apparently is not going to stop. We could not even improve the intelligence-gathering operations for the 16 agencies because it may interfere with the Vice President.

Mr. President, even the vice chairman of the committee voted against moving forward. I heard his conversation with the chairman, why he was doing this--because he had been asked to do it. We have had experiences in the past with the way the Republicans--everybody, hear that--have handled the intelligence-gathering information for our Nation. The Senate had to be closed using rule XXII to get some minimal information how the evidence was manipulated to take us to war in Iraq, and we got some of that information.

There has been a change in the leadership of the Senate. I was hopeful it would be better, and it has been for 3 months. There has been cooperation between the two Senators, the chairman and vice chairman. We are not dealing with--we have had to invoke cloture on everything we have done here because, as I said earlier today, I thought a minority of Republican Senators was standing in the way of our doing what we have done--minimum wage, stem cell, all that stuff.

But here we are dealing with our spies. That is what they are. We know from the situation where there has been an indictment and conviction that the White House was involved in that up to their neck with the ``Scooter'' Libby matter. Karl Rove appeared before the grand jury on three or four or five occasions trying to extricate himself. The President said anyone who had anything to do with leaking information would be dumped from the administration quickly. Of course, that has not happened. I guess there is nothing in the minds of Karl Rove and his minions that is not politics--even the spy operations of this country.

Mr. President, I have the greatest respect for the senior Senator from Missouri, but his facts are all messed up. We tried to bring this bill to the floor for a full debate. In the Senate, as everyone knows, you have to move to proceed to the bill. We did that. They objected. We had to file cloture on even being able to proceed to the bill. They initially said: We are not going to give you cloture. Then they gave us cloture. The purpose of that was to stall for time. They voted to proceed. I said immediately: Why waste the 30 hours? The rule in the Senate is you have 30 hours after you complete the cloture. I said: Offer amendments during this period of time. Don't waste the time. We could have done that last week. I told everybody. All the staff knew that: But no, nothing. I indicated we would be happy to do relevant amendments on this bill.

I ask unanimous consent now that there be four relevant amendments in order for each side and that when they are disposed of, the Senate move to final passage of the bill.

I will repeat the request. I ask unanimous consent that there be four relevant amendments in order for each side and that when they are disposed of, the Senate vote on final passage.

Mr. President, let me say, it is a funny way of wanting to move forward on this bill by stopping cloture twice during the last 30 hours. I repeat, I said anybody who wanted to could offer amendments. We sat for 2 days doing nothing, for 30 hours doing nothing.

I hope the distinguished Senator from Missouri and my friend, my dear friend for life, the junior Senator from West Virginia, can work something out. That is why I moved to reconsider. I hope that on this very important piece of legislation, we are able to move forward. This has nothing to do with partisan politics. This is the security of our Nation and much of the world.

We weren't in session because there was no activity on this bill. No one was offering amendments. I would go one step further than the distinguished Senator from Missouri suggested. The amendments have been filed. Why don't we do the relevant amendments? I don't know how many there are. Let's do the ones that are in keeping with the rules of the Senate, go ahead and handle those, starting in the morning.

That is all I have, Mr. President.

Mr. President, this morning there will be a period of 60 minutes for morning business. The majority will control the first 30 minutes and the Republicans the second 30 minutes.

Following morning business, the Senate will resume the motion to proceed to S. 372, the Intelligence authorization bill, and vote soon thereafter on a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed. I have been advised that the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Senator Rockefeller, will be on the floor and will speak prior to the vote.

Later today, I will have more to say about the schedule for the remainder of this week. A lot will depend on what happens in the motion to proceed on the Intelligence bill.

Mr. President, last November, the call for change in Washington rang out from coast to coast. The Presiding Officer was one of the results of that historic vote on November 7, which has been good for the people of the State of Maryland and for the people of this country. The American people called for us to put partisanship aside in pursuit of common ground, to end the culture of corruption, to cast away the rubber stamp, and, most importantly, to change the course in Iraq. This Congress has heard that call. As we reach our 100th day, we are well on our way to delivering a government as good and honest as the people it serves.

From the very first day, we knew all our progress would depend on renewing the people's faith in the integrity of Congress. And just as an aside, Mr. President, I would note that while I am not much of a poll watcher, it was brought to my attention earlier this week that the polls showed the American people are much more supportive of the Congress than they were just a few months ago. A lot of that is as a result of what we have been able to do here.

Our first order of business was passing the toughest lobbying ethics reform legislation in the Nation's history, and we have done that. We voted to give working Americans a much deserved and long overdue raise in the

minimum wage. We passed a continuing resolution that enacted tough spending limitations, and earmarks were eliminated. We passed every single recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, after they languished in the Congress for years with nothing being done. We passed a responsible pay-as-you-go budget that cut taxes for working people and invested more in education, veterans, and health care. And I might say that as a result of Senator Johnson being incapacitated for the next few weeks, we were able to pass that budget even though the margin here was 50 to 49. We had two brave Republicans to join with us on this very sound budget, which we appreciate very much--Senators Snowe and Collins--and it was done even though in the past the Republicans couldn't pass the budget with a much larger majority than we have.

Yesterday, we passed legislation offering the promise of stem cell research in a responsible, ethical way, with 66 votes--or actually 63, but three Democratic Senators were unable to be here. They would have voted for that. So 66--1 short of being able to override the promised veto of the President. I think it is very possible we will get this bill, and it will be the first to override the President's veto. I think we can do that. There must be another Republican who will step forward, in a profile in courage, and vote with us and give hope to millions of Americans.

In the weeks ahead, we will turn our focus to reducing drug costs for senior citizens. That is going to be a battle because the wealthy, strong, powerful pharmaceutical industry has hired nearly every lobbyist in town--those with Gucci shoes and chauffeur-driven limousines--and they have been flooding this Capitol to prevent the American people from having the benefit of Medicare being able to negotiate for lower priced drugs. The big HMOs, the health care providers, and the insurance companies can but not Medicare. What does that say? It says the pharmaceutical industry is way too powerful. But we are going to have a shot at it. We will see how much power the pharmaceutical industry has over the Senate. On this side of the aisle, they have very little power, but we will see how much power they have over on the other side of the aisle. So we are going to try to allow Medicare to negotiate for lower priced drugs.

We are going to do our very best to develop a new strategy for energy, and we are going to act as quickly as we can to see what we can come up with regarding comprehensive immigration reform. We passed something here last year. We did it without the help of the President. With the help of the President this year, maybe we can do better. I certainly hope so. He says he wants to help, but actions speak louder than words.

All the while, during these first 100 days, as I mentioned, we retired the rubber stamp and restored Congress to its rightful, constitutionally mandated role as a coequal branch of Government. The Bush administration is finally being held accountable for some of its failures--and I say some of them, whether the political manipulation at the Department of Justice, where we learned today that all the e-mails dealing with their so-called political computers appear to have been destroyed or hidden--just part of the manipulations of this very historic Justice Department, and I mean historic in the sense of being the most corrupt ever, the most inept ever. We have also been able to look at this administration for its failures at Walter Reed, the deplorable conditions at Walter Reed, and the tragic mishandling of the war in Iraq.

No message was more clear in November than the call for a new direction in Iraq. Yet, in the months that have passed, President Bush has only dug us deeper, deeper in this intractable civil war going on in Iraq. Now we hear the Army will be forced to put further strain on the troops by extending their tours of duty from 12 to 15 months. Next, the Marine Corps will have added time to their already strained forces.

Today, although you didn't read it in the paper because it happened since the papers went to print, a bridge in Iraq was blown up right in the city of Baghdad, with cars piled up off of that. They do not know how many are dead as a result of that. In the Green Zone, inside the Iraqi Parliament, a bomb went off today, killing members of Parliament. They do not know how many, maybe only a couple. We don't know at this stage. But many were injured right in the Iraqi Parliament.

Policing the civil war was never supposed to be the mission, and every day the price we pay grows worse and worse--3,300 American lives lost, tens of thousands more wounded, and about $\1/2\ trillion spent. That is $\1/2\ trillion that could go to health care for the 47 million Americans who have no health care and to look at what we are going to do about the children dropping out of school and to do something to provide monies for the Leave No Child Behind Act, which could help education around our country. This $\1/2\ trillion spent, yet no end in sight, according to our President, for the troops. More of the same.

It takes more than saying we support our troops to make it so, and in these first 100 days, this Congress put words to action. Our emergency supplemental appropriations bill gives the troops every single penny requested by the commanders on the ground, plus it gives more than the President requested. It provides a reasonable, realistic strategy to draw them out from the crossfire of another country's civil war, and it provides funds that the President's budget left out to make right the unconscionable situations at Walter Reed and other VA medical facilities, because our troops do deserve that support. The support of the American troops doesn't end when they leave Iraq; it must continue when they come home to American soil.

No single piece of legislation will bring this tragic war to a climax. The American people understand that, but they elected us to lead the way, to chart a new course, showing President Bush the way forward, and in these first 100 days, we have done precisely that on the war in Iraq and the issues here at home.

In the weeks and months ahead, we will continue to do the very best we can to change the direction at home and abroad.

Mr. President, when I came to Washington, Senator Inouye--I am sorry, Senator Stevens. They are like brothers, and it is easy to get them mixed up--Senator Stevens had already been here 12 or 13 years. He has a distinguished service: 38 years in this Chamber, going on 15,000 votes, decorated pilot in World War II. But there are a number of instances that I want to spread on this record regarding Senator Stevens.

First of all, he has a relationship that has already been mentioned with one of America's great people, Senator Dan Inouye. Dan Inouye, of course, is a Medal of Honor winner. A gentleman describes who he is. But the relationship between Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens, when the history books are written, will be legendary. They are friends, a Republican and a Democrat, who are like a couple of brothers.

They have traveled the world over many times, and the relationship is something we should all recognize as being possible in this Chamber. People of different parties from different parts of our United States can become friends. Party affiliation is secondary to their relationship.

For me, the example they have set has paved the way for the relationship Senator Ensign and I have. We are from the same State, with totally different political philosophies, but our friendship is, in our own minds, comparable to that of Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, I say to Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye, for the example you have set for us.

I also want to relate to everyone something that is remarkable to me. I was serving in the House of Representatives when Senator Alan Bible died. Senator Bible served in the Senate for 20 years. He was a great public servant from the State of Nevada and a dignified Senator who, because of illness, left the Senate after 20 years.

When he died, there was a plane available to take anyone who wanted to go to the State of Nevada to his funeral. I went, and the only other Member of Congress who traveled to Nevada was Ted Stevens. It was a long way to Reno, NV, where Senator Bible was buried, but Ted Stevens went. Why did he go? Because on a very important vote to Senator Stevens that made the difference between Senator Stevens carrying the day or losing the day, Senator Bible stepped forward, as Senator Stevens said, courageously and voted with this Republican Senator.

Think about that: Senator Bible was long gone, hadn't been in the Senate for many years. He died. But Senator Stevens remembered Senator Bible doing something that he thought was beyond the call of his democratic duty. And so Senator Stevens and I took this lonely flight to Reno, NV, to attend the funeral of my friend and Senator Stevens' friend, Senator Bible. That speaks volumes about the kind of person Senator Stevens is.

One of the highlights of my congressional service has been the ability to travel all over the world. It is part of our obligation as Members of Congress to go see what American interests are doing around the world. On one of those trips, I signed up to go as a

young Senator and was led by the great John Glenn and Ted Stevens. It was a memorable trip. I can remember--the Iron Curtain was down-- leaving Austria and going into Czechoslovakia. They stopped the train. In came the KGB and other Iron Curtain soldiers. They looked under the train, in the train, and looked at all of us. We went into Prague, and in a little diner, bar, that evening, a man came in wearing a flight jacket, a World War II flight jacket. Of course, Senator Glenn and Senator Stevens had worn those flight jackets representing the United States as they flew airplanes: one a marine, one a member of the Army Air Corps.

The conversation that night with that man, who probably was a KGB plant, as we talked later, developed into a great conversation. We were able to be regaled with conversations about Senator Glenn in World War II and Senator Stevens in World War II flying airplanes for America's interests around the world. I always will remember that.

Finally, I say to Senator Stevens, at this desk right here, you watched me manage a few bills. We were able to finish an appropriations bill. You thought I helped a lot. So you gave me the distinct honor of giving me one of your Hulk ties, which I still have.

(Laughter.)

We laugh and joke about that, but it meant a lot to me that Senator Stevens thought enough of me to give me one of his ties.

So I say to Senator Stevens, at this important occasion for you, of course, and our country, recognizing you, your service in this body, the longest serving Republican in the history of the Republic, I extend to you my appreciation and my friendship.

(Applause, Senators rising.)

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to proceed to S. 372 be agreed to.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory live quorum be waived and the cloture vote occur on Monday, April 16, at 5:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume consideration of the bill on Monday at 3 p.m. and that Senator Rockefeller be recognized at that time to offer a managers' amendment on behalf of himself and Senator Bond.

Mr. President, earlier today the Senate invoked cloture on the motion to proceed to the fiscal year 2007 Intelligence authorization bill.

However, as a result of objections from the other side, the Senate now finds itself in the unfortunate position of having to run out the clock for the next several days rather than promptly considering and completing action on this important legislation.

Let me remind my colleagues of the long road we have been down with this bill already.

The previous Republican-controlled Congress failed to pass an intelligence authorization bill in fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2007--2 years in a row.

That is an unprecedented and unacceptable record for this body: prior to that, Congress had passed this bill every single year for 27 years, often with the bipartisan support of every Senator.

As my colleagues know, the Intelligence authorization bill funds the operations of the 16 agencies of the U.S. intelligence community-- including the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Defense Department--and all the critical work they do to keep Americans safe and fight the war on terror.

It includes essential initiatives that would improve our efforts to fight terrorism and control weapons of mass destruction, enhance our intelligence collection capabilities, and strengthen intelligence oversight.

Blocking the passage of this bill, as a handful of Senators on the other side of the aisle have done over the last couple of years, has left Congress silent on these important matters and made America less secure.

Most of us in the Senate recognize how important it is to pass this bill. We know it is not a partisan issue, that there are no political points to be scored on either side. But I am increasingly disappointed at the continued obstructionism by several Republicans on a matter of national security.

Earlier this year, Chairman Rockefeller and Vice Chairman Bond attempted to bring this bill up for consideration. We were told the objections of a single Senator on the other side of the aisle blocked their efforts.

I have heard that some Senators on the other side of the aisle are interested in offering amendments, yet at this time none of these amendments have surfaced or seen the light of day.

I would certainly like to be reasonable and accommodate every Senator's interest in debating amendments offered in good faith, but I am increasingly concerned that we are seeing obstructionism and delay tactics, rather than productive debate.

Some may wonder what is behind the delay. At a time of war, why would a handful of Senators be willing to hold up a bill that is crucial to our national security?

Why would a group of Senators hold up a bill that has always passed quickly, with little debate or amendment?

Why would they hold up a bill that enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support?

It appears the answer lies not in the legislation before us now but the legislation the Senate will turn to next:

A Medicare bill that will lower drug costs for seniors and people with disabilities by giving the Federal Government the power to negotiate drug prices with some of this Nation's most powerful and profitable companies.

This is not good faith debate--it is a cynical effort by the drug companies--their lobbyists in Gucci shoes and chauffeured limousines-- and their supporters--to hold this national security bill hostage and delay the Senate from acting on legislation to help society's most vulnerable.

So I ask my colleagues to consider this fair notice: unless I see some signs of good faith from the other side of the aisle toward a reasonable timeframe for considering a reasonable number of amendments, I will file cloture on this bill tomorrow.

The Senate has a lot of work ahead of it and it should begin with the swift consideration and passage of this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to a period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 75; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that any statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the Senate then resume legislative session.