Floor Statements

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to permanently correct an injustice in the tax code that has harmed citizens in many States of this great Nation.

State and local governments have various alternatives for raising revenue.

Some levy income taxes, some use sales taxes, and others use a combination of the two. The citizens who pay State and local income taxes have been able to offset some of their federal income taxes by receiving a deduction for those State and local income taxes. Before 1986, taxpayers also had the ability to deduct their sales taxes.

The philosophy behind these deductions is simple: people should not have to pay taxes on their taxes. The money that people must give to one level of Government should not also be taxed by another level of Government.

Unfortunately, citizens of some States were treated differently after 1986 when the deduction for State and local sales taxes was eliminated. This discriminated against those living in States, such as my home State of Texas, with no income taxes. It is important to remember the lack of an income tax does not mean citizens in these States do not pay State taxes; revenues are simply collected differently.

It is unfair to give citizens from some States a deduction for the revenue they provide their State and local governments, while not doing the same for citizens from other States. Federal tax law should not treat people differently on the basis of State residence and differing tax collection methods, and it should not provide an incentive for States to establish income taxes over sales taxes.

This discrepancy had a significant impact on Texas. According to the Texas Comptroller, the sales tax deduction saves a family of four $310 a year, or a total of about $1 billion each year for the State's residents who itemize deductions. The ability of taxpayers to deduct their sales taxes will lead to the creation of more than 16,500 new jobs and the addition of $920 million in State economic activity.

Recognizing the inequity in the tax code, Congress reinstated the sales tax deduction in 2004 and authorized it for two years. Last year, we extended the sales tax deduction for an additional two years. As a result of our efforts, the 55 million of us in the eight States with a sales tax but no income tax are no longer discriminated against in the tax code. Unfortunately, the deduction is only in effect through 2007, and we must act to prevent the inequity from returning.

The legislation I am offering today will fix this problem for good by making the State and local sales tax deduction permanent. This will permanently end the discrimination suffered by my fellow Texans and citizens of other States who do not have the option of an income tax deduction.

This legislation is about reestablishing equity to the tax code and defending the important principle of eliminating taxes on taxes. Last year, the Senate voted 75-25 to instruct conferees to make this deduction permanent. I hope my fellow Senators will once again support this effort and pass this legislation.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to provide permanent tax relief from the marriage penalty--the most egregious, anti-family provision that has been in the tax code. One of my highest priorities in the United States Senate has been to relieve American taxpayers of this punitive burden.

We have made important strides to eliminate this unfair tax and provide marriage penalty relief by raising the standard deduction and enlarging the 15 percent tax bracket for married joint filers to twice that of single filers. Before these provisions were changed, 44 million married couples, including 2.4 million Texas families, paid an average penalty of $1,480.

Enacting marriage penalty relief was a giant step for tax fairness, but it may be fleeting. Even as married couples use the money they now save to put food on the table and clothes on their children, a tax increase looms in the future. Since the 2001 tax relief bill was restricted, the marriage penalty provisions will only be in effect through 2010. In 2011, marriage will again be a taxable event and 43 percent of married couples will again pay more in taxes unless we act decisively. Given the challenges many families face in making ends meet, we must make sure we do not backtrack on this important reform.

The benefits of marriage are well established, yet, without marriage penalty relief, the tax code provides a significant disincentive for people to walk down the aisle. Marriage is a fundamental institution in our society and should not be discouraged by the IRS. Children living in a married household are far less likely to live in poverty or to suffer from child abuse. Research indicates these children are also less likely to be depressed or have developmental problems. Scourges such as adolescent drug use are less common in married families, and married mothers are less likely to be victims of domestic violence.

We should celebrate marriage, not penalize it. The bill I am offering would make marriage penalty relief permanent, because marriage should not be a taxable event. I call on the Senate to finish the job we started and make marriage penalty relief permanent today.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to permanently correct an injustice in the tax code that has harmed citizens in many States of this great Nation.

State and local governments have various alternatives for raising revenue.

Some levy income taxes, some use sales taxes, and others use a combination of the two. The citizens who pay State and local income taxes have been able to offset some of their federal income taxes by receiving a deduction for those State and local income taxes. Before 1986, taxpayers also had the ability to deduct their sales taxes.

The philosophy behind these deductions is simple: people should not have to pay taxes on their taxes. The money that people must give to one level of Government should not also be taxed by another level of Government.

Unfortunately, citizens of some States were treated differently after 1986 when the deduction for State and local sales taxes was eliminated. This discriminated against those living in States, such as my home State of Texas, with no income taxes. It is important to remember the lack of an income tax does not mean citizens in these States do not pay State taxes; revenues are simply collected differently.

It is unfair to give citizens from some States a deduction for the revenue they provide their State and local governments, while not doing the same for citizens from other States. Federal tax law should not treat people differently on the basis of State residence and differing tax collection methods, and it should not provide an incentive for States to establish income taxes over sales taxes.

This discrepancy had a significant impact on Texas. According to the Texas Comptroller, the sales tax deduction saves a family of four $310 a year, or a total of about $1 billion each year for the State's residents who itemize deductions. The ability of taxpayers to deduct their sales taxes will lead to the creation of more than 16,500 new jobs and the addition of $920 million in State economic activity.

Recognizing the inequity in the tax code, Congress reinstated the sales tax deduction in 2004 and authorized it for two years. Last year, we extended the sales tax deduction for an additional two years. As a result of our efforts, the 55 million of us in the eight States with a sales tax but no income tax are no longer discriminated against in the tax code. Unfortunately, the deduction is only in effect through 2007, and we must act to prevent the inequity from returning.

The legislation I am offering today will fix this problem for good by making the State and local sales tax deduction permanent. This will permanently end the discrimination suffered by my fellow Texans and citizens of other States who do not have the option of an income tax deduction.

This legislation is about reestablishing equity to the tax code and defending the important principle of eliminating taxes on taxes. Last year, the Senate voted 75-25 to instruct conferees to make this deduction permanent. I hope my fellow Senators will once again support this effort and pass this legislation.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to provide permanent tax relief from the marriage penalty--the most egregious, anti-family provision that has been in the tax code. One of my highest priorities in the United States Senate has been to relieve American taxpayers of this punitive burden.

We have made important strides to eliminate this unfair tax and provide marriage penalty relief by raising the standard deduction and enlarging the 15 percent tax bracket for married joint filers to twice that of single filers. Before these provisions were changed, 44 million married couples, including 2.4 million Texas families, paid an average penalty of $1,480.

Enacting marriage penalty relief was a giant step for tax fairness, but it may be fleeting. Even as married couples use the money they now save to put food on the table and clothes on their children, a tax increase looms in the future. Since the 2001 tax relief bill was restricted, the marriage penalty provisions will only be in effect through 2010. In 2011, marriage will again be a taxable event and 43 percent of married couples will again pay more in taxes unless we act decisively. Given the challenges many families face in making ends meet, we must make sure we do not backtrack on this important reform.

The benefits of marriage are well established, yet, without marriage penalty relief, the tax code provides a significant disincentive for people to walk down the aisle. Marriage is a fundamental institution in our society and should not be discouraged by the IRS. Children living in a married household are far less likely to live in poverty or to suffer from child abuse. Research indicates these children are also less likely to be depressed or have developmental problems. Scourges such as adolescent drug use are less common in married families, and married mothers are less likely to be victims of domestic violence.

We should celebrate marriage, not penalize it. The bill I am offering would make marriage penalty relief permanent, because marriage should not be a taxable event. I call on the Senate to finish the job we started and make marriage penalty relief permanent today.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the tax extender package that will be coming over from the House. It is a very important measure, one of the last items of business that probably will be passed in this session. It is such an important bill. I have to say it doesn't have everything we had hoped it would have. But the important parts that are included are very important. The sales tax deduction--the deductibility of State sales taxes--is a huge item of equity for taxpayers in our country.

As the Presiding Officer knows, there are eight States that do not have income taxes. Yet between the years of 1986 and 2004, there was an inequity. If a State chose to have State income taxes to raise its revenue, their citizens could deduct from their Federal income taxes those State income taxes. But if a State didn't have an income tax and instead raised its State revenue with State sales taxes, you could not deduct the sales taxes on your income tax. It was a huge inequity.

It is essential that in our country we have the same treatment for the people of every State regarding how they pay their State taxes. So this bill, the tax extender package, which will be voted on either tonight or tomorrow, is that equalizer. It does extend for 2 more years the sales tax deduction that would be allowed, just as State income taxes are deductible, from your Federal income tax return. We have had that opportunity for 2 years--2004 and 2005. This would have it available for 2006, this year, and next year, 2007.

The taxpayers in Texas, Alaska, Florida, Washington State, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wyoming would be set to have the penalty if this bill does not pass. This is something I have worked on for years. Since I came to the Senate, I have tried to equalize this inequity. Finally, in 2004, we were able to do that, and now we cannot let this equity go. There are many people who have worked to make this happen, especially the leaders of the Senate. Senator Frist and Senator Reid have been working on this, as I have, for all these years, trying to do what is right by our States, as well as the other States that are affected in this way. We won that right in 2004, and now we will be able to go forward and continue the equitable treatments of all taxpayers in our country.

The other points in the bill that I think are so important are the deduction for college tuition and fees. This can give up to $4,000 to families who are sending children to college. That is something that makes a huge difference to the families in our country who are paying the ever-increasing college tuition rates. It has a $250 deduction for a teacher who buys classroom supplies out of their own pockets. I know teacher after teacher in this country who has seen a child who doesn't have a workbook or who wants to enhance the quality of instruction, so the teacher buys, from her own pocketbook, the supplies that will enhance the educational opportunity. Yet the teachers have done it out of the goodness of their hearts, not because they are highly paid-- because we know teachers are notoriously underpaid. It is because they care about the students and about the learning. So we have a deduction for those teachers who have done this, and that is in the bill before us in this Congress.

We will extend the research and development tax credit. That has been the lifeblood of innovation in our country. We have extended this credit 11 times since it was enacted in 1981. We know that it has helped us remain competitive, with increased competition from foreign countries, and has added American jobs because of the creativity and technological innovation that has been provided. I wish that we had a few more tax cuts.

We have an inequitable situation with timber taxes, where we have a competition with foreign countries that are subsidized. It is my priority to work on that going forward. It is not in this bill. I wish it were. I pledge my efforts, along with many other States, to extend or to have this tax credit reenacted.

There is also a very important energy production bill that is in the tax extender package. It is a bill that passed the Senate with full support, and it will bring the cost of energy down. It is the opening of leases 181 and 181 South in the Gulf of Mexico. These are leases that will open up natural gas and oil, which will have a major impact on the cost of fuel in our country.

It is good for America. We must look to our own natural resources to stop our dependence on foreign resources for energy. If we are going to remain secure in our country, and if we are going to remain in control of our economy, we will pass this legislation that opens up these very important leases in the Gulf of Mexico.

While no bill is perfect, no bill does everything everybody wants, I am in strong support of the tax extender bill. I have heard people speak against the bill and say: How can we pass tax cuts when we have deficits? The fact of the matter is, we have higher revenue when we have tax cuts. We have had the highest revenue in the history of America since the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. We have brought the deficit down and have cut it in half already because of the tax cuts. The stock market is hitting new highs because of the tax cuts.

I hope we will continue to extend tax cuts for hard-working Americans to make our country competitive, to keep the revenue coming in, to bring the deficit down, and to keep the healthy economy that has caused our unemployment to go down to the lowest rates we have had in the last four decades.

It is a good bill. We will work next year to increase the tax cuts, to continue the tax cuts and keep our robust economy and our low unemployment.

Mr. President, I again thank the Senator from Ohio for yielding me this time.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I commend the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Senator Craig has done an outstanding job of making sure the laws that weren't working, where we were not doing what we should be doing to help our veterans, were changed.

He has worked a long time on the bill now coming to its final passage--finally. He has been working on it for 2 years, that I am aware. He has done a terrific job. There is a lot of authorization that is essential to go forward next year on appropriations.

I appreciate the work of the Senator. He is retiring as chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and going to ranking member. I know his working relationship with the new chairman is such that we will continue to see progress in this area.

military construction appropriations

I will talk about the continuing resolution being passed by the House in a few hours that will be sent to the Senate. We will send that bill to the President to meet the midnight deadline so Government can continue to function.

I am talking tonight about this bill with very mixed feelings because I am chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans' Affairs and Related Agencies, and I wanted to pass the full bill, the appropriations for military construction, and I wanted to make sure we covered our veterans' needs. It is an important subcommittee, of which I have served as chairman these last 2 years. I have worked with my ranking member, Senator Feinstein, to assure we had the funding we needed. Senator Feinstein and I were ready to go on our bill. It passed in September. It is a bill that passed unanimously in the Senate. I know everyone agreed we had

covered the bases that need to be covered to do what is right for our military--active duty and the veterans--who have served our country in the past.

Unfortunately, our full bill is not going to pass. It is not going to pass because, first, it was held up in the Senate for appointing conferees, held up by a few Senators who thwarted the majority. I was very disappointed we lost those weeks. Our Appropriations Committee chairman Thad Cochran tried, as I, to pry the bill out so we could go to conference and work with the House.

Finally, this week, through the leadership of Senator Frist and Senator Stevens from Alaska, the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, we were able to alleviate all of the concerns raised and get the bill to conference.

Then, unfortunately, the members of the House committee had determined we did not have enough time to conference the bill. I think we did have enough time. We had the time to do all of the construction that should be started right now. However, that is not going to happen.

I would not have allowed this bill to go forward, and I would be speaking against it right now if we did not have a provision in the House-passed continuing resolution that will give budget transfer authority to the Department of Veterans Affairs so that there will be no medical need, no service need, no payment to any veteran that will not be made before this continuing resolution runs out.

If that provision had not been added in the bill, we would not be passing this bill tonight because I would be talking all night to keep it from passing.

I called the Secretary of Veterans Affairs this afternoon, and I asked him if he could assure me that there would be enough money in the accounts from which they could transfer to assure that all of the medical needs, including surges in medical needs, would be able to be given. The Secretary assured me that is the case. The Secretary said they had enough surplus money, enough rainy day fund money, and enough money in the other accounts that they would not hurt the other accounts and they would be able to transfer. He did say that by the time we got to February 15, if we didn't have a full bill, they would be beginning to run into trouble. He gave me his word--and I know his word is good-- that if they see some shortfall that would start happening before February 15, and if there is no bill, he would call me immediately, and we would begin to work on a supplemental approach.

I am certainly going to trust his word. Secretary Nicholson has been a man of his word throughout these years I have worked with him. He is a veteran himself, a distinguished veteran. He knows the veterans issues. He cares about veterans. He will call, as he did last year when he saw a looming shortfall and he asked for help and we gave him the help to assure the veterans' needs would be met. We are going to cover it, and we are going to do it in a way that will assure that the medical care is given.

I have to say, I am disappointed we are going to adjourn without completing the full bill, without completing the military construction so it can start right away, without completing the appropriations and the priorities that we are putting in the next year for veterans. I know they will not suffer in any way because Secretary Nicholson assured me of that.

I will be watching. I will be staying on top of the VA's financial situation throughout this period that the continuing resolution is going to run, to the middle of February. If a problem arises, I will not stop advocating for the supplemental appropriation that will be necessary to assure we have the funding we need.

We will work together in this Congress to assure that the men and women who are protecting our freedom, as we speak today, get the quality of life they deserve. We will continue to work together to assure that the veterans who have served our country, who have answered the call of our country, are given everything to which they are entitled and which we owe them.

I am going to be the ranking member of this subcommittee next year, having served as chairman for 2 years with a wonderful ranking member, Senator Feinstein. It has been pure joy. She has a wonderful staff. We have never had a disagreement that couldn't be worked out. We have made sure the priorities, which are the same for both of us, have been met. I will be a loyal ranking member, and I hope the new chairman will have the same relationship and the same overall goal for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs that Senator Feinstein and I have had. I believe he will.

I am going to vote for the continuing resolution. However, I could not be more disappointed that we did not pass the full appropriations bill for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. I know the veterans will be taken care of, and I know the military construction will begin with the new starts a couple of months late. We will get those projects done with that small delay. I am going to make it my priority to assure that happens.

Senator Stevens has come to the Senate. I want to say, in addition to Senator Cochran, Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye have been the advocates for our military throughout the time I have been in the Senate. I am honored to be a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. I know those two leaders work together, as Senator Feinstein and I do, and that is with one goal: to make sure the military, who are in harm's way, who are fighting so we may speak freely in this Chamber, who are fighting for our children and grandchildren to have the freedom we enjoy and that has been given to us by generations past, will have the opportunities they deserve, and that is the quality of life that we can give them.

I thank the Senate for coming to the end with this continuing resolution. I will support it.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would just like to clarify, with the Senator from Alaska on this subject, that the Senate did act. The Senate did pass our bill, and we did appoint conferees, and it was a lack of willingness on the part of the House to have conferees meet with the Senate. His disappointment is the same as mine.

I am going to start working on January 4, when we are sworn in to the new Congress. And I hope we can take the bill that has been passed unanimously by the Senate and work through the appropriations process and pass this bill before the continuing resolution is ended on February 15. We do not have to wait until February 15. And once the committee is constituted, and we have a chairman and a ranking member, I will be the ranking member, and I will work with the chairman. And I hope we can pass this bill because it is in very good order and it was unanimously supported by the Senate. And I think we are pretty close to what the House passed. I think, with a strong will, we will be able to come in before February 15 and start those projects about which the Senator from Alaska just spoke.

So I will look forward to working with him in the new year, both for Defense appropriations and for this Military Construction bill and the Veterans Affairs bill and the military quality of life that is in the bill that we passed in the Senate earlier this year.

I thank the Senator.

Madam President, I thank Senator Enzi for giving me this time. I am pleased to rise to support Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach's nomination for Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. I am speaking about a person whom I know. I know him as a person. I know him as a human being. I can say, with full confidence, there is no one more qualified and more well suited to lead this very important agency.

I was very pleased the committee overwhelmingly, unanimously, supported his nomination. Not only is Dr. Von Eschenbach a wonderful friend of mine, but he is so qualified for this position. His experience and integrity make him the right choice to lead the FDA.

He is a nationally recognized urologic surgeon, medical educator, and cancer advocate. He is a three-time cancer survivor. There is no one who can understand what it is like to go through a fight against cancer than someone who has done it. So many doctors haven't had that experience, one might not get the impression that they really understand what a patient is going through. Not Dr. Andy von Eschenbach. He has been through the hard time of being told he has this dreaded disease and fighting it with all his might. He does relate to patients' struggles.

During his 25 years at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Medical Center, he led a faculty of 1,000 cancer researchers and clinicians. He was the chief academic officer at this great cancer institution. He was also the founding director of M.D. Anderson's Prostate Cancer Research Program. In this position, he developed integrated programs to study, treat, and prevent prostate cancer. Before arriving at M.D. Anderson, he served his country as lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Medical Corps from 1968 to 1971. In 1976, he joined M.D. Anderson as a urologic oncology fellow. He became part of the faculty and was named chairman of the Department of Urology in 1983.

When he left M.D. Anderson in 2002, he became Director of the National Cancer Institute. At the time, he was president-elect of the American Cancer Society which, of course, is one of the leading organizations in our country that fights for victims of cancer.

He has, also, been published in more than 200 publications. This year, Time Magazine named Andy von Eschenbach as one of the 100 people who shape our world.

The FDA is fortunate to have Dr. von Eschenbach. It is one of the Nation's oldest and most respected consumer protection agencies. It regulates $1 trillion worth of products available to American consumers, and it makes sure the products are safe and effective.

Dr. Von Eschenbach is the right person to lead the FDA's mission. I completely trust him. I cannot think of a more qualified candidate. I hope we will put politics aside in this very important nomination and we will confirm this very qualified individual. He is balanced. He has good judgment. He will continue to be a cancer advocate as well as a patient advocate.

He knows, also, from the FDA standpoint, of the issues involved with the drug approval process--that products face extensive testing and studies compared to other countries. I have talked to him about this. Of course, their first and foremost responsibility is safety. That is why they have this arduous and comprehensive process of approving drugs.

On the other hand, he also knows you need to make drugs available for patients who otherwise may not survive. He realizes these concerns from every angle. He knows it from the research angle, from the academic angle, from the Government angle, and from the patient advocate angle.

It would be a tragedy if we did not give him the full authority and the full congressional confirmation he deserves. He deserves it because he left the private sector at a world renowned cancer research institution to serve his country and the responsibility it takes in a high public policy position.

Sometimes I wonder how we attract such qualified academics and people who are not experienced in this arena. They are not used to the compromise of politics. They have been researchers and in academia all their lives. They come into public service and all of a sudden they are hit with the public exposure and scrutiny. Sometimes they are unfairly characterized in a way they never dreamed.

Yet we have someone of the caliber of Andy von Eschenbach willing to take all of that to do something better for our country and for cancer patients in the country and in the world. We owe him the ability to have this position without any further delay, with the complete imprimatur of the Senate as well as the President of the United States. He deserves it.

I hope our colleagues will look at this, not from a political prism but from the standpoint of a qualified individual who is trying to help medical research and safety in this country go forward, who is a patient advocate, first and foremost.

I thank Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy for working together to bring this nomination to the Senate. We should have a bipartisan vote in confirming Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I have a motion which is in order, but I need to hold off because another person involved is not here. I have given him my word that I would wait. So if Senator Levin has something to proceed with, I suggest that Senator Levin proceed.

Madam President, I just ask how long does Senator Kennedy expect to speak?

I thank the Chair.

Madam President, we are still in negotiation on the point. If no one else is here, may I make my statement on behalf of Bob Gates?

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that we be able to move that adjournment time until after the motion I wish to make is done and Senator DeMint has a chance to respond.

Madam President, I would like to take this opportunity to speak on behalf of Dr. Robert Gates to become the next Secretary of Defense. I am very pleased to stand in support of this great man. I have gotten to know him, working with him as president of Texas A&M University and, before that, as the head of the Bush Library there. I have found him to be a thoughtful, visionary leader who is a perfect fit for what we need in the Department of Defense at this crucial time.

I was very pleased to see the Senate Armed Services Committee overwhelmingly and unanimously approve his nomination and bring it to the floor. I thank Chairman Warner and Ranking Member Levin for acting expeditiously on the nomination because, of course, when there is a transition in place, you need to have the leader confirmed.

American military personnel are bound by the core values of duty, honor, and country. GEN Douglas MacArthur articulated this during his famous address to cadets at West Point in 1962.

Dr. Bob Gates certainly understands the meaning of these values. Dr. Gates had not anticipated returning to Government service. He said he has never enjoyed any position more than being president of Texas A&M University. That makes me proud in itself. But in wartime, he said he could not refuse the President's request.

Over the last 40 years, Dr. Gates has gained experience that makes him uniquely qualified to serve as our 22nd Secretary of Defense. He stands ready to provide leadership that America needs to achieve victory in the war on terror. He has been a commissioned officer in the Air Force, serving in the Strategic Air Command. He holds a Ph.D. in Soviet history from Georgetown University. He has held numerous positions within the intelligence community, including Director of the CIA and Deputy National Security Adviser. In 2002, he became president of Texas A&M, our Nation's sixth largest university.

Most recently, he was also a member of the Iraq Study Group that has just made its report today. He was a member until his nomination as Secretary of Defense. I believe that also has provided him with a good background on what is needed on the issue he faces so starkly right now; that is, what we do in Iraq, what do we do that allows the Iraqi people to have a government that is stable, a government that cannot be overrun by outside forces, and a government that will be stabilized itself for the good of its own people?

Dr. Gates' background is going to be perfect also at this particular time because he has worked across the aisle. He has worked in intelligence, which is not a partisan issue. So I believe his experience and his ability--acknowledged by all--to work with others is the right formula for leading our Department of Defense and working as one of the President's closest advisers.

I am very pleased that he has accepted this huge challenge. Texas A&M is a great university. It is a university that has a unique spirit, and it is a military spirit. So many of our heroes from past wars have graduated from Texas A&M University. He has kept this military connection, his intelligence connection, and his ability to work with others, all making him the very best choice for the President.

I, for one, know this man and am very confident that he is the right choice. I look forward to working with him to make sure we are doing the right thing in the war on terror, which is bigger than just Iraq. It is Afghanistan. It is all over the world where terrorists are harming people and are taking away part of the freedom for which we stand. And we don't want that to happen. We have to beat the terrorists, and I want to beat them where they are, not have them come to America ever again and hurt American citizens and people who live and work in America.

I think Bob Gates is the right person to advise the President, to work with the President, to implement the President's policies and bring this war to a conclusion with only one thing to be said, and that is, a conclusion that is a victory.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I rise today to speak on behalf of the brave men and women who are defending our country around the world and for those valiant veterans who have served and are now home.

On November 14, this Senate passed the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. I was on the Senate floor for 5 hours, and every Senator had ample time to debate any part of this bill. Several Senators spoke. In the end, this bill was agreed to by the entire Senate by a unanimous vote. It is a good bill. It is a bipartisan bill. It is one that we have worked on together for months.

We are at war. We have to care for the men and women fighting this war, and we have to take care of them when they return. This bill funds the vital infrastructure our brave soldiers, sailors, and airmen and women need to defend our country. They must have the funding to operate bases with sufficient facilities and protection so they can fulfill the mission we ask of them.

The bill also provides critical dollars to care for those veterans who were injured in battle. This bill provides funds for medical services and mental health treatment for veterans suffering from the wounds they received in battle. They are not only suffering from obvious wounds, thousands are suffering from traumatic shock and mental anguish. Thousands are suffering from diseases for which we don't even have a treatment. This bill funds the research for that treatment.

As a nation, we ask our men and women to defend and protect us. We owe it to them. We have an obligation to care for them. It is a moral obligation and one that I feel is my responsibility to fulfill.

If we adjourn without completing our work on this bill, we will let those men and women down. We will let down every American they swore an oath to protect and serve.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 5385, the Military Construction appropriations bill; that the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees.

Madam President, let me say right upfront, I hope this objection will go away sometime today. I think we are talking about whether something is done in writing or whether it is semantics. I didn't have to agree to what was in the letter that was written to the leader because our Military Construction bill meets all of the criteria they set forth. I didn't have to agree to their letter because everything in our bill is authorized or it is in the President's bill or it is in the future years' designations of priority by the Department of Defense. That is called a FYDP. It meets those criteria. We don't put provisions in our military construction conference committee reports that are not in the House or Senate bill.

All I can do is give my word that this is not going to turn into an omnibus. I am giving my word it is not going to be an omnibus. It is going to be the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill that was passed unanimously by the Senate.

I hope that all of the relevant parties will be able to sit down because I can't call this up for a vote. It would be spread out for so long as to lose the ability to go to conference. The House is planning to go out of session at the end of this week. I would stay here for 2 weeks to finish this bill because there is so much in it that is important. It is all new starts. This bill is filled with the priorities that the Department of Defense has in facilities on military bases all over this country, including quality-of-life housing for our military men and women. It has veterans affairs priorities and increases in funding for mental health and for research into post- traumatic stress syndrome. There are many items in this bill that will not be covered in a continuing resolution.

I hope we will all be able to sit down together. I hope the House will cooperate if we send this conference committee request to them. I am prepared to work all night and all day tomorrow to try to fit all of the timeframes.

Let me end by saying that we are very close between the House and the Senate. I think we can work out the differences between the House and the Senate. I am saying right now this will not turn into an omnibus appropriations bill. It will be a bill that funds military housing and quality of life for our men and women in the military and their families, and it will have the new starts that cannot be covered by a continuing resolution. We certainly meet the criteria or the Senate wouldn't have passed the bill unanimously.

So I am not saying the Senator from South Carolina is wrong in his statements about what happens in conference committee reports in many other areas and in the history of the Senate. He is right. Sometimes a conference report will turn into an omnibus, and sometimes you find things that are not in either the House or Senate bill. But I am saying today that would not be the case in our bill, nor has it been the case that I can remember in past bills. Maybe I am forgetting something. But by and large, our bill is straightforward. And by and large, our bill is supported by the entire Senate. It is not very far from the bill that the House passed, and I think if we all put our minds to this and put away--I don't think our leadership would be required to sign a letter and I don't think the chairman of the Appropriations Committee should be required to sign a letter. I think we should be good for our word around here. If we are not, then we have lost the spirit of this institution.

So I am saying today that I am going to go back to the drawing board. I am going to work with the Senator from South Carolina and the Senators from Oklahoma. I am going to work with my counterparts on the House side, and I am going to try to get a bill through here, and I am not going to stop trying for the rest of the time that one of our Houses is in session. I think we owe it to our men and women in the military, we owe it to the veterans who have already served. We owe it to those people who are coming back here without limbs that we are funding at additional levels, not only the prosthetics but also the training on how to be proficient in using those artificial limbs. Madam President, I think we can do it. I am committed to trying, and I hope everybody who is involved in this process will also try.

Let me also add that my counterpart, Senator Feinstein, who is the ranking member of this subcommittee, is in full support of this bill. I have talked to her about the issue I am trying to address, and she is ready to go to conference. I do believe that if we will sit down and talk with everyone who is interested, everybody would be satisfied that we will keep our word and we will do what we intended to do, anyway, which is conference a bill that is going to take the differences in the House and Senate bills and resolve those differences. That is what we are supposed to do, and that is what I am committed to do.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 5385, the Military Construction appropriations bill, that the Senate insist upon its amendments, request a conference with the House, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees.

Mr. President, there was never any other intention. I have discussed this with Senator Cochran, chairman of the committee. I discussed it with Senator Frist, our leader. I have discussed it with the ranking member, Senator Feinstein. And most certainly we will bring back a conference report that has either material in the President's budget request, something that has passed the House or the Senate in this bill, and all of the projects will be duly authorized on the military construction side.

On the Veterans' Administration side, we worked very closely with the authorization committee, Senator Craig, Senator Akaka, and others to assure that we have the approval of the committee leaders for all of the veterans' expenditures.

I have to say to the Senator from South Carolina that there are some very important initiatives in the Veterans bill that would not be covered in a continuing resolution. And there are very important commitments for new starts in the Military Construction bill that are necessary for us to keep pace with the BRAC project and with other military housing and quality-of-life projects that are included in the bill. It is going to be a Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill with the priorities of the Senate. This bill passed unanimously in the Senate. We would go forward with the clear understanding that this is going to be a military construction and veterans affairs and military quality-of-life conference report.

Mr. President, this is a major step forward. I have been working with Senator Feinstein to try to get conferees appointed for our bill. There is time in this session for the House and the Senate to come together and put a bill forward in the conference report that will do what is right by our military who are serving our country and protecting our freedom, who are in harm's way as we speak. There is time for us to take care of those good people. There is most certainly time for us to take care of our veterans and to make sure that the priorities which we have set this year, for heaven's sake, are passed in this session of Congress.

If anyone says to me we don't have time to have a conference, they are wrong. It is 12:40 in the afternoon. It is Wednesday. I will work all night, if necessary, and so will our great staff working with the House, if the House will sit down with us. Our military personnel and our veterans deserve what is in this bill. It is a bill which passed unanimously. The House passed a bill overwhelmingly as well. It will move our military quality of life up. That is certainly our intent.

This could not have been done without everyone's cooperation. I think that is what the people of America expect from the Congress. They deserve it. That is what we are going to give them.

I want to particularly say that Senator Frist and Senator Cochran have been instrumental in allowing us to go forward. There has been a lot of emotional talk and rhetoric around what we do in these last few days of this session of Congress. I think everyone, including the Senator from South Carolina and the Senators from Oklahoma, have all risen above certain emotional feelings and have said: Yes, we are going to work together. I am very pleased that we are.

I am going to yield the floor in one minute and roll up my sleeves and try to get the Military Affairs, Quality of Life, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill in shape for us to pass this session of Congress and send a good conference report to the President of the United States, who I know will sign the bill.

I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Reserving the right to object, I had told the Senator from North Dakota that he could offer the amendment, and then I asked that he set it aside so that Senator Collins could offer her amendment, after which we would have a voice vote, but his amendment would still be in order. I did not know that Senator Akaka was going to speak on it. I ask the Senator from Maine if it would be acceptable to allow the Senator from Hawaii 10 minutes, the Senator from New Hampshire 10 minutes, if that is acceptable, and then the amendment would be set aside and Senator Collins and Senator Feingold would be recognized for their amendment.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order be Senator Akaka for 10 minutes, Senator Gregg for 10 minutes, after which the amendment would be set aside and Senator Collins would be recognized for the Collins-Feingold amendment.

Mr. President, after Senator Gregg, I amend my request to include up to 5 minutes for Senator Conrad, after which Senator Collins would be recognized.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be laid aside.

Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent this amendment be set aside until we have the withdrawal of the previous motion.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I commend the two Senators from North Dakota. We have worked well together. I think we have come to the right accommodation. He has been a gentleman to work with, and I appreciate it.

I am now going to start clearing amendments with voice votes. They have been cleared on both sides of the aisle. We have a couple of other small issues that need to be cleared. I hope by the time I finish, we can go to final passage.

I ask Senator Brownback to come to the floor to work out his issue because we are about to go to final passage.

Amendment No. 5122

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5122 offered by Senator Stevens and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

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

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 5125

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5125 offered by Senator Reed.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5131 offered by Senator Thune, and I send a modification to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I urge adoption of the amendment.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Amendment No. 5125 has been already approved; is that correct?

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5126 offered by Senator Feinstein.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5127 offered by Senator Feinstein.

I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5129 offered by Senator Craig.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5135 offered by Senator Hutchison. I ask unanimous consent that Senators Craig and Allard be added as cosponsors.

I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5141.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5128 offered by Senator Akaka, and I send a modification to the amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

I urge the adoption of the amendment, as modified.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5130 offered by Senator Thune, and I send a modification to the desk.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5138 offered by Senator Obama, and I send a modification to the desk.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5146 offered by Senator Cochran.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, we are now down to two amendments that we are still clearing with the proper committees and one more that is still not yet agreed to.

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 want to announce for our colleagues that it is our intention in the next 15 minutes to finish this bill and go to final passage. We are intending to voice-vote final passage. However, we are still working out two amendments: an amendment by Senator Reid and an amendment by Senator Allen. I cannot say for sure that there will not be a record vote on one of those amendments, but we are trying to avoid that. I will just say the disposition of the Reid and Allen amendments will be the last measures in this bill to be agreed to, and we will then go to final passage.

I would just tell my colleagues we are hoping not to have any more rollcall votes, but it is not totally clear yet. I hope to be able to finish this by 7 o'clock. I will report back.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5143 by Senator Allen.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I urge passage of the amendment.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Yellowstone County National Veterans Cemetery Project

Mr. President, we are now ready to go to final passage. I ask for a voice vote on passage.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the title amendment be agreed to.

Mr. President, I think that finalizes the bill, the Military Construction appropriations bill and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill for 2007. I thank all of my colleagues for their cooperation and patience, especially my colleague, Senator Feinstein, my ranking member who has been such a great colleague to work with on this bill. Her staff and my staff have done an incredible job. I appreciate this opportunity and look forward to going to conference and having our military personnel be housed and have the equipment that is in the Military Construction bill which they so readily deserve.

Especially, I have to say that funding the veterans and their needs is a special privilege for all of us because we have young men and women coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan as we speak with injuries that we want to assure are cared for and healed, and where necessary that we have the rehabilitation which they so richly deserve.

I think we have done a good job of covering these needs. I am very pleased that we have taken one more step to finalize this bill.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator McCain's legislative fellow, Navy LCDR Damien Christopher, be granted floor privileges during the debate and any votes concerning H.R. 5384, as well as any related amendments.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 5385, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and related agencies appropriations bill for 2007. I further ask consent that the committee- reported substitute be agreed to as original text for the purpose of further amendment, with no points of order waived by virtue of this agreement.

Madam President, it is my pleasure today to bring the fiscal year 2007 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and related agencies bill to the Senate for consideration. The bill provides $16.26 billion for military construction, $77.9 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, and $143.5 million for the related agencies.

The bill provides the much needed resources for the Department of Veterans Affairs to care for our brave veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as those who have served with honor in our past wars. We fully support our veterans and appreciate the sacrifices they made for our country, by increasing the VA's funding by $6.45 billion from last year's enacted level to the President's request of $77.9 billion.

This year, we are proposing to bring medical services and medical administration under one account. This merger of the two accounts will give the VA the flexibility to manage and budget all medical services operations, including hospital staff personnel, from one account for better management, organization, and efficiency. The funding for the new combined medical services account is $28.7 billion, which is $3.1 billion above last year's level and equal to the President's request. The funding recommendation also includes the full request of $3.6 billion for medical facilities; $412 million for medical and prosthetic research, which is equal to last year's level and $13 million above the President's request; $429 million for major construction; and $85 million for grants for construction of State extended-care facilities.

This bill bridges a significant funding gap in fiscal year 2007 for the Department of Veterans Affairs. The administration's budget request included legislative proposals for the VA's health care system that would have instituted new enrollment fees and increased the copayments for prescription drugs, both of which would have been paid by veterans. Revenue estimate for those proposals was $795 million. The administration assumed this revenue in the VA's budget request. The subcommittee has denied these proposals and has provided the $795 million difference for VA health care.

The bill also contains additional resources in the areas of advanced prosthetics, recognizing that veterans returning from Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom are experiencing the loss of limbs due to combat injury.

The bill provides much needed funds for military construction. With the impending return of troops as a result of the current overseas rebasing effort, which our subcommittee recommended and strongly supports, BRAC, Army modularity, and the global war on terror, our service men and women are in a time of great transformation, and the funds will be provided for these accounts. It is important that they receive these facilities to enable the transformation. We are also continuing to press our NATO allies to share the burden of construction costs for NATO facilities and have been successful.

The bill provides necessary funds for the rebasing effort as well as continues the emphasis on family housing initiatives within the Department of Defense. It also provides $1.1 billion for Guard and Reserve components which is $215 million above the requested level. The bill includes funding totaling $5.2 billion to implement the BRAC 2005 decisions. This is an increase of $3.7 billion over last year. We do recommend a minor cut of 7 percent to this account because we found flexibility in supplies and equipment will not be needed next year because of the slow pace of BRAC implementation. I would emphasize, however, that no BRAC construction projects are affected.

Putting our bill together was certainly a bipartisan effort. Let me say now we are giving notice to Members on both sides of the aisle that we plan to come forward tomorrow about 2:15 with all of the amendments we have had requested so far, and anything a Member might want to put in this bill needs to be in our hands by close of business today, 5 o'clock. We wish to finish up the bill, deal with the amendments at 2:15 on Tuesday, and have our vote then lined up for later in the afternoon on Tuesday, in the 5 o'clock to 5:30 range. So we are giving notice, and we hope if there are any amendments we have not already been given, anyone with that kind of request will come forward.

I thank Senator Feinstein, the ranking member, for her partnership. We have worked so well together throughout our time on this subcommittee. We actually have been chairman and ranking member, both of us. I have been chairman and she has been ranking member, and we have been the other way, and I think we will be the other way come January. I know it will make no difference. I know we will meet the needs of military construction. We will meet the needs of our veterans. We will do it the right way, and we will do it in agreement, because we have the same goals--that we honor our veterans with the services they deserve and that we provide for our military housing and military construction and cleanup for BRAC in the most responsible way. I couldn't ask for a better working relationship than I have with my ranking member and her staff. I look forward to the years to come.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I agree with Senator Feinstein's statement completely that we should pass this bill. I think it would be irresponsible, honestly, for us not to fund the priorities and the increases that are in this bill for our veterans and our military construction projects. So I will make every effort to ensure that we do have this bill go to conference, and I think we will be very close with the House on the conference items.

I do believe we can get this bill to the President. Frankly, I think there are other appropriations bills that would be in the same situation. We have new projects in many of the pieces of legislation. I cannot think of an appropriations bill that is not bipartisan. So it is my hope that we can keep the priorities and spending that we have worked very hard all of this year to produce in all of the appropriations bills, rather than rely on a continuing resolution that does not take into account the bipartisan efforts that have been made to fund the priorities of today. That is especially true in our bill because it is ongoing, defense-related items, but I think there are other bills that have the same kinds of priorities and necessities as well. So we will work together in our bipartisan way and try to make sure that happens.

I will just say once again that if any of our colleagues have amendments,

now is the time to notify us, by the close of business today, 5 o'clock. It is our hope to dispose of amendments starting at 2:15 tomorrow. I am told that votes could occur any time after 2:15, and the offices will be appropriately notified.

Let me end by saying that I, too, want to give so much credit to Senator Feinstein's staff and my staff who have a great working relationship. They work the long hours and they do so much behind the scenes that makes everything come together--the amounts that we have in the budget resolution and the allocations on the Appropriations Committee and all of the different factors that go into an appropriations bill. They do a great job. I thank Senator Feinstein's three staff members, and my three staff members, who were named by Senator Feinstein earlier.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Monday, November 13, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. to consider the nomination of Susan E. Dudley to be Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Rose Fabia, a detailee to the Appropriations Committee from the Department of Veterans Affairs and a staff member on our committee, be granted floor privileges for the duration of debate on H.R. 5385.

Mr. President, we have four unanimous consent requests that I think have been cleared. I also want to reserve time for Senator Leahy and Senator Cornyn, after the unanimous consent request, to say whatever they wish to say.