SENATE COVERAGE -- (July '04)

No, you're absolutely correct. Matter of fact, I learned of this from a friend of mine on another forum who actually works alongside Halliburton. He said, if it weren't for Halliburton, he wouldn't be able to run his small oil company in West Texas.

She's playing this up for all she can get

Ummmm .. even if it's passed .. it won't help the threats today and at the conventions

That's what I thought .. so Halliburton isn't a Big "Oil" company

They don't drill for oil, but they are contracted by drilling companies to transfer oil by truck. Even in Montana, I see trucks with Halliburton on the tanks transferring natural gas and oil to different locations.

The dems are going to play this for all they can..............."THE REPUBLICAN DON'T WANT TO FUND HLS." I can hear it now......

I was watching the History Channel the other night about the Three Mile Island (semi) meltdown...........Halliburton workers all over the place.

Yep. Halliburton has been military friendly since as far back as the LBJ administration, it doesn't matter if it's a Democrat or Republican in the White House or in control of Congress. They are privately contracted to work the supply lines during times of war, and have been instrumental in moving Iraqi oil out of Iraq. Paul Johnson (former hostage) works for Halliburton.

Big Oil = OPEC

I have no doubt they will

I was just on the phone with my sister in an argument over the Gay Marriage bill

Now I have a headache ...

Babs Boxer has always supported gays and abortion!

Major FR Announcement!

National March Against Terror

Thanks..

Bill Bennett was talking this morning, something about KEN LAY & Teresa Heinz Kerry were on the same board together...........

This could get really juicy real quick....

Dear MoveOn Member,

Millions of progressive Americans still don't vote. Help change that: sign up to register voters on Sunday.

Pundits say that we live in a closely divided nation. If you look at elections, that's true. Yet wide majorities of Americans share our values: fair wages, great public schools, a healthy environment.

What do we need to do move things in our direction? There's a simple place to start--we need to make sure everyone registers to vote.

And this Sunday, we're going to get started. We'll register as many as 10,000 voters in one shot, helping to beat Bush in the bargain. More than 6,000 MoveOn members will be calling voters in key election states and registering them. Will you help us? To join a phone party near you, click here:

http://action.moveonpac.org/phone/

It'll be fun--you'll get to meet other local MoveOn members, and all you need to bring is a cell phone to make your calls on, plus several stamped envelopes to send forms to the people you call. And since we're calling on the weekend, most cell phone calls will be free.

We'll provide everything else. You'll call unregistered voters for an hour or two, help them fill out the voter registration form over the phone, then mail it to them to sign and send in. This is a great way to bring new voters into the process, and a big step toward winning back the White House.

If there's no party near you, or even if there is but you want to call with your friends, you can hold your own party. Just set it up on our website, decide whether other MoveOn members can sign up and pick a maximum number of participants, and we'll give you all the information and tools you need—lists of voters, a script to read, voter registration forms, and a way to send the results back in easily.

Many people register when they get a drivers' license, but it's a huge project to track down those who don't and persuade them to register. But remember Florida in 2000--with a margin of only 537 votes, each registration is a big step forward.

It's incredibly important, but we can't do it without you. Sign up now:

http://action.moveonpac.org/phone/

We hope you can make it on Sunday. Thank you.

Sincerely,

--Adam Ruben Field Director, MoveOn PAC July 8, 2004

PAID FOR BY MOVEON PAC: www.moveonpac.org Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Senate Floor Schedule for Friday, July 9, 2004

9:30 a.m.: Convene and begin a period of morning business.

Frist asked last night at the close that Senators speak on the Marriage amendment that is coming up next week today...

My guess is the dems will be screaming bloody murder about the SASC's report about the CIA intel. leading up to the war in Iraq.

HERE IT IS FOLKS!!!!

108th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. J. RES. 40

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

July 7, 2004

Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. FITZGERALD, Mr. FRIST, Mr. HATCH, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. KYL, Mr. LOTT, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. MILLER, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. TALENT, Mr. CRAPO, and Mr. CRAIG) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read the first time

July 8, 2004

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

`Article--

`SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

`This Article may be cited as the `Federal Marriage Amendment'.

`SECTION 2. MARRIAGE AMENDMENT.

`Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.'.

Calendar No. 620

Thanks for the ping

I'm betting the dems won't even talk about this today..............they'll just bash Bush.

How many hours did we waste on Judaical nominees??????

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I want to let my colleagues know what I am going to do at the end of these remarks. So that there will be no surprises, I am going to ask unanimous consent that the anticipated vote on cloture that is going to occur later today or tomorrow morning be vitiated indefinitely. I am not making that motion yet, but I am going to make the motion. I want to give them notice so they can find someone here who may want to object. I am going to make the motion because my view is that we have worked long and hard on getting this class action reform bill done. This bill is not perfect, but it is a reasonable bipartisan compromise that will reform the nation's class action system.

Having worked on this legislation last fall with a number of my colleagues, we now find ourselves in the middle of July dealing with this issue. I still have never received an adequate explanation of why this matter was not brought to the floor in January, February, March, April, or any point earlier. Why we waited until as late as we have to bring up an issue that has been as important as this makes little sense.

But my plea to the leadership, particularly the majority leader, is to not insist upon this cloture vote right now. Instead, I would like to give the leadership some ample time over the weekend to see if they can't fashion a compromise which would allow for the consideration of a number of amendments, both relevant and nonrelevant, as is the normal course of Senate business. Then we would come to a final vote and go to conference on the class action reform act.

I thought the decision to invoke cloture was one that was made last evening out of frustration because we were not getting very far with the class action reform bill. We began Tuesday night, but there were no votes that evening. On Wednesday morning, before any amendments were offered at all, the majority leader filled the amendment tree, precluding any amendments from being offered without getting his approval. Then Wednesday night, the decision was made to file cloture.

I am looking at a piece of correspondence dated July 6, the day before the decision to invoke cloture, from the National Association of Manufacturers. In his letter to all 100 Senators--dated July 6, not July 7--he notes a cloture vote will occur and that it is going to be considered a vote that will be scored on their annual legislative report card.

I ask unanimous consent to print the letter in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

July 6, 2004.

DEAR SENATOR: On behalf of the 14,000 member companies of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), including more than 10,000 small and medium-sized manufacturers, I urge you to vote for S. 2062, the Class Action Fairness Act; vote in favor of cloture; and vote against all amendments except managers' amendments.

Created for the purpose of efficiently addressing large numbers of similar claims, far too many class action lawsuits are brought solely for settlement value and fees as opposed to helping aggrieved consumers. The Class Action Fairness Act would help mitigate the current situation by giving federal courts original jurisdiction over class action lawsuits where diversity of citizenship occurs and by creating a ``Bill of Rights'' for class members to stem the most flagrant abuses of the current system. Federal courts more consistently decide when class actions should be allowed, and these courts are better equipped to deal with complex cases involving interstate commerce fairly and efficiently. The current system allows plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions to unduly influence national policy through litigation.

S. 2062 does not make any changes to substantive law. Rather, it is a reasonable response to an unanticipated problem with the federal rules of judicial procedure and simply reinforces the intent of the Founders that lawsuits involving litigants from different states should be heard in federal court. The NAM believes that this bipartisan legislation will increase judicial efficiency and provide a forum better suited to adjudicating complex class action litigation.

Votes for cloture and in favor of S. 2062, the Class Action Fairness Act, and against any weakening amendments (including those

[Page: S7811] GPO's PDF

that would endanger final passage), substitutions or motions to recommit will be considered for designation as Key Manufacturing Votes in the NAM voting record for the 108th Congress.

Sincerely,

Jerry Jasinowski,
President.

Mr. DODD. My point is, I would have thought this letter might have been dated on July 7, not the day before the decision to invoke cloture. It raises some suspicion that maybe the intention was all along to file cloture and not to give us a chance to go through the normal processes of debate and amendments.

Apparently the fix was in even before we started, which indicates to this Senator that the intention was never to get to this bill. There were numerous meetings over the last several. One of the things we talked about was the importance of setting aside an adequate amount of time for the full consideration of this bill.

The Democratic leader offered a proposal of limiting several nongermane amendments and a limited number of relevant amendments. The majority leader countered and offered to have even fewer nongermane amendments and an unlimited amount of germane or relevant amendments. I was mystified by that offer because had it been accepted, we could have spent weeks on this bill without ever invoking cloture if we had had hundreds of amendments filed that were germane to the underlying bill.

I am convinced there is still a formulation of germane/nongermane amendments that would allow us to consider those in a relatively expedited fashion and then get to final passage of the class action reform bill. My plea will be at the appropriate time that we vitiate the cloture vote, let the leaders over the weekend see if they can't come up with some formulation on amendments, and then next week or so to return to the legislation.

It is a great travesty that we are going to abandon this bill many of us have worked long and hard on because a small minority are unhappy over the possibility that we might consider as amendments several proposals that enjoy broad support in this institution. I realize that can be difficult. But nonetheless, it seems to me you don't shut down the underlying bill entirely because there are some proposals that may be offered that are unappealing to only a handful. Yet that is the situation in which we find ourselves.

For those who have worked on this, we are about to miss this opportunity, maybe not only for this Congress but for many years to come. That can happen. I have been around here long enough to know if you don't strike when the iron is hot, you may lose the opportunity for a long time down the road.

I appeal to the majority leader, who filed the cloture petition last evening, to vitiate that cloture motion. Give himself, the Democratic leader, and others who are interested a chance over the next several days to see if they can't come up with a formulation that will allow for the consideration of several amendments under time agreements. That ought to be the way we proceed, rather than abandoning this effort.

I am told the next two issues to be brought up--and the minority whip can correct me if I am wrong--are a constitutional amendment on gay marriage and a flag-burning constitutional amendment, neither of which have any chance of passage in this body. I don't believe anyone agrees there is any chance of them becoming the law of the land. Yet we are going to shove class action reform, based on the decision of the majority leader, off the table, maybe permanently, in order to consider two matters that have no chance of being adopted whatsoever.

If that is in fact the situation, then those who have been such strong supporters of this proposal outside of this Chamber ought to understand what the game is. As I have often said, I was born at night, but not last night. I think I understand what is going on here. Maybe all this time was only a game to bring the issue up with the full knowledge that once you close the opportunity for further amendments, you are then guaranteeing the outcome we are about to have.

I am terribly disappointed, after a lot of time being spent on this effort, that we have come to this particular moment. We just listened to the eloquent comments of our colleague from Oregon on legislation that will be adopted later this evening or next week dealing with teenage suicide. We have listened to the Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Domenici, who has worked for 15 years on trying to achieve parity in the provisions providing coverage for people with mental illnesses. There is a significant majority of us in this body who believe that legislation ought to be adopted and then sent to the House for their consideration. They may reject it. It may not be adopted in conference, but we owe those who have fought long and hard a chance to vote on these measures. Certainly the American public might be more impressed with the Senate if we were to deal with the issue of mental health rather than with the issue of gay marriage or flag burning.

Literally thousands of cases, I am told, by people out there are being filed in State courts when they belong in Federal courts. I am a strong supporter of that effort. Are people here to tell me the flag-burning amendment and a gay marriage constitutional amendment are more important than dealing with reforming the class action system or the issue of mental health parity? I hate to see what the outcome would be if I polled the American public what they felt about the priorities of the Senate so close to the election.

What issues would America like to see us address? We have the issue of the minimum wage. Senator Craig of Idaho has an issue dealing with immigration and joblessness which enjoys the cosponsorship of three-quarters of the Members of this body and the support of the White House. We can't get it to the floor of the Senate. We have the provisions offered by our colleagues from Hawaii who are seeking some support for legislation that is critically important to their State. I mentioned the minimum wage. I mentioned mental health parity. These are only some of the issues.

On the question of importation of drugs, we are constantly being told that matter is going to come to the Senate floor for debate. Yet we are finding all of these issues being scuttled, including class action reform, to the sidelines so we can deal with a couple of issues that have limited support in this Chamber and I think marginal support if people thought about them out across the country.

So I am disappointed by the priorities here. I realize the majority has the right to set the agenda; it is their business to set the agenda. The majority party controls this Chamber, they control the other body, and they control the White House. They set the agenda. They have decided that the agenda--America's agenda--ought not to be class action reform, ought not to be mental health parity, ought not to be the minimum wage, ought not to be immigration reforms, which the Latino and Hispanic community and agribusinesses care about so much, and ought not to be the legislation offered by my colleague from Hawaii. Instead, it ought to be gay marriage and flag burning, neither of which have any chance of being adopted by this body.

My colleagues know full well constitutional amendments require supermajorities in order to leave here for consideration by the various States.

I see the presence of a colleague on the other side. I wanted to make sure someone was here before I make a unanimous consent request.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to invoke cloture, scheduled for tomorrow morning, be vitiated indefinitely, and that the reason for doing it is to give the leadership an opportunity to try to formulate a structure that will allow for the consideration of the class action reform bill in some manner that we can all endorse, support, and allow us to get to that issue. I make that request.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I respectfully object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

they'll just bash Bush

I'm going to be very good here
& not type the sarcastic thing I want to..

just glad I can watch today