Floor Statements

Mr. President, for more than a year now, Democrats in Washington have been focused--some would say fixated--on making dramatic changes to the American health care system as we know it.

It is an open debate as to whether spending so much time and energy on this issue was in the best interest of the public at a time of record unemployment and a need to address jobs and the economy. But what is not open to debate is, the plan they came up with was fundamentally flawed--that it focused too much on expanding the size and cost of government and not enough on the core problem with our health care system, which is cost.

This is why Americans have been telling Democrats in Washington to scrap their plan and start over. This is why so many Americans are so frustrated with government right now. The administration says we need to pass its health spending bill to show Americans government still works. Americans are saying the opposite. They are saying the first thing Washington can do to show it is working is to listen to what the public is saying, to scrap this bill and to start over.

Unfortunately, Democratic leaders in Congress are not interested. They are still clinging to the same old bill and the same old process Americans rejected last year. They are more determined than ever to jam their bill through Congress by any means necessary.

So over the next few weeks, we are going to see a replay of the same kind of arm-twisting and deal-making we saw in the runup to Christmas. I say we are going to see it, but in reality we will not see any of it. We will have to read about it--the deals and the arm-

twisting--only after the final bill hits the floor because all the arm- twisting and deal-making is going on behind closed doors, and it has already started.

Somehow the administration seems to think all this arm-twisting and deal-making will prove to the American people government works. I should think Americans will draw the opposite conclusion. Americans do not like the bill any more today than they did 3 months ago. They do not like the frantic, backroom deal-making any more now than they did then.

In the midst of all this, it is understandable that a lot of Democrats are on the fence about whether to vote for this bill, about whether to vote for this process as well. But the reasons they are giving for being on the fence do not square with reality, and they are not going to fly with the public.

Some say they like the current bill because they say it reduces costs. It does not. The administration's own experts say the bill increases health spending by $222 billion more than if we took no action at all. In other words, this bill would bend the cost curve up, not down.

Others say they like the current bill because it reduces the deficit. But even if you grant that highly speculative premise, the one bill the Senate will be voting on tomorrow would wipe away every dime of those projected savings with one stroke of the President's pen. If you believe the health bill will save $100 billion, then you have to also acknowledge the bill the Senate will pass this week increases it by $100 billion.

So far from moving in a more fiscally responsible direction, the health spending bill the White House now wants Congress to pass before Easter would move us in a less fiscally responsible direction. This undercuts the entire point of reform.

The administration recognizes the weakness of its argument. That is why it is trying to create a sense of inevitability about this bill. Once again, it is imposing an artificial deadline to put pressure on Members. It is talking about how we are in the middle of the final chapter of this debate.

The administration wants Members to believe they are characters in a screenplay and that the ending of the play is already written. This is an illusion. House Members are not buying these arguments anymore. In fact, many of them are already walking off the set. My guess is, a lot more are about to.

They know we may be nearing the final act for this bill and the legislative process but that it is just the beginning for those who support it. Americans do not want this bill. They are telling us to start over. The only people who do not seem to be getting the message are Democratic leaders in Washington. But they can be sure of this-- absolutely sure of this: If they cut their deal, if they somehow convince enough Members to come on board, then they will get the message. The public will let them know how they feel about this bill.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, the American people are asking us to start over on health care. They are asking us to scrap the massive bills Democrats have been trying to force on them. They want us to focus on cost instead. That has been their clear message now for over a year. But yesterday Democrats in Washington said they know better. The President and his allies in Congress made up their minds to turn aside any pretense of bipartisanship and plow ahead on a partisan bill--a partisan bill, by the way, that Americans don't want. In a last-ditch effort to get their way, they have staked themselves to a flawed vision of reform over the wishes of the public. What is that vision? It is a vision of health care whereby the Federal Government would become more involved in the health care decisions of every man, woman, and child in America; where small businesses get hit with new job-killing taxes; where Medicare is slashed for millions of seniors, insurance premiums go up, and Federal taxpayers are required, for the first time ever, to cover the cost of abortions.

The administration and its allies in Congress have tried repeatedly to jam this vision of health care through Congress without success. Now they are doubling down. They have one more tool in their arsenal, and they are deploying it. Meanwhile, the American people are watching all this in utter disbelief. Americans do want reform, but they don't want this. They are fed up because the longer Democrats cling to their flawed vision of reform, the longer Americans have to wait for the reforms they really want, the longer they will have to wait for us to focus on jobs and the economy.

The President did a very good job of laying out the problem yesterday. But the heart of the problem, as he himself described it, is the high cost of care, and the simple fact is, the bill he wants doesn't lower cost. On the contrary, the administration's own experts say the Democratic plan increases cost. This alone should be reason enough to start all over and put together a list of commonsense, step- by-step reforms that will actually lower cost.

The good news is we already have the list. At last week's health care summit at the White House, both parties acknowledged a handful of reforms on which all of us could agree. That is where we should start, on the things on which we agree.

Unfortunately, even before the summit began, Democrats were already intent on pushing the same old version they were pushing before the summit by any means possible. They couldn't get the old version over the finish line, even with all the backroom deals, the kickbacks, and the buy-offs, so sometime after the Massachusetts election,

they hatched a plan to win over wavering Democrats in the House by promising to use some legislative sleight of hand that will only require a slim partisan majority in the Senate. This is outrageous on two counts--first, because the method they are proposing has never been used on such a sweeping piece of legislation; second, because Americans have already told us, loudly and clearly, they don't want this partisan approach. What about public opinion do our friends in the majority not understand? The American people are saying loudly and clearly they don't want us to do this.

What is worse, many of the same Democrats who are now pushing this party-line vote are on record as being foursquare against it for major legislation such as this. Here is what one senior Democratic Senator had to say about party-line votes on major legislation only a few years ago:

I've never passed a single bill worth talking about that

didn't have as a lead co-sponsor a Republican. And I don't

know of a single piece of legislation that has ever been

adopted here that didn't have a Republican and a Democrat in

the lead. That's because we need to sit down and work with

each other. The rules of this institution have required

that--that's why we exist.

I couldn't agree more. Americans expect big bills to command big majorities. That is why this is not a fight between Democrats and Republicans; it is a fight between Democrats inside the beltway and their constituents beyond it.

There is a better way. There is a better path to reform that none of us will regret. It is time to listen to the American people. It is time to work together on the kinds of step-by-step reforms they are asking for. Americans aren't stupid. They know the option they are being presented with--the option of some massive bill or nothing. That is a false choice.

So let's drop the partisan plan. Let's drop this unsalvageable bill, and let's start over.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, most Americans breathed a sigh of relief in January when it looked like the Democrats' partisan plan for health care was done for. Most people saw the outcome of the Massachusetts Senate race as an opportunity to start over on what they wanted, which is a step-by-step plan that would target costs without raising taxes or insurance premiums, without cutting Medicare, and without using taxpayer dollars to cover the cost of abortions.

Unfortunately, the proponents of this plan are still determined to force this distorted vision of health care reform on a public who is already overwhelmingly opposed to it. So this afternoon the President will outline yet another version of the Democratic health care plan we have been hearing about all year long. The sales pitch may be new, but the bill is not.

We got a preview of the administration's new sales pitch yesterday in a letter from the President, in which he said he is now willing to incorporate a few Republican ideas into the Democratic bill. But this is not what the American people are asking for.

Americans do not want us to tack a few good ideas onto a bill that reshapes one-sixth of the economy, vastly expands the role of government, and which raises taxes and cuts Medicare to pay for all of it. They want us to scrap the underlying bill--scrap it altogether--and start over with step-by-step reforms that target cost and expand access.

This whole exercise is unfortunate and completely unnecessary. It is also a disservice to the American people. The fact is, the longer the Democrats cling to their own flawed vision of reform, the longer Americans will have to wait for the reforms they want.

Last week's health care summit could have served as the basis for a series of step-by-step reforms that both parties could support and which the general public would embrace. Unfortunately, Democrats in Washington have decided to press ahead on the same kind of massive bill they were pushing before the summit. Even worse, they now seem willing to go to any length necessary--any length necessary--to force the bill through Congress.

Well, Americans do not know how else to say it: They do not want the massive bill. It is perfectly clear. They want commonsense, bipartisan reforms that lower costs, and they want us to refocus our energy on creating jobs and the economy. They have had enough of this year-long effort to get a win for the Democratic Party at any price to the American people. Americans have paid a big enough price already in the time we have lost focusing on this bill.

They do not want it, and they will not tolerate any more backroom deals or legislative schemes to force it through Congress on a partisan basis. History is clear: Big legislation always requires big majorities. This latest scheme to lure Democrats into switching their votes in the House by agreeing to use reconciliation in the Senate will be met with outrage.

So we respectfully encourage the administration to consider a new approach to reform, one that does not cut Medicare to fund a trillion- dollar takeover of the health care system or impose job-killing taxes in the middle of a recession, and one that will win the support of broad majorities in both parties. We encourage the administration to join Republicans and Democrats in Congress in listening to what the American people have been telling us for more than a year now.

At the risk of being redundant, here is what they are saying: Americans are telling us to scrap the bills they have already rejected and start over with commonsense, step-by-step reforms we can all agree on. Now is not the time to repeat the same mistakes that brought us here. It is time to listen to the people and to start over.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, the American people have spoken loudly and clearly on the issue of health care reform. They overwhelmingly favor a plan that addresses our problems step by step. They want a plan that lowers the cost of health care without expanding the role of government and without raising taxes or cutting Medicare. They want us to focus on cost.

Unfortunately, Democrats here in Washington either have not gotten the message or they are ignoring it. We know this because after a year of protests, three statewide elections in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts, and the clear verdict of every public opinion survey, Democrats in Washington are now planning one last-ditch effort to get their plan through Congress and past the American people.

The sad fact is that Washington Democrats are so wedded to the notion that they know better than the general public when it comes to health care that they are about to reject any pretense of bipartisanship in order to jam their plan through Congress by the narrowest margin possible whether people want it or not--a raw exercise of legislative power that Senator Byrd, our resident Senate historian, has described within the last year as an undemocratic outrage on a piece of legislation this far-reaching.

Some on the other side are clearly worried about the consequences of taking such a drastic step. They are wondering whether they should risk the full fury of the public by using these extreme tactics to circumvent the will of their constituents. Democratic leaders are telling them not to worry. They are telling them people will forget about the process once their plan becomes law. Well, they are wrong. Americans are not going to forget if Democrats do this to their health care system.

Wavering Democrats need to realize that there is a better way. Last week, the President and other Democrats acknowledged a number of areas of agreement between the two parties. These are the ideas that could form the solid basis of a fresh start on health care reform. These are the ideas that could form the basis of the kind of step-by-step bipartisan reform Americans really want.

Americans do not want the one-party bill Democrats in Washington are planning to force on them, or any variation of it, and they do not want Democrats to push it through with even more backroom deals. Americans are already seething about the kinds of deals that were used to get the earlier version of this bill through Congress. The ``Cornhusker kickback'' and the ``Louisiana purchase'' became household expressions. But using reconciliation to jam this health care plan through would make the ``Cornhusker kickback'' look like an exercise in good government.

Using reconciliation to fundamentally change the health care of every American would be one of the most brazen single-party power grabs in legislative history. It would be the death of bipartisanship. And Americans will not stand for it. They know bills of this scope only work if they are done along bipartisan lines.

Medicare and Medicaid were created with the support of about half the members of the minority party. The Voting Rights Act passed with 30 Republican and 47 Democratic votes. Only Six Senators voted against the Social Security Act. Only eight voted against No Child Left Behind or the Americans with Disabilities Act. Only 12 voted against the Welfare Reform Act. Big bills are passed with big majorities, and rarely has there been a bigger bill than that. So if ever there was a time not to depart from a bipartisan approach, it is now--right now.

Democrats are saying they want a simple up-or-down vote on health care. What they want is to jam their vision of health care through Congress over the objections of a public they seem to think is too ill- informed to notice. If

they go ahead with this plan, they will see how wrong they are. I know the argument has been made by the leaders on the other side: Let's get this issue behind us; it will get better. If they pass this, it will not be behind them; it will be in front of them--right in front of them. Americans are engaged in this debate in a way I have never seen in my entire career here. They know exactly what is going on. They will make sure their voices and their will is felt one way or another.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, briefly, I am pleased Senator Bunning will have an opportunity to offer the amendments that he thinks are important and that he has been stressing for the last few days. I am glad we were able to work this out and move on with the business of the Senate.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, when the great-great granddaughter of U.S. Chief Justice John Marshall established a safe place for Louisville's troubled and indigent children in 1910, few perhaps could have imagined the impact her actions would make a century later. Yet as The Cabbage Patch Settlement House celebrates its centennial year, the contributions of its alumni to our community and Nation will stand as Louise Marshall's legacy for another 100 years.

Named after the 1901 best-selling novel, ``Mrs. Wiggs and the Cabbage Patch,'' which was written by fellow Louisvillian Alice Hegan Rice, The Patch now serves 1,100 children and their families through a variety of education and counseling programs. Included among its alumni are: an NFL Super Bowl coach, public officials and community leaders, military officers, teachers, coaches, firefighters, and police officers. Thousands of alumni credit their involvement with The Cabbage Patch as a critical factor in their development of strong values and strong faith.

The Louisville Courier-Journal recently recounted the impact this institution has had on my home city, and I ask unanimous consent that the full article be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, earlier this week, the White House unveiled its latest iteration of the Democrat plan for health care reform, and, to put it quite simply, it was a major disappointment.

It was our hope that when the administration called for a health care summit at the White House, it would be an opportunity for both sides to come together and start over. Now it is perfectly clear the administration had something else in mind entirely.

The plan we saw Monday is hardly a starting off point for a bipartisan discussion on commonsense reforms. It is really just more of the same: a massive government scheme with all the flaws of the previous proposals that the American people have already seen and rejected. Changing the name and increasing the cost is not what Americans have been asking for, and it is certainly not reform.

To make matters worse, even as lawmakers head down to the White House for this health care summit tomorrow, Democrats on Capitol Hill are working behind the scenes on a plan aimed at jamming this massive health spending bill through Congress against the clear wishes of an unsuspecting public. What they have in mind is a last ditch legislative sleight of hand called reconciliation that would enable them to impose government-run health care for all on the American people, whether Americans want it or not. And we know that Americans do not, in fact, want it.

Americans have seen these proposals before. They do not want them. So this is the height of legislative arrogance. If you did not like the Cornhusker Kickback, get ready. This is the Cornhusker Kickback on steroids.

In light of all these behind the scenes efforts to get around the will of the people, it is hard to imagine what the purpose of Thursday's summit is. If the White House wants real bipartisanship,

then it needs to drop the proposal it posted Monday, which is no different in its essentials than anything we have seen before, and start over. And they need to take this last-ditch reconciliation effort off the table once and for all.

Then we can work on the kind of reform Americans really want, step by step proposals that will actually get at the problem, which is cost. That is what the American people have been asking us to do for a year. If ever there were a time for the administration to show it is listening, it is now. Reform is too important. We cannot let this opportunity pass.

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

Madam President, as we meet here in Washington this week, unemployment continues to hover around 10 percent. Tens of millions of Americans are struggling to make ends meet. The national debt is at a staggering all-time high. In response to all this, the administration wants lawmakers to go down to the White House to talk about a health care bill Americans have already rejected resoundingly. The American people thought the debate on this approach to reform was over. They issued their verdict on the substance of the Democratic bills and the process that was used to force them on the public. Yet here we are, once again, being told by the White House we have to consider the same health care bills that caused such a backlash across the country in December. Democrats either aren't listening to the American people or they are going down the same road they have gone down again and again over the past year: put a bill together behind closed doors and then try to force it through Congress along a party- line vote and ultimately onto a public that doesn't want it.

Americans don't want to be told what is best for them. They call the shots. What they are telling lawmakers in Washington to do on health care is to stop and start over. They want us to put the old bills on the shelf, pull out

a clean sheet of paper, bring all the parties together, and start over.

They are telling us they want a new bill. It is no wonder, since the bills we have seen would slash Medicare, increase taxes, and lead to higher insurance premiums. You could call this kind of approach many things, but you can't call it reform. Americans want real reform. That is what I had hoped Thursday's meeting at the White House would present, an opportunity for us to share the best ideas and work together on commonsense solutions. I am disappointed the White House seems to view it instead as an opportunity to simply restart where we left off in December. Americans don't know how else to say it. They are not interested in reform that starts with either of these two bills. The American people have been quite clear about that. They are not interested in reform that starts with either of these two bills.

If you think they are mad about the process they have seen so far, wait until Democrats in Washington completely ignore them and try to jam these bills through one more time. People aren't interested in so- called reform that raises costs instead of lowering them. They are not interested in massive cuts to Medicare. They are not interested in new taxes at a time when we are already struggling. They are not interested in a government-run health care system that will inevitably lead to delays and to rationing. They want step-by-step reforms that address the core of our problem, which is cost, not grand government schemes that only expand existing problems, increase our debt, and extend the reach of government further and further into our lives.

Reform is necessary. Unfortunately, it seems Washington Democrats are so wedded to their own flawed vision of reform that they would rather have nothing at all done about health care than to implement the kinds of changes Americans want.

When it comes to solving problems, Americans want us to listen first and then, if necessary, offer targeted, step-by-step solutions. Above all, they are tired of a process that shuts them out. They are tired of giant bills negotiated in secret, then jammed through on a party-line vote in the middle of the night. It should be clear by now, Americans are tired of grand schemes imposed from above. They have been telling us exactly that for an entire year. Incredibly, our friends on the other side still don't seem to get it. But Americans see what is going on, and that is why they will reject this bill one more time.

I yield the floor.

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

I thank the Chair.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

Mr. President, first, I want to welcome everybody back. I don't think there is any snow in the forecast, so hopefully we can get some work done around here. Having spent the past week in Kentucky, I can assure you that my constituents are concerned, first and foremost, about jobs and the economy. And another thing they are concerned about is lawmakers in Washington making matters worse.

Americans are worried about the growing national debt. That is why Republicans hope to offer amendments to the jobs bill that we will be voting on today that would lower it. Those ideas should be considered.

Millions of Americans want to get back to work. That is why Republicans will offer ideas that will make it easier for businesses to hire new workers. Those ideas should be considered too.

Small business owners want greater certainty about the future. That is why Republicans will propose ideas that will keep their taxes from going up and make it easier for them to invest in their businesses. Those and other ideas from both sides of the aisle should be considered.

Later this week, we will have the health care summit at the White House. Americans want the administration to scrap its massive government scheme in favor of an incremental approach to health care reform. Unfortunately, the White House still seems unwilling to do the one thing Americans want most. It is still clinging to a massive bill that Americans have overwhelmingly rejected again and again for months.

The tragedy of this approach is that the longer Washington sticks with its failed approach to health care, the longer Americans will have to wait for the real, step-by-step reforms that will actually lower costs and lead to a better system. That is the kind of real reform Americans have wanted all along. That is what they have been asking for and that is what Republicans in Congress will continue to fight for.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. I believe the majority leader may be on his way.

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

Mr. President, one of the most gratifying things about spending a good deal of time in the Senate, as I have, is the optimism that comes from seeing talent renew itself year after year. I have had the good fortune of having many talented staffers over the years, and the staff I have now is an incredible group. But every one of them will tell you that when Kyle Simmons gets up from his tidy desk and walks out of his office this Friday, the office they return to on Monday will be a very different place.

It has been said that no one is indispensable, and that may be true. But few of us can imagine S-229 without Kyle Simmons in it. So it will take some adjusting. And part of that adjustment involves doing something this week that Kyle never did. We are going to speak well of him. We are going to talk about his many virtues. We are going to make him a little uncomfortable. Because every single person on my staff knows what it's like to be singled out for a good piece of work, or for going above and beyond the call of duty; everybody, that is, except our chief of staff. Now it is our turn.

The first thing to say about Kyle is that he is humble. And that is really saying something in this town. Most people in Washington look in the mirror in the morning and think they see a future President. Not Kyle. If he looks in the mirror at all in the morning, I would imagine that what he sees is the son of a Baptist minister who was blessed with a privilege he didn't seek and who has tried to earn that privilege every single day, regardless of how well he did the day before. As he used to tell his father, ``Dad, I'm always just one mistake away from looking for a job.''

He had a modest upbringing. But he excelled at everything. One day when Kyle was about 10 years old, he made his way over to the Tate's Creek public golf course and picked up a club. Soon

enough, he was a better golfer than his dad. It was sign of things to come--a sign that for him, as for so many others in this country before and since, success would come not from who he knew or where he came from, but from hard work and the determination to succeed.

When Kyle showed up in Washington, he didn't have any connections. He didn't have an Ivy League degree. He didn't even have a job. All he had was some furniture he got from his grandfather, and a lot of talent. He got evicted from the first place he rented because the owner of the building wanted to tear the building down. As his old friend and roommate at the time put it, ``We were just two country bumpkins in a crowd . . . We just wanted to pay our electric bills.''

There were times, I am sure, when back home didn't look so bad. And after a series of jobs outside government and a brush with politics during the 1992 Presidential campaign, Kyle decided he had been in Washington long enough. And so he moved back home to Kentucky, but this time with enough experience under his belt to run a corporate communications shop in Louisville and that is just what he was doing when I first met him on an elevator at the old Seelbach Hotel.

I had just lost my press secretary, and we struck up a polite conversation--the second thing you notice about Kyle is that he is unfailingly polite--and then we pulled a Cheney on him. We asked him if he wouldn't mind coming up with a list of candidates for us, which he did with characteristic diligence. And when he had gone through his list, we asked him if maybe he would be interested in the job. Soon after that, he was sitting at a desk in the Russell Senate Office Building.

He was a quick study. Not even a year had passed before I knew that Kyle was the guy I wanted to manage my next campaign. I sent him down to the office I have always used out on Bishop Lane in Louisville, and he did a flawless job. In a year when Bill Clinton got reelected and carried Kentucky for the second time, Kyle got me reelected by 12 points. It was a landslide, a truly remarkable feat.

After that, he just went from success to success. After returning from Kentucky, I put him in charge of my office. It was one of the best decisions I ever made. Nothing rattled him, and he was always, always, thinking of the one thing that no one else had thought of.

Whether it was taking apart what I had thought to be a terrific idea and patiently explaining to me why it wasn't such a good idea, or mapping out a legislative or political strategy when everyone else was ready to take a break, he became the calm navigator in the middle of the storm--the one person in the office who never took his eye off the destination we had set. And when it came to smoking out some unforeseen problem or vetting some proposal for potential pitfalls, he was, and is, quite simply, the best I have ever seen. It was a skill I always thought I was pretty good at. But Kyle was better. And it is impossible to overstate the value of that kind of mind in politics.

Many of the people who might be listening to me right now are probably asking themselves why they have never heard of this guy. That is no accident. Kyle was never in it for himself. I know as well as I know the sun's coming up tomorrow that through three Senate elections, two whip races, two leader races, and countless legislative efforts in between, that he never put his own interests ahead of my own. He was as loyal as he was effective. He has made me look better than I am for 15 years. And nearly everything I have accomplished over that time I owe, in large part, to him.

He always deflected attention. And if he was suspicious of anything, it was the glory seekers, the people who like to talk about themselves. It is something he just never did. He kept his own counsel and kept to himself. As his mother used to say, ``Kyle can keep silent in 30 different languages.''

But if you ever do get Kyle to talk about his accomplishments, he will probably tell you that his proudest professional achievement was finding a talented group of people in Washington, DC, who had the same attitude about the limelight and about empty praise that he does. He will tell you the thing he's proudest of is the staff he put together-- and that he will soon leave behind.

But he was always the one who set the example.

On any given day over the past few years, any visitor to our office could be excused for wondering who the tall gentleman was out in the reception room asking one of our new staff assistants whether she'd found an apartment yet, and whether it was in a safe neighborhood.

``I'd never be able to look your parents in the eye if anything ever happened to you,'' he would say.

Anyone who had the privilege of sitting in one of our morning staff meetings could be excused for wondering who the guy was at the end of the table who seemed to know absolutely everything--from the legislative details to the fact that some of the Senate pages would be graduating later that day, that one of them was from Kentucky, that his dad had just died, and that our No. 1 priority in the office that day would be to make that young man feel like a million bucks.

Any visitor to our office could be excused for being astonished at seeing that same tall gentleman walk away from a room full of CEOs to focus on a staff issue or at seeing him sneak out during an important vote so he could get home just a little while to see his little girl before she went to bed.

Anyone would be amazed how he could manage such a high-pressure environment with such efficiency, focus, and vision, without ever losing his sense of humor. He inspired confidence in the staff and he inspired loyalty.

Everything I ever asked him to do he did well, especially when he had every excuse not to. I asked him to manage a campaign, even though he had never managed a campaign before. I asked him to run my office, even though he had never run an office before. I asked him to put together a leadership staff, even though he had never done that before. He had never done any of these things, but he excelled at every one, and he never needed the praise. I assure you, that kind of person is in very short supply in Washington.

Someone once said, the best business in the world would be to buy someone for what they are worth and to sell them for what they think they are worth. It was never that way with Kyle. He was always worth more than he thought he was, and that is why he will succeed at whatever he chooses to do.

In the meantime, he leaves a legacy. I cannot tell you how many Senators have come up to me over the past week to tell me how much they will miss his counsel, his advice, and his steady hand. He has left a lot of himself in this place, and it is the better for it.

Above all, though, Kyle leaves his example. It is the example of someone who showed you could be committed to winning and gracious at the same time; that you could be intensely focused, without losing sight of the human beings around you. It is that combination of aggressiveness and caution, political savvy and humanity that anyone who has worked with Kyle has come to admire and will miss.

Now that he is leaving, I am just as confident our office will carry on as it always has because he leaves a fantastic team behind. That is because Kyle's solution to everything was to throw the smartest people in the room at the problem, to find the best talent but not just any talent. He only wanted people who would rather be on a team than on the style pages of the Washington Post--in other words, people like him: honest, intelligent, kind, straightforward people with humility, a deep commitment to excellence, and always a sense of humor.

You do not get those qualities in Washington. You bring them here. In Kyle's case, that means he brought them from a quiet street in Lexington, KY, and, more specifically, from the home of Bill and Barbie Simmons.

Anyone who ever spent any time at the Calvary Baptist Church, where Kyle's dad served as pastor, could tell you there was one thing Bill Simmons could always count on when he climbed into the pulpit, whether he was presiding over a Sunday service, a funeral, a wedding--you name it--Mrs. Simmons would always be out there, always sitting in the same spot. She was always there as a point of reference, as a point of comfort for her husband. When I think of what Kyle has meant

to me over the past 15 years, I cannot help but think that is exactly what he has been to me. He has been that steady presence in the midst of it all. As long as he was there, the team was confident things would turn out well, and they always did.

To me, he has been more than a staffer. He has been a colleague, a confidant, and a dear friend.

Kyle once summed up his approach to the job, and I would like to share it because every Senator should be so fortunate as to have a chief of staff who would write such a thing. It is from a letter he left on the chair of my other chief of staff, Billy Piper, the day Billy took Kyle's job in the personal office 7 years ago.

After a brief introduction, here is what Kyle wrote:

Billy . . . while you sit here you are no longer simply

Billy Piper. You are Billy Piper, Senator Mitch McConnell's

chief of staff. Carry the privileges and responsibilities

just as you have throughout your outstanding career--with

humility and honor. . . .

Kyle went on:

. . . it's a constant struggle while balancing the demands

on your time to remember your audience: the people of

Kentucky, the staff who looks to you for leadership, and

Senator McConnell. . . . We're only here for a short period

of time--and few of us have made it to where you now sit. Do

us proud.

He was honored to serve the Senate and his country. Yet, at the end of that service, he knew he had a more important job still. It was the job of husband and father. That is why, to paraphrase Macbeth, nothing became Kyle's service to the Senate more than the leaving of it. His first love was and is his dear wife Carrie and their beautiful daughter Ava and the Senate could not compete with that--as much as it tried to, especially these last few months.

So he has made the right decision, as he usually does. But that does not change the fact that he leaves behind an office and a boss who will miss him terribly.

Kyle, thank you so very much.

Reserving the right to object, and I am going to object, I believe this is the simple unemployment insurance extension?

I would suggest another way to resolve the issue. I would ask that with respect to the House message on the CJS appropriations bill, that the motion to concur with an amendment be the Baucus-Grassley amendment which was filed earlier today.

I know my friend and colleague is going to offer some scaled-down version of that shortly. But if we offered instead the Grassley-Baucus amendment which was filed earlier today, that would include the unemployment extension. That was one of the features of that Baucus- Grassley amendment.

So if this consent were granted, it would allow us to work on that package rather than the version that the leader of the majority is going to offer here shortly that includes only four of those provisions.

Let me add that unemployment insurance does not expire until February 28. We will be back on February 22, and hopefully we will have sufficient time to work on an acceptable extension.

I object.

If I may, I missed the first part of what my friend was saying, but I think I understand the gist of it because we had an opportunity to talk a couple of times today.

The dilemma we currently have on the proposal the majority leader is referring to is that I believe it is the case that not all members of the Finance Committee are yet fully aware of what the package may look like. We also do not have an entire conference that understands it yet. If we are talking about a roughly $80 billion package, no matter how it may be labeled--whether it is another stimulus, whether it is a jobs bill, whether it is a combination of both--I would say to my friend that my members need to be able to feel as if they understand what they are being called upon to support. So the sooner we could get the parameters of the final package, the better.