Floor Statements

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 684, H.R. 9340.

Mr. President, I understand that there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc.

Mr. President, in order to place the bills on the calendar under

the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceeding en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum calls with respect to the cloture motions for H.R. 7008, H.R. 9340, and the Sonderling nomination.

Mr. President, the theme of the Senate this week is common sense. Today, we will be voting on two eminently commonsense pieces of legislation: the Stop Insider Trading Act and the Ratepayer Protection Act.

The Stop Insider Trading Act actually pairs two commonsense measures: a stock purchase ban for Members of Congress and a voter ID measure. Neither requires much explanation.

To ensure that Members of Congress and their families are not benefiting financially from insider knowledge of the market, the stock purchase ban would prohibit Members of Congress, their spouses, or their dependent children from purchasing stocks issued by public companies while the Member is in office. It would also ensure transparency when it comes to stock sales by requiring Members of Congress and their immediate family to provide advance, public notice of any stock sale. And these rules are enforced with real penalties.

It is a pretty simple measure but an important way to ensure that Members of Congress are held to the standards that Americans should be able to expect of their representatives.

The other half of the Stop Insider Trading Act is also pretty simple. It would do nothing more than require that Americans present a photo ID when they go to vote. That is it. Very simple and something that has the overwhelming--overwhelming--support of the American people. And when I say ``the American people,'' I mean the American people-- Republicans, Democrats, Independents, everyone.

While this vote should be a no-brainer, I do have some concerns, because while the American people overwhelmingly support a photo ID requirement, for some bizarre reason, congressional Democrats have decided that photo ID for voting is a step too far. I say ``bizarre'' because I haven't seen Democrats crusading against showing ID in any of the other situations where Americans are required to present their photo identification. My Democrat colleagues don't seem to have a problem with showing photo ID to board an airplane, to rent a car, to start a new job. They don't seem to have a problem with showing photo ID at the doctor's office or when buying alcohol or when opening a bank account. They don't seem to have a problem--if the Presiding Officer can believe this, they don't seem to have a problem with having a requirement to show a photo ID at their own political events. Think about that. It is only when it comes to voting that congressional Democrats suddenly, inexplicably see photo ID as a terrible problem, even though not only the majority of Americans but the majority of Democrats support photo identification.

It is pretty hard to explain the Democrats' position, but I suspect one of two things is going on here. Either Democrats are just reflexively opposing this proposal because it came from Republicans or Democrats believe that there are, in fact, people out there voting illegally and that it is benefiting Democrats and they would like to keep that going.

I will say that 13 House Democrats found voter ID and the stock purchase ban to be so common sense that they broke with their party and supported the Stop Insider Trading Act when it moved through the House. I would love to see Senate Democrats follow their example. I guess we will see soon enough.

In addition to the Stop Insider Trading Act, the Senate will be voting on the Ratepayer Protection Act this week as well. I know I have used the words ``common sense'' a lot lately, but as I said, it is the theme of this week's legislation. And the Ratepayer Protection Act is as common sense as it gets. It would simply promote the adoption of a standard that would require data centers to shoulder the electricity costs associated with their operation and construction. That is it--a simple piece of legislation designed to protect hard-working Americans from the increased energy costs associated with data centers.

The Ratepayer Protection Act passed overwhelmingly in the House of Representatives, with almost every Democrat--almost every Democrat--as well as Republicans supporting it. So you would think it would have had a pretty easy passage through this Chamber as well, but when we brought this legislation up here in the Senate a couple of weeks ago, Democrats objected. For what reason, I don't know--presumably a political one.

Given the overwhelming support for this measure in the House, it is difficult to conclude that Democrats blocked this bill for any reason other than the desire to deny Republicans another win in an election year, which is a pretty poor reason for opposing a measure to protect Americans from higher energy costs.

But they have another chance this week, and I guess we will see.

Will Democrats support commonsense measures like a stock purchase ban, photo ID to vote, and protection from higher energy costs? Or will they continue to play politics?

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. President, I withdraw my motion to proceed to Calendar No. 648, H.R. 9340.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 453, H.R. 2347.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 931; that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all Members of the Republican Conference be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or Joint Resolutions from October 1 through November 9.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore and the majority the minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent actions of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the Senate's adjournment, reports of committees and introduction of measures be authorized on Thursday, October 15 from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 483, S. 2273.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 571, H.R. 5235.

The clerk will report the bill by title.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 621, S. 5249.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee- reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 637, S. 2437.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee- reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.