Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to note with sadness the passing of Dr. Bobby R. Himes, a retired Campbellsville University professor and star Kentuckian who will be greatly missed. After over four decades of service to his students, his community and the Commonwealth of Kentucky, he leaves behind many loved ones and a great legacy of accomplishment. He was 76 years old.

Known to students and colleagues as ``Mr. Campbellsville University,'' Dr. Himes taught 7,940 students over his long career, according to grade books he kept in his possession. He first came to Campbellsville University in 1961 at the age of 29 and retired in 2001 as a history and political science professor. More than 4,000 Campbellsville students took his popular class ``United States History Since 1877,'' which began in 1961.

Dr. Himes grew up in Hartford, KY, and always remained proud of his hometown. In his recent book ``Life in the Shadows of Hartford College and Campbellsville University,'' he wrote, ``I could not have grown up in a better place or time. Nowhere could there have been better people to nurture a young boy, a young man and now an old man.''

Dr. Himes graduated from Hartford High School in 1950 and earned his bachelor's degree in history and political science from Kentucky Wesleyan College in 1959. He earned a master's degree in social science from Appalachian State University in 1961, did other graduate work at Western Kentucky University, and did his doctoral studies at Vanderbilt University. He also wore our country's uniform for 4 years in the U.S. Air Force, serving in the Korean War.

Dr. Himes's renown as a teacher was legendary. Several years ago I was on a plane from Kentucky to Washington, DC, when a young woman introduced herself to me as one of his former students. She had only the highest praise for him. I made sure to tell Dr. Himes about that afterwards. The impact he had on this young woman's life, and thousands of young people's lives, cannot be understated.

Let me point out that my wife, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, was a big fan of Dr. Himes as well. When she first met him she was new to Kentucky and just getting to know people. Dr. Himes was so friendly and helpful, they soon became fast friends. He was a great guide to the people and places in Kentucky.

Dr. Himes was always actively engaged with the world around him, and so it is no surprise he was involved in political campaigning and public service as well. His first campaign experience came when he was in the third grade at Wayland Alexander Elementary School he supported Wendell L. Willkie in the 1940 Presidential election.

Luckily, that first loss did not deter him from politics completely. Moving to Taylor County, KY, in 1961, Dr. Himes went on to serve in leadership posts for local campaigns. He then became chairman of the Taylor County Republican Party in 1982, a position he held for 10 years.

Dr. Himes was twice named the Campbellsville/Taylor County Chamber of Commerce Educator of the Year. He was also named the 2001 Business and Professional Women's Club Man of the Year and the 2004 Central Kentucky News-Journal Man of the Year. He received the Outstanding Social Studies Teacher Award from the Kentucky Council for the Social Studies in 1982.

Dr. Himes was a member of Campbellsville Baptist Church, and he belonged to the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels. He was perhaps the biggest fan of Lady Tiger Basketball at Campbellsville University, and the team recognized his support by creating the Bobby Himes Award, which honors dedication, determination and loyalty.

Dr. Himes served under five Presidents during his tenure at Campbellsville University. Dr. Michael V. Carter, the current president, said upon hearing the news, ``We thank God for the life and career of Dr. Bobby Himes and his service to Campbellsville University and humanity.''

My prayers and those of the people of Kentucky are with his wife Erlene and the Himes family after this sad loss. I hope the wonderful memories of Dr. Himes's long and fruitful life can give them some strength during this difficult time.

In his book, Dr. Himes looked back at his own success and wrote, ``What a career, what a life for a rural Kentucky boy! My granddad Himes would be pleased.''

What a life, indeed. Kentucky and our Nation have lost a great American with the passing of Dr. Bobby R. Himes. And I have lost a dear beloved friend.

I thank my friend, the majority leader. Let me just add, Jesse and Dot Helms were good friends of Elaine's and mine and good friends of a lot of other people in the Senate on both sides. There are a significant number of our conference planning to attend the funeral tomorrow. I thank the majority leader for his accommodation of those requests by having the votes on Wednesday morning. At Dot Helms' request, I will be doing one of the eulogies tomorrow at the funeral, and I will have more to say about the life of my good friend Jesse Helms when I get back. But I wish to echo the remarks of the majority leader about what a fine gentleman he was.

If you took a poll around here of the pages and the people who work in the Capitol about who was the most popular Member, I expect Jesse Helms would have won it--which would surprise an awful lot of people in the press and out in America who thought of Senator Helms as sort of a fierce individual. In fact, in person, he was as gentle, as accommodating, and as friendly as anybody I have ever met. We all will miss Jesse Helms a great deal.

I thank the majority leader for giving me an opportunity to make some comments at this point about our good friend Jesse Helms.

Mr. President, there is no question what the No. 1 issue is on the minds of the American people. It is the price of gas at the pump. It is literally off the charts. For those of us who have looked at surveys over the years, it is hard to recall, other than the post-9/11 period, a single issue that has enjoyed this kind of dominance in public opinion polls in America. I was home last week. I heard from a lot of Kentuckians on this issue. I know I wasn't the only one hearing the same thing. The high price of gas is the No. 1 issue facing Americans at this time. It should be the No. 1 issue for the Senate. Americans are hurting. They have every right to expect their elected representatives to actually do

something about it. We need to take up and pass legislation which not only makes a statement but which also makes a difference.

Just before the Fourth of July holiday, 44 Republicans introduced the Gas Price Reduction Act, a series of proposals to increase American energy production, to increase conservation, and to make sure that excessive speculation is not driving up the price of oil; basically, find more, use less. This is the only legislation that has been offered that has both a real chance to pass and will truly help consumers at the pump.

The find more provisions include increased exploration on the outer continental shelf, where States want it, and lifting the ban on western oil shale exploration. Under use less, we propose incentivizing the development of plug-in electric cars and trucks, and the advanced batteries needed to power them.

We can and should increase development of alternative sources of energy. But conservation, alone, is not the way out of this problem. The current spike in energy prices is a supply and demand problem, not a demand and demand problem. If prices are going to come down, we need to find more energy at home and use less. We must do both.

The goal of finding more energy at home, rather than relying on the Middle East, is not a fantasy. America is already the No. 3 oil producer in the world, and a number of States have indicated they would like to open up the area off their coasts to even more oil exploration, but they are prohibited by a Federal ban. At $4.10 a gallon, this nationwide ban no longer makes sense. It should be lifted with prices where they are now. It should be up to individual States to decide whether to allow exploration 50 miles off their coasts.

We should also lift the ban on oil shale development which the new Democratic congress enacted last year. Our western States are sitting on a sea of oil three times as large as the oil reserves in Saudi Arabia. Yet at the insistence of the Democratic majority, we are not allowed to touch it. They have put a 100 percent ban on oil shale exploration. With gas prices at more than $4 a gallon, this prohibition makes no sense.

Some on the other side say that opening up new off-shore exploration or using oil shale would not have an immediate effect and therefore should not be done at all. But the effect of allowing new exploration at home would send a clear signal to the international markets that we are willing to take serious steps to increase supply even while we move to conserve.

There is already a strong bipartisan consensus on the importance of conservation. In addition to working with our friends on the other side late last year to pass the first increase in fuel efficiency standards in more than three decades, Republicans are also looking in this bill to conserve energy by spurring the development of plug-in electric cars and trucks.

But conservation alone won't resolve this problem. Conservation is just one side of the problem. We need to find more and use less, if we want to bring prices down.

Finally, I know there have been concerns that oil speculators are contributing to the rising price of gas. Our bill addresses this concern through putting more cops on the beat at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, increasing transparency and strengthening U.S. futures markets.

The Gas Price Reduction Act is a dramatic step in the right direction. In putting it together, Republicans were careful to focus on proposals that already have support from the other side of the aisle. We are not interested in simply making a statement. We are determined to address the problem. We want to pass legislation which will make a difference to families feeling the pinch.

This bill contains provisions that should be agreeable to both sides of the aisle. It tackles both sides of the energy issue by increasing supply and curbing demand. We should do both.

There are many important issues facing the Congress, but few are more important than addressing the issue of energy. It is time to act, and this balanced approach is a good start.

Mr. President, not by way of rebuttal but agreeing with the majority leader, the American people are demanding that we do something. They are not kidding about this issue. I appreciate the spirit of the remarks of the majority leader. Just to give an example of the shifting views on this, a Pew poll just announced last week, taken very recently, indicates that just among political liberals alone, just to give one snapshot of how the public is evolving on this issue, the number of liberals, liberals only, who favor increased energy exploration doubled. That is just among a subset of the American population. The American people are demanding that we act.

I appreciate the comments of the majority leader. Hopefully, we will be able to find a way to do both things, both to find more and to use less.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am not sure we do have a problem. We are taking a look at it now, and we will be in further consultation with the majority leader.

Mr. President, last April the Director of National Intelligence, ADM Mike McConnell, warned Congress about a serious flaw in the laws that govern our Nation's terror-fighting capabilities. New technologies had made our old electronic surveillance program dangerously out of date, he said, causing us to miss substantial amounts of vital intelligence on foreign terror suspects overseas.

In reaction to these concerns, the Senate passed and the President signed a temporary measure, the Protect America Act. The Protect America Act lived up to its name. We are told that from the time of its passage last August until its expiration in February, it allowed us to collect significant intelligence on terrorists and has been critical in protecting the United States from harm. But the Protect America Act had a signal failure: the telecom companies that may have helped prevent terrorist attacks were not protected from potentially crippling lawsuits. This was no small thing since without these companies, America wouldn't even have an effective surveillance program. Bankrupting the telecoms would be like outlawing fire hydrants--you could have the best firetrucks and the best firemen in the world, but you would still be incapable of putting out fires.

So after several months of new negotiations, the House finally devised and approved last week a revision of the original surveillance law that addresses the DNI's major concerns, including the important telecom protection. As the DNI put it in a recent letter endorsing the House-passed bill:

This bill would provide the intelligence community with the

tools it needs to collect the foreign intelligence necessary

to secure our Nation while protecting the civil liberties of

Americans. The bill would also provide the necessary legal

protections for those companies sued because they are

believed to have helped the government prevent terrorist

attacks in the aftermath of September 11. Because this bill

accomplishes these two goals, essential to any effort to

modernize FISA, we strongly support passage and will

recommend the President sign it.

That is the Director of National Intelligence.

Passage of this legislation is long overdue. When the Protect America Act expired in February, the DNI warned Democratic leaders in the House once again about the need for an updated law. Yet House Democrats were evidently more concerned about the pressure they were getting from left wing groups such as moveon.org. They brushed the DNI's warnings aside and refused to take up and pass a bipartisan Senate-passed compromise bill that would have easily cleared the House. As a result of Democratic intransigence, our intelligence community has been handicapped in its ability to acquire new terrorist targets overseas. This was grossly irresponsible, and many of us said so at the time.

Now more than a year after the DNI made his initial plea, House Democrats have finally done the right thing. They have acted on the DNI's warnings by passing an updated surveillance law that meets his original criteria and which meets the criteria Republicans laid out during last year's debate--namely, one that gives the intelligence community the tools it needs to protect us, which doesn't put the telecom companies that made this program possible out of business, and which would get a Presidential signature.

Now it is time for the Senate to take up this bill and pass it without any further delay. The bill isn't perfect. I would have preferred for the Speaker to allow a vote on the Senate-passed FISA bill. But it does meet the DNI's criteria, and therefore its passage will mark a serious achievement, though long overdue, in the interest of our national security.

This hard-fought bill represents the epitome of compromise. The senior Senator from Missouri should be singled out for his outstanding work on this most important piece of legislation. He has done a service to the Senate and to the Nation by patiently working all of this out over the course of more than a year.

He was assisted in that effort by very able staff. Louis Tucker, Jack Livingston, and Kathleen Rice were invaluable throughout the process, to every Senator who was involved in this extremely important debate. They also deserve our thanks.

I will support this bill for all the reasons I have mentioned and urge my colleagues to do the same. We must pass this before leaving town and not allow it to be held up by yet another Democratic filibuster.

Mr. President, I rise to speak for a brave woman, mother and soldier who has fallen. On July 22, 2004, SGT Tatjana Reed was tragically killed when an improvised explosive device detonated near her vehicle during combat operations in Samarra, Iraq.

Born half a world away, Sergeant Reed came to call Fort Campbell, KY her home. She was 34 years old.

For her bravery in service, she received numerous medals, awards and decorations, including the Bronze Star Medal and the Purple Heart.

Born and raised in Germany, Sergeant Reed chose to make America her own, and she chose to enlist in the U.S. Army to protect it.

To hear Tatjana's younger sister, Rebecca Milliner, describe their time together as children, growing up in Germany sounds little different from growing up in America.

``She had to drag her little sister along to hang out with her friends,'' Rebecca recalls. But ``she never complained about having to take me with her.''

Tatjana graduated from high school in Germany, then later came to America as a young woman in 1991 and graduated from basic training in February of that year. The Army proved to be Tatjana's path to embracing both a new country and a new mission in life.

``She loved the Army,'' says Tatjana's mother, Brigitte Dykty, who also came to America from Germany around the same time as her daughter.

Brigitte remembers that before Tatjana left for Iraq, her daughter ``told me not to worry for her,'' she says. Tatjana reassured her mother by saying, ``It's my job.''

Tatjana became an emergency medic and was stationed at Fort Knox, KY. The Bluegrass State became her new home. In 1993, she transferred to Fort Campbell, and also spent time in Kosovo. In August of 1998, she became an American citizen.

But perhaps the greatest gift in Tatjana's life was her daughter, Genevieve, who tucked a framed photo of herself into Tatjana's bags as a gift to her mom when she went to Iraq.

By the time she was deployed to Iraq, Tatjana was assigned to the 66th Transportation Company, based out of Kaiserslautern, in her native Germany, and served as a heavy-wheeled vehicle operator. At a memorial service for Tatjana, her fellow soldiers described the joy of working with her.

``When I first came to the 66th, Sergeant Reed was the first person I met,'' says Private First Class Melissa Cramblett. ``She took me under her wing. She was a good person, a good [non-commissioned officer,] and she cared a lot for us.''

Other soldiers described a caring woman who was a mother figure to the younger troops under her care. She translated German for the soldiers communicating with the locals, and brewed a strong cup of coffee that became the soldiers' favorite.

``She was an exceptional woman,'' says SSG Agustin Sarmiento. ``There were no other words to describe her. She was a real tender, loving, caring person. She cared for soldiers.''

The compassion Tatjana showed for the people around her was not new. A story her sister, Rebecca, shared with me illustrates that.

When I was eight or nine I was rushed to the hospital to have my appendix removed,'' Rebecca says. ``I was scared because I never had to stay in a hospital before. I remember waking up from the surgery and opening my eyes and looking at my sister. She said, `How are you doing?' She started joking with me, so I would forget about my pain.

``She was at the hospital with me every day. That is when she became my hero.''

Tatjana always called her daughter Genevieve ``her little soldier,'' and so at Tatjana's funeral, Genevieve did not cry. To remain her mother's little soldier, she said she would cry when she was alone.

Tatjana's passing leaves a hole in the lives of those who knew her that cannot be filled. We are thinking of her mother Brigitte Dykty; her daughter Genevieve Reed; her sister Rebecca Milliner; her brother Torsten Wissmann; her stepfather Joseph Dykty; and many other beloved family members and friends.

Rebecca still remembers the shock of hearing the tragic news. ``My sister was gone just like that,'' she says.

``The one good thing that came out of it [is] she now is a hero to millions of people and not just to me.''

Rebecca and her family can rest assured that this Senate does indeed recognize SGT Tatjana Reed as a hero. And now, her adopted country will forever adopt her, as a brave patriot who made the greatest sacrifice for her Nation.

Mr. President, in Kentucky today a family mourns the loss of a hero and patriot. SGT William G. Bowling was tragically killed on April 1, 2007, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle as he was on patrol outside Baghdad. Sergeant Bowling hailed from Beattyville, KY, and he was 24 years old.

He received several awards, medals and decorations for his valor, including the Army Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, and the Purple Heart.

``This is the job he wanted to do,'' says his wife, Jennifer, about her husband's service. ``He wanted to serve his country. . . . He really believed in what he was doing in Iraq.''

In fact, this was Will's second tour of duty in Iraq. He was serving as a military police officer assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2nd Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, based out of Fort Drum, NY. Will enlisted in the Army in 2003 and then reenlisted in 2005.

The year of his first enlistment, 2003, was an important one for another reason. That year, Will had a job at Affiliated Computer Services, where he got to meet a young woman named Jennifer.

Their first date was on Groundhog Day; they went to see a movie. As he and Jennifer grew closer, he described for her his desire to join the Army.

``He was at a point in his life where he just felt like he needed to enlist,'' Jennifer recalls. ``He thought about joining right after 9/ 11, and he thought about it some more after that. It was just something he thought he needed to do.

``I knew something could happen,'' she adds. ``But I supported him.''

Will and Jennifer fell in love, and they were married on July 23, 2003, in Richmond, KY. On the very next day, Will reported for Army training.

Will served as an infantryman when he first enlisted, training at Fort Benning, GA, then reporting to Fort Drum. He was deployed on his first tour in Iraq in 2004 and reenlisted while on tour in 2005. Upon returning home, he trained at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, in 2005 and 2006 to become an MP.

Deployed on his second Iraqi tour in August 2006, Will patrolled the streets of Baghdad, and was part of a crew that found and detonated explosives before they could harm other soldiers or civilians.

Looking ahead, Will and Jennifer saw a happy life together. He thought of joining the Kentucky State Police and building a house for his family in Beattyville.

That family included Will and Jennifer's two beautiful daughters, Hannah Katheryn and Allyson Peyton. Sadly, Will never got to lay eyes on his younger daughter Allyson, who was born the day after his funeral.

``I sent him lots of pictures of the girls,'' Jennifer remembers. He ``was very devoted to me and our daughters. [He] couldn't wait to return . . . and was extremely excited about the birth of the new baby.''

Hannah and Allyson will not get to learn firsthand how their father loved the Indianapolis Colts and that his favorite player was Peyton Manning. In fact, that is where Allyson gets her middle name.

They'll miss hearing their father talk about his love of NASCAR and his favorite drivers, Dale Earnhardt and Dale Earnhardt, Jr., Will would even say half-jokingly that he wanted to be a driver someday.

``For our second anniversary, he got to go to the Kentucky Speedway to participate in the Richard Petty Driving Experience,'' says Jennifer. ``He was so excited and had such a great time that day. I can still see the smile on his face. ``

Will liked to have water gun fights with his nephews, build things out of Legos and play a few video games. He enjoyed the bands U2 and the Foo Fighters and the comedian Dane Cook. And together, he and Jennifer would walk their dogs--Oreo, a Siberian Husky, and Java, a German Shepherd.

``He was just an outstanding, respectable man,'' says Jennifer. He ``could be quiet at times, [but] loved to smile and laugh.''

Will was the kind of man who collected many friends. Hundreds of people filled the Booneville Funeral Home

to say their goodbyes, and to recognize his bravery in fighting for such an important cause. I was honored to be able to write a eulogy for Will, which was read at the service.

Our prayers go out to Will's beloved friends and family members today. We are thinking of his wife Jennifer Evans Bowling; his daughters Hannah Katheryn and Allyson Peyton Bowling; his father, Adam Miller; his mother Kathleen Bowling; his parents-in-law James and Cathy Evans; his brother-and sister-in-law Jim and Roxanne Evans; his nephews Michael and Wesley Evans; his grandparents Chester Terry and Francis Bowling; his grandmother-in-law Katheryn Holloway, and many others. Will's grandfather-in-law, Frank Holloway, has also passed away.

Will also served alongside many brave soldiers in the Army, forging friendships that lasted a lifetime and beyond. We are thinking of SGT Billy Messer, SP Travis Tysinger, SGT Brian Marshall, SSG Billy Thompson, SGT Stephen Tucker, and SGT Arthur Briggs.

The town of Beattyville has honored Will by engraving his name on a memorial wall that is erected downtown. That's an appropriate way to remember Will as a soldier and a hero.

His wife Jennifer plans her own way of remembering Will as a husband, a father, and a man.

``I've bought a farm and I'm going to build a house exactly as we had planned,'' she says. ``I will display his die-cast cars . . . and will put his Army memorials on display.''

This Senate will remember SGT William G. Bowling for his life of service, and his enormous sacrifice. We honor his heroism in defending his family and his country. And we will not forget the example he has set for all of us--not least, his two young daughters.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

I, obviously, am not going to. I ask my good friend, the majority leader, if he thinks we need 60 minutes of debate. Is there some chance time will be yielded back?

No.

Mr. President, let me add briefly that we are on a glidepath to completion here of a number of extremely important measures to our country, from the supplemental, which will fund the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which also includes an important new veterans benefit program; to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which has helped protect us against attacks since 9/11; to an important Medicare bill, which will be resolved in one way or another in the next few weeks; to an important housing bill. In each of these instances, we will end up getting a bipartisan result at some point in the very near future on very important issues for the American people. So I think today has been very successful in crafting a pathway--a glidepath, if you will--to completion. I share the majority leader's view that this was a day of considerable accomplishment on major issues for the American people.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, under the consent agreement that was entered, I have 10 minutes?

I will yield back the remainder of my time, and then am I correct that the only remaining speaker is the majority leader?

Mr. President, let me be clear, my side, led by Senator Grassley, has been willing to compromise to get a bill that could become law. Everyone agrees we need to fix the physician payment system. There is no disagreement on that. As Senator Grassley has pointed out, we have offered to negotiate. We have offered to extend current law. We have tried to find a way to solve the problem. Unfortunately, the majority apparently is not interested. The bill we are voting on would cause 2 million seniors to lose the extra benefits they currently get in their Medicare Advantage plans. It would rob millions of rural seniors of the ability to choose a private fee-for- service plan. I worry about the impact that it would have on the Kentucky teacher retirement system.

We have a solution that would protect seniors' access to care, that would prevent a 10.6-percent cut in physician payments in Medicare, that would provide billions of dollars to help rural beneficiaries access care. This is a solution that could become law right away. I hope the majority can find a way to take one of the solutions we are offering so that physician payments are not cut and seniors' Medicare benefits are not put in jeopardy.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, with regard to the Medicare issue upon which we just voted, we have had a number of discussions in the course of the week about the way forward. Senator Grassley has made it clear he would like to lead us in negotiations with the majority, represented by Senator Baucus, to bring us together to get this Medicare extension completed. The way to do it is on a bipartisan basis.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a Senate bill, which I will send to the desk. It is a clean 30-day extension of the Medicare payments bill.

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

Is my good friend objecting to my request?

Mr. President, I believe I have the floor.

I believe I have the floor.

The path the majority leader just recommended we go down leads to a Presidential veto and an expiration of this law at the end of the week and a certain doc fix rejection. In other words, the doctors cut is going to go into effect at the end of this month because of this recalcitrant view, this excessively partisan approach that refuses to accept any input from this side of the aisle.

We have all known the way forward. In fact, Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus working together started the way forward months ago by working together to get a bipartisan agreement, which is the way we have typically done these periodic Medicare bills. But, no, my good friend the majority leader jerks him back in and says: We want to do this on a strictly partisan basis. We don't care whether the President will veto the bill.

Here we are a few days before the doctors receive this unconscionable cut, and the majority is saying it is more important to play politics with this issue, to brag about the fact there are 59 Democrats who voted to go forward, to talk, of all things, during the Medicare debate about who won special elections for the House of Representatives in Illinois, Mississippi, or Louisiana. What in the world does that have to do with the subject matter?

The subject matter before us is not playing political games not bragging about the fact that every Democrat voted to go forward. We ought to be talking about the reality of this situation. And the reality is that the refusal of the majority to approach this issue on a bipartisan basis, as has been typically done in the past, will lead to a Presidential veto, a reduction in the reimbursement rates for doctors, an expiration at the end of the week. There is a way forward to get back together like we have typically done on this, and that is to approve a 30-day extension.

My good friend the majority leader has just objected to an opportunity to prevent the physicians' reduction we all agree should not occur. He is objecting to it. So even the most casual observer could not miss the point.

You have an opportunity to prevent the physicians' pay reimbursement reduction or let the law expire at the end of the week. That is the choice. It is perfectly clear.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, will the majority leader yield for a question?

When the President of the United States vetoes a bill, it doesn't become law, right, unless it is overridden?

So if the President vetoes this bill, it is not likely that the fix will be prevented at the end of the week; is that right?

We probably don't need to prolong it much further, but in spite of the political observations of my good friend, the fact is, the President, as a matter of principle, will not sign this bill. At the end of the week, the doctors' reduction in reimbursement will go into effect. There is a way to prevent that, and that is to do a short- term extension to give us an opportunity to do what we have done in the past on these measures, and that is negotiate a settlement. That has been prevented by my good friend.

I think we have discussed this issue long enough. We have others waiting to debate the supplemental.

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

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

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

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

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, let me brighten our day and lift the mood of my good friend, the majority leader. I think by any standard this is going to be a week of considerable bipartisan accomplishment for the American people. We have a great likelihood of completing the supplemental. As everyone knows, the war portion of the supplemental, we don't even have to vote on again. The only thing we will be voting on, again, on the supplemental are the domestic parts of it that are widely supported on both sides of the aisle.

We all agree we need to do the so-called docs' fix. There is some difference of opinion about exactly how to craft that. Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley have a history of being able to come together and work these things out in a way that makes sense for both sides.

The FISA bill enjoys almost, I assume, unanimous support on this side of the aisle and more than half the votes on the other side of the aisle. There is no reason we would not get there on that.

As the majority leader has pointed out, at some point along the way, the cobwebs and trip wires and other problems the housing bill has run into will be circumvented by the majority and we will get to final passage on a piece of legislation that the vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle think is important.

So I finish today with optimism about the chances of considerable accomplishment for the American people before the week is out.

I yield the floor.