Replies

Ms. LANDRIEU. If the Senator will yield for a question and comment, let me thank my colleague from Louisiana for his extraordinary leadership on this issue. He has been in meetings all week, literally for weeks, as I have, and on the phone with everybody you can talk to. Of course, the time he spent in the House in Louisiana has served him well because he knows how much our needs are. But I want to ask him a few questions because he and I are committed to stay tonight until we get some kind of resolution.
Is it the intention of the Senator, the junior Senator from Louisiana, that these loans be in the same line as the current legislation, which gives discretion on the part of the administration to forgive them or not? Or is it the intention of the Senator for us to leave current law and absolutely make it certain, when no one else has been required to do so, that these loans would have to be repaid under all and every circumstance?
Mr. VITTER. Under the proposed legislation I am talking about, there is new language that would tighten up, if you will, the repayment possibilities of these specific loans. It would not change all of the Stafford Act, in terms of this loan program in general. That new language would simply apply to these specific loans.
That language is included in the proposed legislation for a very simple reason, and that reason is that, based on literally dozens of discussions with various folks, including in the House, it is very clear to me, in fact it is crystal clear to me, this will not pass tonight or tomorrow through the process without this language in the legislation. ...
Ms. LANDRIEU. I can appreciate that. If you don't mind me pursuing that line of questioning. I can most certainly appreciate what the junior Senator is saying about the reluctance of the House of Representatives and the administration at this point because I have yet to receive any letter or assurance, but it is right now the House of Representatives that basically would be willing to make loans to the devastated cities in the gulf coast, but would insist that those loans be paid back, when not insisting on that for other loans that have been given to Puerto Rico, and to Florida, and to Alaska, and to other places, which were waived. ...
Mr. VITTER. A couple points: I think this is a very useful exchange because I take it from the Senator's comments that the senior Senator is, in fact, one of the folks who has expressed an objection to this moving forward tonight.
Ms. LANDRIEU. I have not yet expressed an objection, but I am considering it on the grounds--I am not yet expressing objection, but I am considering it, respectfully, having complimented the junior Senator for the great work he has done, because I am hesitant to accept terms of aid that are applied only to us and to no one else, and not because the junior Senator objects or other Senators, but because the House of Representatives, which is in control of the Republican leadership, has decided that the only way that they will amend the law is to force us alone, uniquely, to have to agree to pay it back, when no one else in America, in the past or the future, will be required to do so. That is a hard thing for the senior Senator to agree to, but I am considering it, if maybe that is our only option. ...
Mr. VITTER. Reclaiming my time, I would wonder if the Senator objects to the fact that under this proposal we would also expand in terms of amount and number and capability the ability to get these loans? We are getting more of these loans than anyone in any other situation would have gotten before. I wonder if the Senator would object to that change?
Ms. LANDRIEU. Can I answer that?
Mr. VITTER. No.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Can I answer that?
Mr. VITTER. Again, reclaiming my time, I would simply ask directly if the Senator could either object or not object--let me know--and also help us identify any specific objections that may exist on the minority side.
But in closing, Mr. President, I would just say, again, it is very clear to me, having spent a week working on this, that we either do this today and tomorrow or we do nothing and go home for 10 days and give no relief to these communities and these parishes which so desperately need the help. I vote for doing something. I vote for leading. I vote for helping in a meaningful and concrete way the people of southeast Louisiana and urge all my colleagues to please join me in that effort.
I yield back my time. ...
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the calling of the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. STEVENS. I object.
Click here: 109th Congress - Senate - October 6, 2005
Navigate to: 11 . DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006--Continued

The record contains a good summary of the "loan," that Mary Mary wants to turn into a gift. The funds are for operation of State services.