Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m., Tuesday, March 13; that when the Senate reconvenes Tuesday, following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that there then be a period of morning business for 60 minutes, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees; that following morning business, the Senate then resume consideration of S. 4, and that the time until 11:45 a.m. be for debate with respect to the Coburn amendments Nos. 294 and 325, and that the time run concurrently and be equally divided and controlled between Senators Lieberman and Coburn or their designees; that at 11:45 a.m., without further intervening action or debate, the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the amendment No. 294, to be followed by a vote in relation to the amendment No. 325, regardless of the outcome of the first vote; that there be 2 minutes of debate between the votes, equally divided and controlled; and that at 12:30 p.m. the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. for the respective work conferences.

So tomorrow, beginning at 11:45 a.m., there will be two rollcall votes in relation to the Coburn amendments Nos. 294 and 325. Members should be prepared to be on the floor at that time for those votes. The remaining amendments will be disposed of, if necessary, after the conference recess period. The managers are going to accept some of the amendments, so we may be able to complete this bill fairly quickly tomorrow afternoon.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate-- I now ask the Republican leader if he has any business to bring before the Senate?

I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, we will shortly vote on the cloture motion filed by the minority.

Amendments to S. 4

Mr. President, first, let me start with a letter written to me dated February 26. There was a comparable letter written to the Republican leader. The letter reads:

It has been exactly 14 years since the first attack on the

World Trade Center; over 5 years since the terrorist attacks

of 9/11; and over 2 years since the 9/11 Commission released

a blueprint for strengthening America's security. The pace of

Congressional response to these wake-up calls has been

glacial.

The House of Representatives has validated its commitment

to improving national security by passing H.R. 1. When S. 4

goes to conference, its provisions must match or surpass the

strength and comprehensiveness of H.R. 1. Failure to act

ratchets up the danger for America. The longer critical

security issues remain unresolved, the more time and options

the terrorists have.

S. 4 should be a clean bill, limited to implementing the

remaining 9/11 Commission recommendations. This legislation

is far too important to be politicized by the introduction of

non-germane, controversial amendments and debate,

particularly those relating to Iraq. Attention to both issues

is critically important. As such, each deserves separate

deliberation.

We urge you to act now to protect America by passing stand-

alone, comprehensive security legislation under S. 4 based on

the 9/11 Commission blueprint without complications regarding

Iraq. The legacy of those whose lives have been taken by

terrorists on American soil is in your hands. Prove to the

families of those killed in 1993 and 2001, and to all

Americans, that this is a new day in Washington, and that

safety and security will finally take precedence over special

interest groups and politics.

Mr. President, the two managers of the bill, Lieberman and Collins, have followed the admonition of that letter. They have worked very hard to have a clean bill. That is basically what we have. But I am sorry to report that of the 100-plus amendments filed, virtually all of them, except 7, are nongermane. To top it off, what the minority did is lumped a bunch of these nongermane amendments together and filed cloture on them.

Here is what the 9/11 families had to say about that. This is a letter to Senator McConnell, dated March 8, 2007:

As family members who lost loved ones on 9/11, we support

full implementation of the

9/11 Commission recommendations. We are writing out of grave

concern that your recent introduction of highly provocative,

irrelevant amendments will jeopardize the passage of S. 4. It

is inconceivable that anyone in good conscience would

consider hindering implementation of the 9/11 Commission

recommendations and we strongly disagree with these divisive

procedural tactics.

Just as the Iraq war deserves separate debate, so do each

of the amendments you offered. S. 4 should be a clean bill

and debate should conclude this week with a straight up

or down vote. Each day that passes without implementation of

the remaining 9/11 Commission recommendations, the safety and

security of our nation is at risk.

Tactics such as those you are contemplating, aimed at

endangering the 9/11 bill, sends a signal to America that

partisan politics is alive and well under your leadership.

Both parties must work together to pass this critical

legislation. We, the undersigned, understand the risk of

failure all too well.

It is signed: ``Respectfully,'' Carol Ashley, mother of Janice, who died, who is a member of Voices of September 11th; Beverly Eckert, widow of Sean Rooney, who is a member of Families of September 11; Mary Fetchet, mother of Brad, who died, who is founding director and president of Voices of September 11th; Carie Lemack, daughter of Judy Larocque, who died, who is cofounder and president of Families of September 11.

Mr. President, this is what the 9/11 families have said. The amendments lumped into one are not germane to the pending bill. That is without any question or debate. It is a collection of far-reaching immigration and criminal law provisions that have never been considered by the Judiciary Committee--never. Senator Leahy said he would be happy to do that. They have never been considered.

These are complex matters which should not be considered on the Senate floor in this manner, especially on this very sensitive legislation. For example, one part of the amendment would overturn a recent Supreme Court decision. Now, remember, seven of the nine members of the Supreme Court are Republicans. They wrote the opinion. They want it overturned. Another part of the amendment would say visa revocations can never, ever be reviewed by any court.

The cloture motion was nothing more than an effort to delay passage of the 9/11 Commission bill. We need to move forward on this vital legislation.

I again ask everyone to listen to the words of the family members of those who perished on September 11. I have read those into the Record. We have, as I speak, these women and others who are watching what we do here today. I hope Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins can go forward and complete this legislation without this. It is just absolutely hard to comprehend that this is what is being attempted on this bill.

I respectfully suggest, as they said in this letter, ``It is inconceivable that anyone in good conscience would consider hindering implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations. . . .'' That is what they said, not what I said. ``Each day that passes without implementation of the . . . 9/11 Commission recommendations [risks] the safety and security of our nation. . . .'' That is what they said, not what I said. ``Tactics such as [these],'' they write to Senator McConnell, `` . . . are . . . aimed at endangering the 9/11 bill, [and it] sends a signal to America that [is inappropriate].''

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

Mr. President, it has been a productive week for the Senate. We have moved closer to completing the long overdue work of the 9/11 Commission--work that will make our country more safe, more secure.

It has been over 2\1/2\ years since the 9/11 Commission gave Congress a roadmap to follow to secure our country. This bipartisan Commission met for over a year, had hearings all over the country, did excellent work. It is important we do not delay their recommendations any longer. The safety and security of our country is too important.

Before we adjourn today, I wish to say a few words in praise of my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Louisiana, Mary Landrieu. In the face of many objections from the minority, Senator Landrieu has been tireless in working to eliminate rules that are nothing more than miles of redtape and mountains of paperwork that are delaying the rebuilding and recovery of the gulf coast, which was devastated by a natural disaster we now know as Katrina.

Her amendment No. 295 is very simple. It would waive the requirement that local communities put up a 10-percent match for every Federal dollar we spend to rebuild public facilities such as schools and fire stations destroyed by Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. These were all devastating hurricanes.

The President has the authority to do this with a single stroke of the pen. In fact, I joined with Senators Landrieu and Lieberman urging him a month ago to do just that, to use his office to lift these significant burdens to recovery. To this day, he simply has not done that. He waived these rules for New York after 9/11. The first President Bush waived these rules after Hurricane Andrew, which was devastating but does not compare to what Katrina did. In fact, these rules have been waived every time disaster recovery costs have grown to even a fraction of those we are now seeing. But not with Katrina and its pals, Rita and Wilma.

So that brings us to why we are here today. What the President would not do we must do legislatively. I would say to all those who are from the administration who are listening to us talk today, when the President gets back from Latin America, let's have him do this. It would save our having to do it in the supplemental. He could call down here. Even maybe he could get some of the people to back off on the other side so we could do it before this bill passes. The President does not need legislation. He has the authority to do that right now. I would hope he would do that. The Senator from Louisiana has been patient and very aggressive. That is what is necessary. I would hope her patience would be rewarded with the President signing his name waiving this 10 percent. It is something that needs to be done. If not, I have committed to her and the people of Louisiana, through her Governor and others who have come to see me, that we are going to do what is right.

This is important. It has happened for every other major disaster, and it should happen for this one. If we cannot do it on this bill, and the President will not do it, then we will have to do it on the supplemental that will be here in a little over 2 weeks. The House has already said they intend to do this. We also intend to do this.

Mr. President, this morning, the Senate will be in a period of morning business for 1 hour, with the time divided between both sides, the Republicans having the first half and the majority the second half. Following that period of time, the Senate will resume consideration of the 9/11 legislation, S. 4.

Last night, the Republican leader and I had a discussion about the legislation, the importance of completing it and how we do so. The Republican leader modified a pending amendment in order to include the provisions of three other amendments which were pending, and then filed cloture on that amendment. Before adjourning last night, I filed cloture on both the substitute amendment and the bill. So tomorrow morning, Friday, we will have a cloture vote on the Republican amendment. And, of course, if cloture is not invoked, then there is an immediate cloture vote on the substitute. So Members could be here Friday well beyond the noon hour.

Just to remind Members, since cloture has been filed on the substitute and the bill, they have until 1 p.m. today to file any additional germane first-degree amendments. At this point, approximately 110 amendments have already been filed.

Right now, 40 amendments are currently pending. That includes, of course, the substitute amendment. I am advised that from a preliminary review by the Parliamentarians of these pending amendments, only eight of them are germane. I have the list of amendments here. It is a long list, as we indicated, of some 100-plus amendments. Out of those, there are eight that are germane. There may be a couple more that are arguably germane. But that is where we are. We will instruct the two managers to see if they, today, can move through the germane amendments. That would speed things up postcloture tomorrow.

We are still attempting to resolve other issues on this most important bill. It is a bill that deals, as we know, with the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. It has been 2\1/2\ years since they completed their work. The House has already done theirs. We are going to do our very best to follow suit. I feel

comfortable we will be able to complete something before we leave here this Friday or Saturday or, if good fortune smiles on us, we can work out something tonight.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Monday, this coming Monday, March 12 at 3 p.m., the Senate begin debate on the following: S.J. Res. 9, sponsored by Senator Reid of Nevada; S. Res. 101, sponsored by Senator Reid of Nevada; S. Con. Res. 7 by Senator Warner; S. Res. 70 by Senator McCain; S. 641 by Senator Gregg; that there be 6 hours for debate on these items en bloc on Monday, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that no amendments or other motions be in order to any of the above; that on Tuesday, March 13 there be 6 more hours for debate on the above, divided in the same way; that at the conclusion or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on each of the above in the above order; and that the preceding all occur without intervening action or debate.

Madam President, we all recall that when we had the debate a couple of weeks ago, the issue was could the Republicans offer amendments to the antisurge resolution that was on the floor. The purpose of that, of course, was to divert attention away from the antisurge resolution. The House and the Senate voted on the antisurge resolution, and 56 percent of the Senate and 56 percent of the House voted against the surge.

I was of the understanding that following the discussion--following the legislation that was completed on that matter, Republicans wanted the opportunity to offer McCain, which was pro-surge; Warner, which was middle ground; and then Judd Gregg, which was a feel-good amendment. At this stage it appears they have changed their opportunities.

I say this: This war has been going on for 48 months--48 months. This war

will soon be beginning the fifth year. As of less than 2 weeks, the war will be in its fifth year. When the Democrats were in the minority, we tried lots of ways to get the President to refocus on this war, to change course. We have been in the majority for 8 weeks and what have we done? We have had almost 50 hearings on Iraq. These are hearings that should have been done a long time ago. We have 3,200 dead American soldiers, 25,000 of them wounded. We are now focusing on Walter Reed, and the same type of oversight we have at Walter Reed and our other military facilities, taking care of our wounded veterans, and then being, some of them, dumped into the Veterans' Administration system prior to their being able to be in that system.

We are being criticized for wanting to go forward on the debate, as we thought the minority wanted. General Petraeus, today, from Iraq--it was on all the news--what did he say? He said the war in Iraq cannot be won militarily. He said that. I didn't say that, he said it. It can only be won politically.

We believe, as does an overwhelming majority of the American people, that President Bush wants to change course in Iraq. That is why we want to debate that. We don't want to take a lot of time. It will be very short. But the mission in Iraq has changed dramatically during these 4 going on 5 years. I am disappointed that again the minority does not want to debate on Iraq.

I say this: There will be a debate on Iraq. The House and Senate, a majority in the House and Senate agree that the course in Iraq must change. Today, the House propounded what they want to do. Today, we propounded what we want to do. They are basically the same thing. Theirs is a little different because they are getting on to a supplemental appropriations bill. We cannot do that. But it is the same principle--change course in Iraq and redeploy these troops.

We will have other opportunities to debate Iraq. But at this stage I am very disappointed we are not going to be able to set up a time next week to go forward. In the meantime, I have spoken to the managers of this legislation now before the body. Hopefully, we can move forward.

I say to everyone here, any bags that were packed for weekend travel should be put on hold. Save that for some other time. We could be in here over the weekend. We could have as many as three cloture votes over the weekend. One will be on the package of bills that has had no hearings or anything else. We will do that. I guess it is an opportunity--filing that cloture--to see if November 7 was correct; did the Democrats win? I guess that is what that first vote will be. I think it will be that they did win. Then we will go to cloture, if necessary, on the bill, and then on the substitute.

Before my friend leaves, I renew my consent making it 60 votes rather than 50 votes. Does that affect anything?

Will my friend yield for a second?

I want to make sure the Record is clear. Speaking to the majority whip, I want to make sure everybody understands we are going to get to this, and whether we do it next week or on the supplemental, we are going to do it. We can do it on both. The issue is that the House is on the supplemental already; therefore, they have things they can do on it we cannot do until we get to it.

Thank you very much.

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

Mr. President, there will be no more votes tonight. We are working to try to come up with a schedule tomorrow. As soon as we have one, everyone will be notified.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period of morning business with Senators allowed to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, along with the Republican leader, Senator McConnell, I have introduced the America COMPETES, Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science, Act of 2007.

This legislation is the result of a truly bipartisan effort. Two years ago, Senators Bingaman and Alexander asked the National Academies to make recommendations on the steps we should take as a nation to maintain our competitive advantage. The result was the Augustine Report, ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm,'' which provided four primary recommendations:

First, the United States needs to dramatically improve K-12 science and mathematics education in order to increase our talent pool. Second, we must sustain and strengthen our Nation's traditional commitment to long-term basic research. Third, we must make the United States the most attractive place to study and perform research. And fourth, we need to provide incentives for innovation and long-term investment so that the United States is the premier place to innovate.

The report warned that the Nation's traditional advantages ``are eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength,'' and that ``decisive action is needed now.''

America has faced this challenge before.

In 1957, when the Soviets launched Sputnik, it caused great panic and concern about our ability to maintain our technological superiority. We responded to these threats quickly. The following year, Congress passed the National Defense Education Act, to keep the United States ahead of the Soviets through increased investment in math and science education.

We trained a whole new generation of engineers and scientists, and thus ensured our preeminence in technology and innovation for a generation.

That fact is, Federal investment in the basic sciences and research has long been a critical component of America's competitive dominance globally. In fact, some economists have estimated that about half of the country's economic growth since World War II has been the result of technological innovation.

Today, however, our position of dominance has been lost. We are challenged by emerging countries like India and China, where national investment in basic research and subject areas such as math and science continues to grow at a far greater pace than here in the United States.

The Augustine panel cited many examples, but some of the statistics are striking.

Consider that in 2005, more than 600,000 engineers graduated from institutions of higher education in China, compared to 350,000 in India and only 70,000 in the United States. China's population is more than three times that of the United States, yet they graduate more than eight times the number of engineers.

The report also found that American 12th graders performed below the international average for 21 countries on general knowledge in math and science. Another study cited in the report had American 15-year-olds ranked 24th out of 40 countries on a math assessment. In my home State of Nevada, the situation is equally alarming, with our students ranked 43rd in the Nation on a 2005 math assessment.

And even though technological giants like Microsoft, Apple, and Intel are American companies, the report indicates that the United States is now a net importer of high technology products--a shift from the early 1990s, when we had a $54 billion surplus in high-tech exports.

As other countries become more competitive, it is clear we must refocus our energies on enhancing the Federal commitment to funding basic research and education.

We must preserve the competitive edge of the United States in science

and technology by getting kids motivated to study math and science. To do this, we need to provide more training for math and science teachers, increase the number of students taking advanced placement courses, offer grants to establish high schools that specialize in math and science, and provide scholarships and fellowships for future scientists and engineers.

The legislation we are introducing today addresses some of these concerns. It is, in effect, a downpayment, a modest first step to ensuring that America retains its competitive edge.

I wish to thank Senators Bingaman and Alexander for authorizing the Academies Study. This study, along with a number of recent reports and books--among them, Tom Friedman's ``The World is Flat,'' which I know that many of my colleagues have read--brought a much-needed sense of urgency to this issue.

Many of these provisions were included in the Protecting America's Competitive Edge Act, or PACE, which Senators Bingaman and Domenici introduced in the last Congress, and I was pleased to cosponsor that important legislation.

I also want to recognize the hard work of a number of my colleagues, Senators Inouye, Stevens, Kennedy, Enzi, Lieberman, Ensign, Mikulski, Hutchison, and Senator Nelson of Florida, who have been instrumental in crafting this legislation.

The legislation that we are introducing will double the Federal investment for the National Science Foundation over the next 4 years, and for the Office of Science at the Department of Energy over the next decade.

America COMPETES will create a DARPA-modeled research project at the Department of Energy and increase investment for basic research at NASA and other science-related Federal agencies.

The bill provides grants to States in order to better align elementary and secondary school curriculum with the knowledge and skills needed for the global economy. Nevada is already doing something similar, with our State P-16 Council.

The legislation will strengthen our math and science teaching workforce by recruiting and training teachers to teach in high-need schools.

America COMPETES will expand the important Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate, IB, programs by increasing the number of math, science, and foreign languages AP and IB courses, and preparing more teachers to teach these challenging courses. This is essential for States such as Nevada, where only 6 percent of 12th graders took the AP calculus exam and only 7 percent took an AP science exam.

The bill will help develop an infrastructure for innovation by establishing a President's Council on Innovation and Competitiveness to promote innovation and competitiveness.

Also, this legislation will help improve math instruction at the elementary and middle school level, through Math Now grants.

If signed into law, our bill will do many of the things that the Augustine Report recommended, but the truth is, in years to come, we will have even more to do.

Though we make new and significant investments in research, we still must address our tax structure and make sure that we do as much as possible to encourage investment in research and development. We should start by finally making the R&D tax credit permanent.

We must also do more in education. This bill strengthens educational opportunities in science, technology, engineering, math, and critical foreign languages, but this is just a first step. For example, we must take a very hard look at our high schools. As Bill Gates has often said, our high schools were designed for a 20th century economy and often do not address the needs of the 21st century workforce.

We should also realize that unless our most basic commitments to America's students are met--by properly funding title I and No Child Left Behind and making a college education accessible and affordable-- these efforts alone cannot prepare our students for the global economy.

Mr. President, Senator McConnell and I began the 110th Congress by promising a new spirit of bipartisanship. Of course we have had our differences on some issues, but I hope that, in jointly introducing this important legislation, we send a signal that investing in America's future is not a partisan issue.

The America COMPETES Act is an important first step in maintaining this Nation's competitive advantage, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that we follow through on the investments we are making in this legislation.

Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I recognize Dr. Susan Lindquist for her cutting-edge work in the field of medical research. Dr. Lindquist's research today has the potential to lead to future cures for some of the most devastating illnesses we face. Her work has attracted national recognition, and next month Dr. Lindquist will be honored as Desert Research Institute Medal Recipient in Nevada. I would also like to thank the Desert Research Institute for their continued commitment in recognizing the best and brightest in our scientific and engineering communities.

Dr. Lindquist has a diverse background of experience in the medical field. She is a member and former director of the Whitehead Institute. She is also a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as the Albert D. Lasker Professor of Medical Sciences at the University of Chicago. Dr. Lindquist has been acknowledged by several institutes, including being elected into the prestigious Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1997.

Her life work in the medical field is nothing short of extraordinary. Potential cures for Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, and many neurodegenerative diseases lie in the most fundamental building blocks of the human body--our proteins. Lindquist and her colleagues have made it their professional mission to understand how long strands of proteins fold to create intricate shapes or misfold and clump together. In her work, Dr. Lindquist found that when proteins misfold, they can contribute to cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's, and even mad cow disease. Dr. Lindquist and her team have studied this exciting line of research so that we can better understand these diseases and hopefully develop new treatments.

Dr. Lindquist's work has led to stunning medical breakthroughs in medicine, biology, and bioengineering. But the true impact of her work is felt by mankind. Today millions of Americans across Nevada and our Nation who suffer from neurodegenerative diseases have hope. Cures for some of the most debilitating diseases are on the horizon as a result of Dr. Lindquist's work.

Again, it is with great pride that I recognize Dr. Susan Lindquist before the Senate. She is a deserving recipient of the Nevada Medal for her extraordinary work. I look forward to her continued accomplishments in this important field.

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

Mr. President, S.J. Res. 9 is at the desk and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. President, I ask for its second reading but object to my own request.