thanks for the heads up ... mute botton is on
Anyway, sort of an interesting day. The first item I looked for, based on yesterday's part of this thread, was Inhofe's amendment regarding pay. What's put here is mostly the guts of the amendment, but the procedural steps leading up to offering the amendment were funny, in the dry-Senate sort of humor.
Inhofe was trying to get time to offer the amendment, and Dodd kept objecting - basically on the grounds that time was alternating between DEM and GOP Senators. Inhofe thought he had a certain time slot, and ended up not getting the one he thought he had. Plenty of confusion, or may I say "Lott's" of confusion, because Senator Lott certainly contributed to the confusion.
Mr. INHOFE. I ask if our leader would defer for a question. I appreciate very much the Senator's attention. I have been down here since before the bill came up with the intention of being the first one. I yielded to Senator Santorum. We wanted to go back and forth. It was my understanding Senator Carper was recognized and I would be right after him and that time has arrived.What is the problem?
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Senator is correct. He came here early on, ready to go. But there had already been discussion with Senator Santorum about being able to offer his amendment. We try to go back and forth from one side of the aisle to the other.
Mr. INHOFE. Last I saw, Senator Carper was a Democrat.
Mr. LOTT. He was just speaking. He didn't have an amendment.
"Last I saw, Senator Carper was a Democrat." LOL. Anyway, Inhofe's amendment would change entitlement to COLA pay increases, so that a Senator could not vote against the increase, get the increase, then claim to be against it.
Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, this amendment is very simple. I have always felt that the greatest single hypocrisy every year is when Members come up and vote to exempt Members of Congress from a cost-of-living increase. The hypocrisy comes in when all the press releases hit the home State and they talk about how great this is, saying they are great reformers and then, of course, it is defeated and they end up taking the increase anyway.11 . LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2006
The next item that came up was Grassley, talking about holds. He was talking in the general, but there is an interesting aspect to his (actually, Wyden/Inhofe/Grassley) proposal that you will read in his commentary.
After Grassley was the Schumer amendment. I'll just run it all together with ellipses in the appropriate places.
Mr. GRASSLEY ... The amendment by Senator Wyden and myself and Senator Inhofe which we proposed today would establish a standing order requiring that holds be made public. We believe it is time to have the Senate consider our proposed standing order and then decide as a body whether to end this secret process.For my colleagues who might be apprehensive about this change in doing business, I ask you to just give it a try. I should point out that this measure is a standing order which, while binding on Senators, does not formally amend the Senate rules and can more easily be changed if it turns out to be unworkable. ...
Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent we set aside the Wyden-Grassley-Inhofe amendment and go to the next pending amendment.The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
Mr. SCHUMER. Reserving the right to object, could I speak, before we set it aside, on this amendment?
Mr. LOTT. I withhold my unanimous consent request at this time, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The consent request is withdrawn without objection.
The Senator from New York is recognized.
Mr. SCHUMER. I commend my colleague from Oregon and my colleague from Oklahoma for their lone battle on this issue. It is an issue we all agree with and very much appreciate their hard work.
AMENDMENT NO. 2959 TO AMENDMENT NO. 2944
Second, I will say a word on another issue that is pending in the House of Representatives. At this point, I offer an amendment at the desk as a second degree to Mr. Wyden's amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: Does he have to have consent? He just calls it up and it would not----
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator does not need consent to offer a second-degree amendment.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from New York [Mr. Schumer] proposes an amendment numbered 2959 to the Wyden amendment numbered 2944.
The amendment is as follows:
In the interest of national security, effective immediately, notwithstanding any other provision of law and any prior action or decision by or on behalf of the President, no company, wholly owned or controlled by any foreign government that recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan during the Taliban's rule between 1996-2001, may own, lease, operate, or manage real property or facilities at a United States port.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SANTORUM. My understanding was that the Santorum-Feingold-McCain-Lieberman amendment was by consent, next in line, is that not the case?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, that is the next first-degree amendment that would be in order.
Mr. SANTORUM. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Martinez). Is there objection?
Mr. SCHUMER. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The assistant legislative clerk continued with the call of the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
Mr. DURBIN. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The clerk will continue the call of the roll.
The legislative clerk continued with the call of the roll.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coburn). Without objection, it is so ordered.
CLOTURE MOTION
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion on the bill to the desk.
13 . LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2006--Continued
... Having said that, what happened today is an amendment came to the floor under circumstances that I am not going to go through right now, but it is such that it really would take us off the course of this bipartisan lobbying reform bill. We had discussions as to whether that amendment would be withdrawn, but it was made very clear after the discussions among us that the amendment would come back later tonight, tomorrow, or the next day.
So, that was the big attention getter of the day, but not the only interesting stuff. Quite a bit can be and is done without oral presentation from the floor of the Senate.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am placing a hold on the nomination of James Lambright to serve as President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.All of that was outside of oral presentation. The next item in the record was performed "live," if anybody was watching.I am placing this hold on Mr. Lambright's nomination as I have major concerns regarding the issuance of taxpayer-guaranteed credit insurance by the Export-Import Bank for an ethanol project in Trinidad and Tobago. Specifically, the approval of this credit insurance by the Export-Import Bank appeared to violate the Bank's authorizing statute. ...
As of 2004, when the credit guarantees for Angostura were approved, the total 100 million gallon capacity of the Angostura facility was nearly 4 percent of U.S. production. This amount clearly exceeded the 1-percent threshold for causing substantial injury to the U.S. ethanol industry as spelled out in the Export-Import Bank's authorizing statute.
So it appeared to me that the approval of credit guarantees for Angostura by the Export-Import Bank violated the Export-Import Bank's authorizing statute.
Moreover, as the amount financed by the Export-Import Bank was less than $10 million, no detailed economic impact analysis was conducted by the bank. I note that the amount approved by the Export-Import Bank $9.87 million was conveniently just below this $10 million threshold amount. ...
As the Export-Import Bank currently does not have an inspector general, I am placing a hold on Mr. Lambert's nomination until such time that I receive assurances from him that, first, the Export-Import Bank will act quickly to appoint an inspector general, and second, that Mr. Lambert will see that the inspector general will indeed provide a written analysis on the credit insurance approval within 90 days of appointment.
17 . HOLD ON LAMBRIGHT NOMINATION -- (Senate - March 08, 2006)
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the Five-Seven handgun, manufactured by the Belgian firearms company FN Herstal, was reportedly designed to provide military and law enforcement personnel with a small, lightweight, and accurate pistol that was powerful enough to kill or seriously injure enemies wearing body armor. A January 2000 cover article in the popular American Handgunner magazine profiled the handgun and predicted that, for obvious reasons, ``neither the gun nor the ammunition will ever be sold to civilians.'' Unfortunately, the American Handgunner article was wrong and FN Herstal made the Five-Seven pistol available to private buyers in 2004. These high-powered firearms clearly have no sporting purpose and pose a great threat to the lives of our law enforcement officers. ...In response to concerns raised by law enforcement officials and others, Senator Lautenberg, introduced the Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act on March 3, 2005. Among other things, this legislation would prohibit the sale of the Five-Seven pistol and its ammunition to private buyers in the U.S. Unfortunately, despite the continuing threat posed by this high-powered pistol to our law enforcement officers, Senator Lautenberg's legislation has yet to receive any consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee in the year since it was introduced.
20 . THE FIVE-SEVEN PISTOL -- (Senate - March 08, 2006)
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, we must enact my legislation, S. 2305, to repeal a provision in the Deficit Reduction Act that will require people applying or reapplying for Medicaid to verify their citizenship with a U.S. passport or birth certificate. Congress must act to repeal this shortsighted policy before it goes into effect July 1, 2006, because it will create barriers to health care, is unnecessary, and will be an administrative burden to implement.21 . REPEAL OF MEDICAID VERIFICATION REQUIREMENT
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I thank Chairman Enzi and Senator Kennedy for placing S. 1902, the Children and Media Research Advancement Act CAMRA, on the calendar today. I appreciate their commitment to the health and welfare of children. I also want to thank the co-sponsors of this bill, Senators Lieberman, Brownback, Santorum, Bayh, and Durbin for being such leaders on this issue, and my fellow Senators on the HELP Committee for their support for this legislation. In addition, I thank two groups, Common Sense Media and Children Now, for raising awareness of the effect media has on children's development. And finally, I express thanks to two researchers, Dr. Michael Rich of the Center for Media and Child Health at Harvard University Medical School, and Dr. Sandy Calvert of the Children's Digital Media Center at Georgetown University. Both Dr. Rich and Dr. Calvert have been great advocates for CAMRA. I thank them for sharing their expertise and support. ...That is why the CAMRA Act--the Children and the Media Research Advancement Act--is so important. This bill will create a single, coordinated research program at the Center for Disease Control. It will study the impact of electronic media on children's--including very young children and infants'--cognitive, social and physical development. ...
[Keep an eye out for this one.]
24 . CHILDREN AND MEDIA RESEARCH ADVANCEMENT ACT
The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated:EC-5953. A communication from the Director of Defense Research and Engineering, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to funding an additional project (enhanced blast tandem warhead) for the Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) Program for Fiscal Year 2006; to the Committee on Armed Services.
35 . EXECUTIVE AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS -- (Senate - March 08, 2006)
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: ...By Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Carper, and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 2388. A bill to establish a National Commission on the Infrastructure of the United States; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. ...
By Mr. Nelson of Florida:
S. 2391. A bill to improve the security of the United States borders and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 2392. A bill to promote the empowerment of women in Afghanistan; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
37 . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. NELSON of Florida:S. 2391. A bill to improve the security of the United States borders and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a critically important bill for our national security and our immigration system. My bill is called the Border Operations Reform and Development of Electronic Remote Surveillance Act of 2006--otherwise known as the BORDERS Act. Getting control over our Nation's borders is an indispensable part of comprehensive immigration reform.
The Government of the United States has the obligation to protect its citizens and to provide for homeland security by having control of its international borders. Yet, as we all know, our borders with Mexico and Canada are broken. Recognizing the dangerous situation that this presents, the bipartisan 9/11 Commission strongly recommended that the United States get operational control of its borders.
Because our Government has not succeeded in adequately securing our borders, millions of undocumented aliens have crossed into our country without our Government's permission. Despite our best efforts to have an orderly system of immigration and to control who enters the United States, it's simply not working. ...
First, and most importantly, this bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to implement state-of-the-art surveillance technology programs to build an integrated ``virtual fence'' at our borders. ...
The BORDERS Act also requires the Department of Homeland Security to greatly increase its detention facilities. Right now, the border patrol is sometimes able to capture illegal aliens sneaking into the country, but we simply lack enough facilities to detain them. In some border areas, up to 90 percent of captured aliens are released, and only 10 percent of them show up for their immigration court hearing. Does that make sense? ...
Another important section of this bill recognizes that in order for our detention mechanisms to function effectively, we need uniform detention standards. ...
Finally, the BORDERS Act of 2006 authorizes the Federal Government to reimburse States that incur the financial burden of detaining illegal aliens. It is unfair of us to expect the States to shoulder this huge cost by themselves.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 366, H.R. 683. ... to amend the Trademark Act of 1946 with respect to dilution by blurring or tarnishment. ...Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The bill (H.R. 683), as amended, was read the third time and passed.