Floor Statements

I yield the time on this side to the Senator from Utah.

I yield whatever time we have.

The proposal, as initially developed, provided that the bill managers and the floor leaders of the respective parties would be able to offer one amendment each if the motion to proceed to a matter were employed as it is available in the standing order. The majority leader and I thought it important not to codify who would offer those amendments on each side of the aisle.

I agree. The Senate works best when all Members have a reasonable opportunity to offer amendments and put forth the views of their constituents.

On the subject of nominations, Senate Republicans will continue to work with the majority to process nominations, consistent with the norms and traditions of the Senate. One of those customs is for home-State senators to be consulted on, and approve of, nominations from their States before the committee on the Judiciary moves forward with considering those nominations, be it a nomination to serve as a U.S. Attorney, U.S. Marshall, or judicial officer. It is my understanding that the order does not change, in any way, the Senate's ``blue slip'' process.

Finally, I would confirm with the majority leader that the Senate would not consider other resolutions relating to any standing order or rules this Congress unless they went through the regular order process?

I thank the majority leader for confirming my understanding of the application of the standing order.

This is consistent with the precedent of the Senate with the understanding that Senators are given the timely notification of the Presiding Officer's intention so that they will be able to come to the floor to exercise their rights under the rules.

Motion to Proceed

Mr. President, I, too, would like to continue this approach for the 113th and future Congresses. It serves the interest of the Senate and the public by helping to retain core committee staff with institutional knowledge, regardless of which party is in the majority. We made a transition in the last Congress to restore special reserves to its historic purpose, but appropriations cuts prevented special reserves from being funded. To the extent possible, we should try to fund special reserves in order to be able to assist committees that face urgent, unanticipated, nonrecurring needs. We know that we will continue to face tight budgets for the foreseeable future, and we have to bring funding authorizations more in line with our actual resources while ensuring that committees e able to fulfill their responsibilities. I look forward to continuing to work with my friend the majority leader to accomplish this.

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

Madam President, President Obama may have been vague on details in his inaugural speech on Monday, but I will give him this, he couldn't have been clearer about the tone and the direction he has in mind for the second term. Gone is the postpartisan rhetoric that propelled him onto the national stage and into the White House. In its place is an unabashedly leftwing appeal for more bureaucratic control and centralized power here in Washington.

On Monday, we saw a President and a party that appeared to have shifted into reverse and jammed on the gas. For Democrats in the Obama age, the era of big government being over is officially over. And anybody who disagrees with their approach isn't just wrong, they are not just standing in the way of progress, they are malevolent, they are the bad guys, they are the ones who want to take food away from children, they want the old and the infirm to suffer, they want to choose between caring for the people who built this country, as the President put it on Monday, and investing in those who will build our future.

I don't know if the President buys all this stuff; I don't know if he believes his own caricature--I certainly hope not--but one thing I do know is that questioning the intentions of one's political opponents makes it awfully hard to get anything done in a representative democracy. As the President himself said, without so much as a hint of irony, we cannot mistake absolutism for principle or substitute spectacle for politics or treat name calling as reasoned debate.

The President won the election. I congratulate him on his victory. It is his prerogative to lay out an agenda and to make an argument-- against all evidence--for the efficacy of big government, more Washington spending, and centralization. It is even his prerogative to argue--mistakenly, in my view--that America's greatness somehow rests not on its communities and voluntary associations, its churches and charities, on civil society, but instead on the dictates of Washington. But to suggest that those of us and our constituents who believe otherwise don't want the best interest of our parents or our children or our country's future is, at best, needlessly provocative; at worst, it suggests a troubling inability to view those who don't happen to share your opinions as beneath you.

To suggest, as one of the President's spokesmen did earlier this week, that both the American political system and those who belong to the party of Lincoln aren't worthy of this White House or its agenda isn't the way to get things done. It makes it impossible to tend to problems we simply have to face up to and that we will only solve together. Frankly, it calls into question the President's own belief in the wisdom and the efficacy of the constitutional system of checks and balances that the Founders so wisely put in place.

The postinaugural period is usually a chance to pivot to governing after a long campaign. It is an opportunity for Presidents to reach out to the minority and to forge compromises. But that is not what we are seeing this time around. Even before Monday we all noted the harsh change in tone, the reboot of the campaign machine, and how, instead of offering an olive branch to those who disagree with him, the President had already decided to transform his campaign operation into a weapon to bulldoze anyone who doesn't share his vision. Well, I would suggest that one thing the American people don't want is a permanent campaign. That is the last thing the American people are looking for--a permanent campaign. They want us to work together on solutions to our problems. And deficits and debt are right at the top of the list.

I wish to suggest this morning the President rethink the adversarial tone he has adopted in recent weeks. Our problems are simply too urgent and too big for the President to give up on working with us. I appeal to him once again to work with us on the things we can achieve together, and let us start with the deficit and the debt. Because the only way we will be able to tackle these problems is by doing it together.

If he refuses, if he insists on spending the next 4 years pushing a polarizing hard-left agenda instead, I assure him he will meet a determined opposition not only from Republicans in Washington but from the very people he seems to believe are squarely on his side in the push to remake government in his image.

The irony in the President's attacks, of course, is that the kind of reforms Republicans are calling for are the only conceivable route to saving the programs the President claims he wants to protect. Failing to reform the entitlement programs of the last century now--right now-- is the best way to guarantee they no longer exist in their current form. I mean, one could practically hear the ring of the cash register with every new promise the President made. At a time when we can all see the failure of such policies by simply turning on the news, he seems blissfully--blissfully--unaware of the fact that from Athens to Madrid the sad, slow death of the left's big government dream is on display for all to see. If we want a less prosperous, less dynamic, less mobile society, that is the way to go--just ``Europeanize'' America.

The President's vision of an all-powerful government that rights every wrong and heals every wound may warm the liberal heart, but it is completely divorced from experience and from reality. So today I wish to do my part to bring the President and his allies in Congress a little closer down to Earth. I know it may be hard for them to accept, but the reality is this: We have a spending problem--not a taxing problem, a spending problem.

Let's take a look at the chart to my right. The green represents historic and projected tax revenue. And we can see it goes right straight across here out to 2040. The tax increases of 3 weeks ago were delivered by operation of law. In other words, the law expired and all of the Bush tax cuts were over. The Congress, 2 hours after everybody's taxes went up--in other words, after all the Bush tax cuts expired-- restored tax relief for 99 percent of the American people, and they did it on a permanent basis to guarantee we wouldn't have another cliff, as we inevitably have. When a law sunsets, we have a cliff.

So the President was able to get some new revenue by operation of law, and that represents this dark blue line right across here. You can see that is pretty steady out to 2040.

The President, of course, said that wasn't nearly enough. He said: We need more taxes, and we will be back asking for more taxes later. So as nearly as we can tell, based on what he has said, the taxes he would like to add to the ones he got by operation of law 2\1/2\ weeks ago is this light blue line right across here.

If the President were given all the tax increases he says at the moment he wants, that would provide this amount of revenue going out to 2040. As you can see, that doesn't do anything to solve the problem because the red represents spending in the past and the spending escalation that will occur if we don't do anything to solve the spending problem.

Look at this line dramatically going up to 2040. So as you can see, there is not enough revenue we can raise without completely shutting down the economy to solve the problem. In fact, it produces a rather static and totally insignificant amount of revenue in order to deal with the massive spending problem.

So this constant demand for more and more tax increases on, I guess, whom people assume is the more successful guy down the street may be a great campaign tactic, but it doesn't do anything to solve the problem. Even if the President were able to get every bit of taxes he wants, we still have an enormous gap in spending if we don't deal with the real problem, which is spending. We have a spending addiction. I didn't make this up. This is a fact. This is reality.

So the tax issue is over. Congress has restored permanent tax relief for 99 percent of the American people. Even if the President were to get--and he will not--any more tax revenue, it is perfectly obvious that doesn't do anything to solve the problem.

So the challenge for us--and looking at the chart we can see--is revenue today is just about where it has been for the past 30 years or so. The President spent nearly his entire first term arguing that we needed to tax the so-called rich to solve our fiscal woes. He harangued Congress about it. He argued for it in rallies and debates. He threatened to push us over the cliff if he didn't get his way.

In the end, by operation of law he got part of what he asked for. And the reason he got it, as I said earlier, is because the tax relief we passed in 2001 and 2003 carried an expiration date. President Obama got some of the tax increases he wanted because the law expired. Then Congress, led by Republicans, voted to make Bush-era tax rates permanent for 99 percent of all Americans. Now, permanency is important. It has been kind of lost on the general public, but the importance is we don't have another cliff, another expiration date where all of a sudden everything changes.

Given how much time he devoted to that one topic, one would think his tax hike would have closed the deficit, eliminated the entire national debt, and left us with extra cash to spare. But do you see that tiny little blue line I pointed to right here? That is how much additional revenue he got. This blue area is the revenue he says he wants. He will not get it; but if he did, it is pretty apparent it has nothing whatsoever to do with solving the spending addiction.

So if this revenue doesn't come anywhere close to solving the problem, the real challenge, obviously, is how we are going to control all of this red. What do we do about this? Well, we are clearly spending way more than we take in. The real uptick, interestingly enough, occurs about the time the President took office. It has been hard enough to find ways to close the President's trillion-dollar deficits. But as I just pointed out, they are nothing next to what is going to hit us when tens of millions of baby boomers reach retirement age--nothing compared to what is heading our way.

I pointed out the massive slope. That is what is headed our way. Nothing short of a bipartisan effort is going to fix this problem, and there is only one way we can do it. We can't tax our way out of this problem. The revenue question is behind us. The law we voted for, as I said, made current tax rates permanent. I am pretty confident not a single Republican in the House or Senate will vote to raise any more taxes. But even if we were to do that, all the taxes the President asked for would only put us here in 2040. And look at what would be spent.

So the reality the President needs to face--and quickly--is that there is no realistic way to raise taxes high enough to even begin to address this problem. That is why Republicans are saying we need to start controlling spending, and we need to do it now. That is why if the President wants to do something good right now, he should put us out of the liberal wish list and put us out of the character attacks and join us in this great task. It is the transcendent issue of our time.

If we don't fix this problem, we don't leave behind for our children and grandchildren the kind of America our parents left behind for us. There is no bigger issue, even though it got scant mention in the State of the Union.

Now, I have no animus toward the President. I just want to see him do something about the problem because the longer we wait, the worse the problem becomes. The more we delay the inevitable, the less time younger Americans will have to plan for the reforms we make today. That is simply not right.

So the President has a choice. He can paint himself as a warrior of the left and charge into battle with failed ideas we have already tried before; he can demean and blame the opposition for his own failure to lead; he can indulge his supporters in a bitter, never-ending campaign that will only divide our country further; or he could take the responsible road. He can help his own base come to terms with the mathematical reality.

Some people over there are living in a fantasy world--a world that doesn't exist. He could reach out to leaders in both parties--and all of the members in both parties--and negotiate in good faith. We would be happy to give him credit. That is fine by me. If boosting his legacy is what it takes and it helps the country, that is all the better.

If my constituents believe they are working to help make their future a

little better and a little brighter, great. But we can't waste any more time denying the reality that is staring each of us in the face. There is only one way to solve this problem, and that is to do something about this spending addiction that is going to sink this country and turn us into Greece.

Senate Republicans are ready to help the President solve this problem. I hope we have an opportunity to do so.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

I would be happy to respond.

I say to my friend from Tennessee, it is counterintuitive. But one could argue that a divided government--which we have had more often than not since World War II--has produced four of the most significant accomplishments for our country in modern times.

In the Reagan administration, President Reagan and Tip O'Neill, the Democratic Speaker of the House, agreed to raise the age for Social Security to save Social Security for another generation. Reagan and Tip O'Neill did the last comprehensive tax reform.

Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress did welfare reform, arguably the most important piece of social legislation in recent times. And Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress actually balanced the budgets in the late 1990s.

My friend from Tennessee is correct. Divided government actually is the perfect time--some would argue even the only time--we can do tough things, hard-to-explain things that need to be done to save the country. So I hate to miss the opportunity presented by a divided government to tackle the transcendent issue of our times.

The President talked about a lot of things, and that is all interesting, but it had nothing to do with fixing the country. Until we fix this problem, we will not have the kind of country for our children and our grandchildren that our parents left behind for us.

I say to my friend from Tennessee--in many ways it is a statement of the obvious but a lot of people forget it--there is only 1 person in America out of 307 million Americans who can sign something into law and only 1 person in America who can deliver the members of his party to support an agreement that he makes. The only way to get an outcome on the biggest issue of our time is with Presidential leadership. So it was disappointing to see scant reference in the State of the Union. Of course that is just one speech and I have not given up hoping that this President can make solving the transcendent issue of our time one of his premier accomplishments.

The point I think the Senator from Tennessee and I are making this morning is there are potential partners on this side of the aisle to make this happen. I hope we will not lose this opportunity once again to deal with the biggest issue in the country.

Mr. President, I wish to start by congratulating President Obama on his inauguration. Presidential inaugurations are always a time for the country to come together. We all feel a certain pride in the event, and we are reminded of how fortunate we are to live in a Nation where we have the ability to choose our leaders freely and resolve our differences in peace. Inauguration Day is also a time for new beginnings, a chance to learn from the mistakes and missed opportunities of the past as we reengage in some vitally important debates about our future.

Too often over the past 4 years, political considerations have trumped the need to put our country on a sound financial footing and a path to prosperity. Today we should recommit ourselves to the task of facing up to our problems head-on. I understand that the passions of an election can sometimes overshadow the business of governing, but the Presidential campaign is now behind us, and so it is my hope that the President will finally be willing to do what Republicans have been asking him to do since his first inauguration 4 years ago, and that is to work with us on identifying durable solutions to the problems we can only solve together, to put aside those things we know we can't agree on and focus on what we can.

We should start with spending and debt because if we don't get a handle on that, nothing else matters. If we don't work together to strengthen our entitlement programs, they will go bankrupt. Automatic cuts will be forced on seniors already receiving benefits, rendering worthless the promises they have built their retirements around. It is nice to say, as the President did yesterday, that these programs free us to take the risks that make our country great, but if we don't act to strengthen and protect them now, in a few years they simply won't be there in their current form. And if we don't work together to control the debt, then the cost of our interest payments alone will eventually crowd out funding for things we all agree on--from defense, to infrastructure, and assistance for those who need it most. In short, the debate we are now engaged in over the growing Federal debt is about much more than numbers on a page; it is about the cost of inaction in terms of promises broken, jobs lost, and dreams deferred. That is why there is simply no more time to waste.

Over the past 4 years, while the President focused on reelection and too many Senate Democrats focused on avoiding tough decisions, the debt grew by more than $6 trillion. We saw the President blast House Republicans for doing their job and passing a budget while Senate Democrats didn't even propose one. Rather than work with us to save existing entitlements, we saw the President team up with Democrats in Congress to force through a brandnew entitlement that will make it even harder to cover the cost of programs we already have. In short, Democrats have put off the hard stuff until now, and our problems have only gotten worse.

But that was the first term. A second term presents the opportunity to do things differently, and in the Senate that means a return to regular order. Later this week the House plans to send the Senate a bill to address the debt limit in a timely manner. Once we get it, the Senate should quickly respond. If the Senate version is different from the one the House sends over, send it to conference. That is how things are supposed to work around here. We used to call it legislating.

I know a lot of Democrats are afraid of a process that exposes their priorities, particularly on spending and debt. After nearly 4 years of refusing to pass a budget, they have only now reluctantly agreed to develop a spending plan for the coming fiscal year. All I would say to that is since the revenue question has been settled, I am sure the American people are eager to see what other ideas Democrats might have to bring down our ruinous deficits.

Let me just say that one thing Americans will no longer tolerate is an attitude that says we can put off our work until the very last minute. They are tired of eleventh-hour deals. They are tired of careening from crisis to crisis, and so am I.

The good news is that a return to regular order is the surest way to solve the problems we face. And I hope some of my friends on the other side will agree that there is value in this body actually functioning the way it was intended to. Let's face it. The status quo isn't working. The Senate isn't functioning as it should. It has nothing to do with the process that has served us well for a very long time. But if we work together and strive to avoid some of the bad habits that have developed around here, I truly believe we will be able to achieve the kinds of solutions that have eluded us for the past 4 years and deliver some positive results for the people who sent us here, with time to spare.

We can do better. I know my constituents expect better than what they have been getting from Congress in recent years, and so should we.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, Tony Hanagan and Keira Harris are two former pages who returned to the Senate, graciously volunteering to sacrifice some of their Christmas vacation to help here on the Senate floor this past weekend. Tony and Keira have worked tirelessly to complete work typically performed by 14 pages. We appreciate their help during the Senate's recent late nights. We thank them for their great effort and impeccable service to the Senate.

Mr. President, are we in a quorum call?

Mr. President, yesterday--after days of inaction--I came to the floor and noted the obvious: we need to act but I need a dance partner. So I reached out to the Vice President in an effort to get things done. I am happy to report that the effort has been a successful one, and as the President just said in his television appearance, we are very close to an agreement.

We need to protect American families and job creators from this looming tax hike. Everyone agrees that action is necessary, and I can report that we have reached an agreement on all of the tax issues. We are very close.

As the President just said, the most important piece--the piece that has to be done now--is preventing the tax hikes. The President said, ``For now our most immediate priority is to stop taxes going up for middle-class families starting tomorrow.'' I agree. He suggested that action on the sequester is something we can continue to work on in the coming months.

So I agree, let's pass the tax relief portion now. Let's take what has been agreed to and get moving. This was not easy to get to. The Vice President and I spoke at 12:45 this morning, 6:30 this morning, and multiple times again during this morning. This has clearly been a good-faith negotiation. We all want to protect taxpayers, and we could get it done right now.

So let me be clear: We will continue to work on finding smarter ways to cut spending, but let's not let that hold up protecting Americans from the tax hike that will take place in about 10 hours from now. We can do this; we must do this.

I want my colleagues to know that we will keep everybody updated as we continue to try to wrap this up.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I wish to thank my good friend the majority leader for his kind words and thank everyone for their patience and their counsel throughout this process.

I also thank the Vice President for recognizing the importance of preventing this tax hike on the American

people and stepping up to play a crucial role in getting us there. It shouldn't have taken us this long to come to an agreement and this shouldn't be the model for how we do things around here, but I appreciate the Vice President's willingness to get this done for the country.

I know I can speak for my entire conference when I say we don't think taxes should be going up on anyone, but we all knew that if we did nothing, they would be going up on everyone today. We weren't going to let that happen. Each of us could spend the rest of the week discussing what a perfect solution would have looked like, but the end result would have been the largest tax increase in American history.

The President wanted tax increases, but thanks to this imperfect agreement, 99 percent of my constituents will not be hit by those hikes. So it took an imperfect solution to prevent our constituents from very real financial pain. But, in my view, it was worth the effort.

As I said, this shouldn't be the model for how we do things around here, but I think we can say we have done some good for the country. We have done some good for this country. We have taken care of the revenue side of this debate, and now it is time to get serious about reducing Washington's out-of-control spending. That is a debate the American people want. It is the debate we will have next, and it is the debate Republicans are ready for.

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

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken.) Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. President, my office submitted our latest offer to the majority leader last night at 7:10 p.m. and offered to work through the night to find common ground. The majority leader's staff informed us they would be getting back to us this morning at 10 a.m., despite the obvious time crunch we all have. It is now 2 p.m. We have yet to receive a response to our good-faith offer. I am concerned about the lack of urgency here. I think we all know we are running out of time. There is far too much at stake for political gamesmanship. We need to protect the American families and businesses from this looming tax hike.

Everyone agrees action is necessary. In order to get things moving, I have just spoken with the majority leader. I also placed a call to the Vice President to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side. The Vice President and I have worked together on solutions before and I believe we can again.

I want my colleagues to know that we will keep everyone updated. The consequences of this are too high for the American people to be engaged in a political messaging campaign. I am interested in getting a result. I was here all day yesterday. As I indicated, we submitted our latest proposal at 7 p.m. last night. I am willing to work with whoever can help.

There is no single issue that remains an impossible sticking point. The sticking point appears to be a willingness, an interest, or, frankly, the courage to close the deal. I want everyone to know I am willing to get this done, but I need a dance partner.

Mr. Leader, you are talking about Sunday, right?

I share the view of the majority leader. We had a good meeting down at the White House. We are engaged in discussions, the majority leader and myself and the White House, in the hopes that we can come forward as early as Sunday and have a recommendation that I can make to my conference and the majority leader can make to his conference. So we will be working hard to try to see if we can get there in the next 24 hours.

I am hopeful and optimistic.

Madam President, I am going to proceed in my leader time.

Madam President, you will excuse me if I am a little frustrated at the situation in which we find ourselves.

Last night, President Obama called myself and the Speaker--and maybe others--from Hawaii and asked if there was something we could do to avoid the fiscal cliff.

I say I am a little frustrated because we have been asking the President and the Democrats to work with us on a bipartisan agreement for months--literally, for months--on a plan that would simplify the Tax Code, shrink the deficit, protect the taxpayers, and grow the economy, but Democrats consistently rejected those offers.

The President chose instead to spend his time on the campaign trail. This was even after he got reelected, and congressional Democrats have sat on their hands. Republicans have bent over backward. We stepped way out of our comfort zone. We wanted an agreement, but we had no takers. The phone never rang.

So now here we are, 5 days from New Year's Day, and we might finally start talking. Democrats have had an entire year to put forward a balanced, bipartisan proposal. If they had something to fit the bill, I am sure the majority leader would have been able to deliver the votes the President would have needed to pass it in the Senate and we wouldn't be in this mess. But here we are, once again, at the end of the year, staring at a crisis we should have dealt with literally months ago.

Make no mistake. The only reason Democrats have been trying to deflect attention onto me and my colleagues over the past few weeks is that they don't have a plan of their own that could get bipartisan support.

The so-called Senate bill the majority leader keeps referring to passed with only Democratic votes, and despite his repeated calls for the House to pass it, he knows as well as I do that he himself is the reason it can't happen. The paperwork never left the Senate, so there is nothing for the House to vote on.

As I pointed out before we took that vote back on July 25, the Democratic bill is, ``a revenue measure that didn't originate in the House, so it has got no chance whatsoever of becoming law.'' The only reason we ever allowed that vote on that proposal, as I said at that time, was we knew it didn't pass constitutional muster. If Democrats were truly serious, they would proceed to a revenue bill that originated in the House--as the Constitution requires and as I called on them to do again last week.

To repeat, the so-called Senate bill is nothing more than a glorified sense of the Senate resolution. So let's put that convenient talking point aside from here on out.

Last night, I told the President we would be happy to look at whatever he proposes, but the truth is we are coming up against a hard deadline. As I said, this is a conversation we should have had months ago. Republicans are not about to write a blank check for anything Senate Democrats put forward just because we find ourselves at the edge of the cliff. That would not be fair to the American people.

That having been said, we will see what the President has to propose. Members on both sides of the aisle will review it and then we will decide how best to proceed. Hopefully, there is still time for an agreement of some kind that saves the taxpayers from a wholly preventable economic crisis.

I yield the floor.

I would only add the majority leader has given you his view of the last 2 years. I have certainly given you my take on it. The American people have spoken, and they basically voted for the status quo. The President got reelected, the Senate is still in Democratic hands and the House is still in Republican hands and the American people have spoken. They obviously expect us to come together and to produce a result.

As I indicated, the President called me and probably called others last night. My impression is he would like to see if we can move forward. We do not have very many days left. I have indicated I am willing to enter into a discussion and see what the President may have in mind. I know the majority leader would certainly be interested in what the President has in mind. It appears to me the action, if there is any, is now on the Senate side. We will just have to see whether we are able, on a bipartisan basis, to move forward.

Mr. President, most people, of course, are focused on what happened last night over in the House. I would like to focus on the press conference that congressional Democrats held just a few hours earlier.

Here were the leaders of the Democratic Party in the Senate--other than the President, these are the folks with the greatest responsibility for protecting the American people from a massive tax hike coming in January--and what did they do? They stood in front of the cameras and laughed. They laughed. They giggled at a bunch of bad jokes and told the American people they didn't plan to do anything this week--nothing, absolutely nothing.

Democrats in the House vowed they wouldn't vote for this bill, the majority leader vowed he would ignore it if it made it out of the House and landed in the Senate, and the President vowed he would veto it if it made it out of the Senate.

So Democrats spent literally all day yesterday defeating a bill that would make current tax rates permanent for more than 99 percent of Americans, and they laughed about it. Ten days to go until the fiscal cliff, and they laughed about it.

I don't know if anybody has looked at a calendar lately, but we are about out of time here, folks. This isn't funny. People's livelihoods are at stake. The U.S. economy is at stake. Millions upon millions of families are counting on us to do something.

Look, it is the President's job--it is his job to find a solution that can pass the Congress. He is the only one who can do it. This isn't John Boehner's problem to solve. He has done his part. He has bent over backward.

Mr. President: How about rallying your party around a solution. How about getting Democrats to support something.

I have said it many times before: We simply cannot solve the problems we face unless and until the President of the United States either finds the will or develops the ability--the ability--to lead. This is a moment that calls for Presidential leadership. That is the way out of this. It is that simple.

Does anybody wonder why we keep going from crisis to crisis around here? Does anybody notice a pattern? This doesn't have to be a crisis. This was an opportunity, but once again the President ignored it. He went out and held rallies and gave partisan speeches even after he had already been reelected.

As I said yesterday, I think it is obvious at this point the President wants to go off the cliff. But I know most of the American people don't want that. Today, I am going to make an offer. With 10 days to go, we have an obligation to act on something--something that can pass the House and the Senate. If the President won't propose it, if Senate Democrats won't propose it, I will.

Earlier this year, the House passed a bill that extends current rates on everyone for 1 year, with instructions for expedited comprehensive tax reform by next year. We could bring up this House-passed bill.

If the majority leader has a plan that can get 60 votes in the Senate, break through the disarray in his own caucus and build bipartisan support, offer that as an amendment and then let's vote. Let's vote on amendments from all sides, and then let's go to conference with the House of Representatives. They have already passed a bill--one I support--to prevent a tax hike on all Americans and reform the Tax Code. Why don't we take it up here? Let's get this done.

It is called legislating. That is what we used to do in Congress. Democrats may be popping champagne corks today about bringing down Plan B, but all their efforts to do so yesterday will not protect a single taxpayer from a massive tax hike in just a few weeks. The American people are waiting. Surely, we can do better than this. Let's do it.

I yield the floor.

All I was suggesting to my friend the majority leader is that you have the tax bill that originated in the House. It came over to the Senate. If our friends in the majority don't like that version of it, they could call it up, amend it, and see if there is a majority in the Senate for something.

It seems to me that the time for finger-pointing is about over. The American people are not particularly interested in what originated here or there or who is doing what; they are interested in getting a result. I was trying to be helpful in suggesting that you have a tax bill that came over from the House. You have a majority here. You could take it up, offer amendments, and see if there is something that could achieve a majority of the Senate rather than just complaining because the House did not pass something yesterday. That is not going to solve the problem. Somehow, some way, we need to find a way forward, and I hope we can in the coming week.

Mr. President, I add that the time for finger-pointing is gradually running out. The American people know we have a President, they know we have a Senate, and they know we have a House. They are anxiously awaiting whether we are going to solve this problem before the end of the year.

I object.