{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "is_view": false, "human_description_en": "where congress = 110 sorted by date descending", "rows": [["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgD1333-2", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1333", "D1333", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1333", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1333]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgD1333-3", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1333", "D1333", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1333", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1333]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgD1333-4", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1333", "D1333", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1333", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1333]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgD1333-5", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1333", "D1334", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1333", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1333-D1334]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1334]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                    10 a.m., Friday, January 2, 2009\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Friday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgD1333", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1333", "D1333", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1333", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1333]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                         Tuesday, December 30, 2008\n\n[[Page D1333]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 10:30:03 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n10:30:12 a.m. until 10:00 a.m., on Friday, January 2, 2009."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10983", "S10983", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10983", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10983]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2008\n\nNo. 192"], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgS10983-2", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10983", "S10983", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10983", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10983]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nTuesday, December 30, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n   The Senate met at 10:30 and 3 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable John D. Rockefeller\nIV, a Senator from the State of West Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgS10983-3", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, JANUARY 2, 2009, AT 10 A.M.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10983", "S10983", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10983", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10983]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n            RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, JANUARY 2, 2009, AT 10 A.M.\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate stands in recess until Friday, January 2, 2009, at 10 a.m.\n   Thereupon, the Senate, at 10:30 and 12 seconds a.m., recessed until\nFriday, January 2, 2009, at 10 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-30-pt1-PgS10983", "2008-12-30", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10983", "S10983", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10983", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 192 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10983]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10983]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgD1331-2", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1331", "D1331", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1331", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1331]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgD1331-3", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1331", "D1331", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1331", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1331]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgD1331-4", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1331", "D1331", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1331", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1331]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgD1331-5", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1331", "D1332", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1331", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1331-D1332]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1332]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                    10:30 a.m., Tuesday, December 30\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Tuesday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgD1331", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1331", "D1331", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1331", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1331]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                          Friday, December 26, 2008\n\n[[Page D1331]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 11:00:01 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n11:00:11 a.m. until 10:30 a.m., on Tuesday, December 30, 2008."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10981", "S10981", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10981", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10981]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 26, 2008\n\nNo. 191"], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgS10981-2", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10981", "S10981", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10981", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10981]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nFriday, December 26, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 11 and 01 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable John D. Rockefeller\nIV, a Senator from the State of West Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgS10981-3", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL 10:30 A.M., TUESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2008", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10981", "S10981", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10981", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10981]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          RECESS UNTIL 10:30 A.M., TUESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2008\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in\nrecess until Tuesday, December 30, 2008, at 10:30 a.m.\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 11 and 11 seconds a.m., recessed until\nTuesday, December 30, 2008, at 10:30 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-26-pt1-PgS10981", "2008-12-26", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10981", "S10981", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10981", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 191 (Friday, December 26, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10981]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10981]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgD1329-2", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1329", "D1329", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1329", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1329]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgD1329-3", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1329", "D1329", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1329", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1329]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgD1329-4", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1329", "D1329", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1329", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1329]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgD1329-5", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1329", "D1330", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1329", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1329-D1330]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1330]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                      11 a.m., Friday, December 26\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Friday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgD1329", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1329", "D1329", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1329", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1329]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                         Tuesday, December 23, 2008\n\n[[Page D1329]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 11:00:08 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n11:00:40 a.m. until 11:00 a.m., on Friday, December 26, 2008."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10979", "S10979", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10979", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10979]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2008\n\nNo. 190"], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgS10979-2", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10979", "S10979", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10979", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10979]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nTuesday, December 23, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 11 and 8 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable John D. Rockefeller\nIV, a Senator from the State of West Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgS10979-3", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10979", "S10979", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10979", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10979]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to\nthe Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).\n  The legislative clerk read the following letter:\n\n                                                      U.S. Senate,\n\n                                        President pro tempore,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 23, 2008.\n     To the Senate:\n       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the\n     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable\n     John D. Rockefeller IV, a Senator from the State of West\n     Virginia, to perform the duties of the Chair.\n                                                   Robert C. Byrd,\n                                            President pro tempore.\n\n  Mr. ROCKEFELLER thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro\ntempore.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgS10979-4", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, DECEMBER 26, 2008, AT 11 A.M.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10979", "S10979", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10979", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10979]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n           RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, DECEMBER 26, 2008, AT 11 A.M.\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate stands in recess until Friday, December 26, 2008, at 11 a.m.\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 11 and 40 seconds a.m., recessed until\nFriday, December 26, 2008, at 11 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-23-pt1-PgS10979", "2008-12-23", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10979", "S10979", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10979", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 190 (Tuesday, December 23, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10979]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10979]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgD1327-2", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1327", "D1327", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1327", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1327]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgD1327-3", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1327", "D1327", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1327", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1327]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgD1327-4", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1327", "D1327", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1327", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1327]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgD1327-5", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1327", "D1328", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1327", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1327-D1328]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1328]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                     11 a.m., Tuesday, December 23\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Tuesday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgD1327", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1327", "D1327", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1327", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1327]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                          Friday, December 19, 2008\n\n[[Page D1327]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 10:00:37 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n10:01:04 a.m. until 11 a.m., on Tuesday, December 23, 2008."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10977", "S10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2008\n\nNo. 189"], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgS10977-2", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10977", "S10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nFriday, December 19, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 10 and 37 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable Ron Wyden, a Senator\nfrom the State of Oregon.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgS10977-3", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10977", "S10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to\nthe Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).\n  The assistant legislative clerk read the following letter:\n\n                                                      U.S. Senate,\n\n                                        President pro tempore,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 19, 2008.\n     To the Senate:\n       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the\n     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable\n     Ron Wyden, a Senator from the State of Oregon, to perform the\n     duties of the Chair.\n                                                   Robert C. Byrd,\n                                            President pro tempore.\n\n  Mr. WYDEN thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro\ntempore.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgS10977-4", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2008, AT 11 A.M.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10977", "S10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          RECESS UNTIL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2008, AT 11 A.M.\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate stands in recess until Tuesday, December 23, 2008, at 11 a.m.\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 10:01 and 4 seconds a.m., recessed until\nTuesday, December 23, 2008, at 11 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-19-pt1-PgS10977", "2008-12-19", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10977", "S10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 189 (Friday, December 19, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10977]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgD1325-2", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1325", "D1325", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1325", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgD1325-3", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1325", "D1325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1325", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgD1325-4", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1325", "D1325", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1325", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgD1325-5", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1325", "D1326", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1325", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1325-D1326]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1326]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                      10 a.m., Friday, December 19\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Friday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgD1325", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1325", "D1325", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1325", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                         Tuesday, December 16, 2008\n\n[[Page D1325]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 11:00:19 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n11:00:50 a.m. until 10 a.m., on Friday, December 19, 2008."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10975", "S10975", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10975", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10975]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2008\n\nNo. 188"], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgS10975-2", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10975", "S10975", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10975", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10975]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nTuesday, December 16, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 11 and 19 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable John D. Rockefeller, a\nSenator from the State of West Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgS10975-3", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10975", "S10975", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10975", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10975]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to\nthe Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).\n  The assistant legislative clerk read the following letter:\n\n                                                      U.S. Senate,\n\n                                        President pro tempore,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 16, 2008.\n     To the Senate:\n       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the\n     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable\n     John D. Rockefeller, a Senator from the State of West\n     Virginia, to perform the duties of the Chair.\n                                                   Robert C. Byrd,\n                                            President pro tempore.\n\n  Mr. ROCKEFELLER thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro\ntempore.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgS10975-4", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2008, AT 10 A.M.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10975", "S10975", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10975", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10975]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n           RECESS UNTIL FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2008, AT 10 A.M.\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate stands in recess until 10 a.m. on Friday, December 19, 2008.\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 11 and 50 seconds a.m., recessed until\nFriday, December 19, 2008, at 10 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-16-pt1-PgS10975", "2008-12-16", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10975", "S10975", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10975", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 188 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10975]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10975]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgD1323-2", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1323", "D1323", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1323", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1323]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgD1323-3", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1323", "D1323", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1323", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1323]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgD1323-4", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1323", "D1323", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1323", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1323]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgD1323-5", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1323", "D1324", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1323", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1323-D1324]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1324]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                     11 a.m., Tuesday, December 16\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Tuesday: Senate will meet in a pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be anounced."], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgD1323", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1323", "D1323", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1323", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1323]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                          Friday, December 12, 2008\n\n[[Page D1323]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\n  Senate met at 10:00:23 a.m. in pro forma session, and recessed at\n10:00:54 a.m. until 11 a.m., on Tuesday, December 16, 2008."], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10959", "S10959", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10959", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page S10959]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2008\n\nNo. 187"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10959-2", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10959", "S10959", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10959", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10959]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 Senate\n\nFriday, December 12, 2008\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 10 and 23 seconds a.m., on the expiration of the\nrecess, and was called to order by the Honorable Carl Levin, a Senator\nfrom the State of Michigan.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10959-3", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10959", "S10959", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10959", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10959]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to\nthe Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).\n  The legislative clerk read the following letter:\n\n                                                      U.S. Senate,\n\n                                        President pro tempore,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 12, 2008.\n     To the Senate:\n       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the\n     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable\n     Carl Levin, a Senator from the State of Michigan, to perform\n     the duties of the Chair.\n                                                   Robert C. Byrd,\n                                            President pro tempore.\n\n  Mr. LEVIN thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro\ntempore.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10959-4", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTES TO SENATORS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10959", "S10970", "[{\"name\": \"Mitch McConnell\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Michael B. Enzi\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Olympia J. Snowe\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jeff Sessions\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Kay Bailey Hutchison\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Saxby Chambliss\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Susan M. Collins\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10959", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10959-S10970]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          TRIBUTES TO SENATORS\n\n                             Elizabeth Dole\n\n  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, one of the great privileges of\nmy career has been the time I have spent working alongside Senator Bob\nDole and his wife, Senator Elizabeth Dole. I feel a special kinship to\nthe Doles. Not only are they both dear friends to Elaine and me, but in\nmy position as Republican Leader I often think back on Bob's superb\nstewardship of the office. Bob Dole was in many ways a model and a\nmentor to me. I was humbled and honored to assume a role that he filled\nfor so long with such dignity and skill. And today I am honored to\nsubmit for the Record a letter of tribute from my old friend to his\nremarkable wife at the conclusion of her Senate career. Elizabeth Dole\nhas graced this chamber in the same way that she has graced every other\ninstitution of which she has been a part in a long and distinguished\ncareer of public service. We will miss Senator Dole's kindness, her\nwarmth, and her unyielding belief in the greatness of her country.\nSenator Dole is one of the great public servants of our day. It is my\ngreat pleasure to ask that this letter from one dear friend to another\nbe printed in the Record.\n  The letter follows.\n\n                                                December 12, 2008.\n       Dear Mitch: I wish I could be a Senator again just long\n     enough to speak of Senator Elizabeth Dole's accomplishments\n     which have spanned a period of nearly a half century.\n       Elizabeth correctly chose to focus her farewell remarks on\n     those who helped and counseled her along the way. She spoke\n     about those who were most important in her life's journey\n     such as her mother, her father, her teachers, co-workers, and\n     her dear brother, John, who passed away on April 8, 2008.\n     John was her mentor, her confidant, and a proud naval officer\n     in World War II. Elizabeth's speech was all about others\n     rather than herself, which, in itself, says a lot about\n     Elizabeth as a caring human being.\n       So in an indirect way, I want to share her many areas of\n     service with all those thinking about their future and the\n     path they will follow. Believe me when I say they will not\n     find a better example than the Senator Dole from North\n     Carolina. Senator Dole, in many respects, was a pioneer for\n     American women, as many of her early opportunities came\n     before women were in the forefront of public or private\n     sectors of meaningful service activity.\n       Elizabeth has never stopped looking for ways to make a\n     difference. It would be impossible to determine the number of\n     good people in North Carolina and across America that\n     Elizabeth's efforts have had an impact upon, myself included.\n     She assisted me three times in campaigning full-time for the\n     presidency, taking a one year leave of absence from the Red\n     Cross, but more importantly were the countless times she\n     assisted me personally because of my disabilities.\n       Let me recount some of the highlights of Senator Dole's\n     career so that those who may be looking for a role model may\n     fully understand the differences she has made for others,\n     irregardless of party, race, religion or status.\n\n  Public Service Career and Selected Accomplishments of Elizabeth Dole\n\n      Early 1960's: Summer jobs during graduate school\n       Office of Senator B. Everett Jordan (D-NC)\n       United Nations Guide\n       United Nations Intern Program\n     1966-1967: Assistant at the U.S. Department of Health,\n         Education and Welfare\n       After completing her Master of Arts in Teaching and her\n     graduation from Harvard Law School, Elizabeth Hanford was\n     hired by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and\n     Welfare. Her assignments there included planning the first-\n     ever United States government sponsored conference on\n     education of the deaf. This conference, which spawned a\n     career-long dedication to the rights of the disabled, was\n     held in Colorado Springs in\n\n[[Page S10960]]\n\n     1967. During this time, she took cases for indigents, those\n     who could not afford an attorney.\n     1967-1968: Deputy Assistant for Legislative Affairs, White\n         House Office of Consumer Affairs\n       In April 1968, Elizabeth Hanford joined the Lyndon Johnson\n     Administration at the White House Office of Consumer Affairs,\n     working for Betty Furness. As Deputy Assistant for\n     Legislative Affairs, she traveled frequently to Capitol Hill\n     to advocate for policies protecting American consumers.\n     1969-1973: Deputy Director, President's Committee on Consumer\n         Interests\n       Upon taking office in January 1969, President Richard Nixon\n     renamed the White House Office of Consumer Affairs the\n     ``President's Committee on Consumer Interests.'' Virginia\n     Knauer was appointed Special Assistant to the President for\n     Consumer Affairs and promoted Elizabeth Hanford to serve as\n     her deputy. Hanford would serve with Knauer for five years as\n     a tireless advocate for American consumers, developing\n     consumer education curriculum for America's schools, reaching\n     voluntary agreements with industry to undertake nutritional\n     labeling and unit pricing, and helping to create the Consumer\n     Information Center in Pueblo, Colorado. They were guided by\n     the philosophy that for consumers to make wise decisions,\n     they must have access to all relevant information.\n     1973-1979: Commissioner, United States Federal Trade\n         Commission\n       In 1973, Elizabeth Hanford was nominated by President\n     Richard Nixon and confirmed by the United States Senate to\n     serve as a member of the United States Federal Trade\n     Commission. Established in 1915, the Federal Trade\n     Commission's duties include promoting fair competition\n     through the enforcement of antitrust laws, preventing the\n     dissemination of false and deceptive advertising of goods,\n     and investigating unfair business practices.\n       Seeing the commission as an opportunity to bring about\n     lower prices for consumers, to ensure better quality goods\n     and services, and to expand the choices available in a free,\n     competitive marketplace, Commissioner Hanford's (married\n     Senator Bob Dole in 1975) priorities included consumer\n     protections for women and the elderly. She held seminars for\n     women in business, and as the FTC enforced the Equal Credit\n     Opportunity Act, worked with Women in Radio and TV on ads\n     explaining how women, for the first time, could get credit in\n     their own name. Dole's work also included a comprehensive\n     investigation of nursing homes and a number of antitrust and\n     consumer protection investigations and enforcement actions.\n     1981-1983: Assistant to the President for Public Liaison\n       In January 1981, President Ronald Reagan named Dole\n     Assistant to the President, to head the White House Office of\n     Public Liaison. In that position, Dole played a key role in\n     advancing the Reagan agenda to a wide number of constituent\n     groups (for example, women, business, labor, religious\n     community, Hispanics and other ethics organizations) and to\n     the American people. Dole was instrumental in the passage of\n     the Prompt Pay Act of 1982, which required the government to\n     pay vendors on time or pay an interest penalty.\n       Dole also headed the White House Coordinating Council on\n     Women, charged with reviewing government regulations to\n     eliminate vestiges of discrimination, thereby increasing\n     opportunities for women in government and in the country at\n     large. The Council advocated legislation that would make it\n     easier for women to collect court ordered child support\n     payments, and to equalize Social Security benefits for widows\n     and widowers.\n     1983-1987: Secretary, United States Secretary of\n         Transportation\n       In 1983, President Reagan nominated Dole to serve as\n     Secretary of Transportation--the first women in history to\n     lead that cabinet department. The United States Senate\n     unanimously confirmed her.\n       Dole's many accomplishments as Secretary of Transportation\n     included:\n       Presiding over what, up to date, were the safest years in\n     the history of American transportation--highways, railways,\n     and airlines.\n       Initiating widespread efforts to eliminate drunk driving,\n     particularly among the nation's youth. These efforts led to\n     the passage of legislation raising the drinking age to 21 to\n     eliminate ``blood borders'' between states with differing age\n     requirements.\n       Instituting random drug testing of safety and security-\n     related employees--the first civilian department to do so.\n       Crafting a rule that resolved a twenty year controversy\n     over automatic crash protection in cars. This rule totally\n     changed the climate for auto safety in America, leading to\n     the adoption of mandatory safety belt use laws in 49 American\n     states and providing incentives for auto manufacturers to\n     develop, test, and offer air bags in automobiles.\n       Mandating high-mounted brake lights on cars. These ``Dole\n     lights'' cost less than $20 per vehicle, and have been\n     estimated to eliminate 900,000 crashes annually.\n       Implementing rules that improved safety in aircraft cabins\n     by making aircraft seats less flammable, improving aircraft\n     cabin evacuation with low-level lights, and reducing the\n     danger of fire in aircraft lavatories.\n       Leading successful effort to pass legislation authorizing\n     the transfer of two federally owned airports, Washington\n     National and Dulles, to a regional authority, accomplishing a\n     de-federalization move that had been proposed eight times\n     since 1948 and had never been voted out of committee in\n     either the House or the Senate. The new Reagan National\n     Airport and doubling the size of Dulles International were\n     thereby accomplished through revenue bonds, not federal\n     taxpayer dollars.\n       Leading effort for the reopening and redevelopment of\n     Washington D.C.'s Union Station, which had been closed for\n     over five years. Historic Union Station re-opened in 1988,\n     and now houses dozens of shops, restaurants, and theaters,\n     while also serving as a major transportation center.\n       Selling government's freight railroad, Conrail, in the\n     largest public offering of its kind to that date.\n       Overseeing a 10% increase in the number of women in the\n     Department of Transportation workforce, which had only 19%\n     women in its 100,000 workforce when Elizabeth became\n     Secretary.\n       10-point initiative including rotational assignments and\n     career development programs to assist talented women in\n     moving up the ladder.\n       First woman to serve as departmental head of a branch of\n     the armed forces, U.S. Coast Guard.\n     1989-1990: Secretary, United States Department of Labor\n       In January 1981, President George H.W. Bush nominated and\n     the Senate unanimously confirmed Dole to serve as Secretary\n     of the United States Department of Labor--the first woman in\n     history to serve in the cabinet of two presidents.\n       Dole's priorities and accomplishments as Secretary of Labor\n     included the following:\n       Improving the skills of individuals entering the American\n     workforce. This focus included the appointment of a blue-\n     ribbon commission charged with developing national competency\n     guidelines that reflected work readiness and which could be\n     used by the schools for curriculum development; sponsorship\n     of a first-ever national conference on the ``school-to-work''\n     population; expansion of work-based training along the\n     principles of apprenticeship; and ensuring that the Job\n     Training Partnership Act provided basic skills, literacy, and\n     remedial education along with job training.\n       Instigating a ``glass ceiling initiative,'' which revealed\n     the barriers preventing women and minorities from reaching\n     the top levels of corporate America.\n       Traveling twice to Poland to assist that country in its\n     transition from communism to democracy. DOL programs included\n     the creation of construction training centers in Warsaw and\n     Gdansk.\n       Crafting a strategy that led to the successful conclusion\n     of a bitter eleven month United Mine Workers strike against\n     the Pittston Coal Company. Elizabeth visited the strike scene\n     and traveled through a coal mine.\n       Special focus on improving lives of youth at risk in our\n     society.\n     1991-1999; President, American Red Cross\n       (The first woman president since Clara Barton, who founded\n     the Red Cross in 1881; Out of respect for the thousands of\n     volunteers, she served her first year without pay.)\n       During her eight years at the helm of the American Red\n     Cross, Dole led a $287 million project that totally\n     modernized and transformed the Red Cross blood operations\n     begun in World War II. ``Blood Transformation'' integrated 28\n     different computer systems into a single centralized network;\n     replaced 53 non-standardized testing facilities with 8 state-\n     of-the-art labs to test for infectious diseases; standardized\n     manufacturing processes across each of its 38 blood regions;\n     and established a Quality Assurance Program that became a\n     model for the blood banking industry.\n       Dole also led a massive four-year revitalization of Red\n     Cross disaster relief services, establishing a National\n     Disaster Operations Center open 24 hours a day, 365 days a\n     year to monitor ongoing disasters and impending threats;\n     increasing to twenty-one thousand the number of those trained\n     to handle national catastrophic disasters; and warehousing\n     equipment in areas likely to get hardest hit.\n       Dole restructured and strengthened Armed Forces Emergency\n     Services, which provided an average of 4,000 emergency\n     communications a day and other assistance to members of the\n     Armed forces and their families. Her 3-year modernization of\n     AFES included the establishment of two centralized Case\n     Management Centers utilizing the latest technology to replace\n     145 stations on military installations.\n       For the first time in its history, Red Cross chapters had\n     to defend their charters, meeting high standards. Henceforth,\n     they were required to meet those high standards every five\n     years in order to keep their charters.\n       10-point initiative to help qualified women and minorities\n     move up the ladder, such as apprentices assigned to all\n     senior managers.\n       Throughout her tenure, Dole ensured that 91 cents of every\n     dollar donated to the American Red Cross was spent on\n     programs and services.\n       Dole led humanitarian visits to disaster sites and war\n     zones around the world, e.g. Kuwait; Somalia; Goma, Congo.\n     2003-2009; United States Senator from the State of North\n         Carolina\n       In November 2002, Dole was elected by the voters of North\n     Carolina to serve in the\n\n[[Page S10961]]\n\n     United States Senate. Upon taking office in January 2003,\n     Dole became the first woman in history to represent North\n     Carolina in the Senate.\n       In her six years in the Senate, Dole's accomplishments\n     included:\n       Leading a successful effort to protect North Carolina's\n     military bases from closure and adding additional jobs, for\n     example 9000 at Fort Bragg.\n       Working to ensure a fair process that resulted in the\n     basing of two F/A-18E/F Squadrons at Marine Corps Air Station\n     Cherry Point, which brings more than 1,200 jobs and an annual\n     infusion of $40 million to the local economy.\n       Securing nearly $4 billion in funding for rural North\n     Carolina and preventing thousands of farm families from\n     bankruptcy by achieving a tobacco quota buyout with no tax\n     implications.\n       Leading a bipartisan effort to extend family and medical\n     leave coverage to military families.\n       Successfully working for a law that protects service\n     members and their families from predatory lenders.\n       Successfully advocating since 2003 for a strong world class\n     regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.\n       Securing $57 million for hiring customs agents focused\n     solely on keeping illegal textiles out of the country.\n       Securing $350 million in federal funding for North Carolina\n     transportation infrastructure projects.\n       Authoring legislation that provided increased grant funding\n     to community colleges through the Higher Education Act.\n       Working with federal officials and sheriffs across North\n     Carolina's 100 counties to deliver the first in the nation\n     statewide partnership to apprehend, identify and remove\n     undocumented aliens who commit crimes.\n       Helping to lead the effort to raise fuel economy standards\n     for cars and light trucks in the 2007 energy bill to 35 miles\n     per gallon by model year 2020, thereby saving 800,000 barrels\n     of oil per day in 2020 and nearly one million barrels per day\n     by 2021.\n       Becoming a national leader in the fight against hunger,\n     through the adoption of a farm bill that expanded funding for\n     federal anti-hunger programs, and helping to secure more than\n     $400 million for the McGovern-Dole International Food for\n     Education and Child Nutrition Program.\n       Convincing the Office of National Drug Control Policy to\n     designate five counties in North Carolina as part of its High\n     Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) program.\n       Helping to lead the effort to reauthorize the President's\n     Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief at $48 billion, and $9 billion\n     for prevention of malaria and tuberculosis, thereby\n     preventing 12 million new HIV infections, treating 3 million\n     people living with HIV/AIDS, and supporting care for 12\n     million people living with HIV/AIDS.\n       Handling 40,000 cases for North Carolina constituents who\n     needed assistance with a federal agency.\n       These are just the highlights and while she did not always\n     reach her goals, most of her life has been filled with\n     successes because of her hard work, her faith, integrity and\n     determination. Mitch, I'm proud of her record, as you are of\n     Elaine's remarkable achievements, which included their work\n     together at the Department of Transportation. I believe those\n     who read this will be inspired to set higher goals for\n     themselves and will accomplish a great deal more in their\n     lifetimes.\n           God Bless America,\n                                                      Bob.\n Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the final gavel will soon bring to a\nclose the 110th Session of Congress. When it does, we will all return\nhome to spend time with our friends and families to celebrate the\nholidays. We will also have a chance to meet with our constituents as\nwe prepare for the challenges the New Year, a new administration and a\nnew session of Congress will bring.\n  Before all of that occurs, we will say goodbye to several of our\ncolleagues who will be returning home at the end of the year. We will\nmiss them and the important presence they have been in our lives and\nour work over the past few years. One Senator I know we will all miss\nis Elizabeth Dole, the Senator from North Carolina.\n  It's that time of year when we will be watching our traditional\nholiday film favorites and one that certainly brings Elizabeth Dole to\nmind is It's A Wonderful Life. I don't think anyone has had a more\nexciting or interesting career than Elizabeth and certainly no one has\na more impressive or detailed resume than she does.\n  Elizabeth has been a trailblazer throughout her life as she set out\non a path to show others what was possible. Thanks to her, women of all\nages across the country have a role model and a champion to look up to\nwho has raised their sights as to what is possible for them to achieve\nin their lives.\n  Looking back, Elizabeth has been on the front lines of our national\npolitical scene for many years. She has broken quite a few glass\nceilings, too, as she has taken a position of leadership and worked in\nthe administrations of five Presidents. In the recent past she was\noften mentioned as someone who would make a good Presidential candidate\nherself.\n  Elizabeth really has lived a wonderful life. After her graduation\nfrom Harvard Law School she was asked to serve as a consumer affairs\naide to President Lyndon Johnson. She then served under President\nNixon, President Carter, President Ford and President Reagan, who asked\nher to join his administration.\n  Elizabeth set another precedent when she was appointed to serve as\nthe Secretary of the Department of Transportation. She was the first\nwoman ever to serve in that post. It was another opportunity for her to\nmake a difference and she got right to work. She increased automobile\nsafety requirements, worked to raise the drinking age to 21, imposed\ntougher security measures at our airports, and helped to make our cars\nsafer. All of these changes not only made our lives better, but they\nalso helped to save countless lives over the years.\n  President George Herbert Bush then asked her to serve as his\nSecretary of Labor, a post that Elizabeth would use to help identify\nand erase the barriers that were preventing women and minorities from\nmoving up the corporate ladder. She saw her service as an important\nopportunity to change things and make life better for others, and once\nagain, she succeeded.\n  That would have been enough for most people, the end of a remarkable\ncareer, a wonderful life in itself, but Elizabeth was just getting\nstarted. When she left public life and entered the private sector, she\nthen took up the reins as the President of the American Red Cross. She\nwas the first woman to hold the post since Clara Barton, the\norganization's founder held it in 1881. It was a difficult job and a\ntremendous challenge, but she was more than up to the task. Elizabeth\ntook over a Red Cross in real financial trouble, but when she got\nthrough organizing and overhauling things, a large deficit turned into\nenough cash on hand to provide the kind of assistance the Red Cross is\nknown for in the event of any local or national emergency.\n  Elizabeth is probably one of Duke University's best known graduates.\nHer North Carolina roots then brought her back home to make a run for\nthe Senate. As she campaigned, the people listened to her and they\nliked what they heard. They decided that sending her to Washington to\nrepresent them would be a good idea. The record shows they were right.\n  In the Senate, Elizabeth has been at the forefront of efforts to\nensure that our workers will have the training they will need to change\ncareers and move on to better jobs in the current global economy. She\nhad the insight to propose legislation to provide grants to small\nbusiness owners so they could get the training they would need to be\nmore competitive in the markets of today.\n  On the Banking Committee, Elizabeth has been at the center of the\naction on the Nation's financial problems. She has played an important\nrole in the effort to enact tougher regulations to stop predatory\nlending and place tighter controls on government sponsored mortgages.\n  Clearly, Elizabeth has compiled a long list of achievements and\naccomplishments in her life that would make anyone proud. She has\nreceived a number of awards and recognitions for her tremendous efforts\nas a national political figure. But, what is probably most important to\nher, is the fact that she has blazed a trail for others to follow and\nby so doing she has inspired a new generation of women of all ages to\nset a higher standard for themselves and what they think is possible\nfor them to achieve. In the end, that may be her greatest\naccomplishment of them all.\n  This is only a small part of Elizabeth's story and there are many\nmore items on her record that are equally impressive. Together with her\nhusband, Bob Dole, she has been part of a remarkable team and they have\nhad a profound influence on the Senate and the Nation on every level.\n  Diana and I will miss seeing Elizabeth here in the Senate, but I have\na hunch she will be close by to keep an eye on us and to keep in touch.\nShe has had a remarkable career and a wonderful life and we were very\nproud to be a\n\n[[Page S10962]]\n\npart of it. We enjoy her company, her unique style, and most of all, we\nenjoy her friendship. We don't know what her next adventure in her life\nwill be, but we will be watching with great interest as this exciting\nchapter comes to a close and she begins to write the next.\n Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to my longtime\ngood friend and colleague who, as one of 16 women Senators in the 110th\nCongress, has been a tremendous and cherished compatriot and an\noutstanding legislator, leader, and public servant.\n  This Chamber was truly fortunate and blessed to have someone of\nElizabeth's background, understanding, and stature. A veteran of five\nadministrations, Senator Dole, upon her arrival in the U.S. Senate in\n2002, brought with her an impressive depth and breadth of experience\neven by Senate standards, and a grace befitting her southern heritage\ncombined with a tireless commitment to uncompromising substance.\n  Having acquired both a masters and law degree from Harvard\nUniversity, Senator Dole put the rigors of academia to good use in the\npursuit of public service. She worked as a consumer affairs aide to\nboth President Johnson and President Nixon and as a member of the\nFederal Trade Commission under President Ford and President Carter. And\nas a Member of Congress, I well recall Elizabeth in her role as\nassistant for public liaison in the Reagan Administration--where she\nserved while I was in the U.S. House of Representatives. And she broke\nnew ground as the first woman to serve as U.S. Secretary of\nTransportation--a post she held under President Reagan, and then as\nSecretary of Labor under President George H.W. Bush.\n  After ending her stellar executive branch tenure, Senator Dole\nassumed the helm of the American Red Cross in 1991. And who could\nforget her valiant run in 1999 for the White House. As ranking member\non the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I had\nthe privilege of not only serving with Senator Dole, but also\ncollaborating with her on issues affecting women in small business.\nTogether, we saw an untapped capacity that women business-owners\nclearly possess to contribute to this economy--and we have worked\ntirelessly to remove unacceptable and regrettable impediments to\nreceiving assistance and contracting opportunities from the Federal\nGovernment.\n  In fact, we introduced legislation which would amend the Small\nBusiness Act to allow women-owned small businesses to have a meaningful\ncontracting program--one that would apply to a broad array of business\nindustries across this Nation; and prevent the SBA from requiring\nagencies to admit to past discrimination in order to participate in the\nwomen's Federal contracting program. The fact is, our government is\nsupposed to work for the people, not against them. Senator Dole\nunderstood that basic tenet firsthand, as it impacted women business-\nowners, and was instrumental in championing our opposition to an\negregious SBA rule.\n  I say to Elizabeth, all of us in the Senate are going to miss her\npresence and contributions to this venerable chamber--but as she is\nwell aware, there are 15 of us who are losing more than a friend and a\ncolleague . . . but also a compatriot . . . and, yes, a kind of sister-\nin-arms. We all have the sense of a bond born of serving together in\nthis institution as a minority of our own. I recall having our dinners\nfirst at the Sewall-Belmont House, then the Supreme Court, the Library\nof Congress, and the last one we came full circle by dining in the U.S.\nCapitol. Elizabeth, will certainly be missed.\n  Lastly, on a very personal note, I don't think many of us will get\ncompletely used to a U.S. Senate without a Dole--and what an\nincalculable personal and combined service both Elizabeth Dole and our\nesteemed and beloved former majority leader, Bob Dole, have rendered to\nour country. So on this occasion, as we celebrate the exceptional\ncontributions of Elizabeth Dole in the Senate and throughout her life,\nour warmest regards go out to her and leader Dole, and we wish them\nboth nothing but the best for the future.\n Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask to have printed in the\nRecord an article about Senator Elizabeth Dole, who will be departing\nthe Senate this year. She has been my seatmate, and, I must say, she is\nmy favorite in the entire Senate. A brilliant thinker, an incredibly\nhard worker, gracious, a person of sincere faith who lives it every\nday, she has lifted the Senate to a higher level throughout her tenure\nand through many difficult times. Her record of service, as Paul\nWeyrich notes, is truly extraordinary. Throughout her long and\ndistinguished career, her commitment to America has never been\nquestioned. Her decency, experience, and leadership qualities have\nblessed us all. She grew up in small town North Carolina and the values\ninstilled in her by family, church, and school were never lost. I wish\nher every success in her future endeavors and am confident that in this\nnext stage of her life she will continue to contribute to the\nbetterment of our nation.\n  The article follows.\n\n                     [Townhall.com. Dec. 11, 2008]\n\n                 A Tribute to Senator Elizabeth H. Dole\n\n                           (By Paul Weyrich)\n\n       A good lady is about to leave Washington, D.C. after\n     decades of public service. I refer to Senator Elizabeth\n     Hanford Dole (R-NC), who was defeated in her bid for re-\n     election in the 2008 election. Dole married Senator Robert J.\n     ``Bob'' Dole in 1975. President Gerald R. Ford named him his\n     running mate after dumping the unpopular Vice President,\n     Nelson A. Rockefeller. Dole was Majority Leader of the Senate\n     from 1985 to 1987, when Democrats regained control of the\n     Senate and he became Minority Leader. Dole remained the\n     leader of the Senate Republicans until he resigned his post\n     to be the GOP Presidential nominee in 1996.\n       All this time Elizabeth Dole was at his side. But she\n     became an important figure in her own right. When Ronald W.\n     Reagan was elected President in 1980 Dole became Reagan's\n     liaison to conservatives, veterans and others. Soon Reagan\n     named her Secretary of Transportation. By all accounts she\n     did an admirable job. In the Administration of George H.W.\n     Bush, Dole became Secretary of Labor. She and Bob Dole became\n     a power couple in D.C.\n       When Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) retired after 40 years in\n     the Senate, Elizabeth Dole ran for his seat. He campaigned\n     for her. She suggested she would vote like Helms and indeed\n     she did. However, some North Carolinians suggested that her\n     constituent services left much to be desired. And by all\n     accounts she ran an inadequate re-election campaign.\n       I watched with sadness as she questioned automobile\n     manufacturers in the lame duck session of Congress. Soon she\n     will have to pack up her office and head home. Her husband is\n     now all but retired. This once-powerful couple is out of\n     power. Dole is gracious about her loss. One would hardly know\n     she had been defeated. Yet she leaves Washington having\n     accomplished much in her service in the White House, the\n     Transportation and Labor Departments and the United States\n     Senate. This is one fine lady, the likes of whom we probably\n     will not see in this town for many years.\n\n Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, even before she came to the\nU.S. Senate, Elizabeth Dole was already a trailblazer and one of the\nmost accomplished women in American history.\n  At a time when women who attended prestigious colleges and\nuniversities were rare, Senator Dole received an undergraduate degree\nfrom Duke University, as well as two degrees from Harvard University: a\nmaster's degree in education and government, and a law degree. She was\none of only 24 women in her Harvard Law School class of 550.\n  She then began a public service career that paved the way for\nmillions of women who have admired and followed her.\n  After serving as the Deputy Director of the White House Office of\nConsumer Affairs in the Nixon administration, Elizabeth Dole was\nappointed as a member of the Federal Trade Commission.\n  From 1981-83, she served in the Reagan administration as assistant to\nthe President for Public Liaison.\n  From 1983-87, she served as Secretary of Transportation, the first\nwoman to hold that position.\n  She joined the administration of President George H.W. Bush as\nSecretary of Labor from 1989-90.\n  From 1991-98, Elizabeth Dole was the President of the American Red\nCross, the world's largest humanitarian organization.\n  Finally, in 2002, she won election to the U.S. Senate from North\nCarolina.\n  As the senior Senator from the Tar Heel State, Elizabeth Dole has\nfought for lower taxes, choice in Social Security, and comprehensive\nenergy reform.\n  Senator Dole, and her wonderful husband, former Senate Majority\nLeader Bob Dole, have made a tremendous impact on American history.\n\n[[Page S10963]]\n\n  I will miss working with Senator Elizabeth Dole, and I wish her all\nthe best.\n\n                              Gordon Smith\n\n Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, we have come to the end of another\nlegislative session and we are all preparing to return home to\ncelebrate the holidays with our friends and families back home. As we\nclose the books on the 110th Session of Congress, it is good to have\nthis opportunity take a moment to say goodbye to our colleagues who\nwill not be with us when the gavel opens the next session of Congress.\nWe will miss them all.\n  One Senator we will particularly miss when the next session of\nCongress begins is Gordon Smith. Gordon is a remarkable representative\nof his home State and he has been an important voice for the people of\nOregon during his 12 years of service in the Senate.\n  I have enjoyed coming to know Gordon and having a chance to work with\nhim on several issues of concern to the people of our States. During\nhis service, he has compiled a remarkable record of success that has\nearned him a reputation for his ability to get things done in both the\nprivate and public sector.\n  Gordon and I have something in common--a love of numbers and the\nintricacies of the law and how they impact the small businesses of our\nNation. We are both aware of the importance of the small business\ncommunity and the jobs they provide to the people of this Nation.\nWithout them our local, State and national economies would be in even\nworse shape than they are right now. With them, there is great hope and\nconfidence that we will be able to find a solution to the economic\nproblems facing our country.\n  Gordon knows something about running a small business from the days\nhe spent trying to revive the frozen vegetable processing company that\nhad been in his family's hands. Because of the strength of his will,\nhis determination to succeed, and his commitment to excellence, he was\nable to produce amazing results. He took what had been an unprofitable\nbusiness and turned it into one of the largest frozen food companies in\nthe United States. His incredible ride to the top earned him a place in\nthe Frozen Food Industry Hall of Fame.\n  It also earned him a spot on the Senate Finance Committee, where he\nhas worked tirelessly to protect the small businesses of our Nation.\nHis business sense and the practical experience he had of meeting a\npayroll and planning a budget helped him to master all of the details\nof our tax policy. He has an uncanny sense and a profound understanding\nof what works and what doesn't--and why. Fortunately, he has been at\nthe right place at the right time and has known what to do to fix\nthings and right our country's economic ship.\n  Gordon's commitment to our families has shown itself in many ways,\nmost notably, by his work to tackle the problem of uninsured children.\nHe offered an amendment that passed the Senate that provided for an\nincrease in Federal cigarette taxes to fund a program to cover some 6\nmillion uninsured children who were eligible for but were not enrolled\nin State health insurance programs or Medicaid.\n  He fought for our children because Gordon understands full well that\nthey are our most important resource. If we don't provide them with\naffordable health care, a good education, and a supportive home\nenvironment that will make it possible for them to be successful in\nschool and later in life, then nothing we do, no matter how well we do\nit will matter much in the long run.\n  Gordon knew it would not be easy to pass that amendment, but he was\nready for a fight. He made it clear that if anything was worth fighting\nfor, that was it. It really was no wonder, therefore, when he won a\nclear and decisive victory--not for himself, but for those 6 million\nchildren who now have a chance to live a happier and healthier life,\nthanks to Gordon Smith. It's another proud chapter in his legislative\ncareer--and it's part of a legacy of service to the people of Oregon\nthat will never be forgotten.\n  As I have come to know Gordon, I have thought that he is a little\nlike me because we both love to confound those in both parties who are\nsurprised to see us working so well with members on both sides of the\naisle. We have both worked with Ted Kennedy and thanks to his\nwillingness to help us pursue a common agenda, we have both been able\nto make progress on the issues that concern us and the people back\nhome.\n  In the months to come, I believe we will most remember Gordon for the\nway he faced the personal tragedy of losing a son. I can only imagine\nthe pain that comes with such a loss. Gordon handled that time in his\nlife with great strength and shared his experience with us, not to draw\nattention to himself, but because he knew that ``his having been\nthere'' would enable him to reach out to help those who might be facing\na similar struggle in the lives of their own families.\n  As he began to heal from that painful wound, he took that personal\ntragedy and gave it added meaning by working to pass a suicide\nprevention bill that now bears his son's name. It was another battle he\nfought because it was the right thing to do. He took up the cause\nbecause he believed in it with all his heart. As a result, the Garrett\nLee Smith Memorial Act will forever serve as a loving testament of a\nfather to the life of his son. It will encourage us all to reach out to\nthose facing similar problems so they can receive the help and support\nthey need to go on with their lives.\n  I have always known Gordon to be a man of great spiritual strength, a\nformer Mormon bishop who has deep personal and moral convictions. He\nhas a strong sense of right and wrong and his inner compass has helped\nto guide him in the direction that he felt was best for his State and\nthe Nation. He is an individual blessed with a strong and determined\nspirit who has a special place in his heart and his life for his God\nand his country.\n Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to\nSenator Gordon Smith, with whom I have had the privilege of working\nthroughout his 12 years of service in the U.S. Senate. Gordon has been\na great friend to me as he has to so many of us--but most importantly\nhe has been a tremendous asset to the Senate, the Nation, and certainly\nthe great State of Oregon.\n  Since his election to the U.S. Senate in 1996, the people of Oregon\nhave benefited immeasurably from Senator Smith's leadership. Throughout\nhis service on numerous committees, including the Commerce and Finance\nCommittees where we have served together, Senator Smith has been a\ncredit to this body and has left a positive and lasting mark--\nexemplified by his tireless work on the State Children's Health\nInsurance Program, and the leadership he took in defending the Medicaid\nprogram from misguided budget cuts.\n  Above all else, Senator Smith always perceived his responsibility as\nrepresenting his country before his party. There is no doubt that as we\nmove forward into next Congress, I, for one, will miss his independent\nperspective.\n  Since 1992, when he won election to the Oregon State Senate, Senator\nSmith has devoted his life to public service--and his integrity and\ndedication to the finest ideals of service make him a role model for\nall Americans. Few who have held the position of U.S. Senator have been\nable to combine his candor, civility, aptitude, and absolute dedication\nto the public good that have allowed him to be such an effective,\nbipartisan Member of the Senate.\n  What many may not understand is the camaraderie that we build with\nour fellow Members of the Senate. We spend aggregate months each year\nseparated from our homes, families, and friends and in doing so, each\nof us becomes a part of an extended family. So it was the most acute\nand profound sadness that we all felt in our hearts upon the loss in\n2003 of Gordon's son, Garrett Lee. And having read Senator Smith's\nbook, Remembering Garrett, One Family's Battle with a Child's\nDepression, I still find it almost unimaginable the grace and courage\nhe displayed in continuing his work during the most difficult of times\nafter Garrett's tragic passing.\n  As a testament to his humble nature, Senator Smith turned from his\nown loss to help others. And he forged a remarkable and indelible\nlegacy for his son with the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act--legislation\nto which Senator Smith has dedicated his life. This act, which the\nPresident signed into law on\n\n[[Page S10964]]\n\nOctober 21, 2004, authorized $82 million for suicide-prevention and\nawareness programs, and represented just the first step Senator Smith\nhas taken to help prevent other families from having to experience what\nhis has endured.\n  Ou Government is supposed to work for the people, and few individuals\nduring my tenure in public service have exemplified this truism more so\nthan Senator Smith. In the Senate, Gordon never allowed a party label\nto determine who he works with on critical legislation affecting our\nNation. He had the skill to work across the aisle with intelligence and\ngrace, and most of all, his highest priority was his constituents in\nOregon. Whether he was fighting for transit funding in urban Portland\nor assistance in coastal fishing communities and rural timber towns,\nGordon always knew where his roots were, and he was invariably an\neloquent champion for those issues that truly mattered for the people\nof Oregon.\n  Gordon, we thank you, we will miss you, and please know that you have\nleft a positive and indelible mark on the Senate. All the best to you,\nSharon, and your entire family for the future.\n Mrs. HUTCHISON. Gordon Smith has served the people of Oregon\nextremely well.\n  Before coming to the U.S. Senate, he served as director of the\nfamily-owned Smith frozen foods company in Weston, Oregon, where he\ncreated jobs and spurred economic growth.\n  Gordon Smith entered politics with his election to the Oregon State\nSenate in 1992, and he became president of that body in 1995.\n  Since winning election to the U.S. Senate in 1996, Senator Smith has\nworked with his colleagues on both sides of the aisle on critical\nissues.\n  Senator Smith chaired the Special Committee on Aging, and he also\nserved on the following Senate committees: Commerce, Science and\nTransportation, Energy and Natural Resources, Finance, and Indian\nAffairs.\n  Senator Smith has also courageously used family tragedy as a way to\neducate and encourage Americans on a very important subject: suicide\nprevention for young men and women.\n  In 2004, I was so proud when President Bush signed the Garrett Lee\nSmith Memorial Act, authorizing $82 million for suicide-prevention and\nawareness programs at colleges.\n  Senator Smith also distinguished himself by championing rural\nOregonians, including the many farmers and ranchers throughout the\nmountains and lake areas of his beautiful State.\n  I thank Gordon Smith for his dedication and service, and I wish him\nwell.\n Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I too wish speak of my good\nfriend, Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon. Senator Smith came to the\nSenate for all the right reasons, most importantly to represent the\npeople who elected him and he has done an outstanding job of doing just\nthat. Gordon never shied away from the controversial issues and often\nwent against the majority position of his own party. Every time he did\nso he articulated in a very professional way his reason why he was\nvoting and the way he did. This always takes courage and conviction,\nand Gordon Smith possesses both.\n  I will always admire Gordon's faith, which allowed him to survive\npersonal tragedy as well as deal with the day-to-day decisions of the\nSenate.\n  Senator Gordon Smith is one of those Members who makes serving in the\nSenate a pleasure. I will miss his counsel, his advice, and his\nfriendship. God speed to he, Sharon, and their family.\n\n                              john sununu\n\n Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to\nSenator John Sununu, an outstanding public servant and fellow New\nEnglander whose common-sense approach to governance and dedication to\nproblem-solving have well-served both his constituents of the Granite\nState of New Hampshire as well as his country.\n  It is impossible not to like and respect someone of Senator Sununu's\ntremendous affability and enormous capability. Personable and\nanalytical, John brought to the U.S. Senate what he exhibited during\nhis accomplished tenure in the U.S. House--a welcomed engineer's\nperspective. So, we are losing more than a colleague of undeniable\nskill and integrity--we are going to miss his vital and refreshing\ncontribution to this Chamber's national conversation.\n  And so, let me just say, it's been my good fortune to serve with John\non the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation--\nspecifically, the Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and\nCoast Guard as ranking member, and the Senate Committee on Finance.\n  Particularly, as a member of the Ocean's Subcommittee, and former\nchair of the Subcommittee on the National Ocean Policy Study, Senator\nSununu advocated for New England's fishermen and fishing communities\nthrough several difficult years. Moreover, as Maine's groundfishery\ncontinued to suffer under ever more stringent catch limits, and our\nlobster industry faced increasingly strict regulations, John's help was\ninstrumental in keeping these issues at the fore and protecting one of\nour region's and our Nation's most historic professions. For his\ntireless leadership on these crucial issues, we are forever grateful.\n  On two additional topics that are also profoundly critical not only\nto my State of Maine, but also to the entire New England region--the\nvitality of Kittery-Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and the protection of the\npivotal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program or LIHEAP, John and I\nhave been vigilant, working hand-in glove to ensure the continued\nviability of these indispensable mainstays of our neighboring States.\n  In fact, in the 110th Congress, we--as part of both the New Hampshire\nand Maine delegations--working with the Kittery-Portsmouth community,\nunion leaders, and Captain Mazzone and his world-class team--fought\nvigorously and successfully to secure $20.7 million in full funding for\nthe construction of the Waterfront Support Facility at drydock #3--and\n$9.9 million for the first phase of a new Consolidated Global Submarine\nComponent Facility. As a much-admired, ``best in Navy performance''\nshipyard that delivers the best work consistently on time and under\nbudget, Kittery-Portsmouth Naval Shipyard--the oldest naval shipyard in\nthe Nation--unquestionably deserved no less.\n  When it comes to the life or death matter of LIHEAP, since coming to\nCongress in 1997, John has, time and again, battled on behalf of\nthousands of families in New Hampshire who require fuel assistance to\nstay warm in their homes during the winter months. Senator Sununu was a\nstalwart addition to the chorus of those championing LIHEAP from New\nEngland and other affected regions around the country.\n  Although there are truly serious subjects of public policy that bind\nus as New Englanders, nothing brings us together more than our beloved\nBoston Red Sox. And I dare say, one of John's fondest memories over the\nlast 6 years likely has nothing to do with the U.S. Senate and\neverything to do with being from New England and a Red Sox fan--as\nBoston won not one but two World Series Championships, shattering the\nmuch-ballyhooed curse for good.\n  In the end, Mr. President, the true measure of a person is not making\na living by what you get--but rather by what you give, and John Sununu,\nduring his entire time in Congress, has given his State of New\nHampshire remarkable public service worthy of its venerable heritage.\nBy entering the family business of politics, John has indeed been a\nsteward of the country's business, and we, and his State of New\nHampshire, owe him a debt of great thanks.\n Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, soon the gavel will bring to a close\nthe 110th Congress and we will say goodbye to several good friends who\nwill be leaving the Senate and returning to their home States. We will\nmiss them all.\n  John Sununu will be heading home at the end of the current session\nand I know I will miss him when the next session of Congress is called\nto order on the Senate floor. I have enjoyed having an opportunity to\ncome to know him during his service in the Senate and on the Senate\nBanking Committee. He has always impressed me with his knowledge of the\nintricacies of our Federal mortgage system. It is clear he has always\nhad the tools and the talent to be an effective representative for the\npeople of his State and he has always been a strong and effective voice\nfor the people of New Hampshire.\n  John learned about politics and public service at a young age as he\n\n[[Page S10965]]\n\nwatched both of his parents pursue their careers in their chosen\nfields. John's mother was a school board member, which explains his\naptitude for science and math. He soon turned his talent for numbers\ninto a degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and his\ninterest in business into a degree from Harvard.\n  As the old adage says so well, he comes from good stock and a great\npolitical family. His father served as the Governor of New Hampshire\nand later as President Bush's Chief of Staff. He learned a great deal\nfrom his father about politics and what mattered to the people of his\nhome State as he traveled around New Hampshire with his dad. He then\nput those lessons into practice when he made his own run for office.\n  John's initial run for the House led to three successful terms. He\nthen launched a successful campaign for the Senate.\n  As soon as he arrived, he made it clear he was going to follow his\nown path and he had his own way of doing things. He had spent years\nworking with the people of his home State and he had a clear view of\nthose issues that were of great concern to them.\n  When he was asked, he had a ready explanation for the reason why he\nhad such a unique perspective on things. It was all due, he would say,\nto his long New Hampshire roots. He knew that the people of New\nHampshire are known for their independence and they have a long\ntradition of great respect for the rights and freedoms of this country.\nThat, he would say, has drawn my focus and sparked my interest in these\nissues.\n  John has been a welcome and spirited presence on the Senate Commerce,\nScience and Transportation Committee. His educational background has\nhelped him to stay on top of the latest technological advances and\ndevelopments and that has helped him in the effort to keep our\nregulations on the latest technologies up to date, current and\neffective.\n  Yogi Berra used to say that you can observe a lot just by watching. I\nhope John will forgive me for quoting the words of a Yankee legend to a\nRed Sox fan, but as I have watched him in action, it is clear from his\nstyle that he has a bit of Wyoming in him. Never one to look for\nopportunities to speak to the press or make lengthy speeches to get\nnoticed, John has always been focused on what he could do that would\nhelp to get things done. In my home State we like to say that you can\nget anything done if you don't care who gets the credit. John is like\nthat. He has been working to get things done for New Hampshire and he\nhas earned the credit he has received back home.\n  One of the issues that has always drawn John's interest has been the\nenvironment, especially the quality of our air. It is a sensitive issue\nfor him, and he has always shown himself up to the task of fighting for\ncleaner air for the folks back home. His long list of achievements on\nthis and many other issues will be his legacy, a record of which he can\nbe very proud.\n  In the years to come, I will remember John for his unique sense of\nstyle, his determination to get things done for his state, and his\nwillingness to stand up for those things he believed in with that\nremarkable intellect of his. He's not just a smart guy. There are a lot\nof very gifted individuals who knew what had to be done but could just\nnever do it. John is a thoughtful man of action who has an in-depth\nunderstanding of the problems that face the Nation and a unique insight\ninto what will work and what won't. Simply put, John knows how to make\nthe right things happen.\n  Now John and Kitty will be returning home to New Hampshire to begin\nsome new and exciting chapter in their lives. I don't know what they\nwill decide to do, but I do know that John will stay active and\ninvolved in the issues that concern him that carried him to Washington\nfor these past 12 years to serve in the House and the Senate. He would\nbe the first to tell you that it has been a pleasure and an honor to\nwork for the people of New Hampshire, and I am certain we haven't heard\nthe last from him. For my part, I appreciate all his help on the issues\nwe worked on together, but most of all, I appreciate his friendship and\nhis willingness to play such an important part in the history of New\nHampshire and the United States. He can be very proud of the difference\nhe has made. He has been a good and effective Senator and the people of\nNew Hampshire will always be proud of him and that they had the good\nsense to send him to Washington.\n Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I have really enjoyed working\nwith John Sununu.\n  John Sununu grew up in Salem, NH, and is one of eight children. He\nwas first introduced to public service at a young age, when his mother\nserved as chairman of the local school board.\n  John attended public schools, graduated from Salem High School, and\nreceived bachelor's and master's degrees in mechanical engineering from\nthe Massachusetts Institute of Technology.\n  John also earned a master's degree in business administration from\nthe Harvard Graduate School of Business.\n  John Sununu first ran for public office in 1996, winning election in\nNew Hampshire's 1st District and serving three terms in the U.S. House.\n  In 2002, John defeated both an incumbent Senator and an incumbent\nGovernor to become the youngest member of the U.S. Senate.\n  As a Senator, John distinguished himself as an innovative legislator,\nbringing his extensive background in science, engineering, and small\nbusiness to his work in Washington.\n  Senator Sununu has been a staunch advocate for low taxes, smarter\nregulation, and civil liberties.\n  Senator Sununu is also a man of heart.\n  I will never forget that in July 2005, to show solidarity with\nSenator Specter, who had lost his hair due to chemotherapy, Senator\nSununu shaved his head.\n  Since he is still a young man at the age of 44, I suspect that we\nwill be hearing a lot more from John Sununu in the years to come.\n  I wish him well in his future endeavors.\n Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, Maine and New Hampshire have much\nin common. When John Sununu came to the Senate six years ago, I\nimmediately saw in him those traits shared by the people of our two\nStates: a strong work ethic combined with a great sense of humor,\ntraditional values balanced by a spirit of innovation, and fiscal\nprudence always tempered by compassion. He quickly became not only a\nvalued colleague but also a trusted friend.\n  John's extraordinary intellect, wisdom, and experience belied his\nyoung age and benefited this chamber and Nation. His upbringing in a\nfamily devoted to public service, his education in science,\nengineering, and business, and his experience in the House of\nRepresentatives made him a veteran from day one. His ability to analyze\nchallenges and devise creative solutions made him an esteemed\ncolleague.\n  In the best tradition of the Senate, John brought his knowledge and\nexperience to bear on some of the most pressing issues we face. In\ntechnology, he has been a leader committed to growth and advancement.\nHe has been a devoted advocate for special education and rural health\ncare. He has been a strong voice for our forest products industry and\nfor a sound energy policy that would reduce our dangerous reliance on\nforeign oil.\n  It has been an honor to work with him on the Homeland Security\nCommittee. His diligence and commitment have helped make America safer.\nHis tireless leadership to reform the Patriot Act demonstrated his\nunwavering commitment to safeguard the civil liberties Americans\ncherish.\n  In addition to his leadership on national issues like the Patriot Act\nand tax policy, John has been an effective advocate for projects of\nspecial concern to New Hampshire, whether it is low-income heating\nassistance and weatherization programs or the Portsmouth Naval\nShipyard. We recently worked closely together with our two colleagues\nto secure $20 billion for the shipyard's new dry dock to help secure\nits future.\n  Above all, Senator John Sununu has distinguished himself as a\nchampion of good government. He is an independent thinker who stands\nup--always--for what he believes to be right for New Hampshire and\nright for our country. He has a sharp eye for wasteful spending and is\na resolute fighter for fiscal responsibility.\n  It has been an honor to serve with John, and I wish him and his\nfamily all\n\n[[Page S10966]]\n\nthe best. I will miss serving with him day to day, but I know that he\nwill continue to accomplish a great deal.\n\n                             pete domenici\n\n Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an undeniable,\nuniversally-acknowledged legend of the U.S. Senate, an outstanding\npublic servant who has been a legislative master of this institution\nand its most labyrinthine but pivotal and influential procedures, and a\nU.S. Senator who, with passion and verve, brilliantly grasped the\ncomplex nuances of legislation without losing the broader perspective\ndriving the national issues of the day. I am referring, of course, to\nthe Senior Senator from New Mexico, Pete Domenici.\n  In his 36 years serving the people of New Mexico in this venerable\ninstitution, Senator Domenici embraced and confronted the most\ndifficult or consequential of matters regardless of opposition or the\ncomplexity of the subject. Indeed, Mr. President, as our country faces\nmyriad challenges, it is with a heavy heart that we lose not only an\nexceptional colleague and friend to many of us, but one of the Senate's\nfinest legislators.\n  I had the distinct privilege of witnessing Pete Domenici's sterling\nleadership and political acumen firsthand when he chaired the Senate\nCommittee on the Budget from 1995 to 2002 in three successive\nCongresses. Having been a member on the House Budget Committee, I can\ntell you that serving on the Senate Budget Committee during Pete's\nchairmanship represented a magnificent opportunity for a freshman\nSenator--not to mention the fact that Pete empathized with me as he had\nbeen offered a seat on the committee as a freshman Senator as well.\n  Although Pete was quoted as saying that he joined the committee in\n1973 ``because it was available to me as a freshman, when other\ncommittees were not,'' history will show that the Senate Budget\nCommittee, the U.S. Senate, and the country were all well-served\nbecause of Pete Domenici's undaunted command of the budget process and\nthe esteem and respect with which he was held by his colleagues.\n  As I joined the Senate Budget Committee in 1995 with Chairman\nDomenici at the helm, we worked hand-and-glove to reprioritize our\nFederal budget, instill greater fiscal discipline, and pass a balanced\nbudget for the first time in 26 years. Success was going to require\ndedication and pragmatism or in Pete's words, ``guts.''\n  I well recall standing on the floor of the Senate as we were debating\nthe budget resolution, and, referencing Winston Churchill's famous\nremark, I said, ``I feel we finally have reached the `end of the\nbeginning' of what I hope will eventually be known as the first seven-\nyear budget to reach a balance in over a generation.'' And the force\nbehind that legislative and budgetary milestone was the Senator we\nhonor today, Pete Domenici. The ramifications of our work on that\nbudget resolution, along with our strong bipartisan 92 to 8 victory on\nthe 1997 Balanced Budget Act, represent a historic template for how\nthis institution tackles budgetary issues today and likely will in the\nfuture.\n  However, what has resonated the most through the years--and what is\ncertainly one of the crowning hallmarks of his monumental legacy--is\nhow Pete reminded us that the Senate can indeed achieve resolution by\nbridging the partisan divide and forsaking polarizing acrimony in favor\nof substantive action advancing the public good.\n  Senator Domenici brought this same constancy of purpose and tireless\ncommitment to the common good to his advocacy for mental health parity\nin healthcare coverage. Vigorously working across the aisle with\nSenators Wellstone and Kennedy, Senator Domenici demonstrated that\nbuilding bipartisan coalitions based on common objectives and good will\nwere not only possible but fundamental to creating good policy.\n  As Senator Domenici made his compelling case against the inequality\nof mental healthcare to the White House and to each Member of the\nSenate, his personal history with the disease was conveyed in a manner\nthat could not have been more poignant and powerful. The story of\nClare, Senator Domenici's daughter, mirrors that of millions of\nAmericans afflicted with a mental health disorder, and Senator Domenici\ncourageously recognized that he was uniquely positioned to help\nshepherd the message that health care coverage should not financially\ndiscriminate on the basis of this disease.\n  Although Senator Wellstone characterized his partnership with Senator\nDomenici as, ``an odd couple,'' where their political philosophies\ndiverged, there common allegiance to making a difference paved the way\nfor enormous strides that engendered an effective bond. And with\nstately leadership, Senator Domenici and Senator Kennedy rallied the\nSenate, which at that point had mourned the tragic loss of Senator\nWellstone, to action, passing the Mental Health Parity Act which the\nPresident signed into law. Once again, Mr. President, Senator Domenici\nconfounded the status quo and fought for meaningful change.\n  I believe we ought to have more, not fewer, ``odd couples'' and\nalliances in the Senate, given that compromise and conciliation are the\ntrue and necessary lifelines to achieving real results. To that end, my\nhope is that the Domenici-Wellstone-Kennedy example will constitute a\nmodel for generations to come of bipartisanship and comity. And I\ncouldn't have been more pleased, having been a longtime leader on this\nissue myself, to work in accord with Senator Domenici in bringing this\nmatter to fruition in the 110th Congress.\n  Lastly, I cannot help but applaud Senator Domenici for his\nindispensable role in championing the 2005 Energy Policy Act. And while\nwe had some differences on policy, once again, true to his relentless\nwork ethic, his can-do optimism, and dogged determination, what was\nmost conspicuously vital and on display was Senator Domenici's\npragmatism in crafting this legislation.\n  Advancing this measure required Senator Domenici to compromise with\nhis own colleague from New Mexico, Senator Bingaman. Yet they sought,\nfound, and maximized the common denominators that would, in the end,\nallow this bill to be signed into law. It stands as an enduring\ntestament to Senator Domenici that the final energy bill in 2005 passed\nwith 71 votes, and Congress took a serious step forward in addressing\nour energy crisis.\n  Time and again, Senator Domenici has placed legislative performance\nabove political posturing, and a desire for concrete results above the\ndin of discord and rancor. And in the process, Senator Domenici leaves\na formidable legacy of establishing the standard for facilitating the\nbudget process, providing mental health parity for millions of\nAmericans, and forging a critical first step toward altering the course\nof our long-dormant energy policy.\n  For well more than three decades, this institution has been blessed\nto have among our ranks one of the giant legislators of his generation\nand our time, and we will miss you Pete and all you brought to the\nSenate, to public service, and to the people of New Mexico. As the son\nof Italian immigrants, who worked in your father's whole grocery\nbusiness, and who would later become a minor baseball pitcher, math\nteacher, lawyer, and then a legendary Senator--you truly exemplify the\nvery best of the American story and dream. To Nancy and the entire\nDomenici family, thank you for sharing Pete with us and our country. We\nare all the better for knowing him, working with him, and calling him\nour colleague and friend.\n\n                              john warner\n\n  Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to my good friend and\ncolleague, a true giant of this institution, and a consummate public\nservant, the gentleman--and I use that term with every fiber of the\ntrue definition of the word--the gentleman from Virginia, Senator John\nWarner.\n  Mr. President, in delivering these remarks, and most especially in\nconsidering Senator Warner's impending retirement from the Senate, I\nhave chosen not to focus on the tremendous loss to this body that will\noccur with John's departure--though the dimension of that loss is\nindisputably monumental. Rather, I prefer to recall the incalculable\ncontributions John has made to enhancing this institution since his\narrival here nearly 30 years ago--and his unparalleled commitment to\nthe state and the Nation he has served so honorably and so well.\n\n[[Page S10967]]\n\n  John and I both came to the Congress at the same time--albeit to\ndifferent chambers. I had long been familiar with Senator Warner's\noutstanding reputation as a man of strength, character, knowledge and\nintegrity from my days in the House. And it didn't take long for me to\nfind out why when I joined him in the Senate.\n  Among many memories is my service on the Senate Armed Services\nCommittee as Chair of the Seapower Subcommittee under John's leadership\nas chairman--and the command and the focus and the vision that he\nbrought to that critical panel. I can tell you, with his long service\non the committee--and of course as a former Secretary of the Navy,\nthere wasn't anyone who instilled greater confidence when it came to\nmeeting the challenges of limited defense dollars and the reality of\nthat post-Cold War period than John Warner.\n  I certainly well recall that at a time when our foreign policy had\nquite frankly made our Navy into America's ``Emergency 9-1-1'' force,\nwith a 331 percent increase in contingency operations at that time from\nthe previous ten years, at a time when the branches of the services\nweren't meeting their recruitment goals and the Air Force and Navy were\nwoefully short of pilots, at a time when China was continuing to make\nquantum leaps in military technology, Senator Warner's expertise and\nleadership didn't arrive a moment to soon.\n  I remember an instance when he called our allies to account on\nKosovo--when he saw that our European partners had deployed only 722 of\nthe 1,264 policemen they had promised to provide as part of the Kosovo\nPolice Force, he held them to their commitment. He exposed that\ninequity and thanks to his hand at the helm they began to change their\ncourse.\n  From day one as chairman, Senator Warner was relentless in\nscrutinizing existing defense programs as well as articulating a vision\nfor the future. And no where was that more in evidence--or more\nprescient, for that matter, than when he created the Emerging Threats\nSubcommittee, to address everything from cyberterrorism to terrorist\nthreats here at home.\n  Indeed, as I said at an event at the time, ``the fact is, since\nSoviet power has receded from the heart of Europe, the United States\nfaces more regionally diverse and unpredictable challenges to its\nnational security than ever before. And John knew we must be prepared\nto respond.'' Well, that was and is the John Warner I know--always\nlooking ahead, always anticipating the next challenge, and always\nworking to meet those challenges head on.\n  And above all else, no one, no one, is more concerned about the\nwelfare and well-being of our brave men and women in uniform than John\nWarner.\n  Interestingly, Senator Warner was Undersecretary of the Navy while\nthe late Senator John Chafee served as Secretary. And might I just say\nas an aside, what an extraordinary duo would come out of the Pentagon\nto subsequently serve side-by-side in the United States Senate. And\nlike John Chafee, John Warner earned the unwavering respect of our\nmilitary men and women because of his unflagging respect for each and\nevery one of them.\n  Certainly, Senator Warner has always had unlimited enthusiasm and\ncommitment for the men and women of the Navy and Marine Corps. In fact,\nI understand that, in a time before there were elevators and escalators\nin the Pentagon, he was known for quite literally bounding up the steps\n``two by two'' in the mornings, and that he did so every morning to get\nto his office to serve the officers, sailors, and Marines for whom he\ncared so much.\n  I am certain it is that very spirit that explains why he is so\nbeloved by our members of the armed forces of the United States. I am\ncertain it is also that spirit that's made him so beloved by members of\nthis United States Senate.\n  It's a spirit not only of ``can do'', but of ``must do''. It's an\nhonor-bound dedication to the notion that we all have a sworn duty to\nour constitution and to our country to leave a better nation for having\nacted in our country's best interests.\n  It's a quality we witnessed once again during historic debates on our\ncourse in our war in Iraq. Senator Warner consistently brought to bear\nhis credibility, his gravitas, and his experience to elevate the\nSenate's deliberations and rise above the din of partisanship. What\nJohn Warner said on the matter of Iraq--or on any military issue of\nvital import--carried the weight of an intellect pledged solely to the\nconcept and pursuit of doing what is right.\n  And at no time was John's sense of the greater good more evident than\nin John's leadership in the so-called ``Gang of 14''--at a crossroads\nwhen the very institution of the Senate was caught in the cross-hairs\nof a struggle over judicial nominations. As we recall, at the time, the\nrepeated, systemic filibuster of the President's nominees had been a\ncorrosive force on the Senate. At the same time, the repeated,\nsystematic filibuster of the President's nominees had been a corrosive\nforce on the Senate. At the same time, exercising the so-called\n``nuclear option''--that would have jettisoned the traditional rules\ngoverning these nominations--would truly have had longstanding\nconsequences for the future of the Senate.\n  But we set aside partisan differences to help forge consensus to\nsafeguard a body constituted to be neither a rubber stamp nor a\npersonalized veto. Just when we were about to cross a political\nRubicon, this watershed compromise embraced and preserved the essence\nof our Founding Fathers' vision to achieve results through\naccommodation--and embodied the best traditions of the Senate. And John\nWarner was instrumental in standing up and leading that charge--once\nagain, lending the gravity of his standing in the Senate to advance\nthat crucial cause.\n  So when I think of John Warner, I think of an embodiment of what our\nforefathers quite likely had in mind when they envisioned a U.S.\nSenator. Someone who is learned, who is deliberative, who is\ncompassionate, who is considered, who is experienced, who is reasoned\nand measured in approach--but who is most undeniably unafraid to act\ndecisively when circumstances demand.\n  That is the caliber of the man to whom this institution is about to\nbid farewell. And as we do so, I also cannot help but recall the proud\ntradition of extraordinary thinkers and leaders that the great\nCommonwealth of Virginia has produced over centuries--the ranks of\nwhich John Warner is most unquestionably fit to occupy. What a credit\nhe has been to his State, what a legacy he contributes to Virginia, and\ncertainly to America. The people of Virginia could not have asked for a\nmore eloquent and powerful voice in the U.S. Senate--and it was a\npowerful voice not for the brashness of its volume or tone, but because\nof the credibility and thoughtfulness behind the words and thoughts\nthat voice delivered.\n  Quite simply, he is truly one of the best--deeply respected, highly\nregarded, a principled, independent-minded voice of reason. He is what\nwe need more of in government. And he sets an example for us all.\n  He has also been a great friend to me--as he has to so many of us. I\nwill miss the firmness and sincerity of his warm ``hellos''. I will\nmiss running into him in the hallways, on the Senate subway, on this\nfloor. I will miss his institutional wisdom and depth and breadth on\nthe issues. I will miss his kindness and comradery. And, I imagine,\nthere are 98 others in this Chamber who feel likewise.\n  So let me just say, farewell, John Warner. And while none of us want\nto see you go, there is certainly unanimous consent that--as you yield\nthe floor for the final time--no one is more deserving of this time to\nnow spend with your family, your friends, and with whatever personal\npursuit you may choose--than you, John, as a public servant of so many\nyears, a public servant of great accomplishment, and a public servant\nof such positive and indelible consequence to the Senate, and to\nAmerica.\n Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, it has been one of my great\nhonors to serve with one of the most distinguished Senators in our\nbody, Senator John Warner of Virginia. A man of great wisdom, a man\ncommitted to the country that he has served for many decades in a host\nof important positions. John Warner has never failed his Nation. In\naddition to his knowledge and\n\n[[Page S10968]]\n\njudgment which I so deeply respect and have so often followed, he is a\ntrue delight to be with and has the rare collegial skills to bring\nhighly intelligent and committed Senators together for the common good.\nAs chairman of the Armed Services Committee, as its ranking member and\nin the last 2 years as its de facto ranking member he has continued his\nrecord of superb service. We have gone through many difficult times and\nwithout his leadership I don't see how we could have worked our way\nthrough some of our Nation's great challenges.\n  John Warner is a product of the heart of Virginia. Our affectionate\ntitle of ``squire'' reflects the recognition of his Virginia heritage\nand style. Among other good qualities no one is more delightful to\ntravel with than John Warner. I cherish the opportunity to have\nlistened to many of his stories both humorous and insightful. He is a\nwalking student of American history. I urged him to seek reelection but\nhe chose not to. He will be greatly missed. My best wishes go with him\nand his wife Jeanne.\n Mr. CHAMBLISS. I wish to speak of the retirement from the\nSenate of my friend Senator John Warner. Senator Warner is the\nquintessential Virginia Gentleman. He is gifted of speech, courteous,\npossesses courage and conviction, and is a defender of freedom and the\nSenator most committed to the protection of our men and women in\nuniform as well as their families. It has been my privilege to serve\nwith Senator Warner on the Armed Services Committee. His leadership as\nChairman was superb. His commitment to protecting America and Americans\nis unparalleled.\n  From his days in the U.S. Navy to his years as Secretary of the Navy\nto his years in the U.S. Senate, John Warner has provided the kind of\nservice and leadership that Virginians and Americans appreciate and\nrespect.\n  I will miss John Warner but certainly wish him and Jeanne Godspeed as\nthey continue life's journey.\n\n                              Ted Stevens\n\n Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, it is always a bittersweet moment as\nthe clock winds down on the last minutes of the current session of\nCongress and we start to pack up and get ready to head home for the\nholidays. As we do, it's always good to take a moment to reflect on all\nwe have accomplished over the past 2 years and those special Senators\nwho did a lot of the heavy lifting who will be returning home at the\nend of the year. That is when we begin to realize just how much they\nwill be missed. Such a Senator is Ted Stevens.\n  As Ted leaves Washington for his beloved Alaska, he will long be\nremembered for a long list of achievements in the Senate. The fact that\nhe is the Senate's longest serving Republican is no accident. It came\nabut because Ted always had one foot in Washington and the other in his\nhome State of Alaska. He was always heading back home whenever it was\npossible to keep in touch with the people of his State and let them\nknow what he was doing on their behalf in Washington.\n  Ted has an affection for super heroes and that is no surprise because\nTed is one. He may not be able to leap tall buildings in a single\nbound, but he was able to make sure that the needs of his constituents\nwere heard and addressed unlike any other Senator for his entire Senate\ncareer. The people of Alaska watched Ted hard at work in Washington and\nthey liked what they saw. It isn't any wonder that the folks back home\ncall him not Senator Stevens but Uncle Ted.\n  When Ted returns home, Alaska will have lost a powerful force in the\nSenate. He is not only his State's greatest fighter, but he is also\nAlaska's best ambassador. He loves his State and he loves showing it\noff whenever he can. Many of us have had a chance to enjoy a wonderful\ndose of his special brand of Alaskan hospitality when we have had a\nchance to take a trip to visit that remarkable land up north.\n  I love fishing and hunting and all the activities that are possible\nin the great outdoors. So, for me, it was a special pleasure to be in\nAlaska and have a chance to take part in Ted's Kenai Tournament. Alaska\nis a magical place and the fishing and the scenery there is second only\nto Wyoming. More importantly, the Kenai Tournament is more than a\nsocial occasion or a chance to get in some great fishing during a\nbreak. It has a much more important purpose. The tournament was created\nto help raise the funds that are needed to restore and improve the\nhabitat of the salmon in Alaska and over the years it has done a\nremarkable job of both protecting and helping to promote the wonders of\nhis home State.\n  It might surprise some people to learn how much Ted loves the\nenvironment of his State and how concerned he is that it continues to\nbe preserved for future generations to enjoy. It's a cause that Ted has\nworked on as he dealt with all of us in working to pass bills that\nwould help to keep Alaska's great outdoors open and available to all\nthose who love to hike, fish, hunt or just stand back and admire the\nscenery. Like me, Ted knows that our national treasures should be\nmaintained not by excessive and intrusive regulation, but through the\nefforts of good stewards of the land who understand its value and its\nimportance to our future as a nation.\n  For almost 40 years, whenever it came to fighting for Alaska's best\ninterests on the Senate floor, or promoting the treasures of Alaska at\nhome or here in Washington or anywhere in between, Ted Stevens has been\nthe voice of Alaska. Whenever an issue was brought up in the Senate\nthat affected his State, we all knew immediately to find out what Ted\nthinks. He always knew what would be best for Alaska and when he spoke,\nwe all stopped to listen.\n  Alaska is perhaps best known for its towering spectacular and\nimposing mountains that seem to rise dramatically right out of the\nocean. It is the perfect backdrop for Ted Stevens who is a man to match\ntheir mountains. Ted is a landmark of service and he has achieved a\nmountain of results for the people of his State.\n  As I have come to know Ted I have become very aware of the truth of\nthe old adage that it isn't the number of years in your life that\ndetermines who you are, it is the amount of life in your years. For his\nentire Senate career, Ted has kept up an incredible pace and he has the\nresults to show for it. He just celebrated his birthday and I can say\nthat he is a very young 85 years of age.\n  He won't mind my mentioning his age. He's proud of it. He's earned\nevery year of it and he certainly hasn't been taking it easy. At a time\nin his life when most people his age are sitting back and relaxing, Ted\nhas been fighting here in Washington to protect their benefits, keep\ntheir taxes under control, and reduce Federal spending so that they\ncould have the peace of mind that comes from knowing that things are in\ngood hands--Ted's hands.\n  Ted and I get along so well because in a lot of ways, Wyoming is a\nlot like Alaska, and that often puts Ted and me on the same side on a\nlot of issues. We both understand the needs of rural America, and we\nboth know how important it is to see that those needs are met.\n  His determination to serve the people back home was most evident when\nhe took aim at keeping universal phone service in operation. He knew\nhow important phone service is to people, especially those in isolated\nareas. For them, a phone is more than just an instrument they can use\nto keep in touch with others. For those in remote regions, a phone is\ntheir lifeline. It helps to provide them with the peace of mind that\ncomes from knowing they can place a call and report an emergency\nwhenever they are facing a life threatening emergency. For them and for\nall Alaskans, there was never any substitute for knowing that the\nSenator who speaks for you, understands your life and your needs and\nTed has been the one to do that--ever since he first came to\nWashington.\n  It will be tough to say goodbye to Ted when he leaves Washington\nbecause I will miss having him riding shotgun as we go to work on those\nissues that are going to make a difference in the lives of the people\nof our states. As we say in Wyoming, Ted is a guy who walks the walk\nand doesn't just talk the talk. He says what he means and he means what\nhe says. You know just where you stand when you deal with Ted and he\nhas never been one to back down from a fight in committee or on the\nFloor.\n  In the years to come, whenever I think of Ted I will remember him as\na man of action who knew it was more\n\n[[Page S10969]]\n\nimportant to get things done than to talk about doing things. He was\nalways quick to put his words into action and get results. He has a\nwealth of knowledge about how to get things done in the Senate--and\ndone right. When it comes to being an effective Senator, Ted could have\nwritten the book on it.\n  I won't say goodbye, Ted, I will just say we'll see you around town.\nI have no doubt that we will keep in touch with you and I am sure you\nwill keep in touch with us--whenever something comes up in the Senate\nthat we need to fine tune to make sure it treats Alaskans just right.\nThanks for all you have done for me, for the West, for Alaska and for\nthis Nation. Thanks most of all for your friendship. That is something\nI will always treasure most of all.\n Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I wish to speak about my great\nfriend, Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, who has served in the U.S.\nSenate for 40 years and is the longest-serving Republican Senator in\nhistory.\n  On a personal note, I have always enjoyed working with Senator\nStevens, and it has been a true privilege to collaborate with him on\nsome of the most important issues facing our great Nation--including\nenergy, health care, and national defense.\n  Senator Stevens' service to the United States didn't begin when he\nstepped inside this Chamber. Rather, his service began decades\nearlier--during some of the most harrowing days of World War II.\n  Senator Stevens was part of the Greatest Generation who fought and\nwon that global struggle for freedom--flying a C-47 in the China-Burma-\nIndia theater.\n  Incredibly, over 1,000 of Senator Stevens' fellow airmen died\n``flying the hump'' and elsewhere in the China-Burma-India theater--a\nsobering reminder of the high price of freedom.\n  For his heroic efforts, Senator Stevens later received two\nDistinguished Flying Crosses and two Air Medals, as well as the Yuan\nHai medal awarded by the Republic of China.\n  After the war, Senator Stevens completed his education at UCLA and\nHarvard Law School, and then moved to Alaska, which was then a U.S.\nterritory.\n  In the city of Fairbanks, Senator Stevens practiced law for several\nyears, until he came to Washington, DC to serve in the Eisenhower\nadministration, and also to lobby for Alaska's admittance into the\nUnion--a mission that succeeded in 1959.\n  When Senator Stevens returned to Alaska, he ran for--and won--a seat\nin the Alaska House of Representatives, and later became House Majority\nLeader.\n  Then, in December 1968, Governor Walter J. Hickel appointed him to\nfill a vacancy in the U.S. Senate.\n  In 1970, the voters of Alaska ratified that choice by electing\nSenator Stevens to finish that term in a special election, and then re-\nelecting him six more times, always by overwhelming margins.\n  Senator Stevens' achievements are legendary in this Chamber--\nincluding (but not limited to) Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee,\nChairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and President pro\ntempore of the U.S. Senate--putting him third in line for the\nPresidency from January 2003 to January 2007.\n  For his many decades of service, Senator Stevens has received and\naccepted numerous honors--including having the Anchorage International\nAirport named after him.\n  Our entire country has been enriched and improved by his hard work,\ndedication, and leadership.\n  I say this, not as a distant observer, but as an up-close witness to\nhis achievements.\n  Back in 1993, when I first arrived in the U.S. Senate, I was one of\nonly seven female Senators, and if the Senate was a men's club, then\nthe Appropriations Committee was its inner sanctum.\n  There was not a single woman on the Defense Appropriations\nSubcommittee, but that's where I wanted to serve.\n  I explained to Senator Stevens--who was then the ranking member of\nthe committee--that Texas has more Army soldiers than any other State,\nmore Air Force Airmen and women stationed in Texas than any other\nState, and our defense industry builds everything from fighter aircraft\nto Army trucks to artillery systems to sophisticated electronics\nequipment for the Pentagon.\n  Therefore, it was absolutely essential that a Senator from Texas\nserve on that committee.\n  After some careful thought, Senator Stevens agreed and welcomed me to\nthe committee. And since that time, he has been a valuable mentor to\nme--not to mention a passionate advocate for Alaska and America.\n  And when I say passion, I really do mean passion.\n  Senator Stevens has been known to show dramatic performances on the\nSenate floor, keeping wandering eyes focused on the urgent issues that\nneed to be addressed.\n  One day, during a mark-up in the Senate Appropriations Committee,\nSenator Stevens, who chaired the committee at the time, grew very\nanimated and laid down the law.\n  When a frustrated senior Senator told Senator Stevens that ``there\nwas no reason to lose your temper,'' Senator Stevens glared back and\nresponded, ``I never lose my temper. I always know exactly where I left\nit.''\n  But if Senator Stevens has a temper, he also has a compassionate\nheart.\n  I will never forget when a group of protestors gathered outside of\nthe Appropriations Committee conference to demand increased funding for\nbreast cancer research.\n  One particularly agitated advocate got in Senator Stevens' face and\nsaid, ``If men were dying of breast cancer, you wouldn't think twice\nabout increasing the funding.''\n  Needless to say, those words made quite an impact on Senator Stevens,\nbut probably not what this advocate anticipated.\n  When Senator Stevens walked back into the conference, he repeated the\ncharge and then looked around at his mostly male colleagues.\n  He knew that at least six of them suffered from prostate cancer.\n  He also noticed that the bill they were considering didn't fund\nprostate cancer research.\n  But thanks to the excellent suggestion of the woman in the hallway,\nhe was going to advocate breast cancer research and prostate cancer\nresearch. Senator Stevens was determined to become a leader on these\nissues, and over time, that is certainly what he's become.\n  I congratulate Senator Stevens on all that he's accomplished for\nAlaska and America, and I wish him well in his retirement.\n\n                              CHUCK HAGEL\n\n Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to express my enormous\ngratitude and deep appreciation to my good friend and colleague,\nSenator Chuck Hagel, for his 12 years of sterling leadership and\nsteadfast service in the U.S. Senate.\n  A man of deep-seated principle, honor, conscience, and conviction,\nSenator Hagel has been a stalwart legislator and an unwavering guardian\nof the first branch of government during his remarkable two-term tenure\nin the Senate. And, having served with Chuck side-by-side for that\nentire period--including, in the 107th Congress on the Senate Committee\non the Budget, and subsequently for the remaining three Congresses on\nthe Senate Committee on Intelligence--I can attest firsthand to the\ntremendous intellect, independence, and integrity that he has brought\nto his office and to some of the most consequential debates of our\ntime.\n  Anyone familiar with Senator Hagel's background will notice readily\nhow a fourth generation Nebraskan steeped in the time-honored\ntraditions and mores of the heartland was well-equipped with the\nbedrock character and unshakable foundation necessary to reach the\nhighest heights in both the public and private sector. Whether serving\nas President Reagan's Deputy Administrator of the Veterans'\nAdministration, demonstrating keen entrepreneurial acumen as an early\nleader in the cellphone industry, heading the World USO, or eventually\nrunning successfully for the U.S. Senate from Nebraska, the common\ndenominator, time and again, pervading Senator Hagel's life--and what\nhas shaped his renowned trajectory of accomplishment in every\nundertaking he has pursued--has been his unwavering love for his\ncountry and abiding faith in its founding principles.\n  Nowhere was Senator Hagel's devotion to our Nation more paramount\n\n[[Page S10970]]\n\nthan when his country called on him to serve in Vietnam, where he and\nhis brother Tom, having bravely enlisted together, fought shoulder-to-\nshoulder as infantry squad leaders with the U.S. Army's 9th Infantry\nDivision. Both displayed enormous heroism on the field of battle and\nwere decorated soldiers, with Chuck earning two Purple Hearts.\n  As you can imagine, it has been a privilege over these past 12 years\nto witness the courage and candor of this American hero and esteemed\ncolleague, whether on measures addressing war, specifically in Iraq, or\nmatters concerning the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA.\nSenator Hagel was indeed my compatriot and ideological soul mate on the\nSenate Intelligence Committee. If you must go into battle whether in\nwar or in politics, you want to engage your opponents with someone of\nChuck Hagel's mettle and fortitude.\n  A true conservative who believes in limited government--and that the\ndiffusion of power and authority are the surest check against despotism\nand the best hope for democracy--Senator Hagel has demonstrated a\nvisceral and unending passion for this institution and for the\npossibilities of effective governance by people of good will. And\nSenator Hagel crystallized this deeply held belief in his farewell\nspeech on the floor of the Senate when he emphasized to his colleagues\nthat . . .\n\n       Article I of the constitution is about the Congress. We are\n     a co-equal branch of government. And if anything I've learned\n     in the 12 years I've been here is the importance of sharing,\n     participating in the governance of our country, being part of\n     that governance, helping make decisions with the president\n     and the executive.\n\n  Finally, as a Mainer, I must say how fitting it was that a few years\nago Senator Hagel was recognized as one of the esteemed recipients of\nThe Edmund S. Muskie Distinguished Public Service Award. Senator Hagel\nexemplifies the best of the Muskie tradition which was built upon\ncertain irrefutable, sterling standards for high intellect,\nunassailable integrity, and a lifetime of legendary service.\n  To his wife Lilibet and their daughter Allyn and son Ziller, thank\nyou for sharing your husband and your father with us for these 12\nyears. And to Chuck, we will miss your voice and your vision. By your\nwords and in your deeds, you bring to mind the Greek playwright and\npoet, Aeschylus, who wrote that ``his resolve is not to seem the\nbravest, but to be.'' You have been a brave steward of the public\ntrust, and we are forever thankful.\n\n                              Wayne Allard\n\n Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, one of the great privileges of my\ntenure in the Senate has been to serve with my colleague Wayne Allard\nfrom Colorado.\n  He and his wonderful wife and partner Joan have contributed greatly\nto the life of the Senate. Wayne has been a leading advocate for a\nstrong space and missile defense program, an important issue when he\nchaired the Strategic Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on the\nArmed Services. I was honored to follow him in that position when he\nmoved to the prestigious Appropriations Committee.\n  Wayne has also been a firm and consistent voice for a sound economic\npolicy based on the free market, lower taxes, free trade, and restraint\nin spending. Day after day--year after year--he never wavered in those\nprinciples.\n  I deeply regret that Wayne took a pledge to not seek a third term in\nthe Senate. His unqualified commitment to principle will be sorely\nmissed. Wayne is a man of integrity, and he never hesitated to keep the\npromise he made to the voters of Colorado.\n  Wayne and I came to the Senate together. We have been good friends\nthroughout our time here. We have stood together in the Armed Services\nCommittee in support of our men and women in uniform. We were thrilled\nto see the child tax credit become law, providing relief to hard-\nworking American families. We witnessed many other important pieces of\nlegislation be enacted into law. And we were able to stop quite a few\nbad pieces also.\n  Mary and I send our best and most sincere wishes to Wayne and Joan. I\nknow that he will continue to contribute to the good of Colorado and to\nthe Nation.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10959", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10959", "S10959", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10959", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10959]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10959]]\n                        House of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on\nSaturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                   _________________________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10970", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10970", "S10970", "[{\"name\": \"Ron Wyden\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John F. Kerry\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10970", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10970]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS\n\n Mr. WYDEN. Yesterday, when I heard the majority leader was\ngoing to call a cloture vote, I changed my schedule and hurriedly\nreturned to Washington, DC, from Oregon, where I had been working on\nthe Oregon Business Plan at the Oregon Business Summit in Portland. I\nwas on an airplane, about an hour away from the Capitol, when the\nSenate Leader called the vote, and I missed the cloture vote on the $14\nbillion loan package for the U.S. automobile industry. It is my\nunderstanding that if my vote could have possibly made the difference,\nthe Leader would have waited for my plane to arrive, but I want it to\nbe noted that it was my intention to vote for cloture. While I continue\nto have concerns about ensuring that taxpayers are protected if this\nloan is to occur, I believe that if the President can unwisely provide\n$700 billion of taxpayer money for the investment banks that took\nhorribly unacceptable risks and helped trigger an economic collapse, we\ncertainly have a duty to attempt to preserve a cornerstone domestic\nindustry and the jobs of hundreds of thousands of working people whose\npersonal actions are in no way responsible for the current economic\ncrisis.\n Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am extremely disappointed that the\nSenate was not able to pass legislation to make bridge loan funding\navailable to our country's automotive industry--not because I condone\nthe behavior of these companies in recent years which brought them to\nthe brink but because I believe allowing their failure at a time of\ngreat economic uncertainty could deal a serious blow to our national\neconomy.\n  The domestic automotive industry represents almost four percent of\nour Nation's gross domestic product and ten percent of our industrial\nproduction by value. One out of every 10 U.S. jobs is impacted by the\nU.S. automotive industry. GM, Ford and Chrysler account for roughly 65\npercent of U.S. auto production and support millions of jobs across all\n50 States. The Center for Automotive Research recently reported that in\nMassachusetts alone, the automobile industry accounts for more than\n28,000 jobs and $256 million in wages. The bridge loans that would have\nbeen made available through this legislation would have gone to protect\nnot only the jobs dependent on this industry but the American economy\nas a whole, which is suffering from a widespread liquidity crisis that\nextends well beyond the vital automotive sector.\n  I believe this critical moment presents an opportunity for the\nFederal Government and the automobile manufacturers to transform an\nindustry that has long resisted the changes that are so clearly\nnecessary for their continued global competitiveness. The assistance\nprovided in the bill was conditioned upon a commitment by the industry\nto use this money wisely to become more efficient market participants.\nThe legislation included important provisions that would help ensure\nAmerican taxpayers that this assistance is not used as a line of credit\nsimply to continue business as usual. The legislation also included\nimportant safeguards to limit executive compensation to ensure that\ntaxpayer funds are not wasted.\n  I was absent for the vote that occurred Thursday evening because--as\nthe incoming Foreign Relations Committee Chairman--I was representing\nthe Senate at ongoing international climate change negotiations being\nheld in Poznan, Poland. But I was prepared to return from Poland at a\nmoment's notice had we reached a bipartisan agreement or were my vote\nneeded to pass cloture and break a logjam. Instead, thanks to\nobstruction by the minority, the 110th Congress has come to a close,\nand the automobile industry teeters on the brink of collapse. In the\nabsence of Congressional action, I urge the President to tap the\nTroubled Assets Relief Program so that American automakers can access\nsufficient capital to survive in the short-term. I remain hopeful that\nthe 111th Congress will be a Congress of real economic progress and\nwill work to ensure that the American automobile industry remains\nglobally competitive in the long-term.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10971", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "TARP SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10971", "S10973", "[{\"name\": \"Claire McCaskill\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Patrick J. Leahy\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3731\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3731\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. S10971", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10971-S10973]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10971]]\n                     TARP SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, this week, the Senate passed an\nimportant piece of legislation sponsored by Senator Grassley and\nmyself, that was needed to assure the new Special Inspector General for\nthe $700 billion financial rescue program could staff up quickly and\nhave the ability to do his job. S. 3731's other cosponsors--Senators\nCollins, Lieberman, Snowe, Dodd, Bunning, Schumer, Levin, Carper,\nColeman and Cantwell--were also key to securing unanimous support for\nthis bill in the Senate. Finally, I want to give special thanks to\nSenators Baucus and Shelby for working closely with us to craft a\nstrong bipartisan bill.\n  This legislation, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled\nAsset Relief Program, SIGTARP, would specifically grant the Special IG\ncreated under TARP earlier this fall to have full oversight over all\nactivities under the TARP program. The bill would have also granted the\nIG the temporary hiring authority needed to quickly hire the dozens of\nauditors required to conduct this critical oversight.\n  As the original Inspector General language is written under current\nlaw, Mr. Barofsky, who was confirmed as the Special Inspector General\nthis week, must hire his entire staff using normal civil service\nchannels. I am a big proponent of using the normal hiring process\nwhenever possible. But that process is time consuming and can take\nweeks, sometimes months, to hire one person. Meanwhile, this money is\nflying out the door. TARP has given out nearly all of the first $350\nbillion, and they have already told us they want the second half soon.\nYet, Mr. Barofsky has no staff, and he won't have staff for some time.\nWe need to fix this--right now.\n  Our bill would also make clear that the Special Inspector General has\noversight authority over the entire relief program. As written right\nnow, SIGTARP has oversight authority over only two sections of the\nrelief program. Why would we want to limit the Inspector General to\nonly certain sections of this program? Our legislation would make clear\nthat SIGTARP has oversight duties over all of TARP. This would include\nsections related specifically to assistance to homeowners and\npromulgation of conflict of interest rules by the Secretary of the\nTreasury.\n  Senator Snowe added some provisions to assure that the IG would\nprovide Congress and the public a thorough analysis of TARP's spending,\nas well as a requirement for Treasury officials to report to Congress\nan explanation if they did not implement the IG's recommendations.\n  As a former auditor, nothing is more frustrating than seeing your\nrecommendations completely ignored. I would never claim that all audit\nrecommendations can, or should, be immediately implemented. But we need\nto be able to assure ourselves that these recommendations are taken\nseriously and are being considered. We should know the reason if these\nrecommendations are not implemented.\n  Finally, Senator Snowe suggested that we should make sure that the\nSpecial Inspector General has the resources he needs by imposing a time\nlimit on providing him with the money allocated to his office in the\noriginal bill. The relationship between an agency and an office charged\nwith overseeing them is a delicate one. Tensions sometimes arise due to\nthe fact that IGs must rely on the agency they audit and investigate\nfor their resources. While I have no reason to think that the Treasury\nDepartment would deny Mr. Barofsky the funds needed to perform his\nduties, this provision would eliminate that tension.\n  Unfortunately, we were not able to secure passage of this legislation\nin the House before we adjourned this week. I will do everything I can\nto bring it back first thing in the 111th Congress to secure its quick\npassage in both chambers and signed into law to assure we have strong\noversight on the $700 billion financial rescue program.\n Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the election of Barack Obama and Joe\nBiden, and the President-elect's selection of Eric Holder to be\nAttorney General of the United States, provide an historic opportunity\nfor the country to move past the partisanship of the past decades, and\nwork together to solve the Nation's problems, protect against serious\nthreats, and meet some of the greatest challenges of our time. We all\nknow these men. They have long and distinguished records of service and\naccomplishments. They can make a real difference if we join with them,\nnot as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans.\n  The need for new leadership at the Department of Justice is as\ncritical today as it has ever been. The Judiciary Committee, both\nDemocrats and Republicans, spent a good deal of time and effort during\nthis Congress uncovering scandals at the Department. Former Attorney\nGeneral Gonzales, Karl Rove, Mr. Rove's White House deputies, and\nvirtually the entire leadership at the Department resigned in the wake\nof congressional investigation. Since then, the Inspector General at\nthe Department has confirmed many of our findings and fears, and there\nare still more reports to come. An ongoing criminal investigation is\nbeing conducted by a specially appointed prosecutor. The crisis at the\nDepartment of Justice is not resolved, but ongoing.\n  I want to continue the work we began last year when I scheduled\nprompt hearings and the Senate proceeded to confirm Michael Mukasey,\nMark Filip and Kevin O'Connor to serve as Attorney General, Deputy\nAttorney General and Associate Attorney General after the Rove-Gonzales\nresignations, even though we were on the eve of the election of a new\nPresident. We cannot now delay restoring the Justice Department and the\nconfidence the American people have in our justice system. We must\npromptly consider and confirm Eric H. Holder Jr., and other nominees of\nthe new President.\n  I was encouraged by the initial reaction in mid-November when Mr.\nHolder's name was reported as the likely nominee, and when he was\ndesignated by the President-elect on December 1. Democrats and\nRepublicans alike acknowledged his qualifications and praised the\nchoice. I appreciate the willingness of Larry Thompson, who was\nconfirmed early in 2001 as President Bush's first Deputy Attorney\nGeneral; Louis Freeh, the former Director of the FBI; and Fran\nTownsend, President Bush's former Homeland Security advisor, to speak\nout in support of Mr. Holder's designation.\n  As early as November 19, the ranking Republican member of the\nJudiciary Committee said that he would not hold up the matter, but\n``would be prepared to move ahead very promptly with hearings.'' I\nappreciated and shared his desire to proceed ``as fast as we can move''\nand his commitment that he ``wouldn't hold it up.'' He said that he\nhoped Mr. Holder would ``re-professionalize'' the Justice Department. I\nhope so, too.\n  I agree with Senator Specter that we need to strengthen the Justice\nDepartment. He and I coauthored an article in the Politico before the\nelection. In a sentence Senator Specter quoted recently on the Senate\nfloor, we wrote: ``The Attorney General must be someone who deeply\nappreciates and respects the work and commitment of the thousands of\nmen and women who work in the branches and divisions of the Justice\nDepartment, day in and day out, without regard to politics or ideology,\ndoing their best to enforce the law and promote justice.'' I have every\nconfidence that Eric Holder is such a person, and I said so in this\nchamber on November 20. Indeed, in his brief remarks on the morning he\nwas designated, Mr. Holder expressed just such appreciation.\n  I know that the professionals at the Department of Justice reacted\nwith delight when he was named because they know him well. They know\nhim from his 12 years at the Public Integrity Section, from his time as\nthe U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, from his tenure on the\nbench, and from his years as the Deputy Attorney General, the second-\nhighest ranking official of the Department. His prompt confirmation\nwill do a great deal to restore morale throughout the Justice\nDepartment.\n  I have called Mr. Holder a prosecutor's prosecutor. He participated\nin a number of prosecutions and appeals involving such defendants as\nthe State Treasurer of Florida, a former Ambassador to the Dominican\nRepublic, a local judge in Philadelphia, an Assistant United States\nAttorney in New York City, an FBI agent, a ``capo'' in\n\n[[Page S10972]]\n\nan organized crime family, and a powerful Democratic chairman of the\nHouse Ways and Means Committee.\n  After he served for a dozen years as a prosecutor, President Reagan\nnominated Mr. Holder to be a judge, and he served with distinction on\nthe Superior Court of the District of Columbia. He left the bench to\nbecome the first African American U.S. Attorney for the District of\nColumbia, heading the largest U.S. Attorney's office in the country.\n  Four years later, Mr. Holder was nominated to the important post of\nDeputy Attorney General. I worked with Senator Hatch, who was then\nChairman of the Judiciary Committee, to report his nomination favorably\nto the Senate. I was disturbed that an anonymous Republican hold\ndelayed consideration of his nomination for three weeks, but when the\nSenate finally voted, the vote was unanimous. All 100 Senators voted to\nconfirm Eric H. Holder Jr. to be the Deputy Attorney General of the\nUnited States. He became the first African-American in the history of\nthe Department to achieve that high position.\n  Eric Holder has prosecuted high-level public officials and organized\ncrime, developed comprehensive programs to combat domestic violence,\nchild abuse, and violent crime, and revitalized programs to assist\ncrime victims. He helped guide the Department's efforts on the criminal\nprosecution of corporations, health care fraud, computer crimes,\nsoftware piracy, and helped develop the community prosecution model. He\nhas served at nearly every level of the Department of Justice he would\nlead.\n  He is a public servant who will have broad support within the law\nenforcement community. He has already received the support of the 7,000\nmember National District Attorneys Association, NDAA. It was when I was\nthe vice president of that association and Arlen Specter was\nthe District Attorney in Philadelphia that the ranking member and I\nfirst met. The NDAA indicates that it feels a special relationship with\nMr. Holder because he was a street crime prosecutor.\n\n  Having a prompt confirmation hearing for the new Attorney General is\nin keeping with how we have treated all the men and women nominated to\nbe Attorney General in the 34 years I have served in the Senate, in\nparticular at the beginning of a newly-elected President's term. That\nis how the Senate acted on President Carter's appointment of Attorney\nGeneral Griffin Bell. That is how we acted on President Reagan's\nappointment of Attorney General William French Smith. When I chaired\nthe Judiciary Committee as President Bush was preparing to take office,\nI began the hearing on his selection for Attorney General just 25 days\nafter his designation. Likewise, last year I rejected the efforts by\nsome on my side of the aisle to delay hearings on Michael Mukasey and\nproceeded on that nomination in 30 days. I did not curb the rights of\nCommittee members to pose questions to then-nominee Mukasey during his\nconfirmation process; I do not intend to do so with Eric Holder.\n  I want to be as fair to President-elect Obama and to Mr. Holder as we\nhave been to others. I have noticed the hearing for the next Attorney\nGeneral to begin 39 days after he was officially designated and 52 days\nafter we all began reviewing his record following press reports on\nNovember 18.\n  In my statement to the Senate on November 20, I commended Senators\nHatch, Sessions, Coburn, and Grassley for their nonpartisanship when\nthey praised his selection. Senator Hatch spoke of his support for Mr.\nHolder, his experience and reputation. Senator Sessions, a former\nprosecutor, U.S. Attorney, and State Attorney General who is well aware\nof the problems at the Justice Department, said he was disposed to\nsupport him. Senator Coburn called it ``a good choice.'' In addition,\nSenator Grassley has acknowledged Mr. Holder's impeccable credentials\nwhile reserving judgment.\n  But of course since then, Karl Rove has appeared on the Today Show\nand signaled that Republicans ought to go after Mr. Holder. Right-wing\ntalk radio took up the drum beat.\n  I think the responsibilities of the Attorney General of the United\nStates are too important to have that appointment delayed by partisan\nbickering, by some tit-for-tat drawn out process. This is a public\nservant we have known and worked with for more than 20 years, and the\nSenate has previously confirmed him three times to important positions.\nHis record of public service, his integrity, his experience and the\ncommitment to the rule of law that he will bring to the office of the\nAttorney General of the United States deserve better. He should not be\nmade a pawn in some partisan political game.\n  I began the week meeting with Mr. Holder. He did not defend the Rich\npardon. That is hardly a new matter. It was the subject of House\nhearings and a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing chaired by Senator\nSpecter in 2001, almost 8 years ago. That is not a reason to delay his\nconfirmation hearing. In fact, the confirmation hearing will give those\nwho have doubts and need reassurance the chance to ask Mr. Holder about\nthat matter and hear about it directly from him.\n  I thought the President-elect had it right when he said recently that\nMr. Holder has acknowledged that the Rich pardon was a mistake.\nPresident-elect Obama agrees. I agree. President-elect Obama said:\n``But when you look at the totality of his experience, there is no\ndoubt that he is going to be an outstanding Attorney General.'' That is\nthe essential point.\n  Like the President-elect, I want the American people to have\nconfidence that laws are being evenly applied to everyone and that we\nare working with local and state as well as Federal officials\nconstantly to improve our criminal justice system. Public confidence\nand faith in that system has been shaken during the last several years,\nand Mr. Holder can help restore it.\n  We need the new Attorney General to be a person of integrity and\nexperience, who can inspire the thousands of hardworking prosecutors,\nagents and employees who do their best every day to enforce the law and\npromote justice without regard to partisan politics. We need an\nAttorney General, as Attorney General Robert H. Jackson said 68 years\nago about the Federal prosecutor, ``who serves the law and not\nfactional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.''\n  That is the kind of man Eric Holder is, the kind of prosecutor Eric\nHolder always was and the kind of Attorney General he would be. The\nnext Attorney General will understand our moral and legal obligation to\nprotect the fundamental rights of all Americans and to respect the\nhuman rights of all people. Eric Holder will ensure that the Department\nof Justice is working to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law,\nnot working to circumvent them.\n  I was struck by the contrast between what President Bush and Alberto\nGonzales said at that announcement and how President-elect Obama and\nMr. Holder spoke at his. This is part of the change we need, the change\nthe American people voted for and hunger for. President-elect Obama\nsaid: ``Let me be clear. The Attorney General serves the American\npeople. And I have every expectation that Eric will protect our people,\nuphold the public trust, and adhere to our Constitution.'' The next\nPresident understands the role of the Attorney General of the United\nStates and that it is not as counselor to the President. I have no\ndoubt that Mr. Holder understands the independence required of the\nAttorney General and that his experience and lessons he has learned\nwill serve him and the American people well.\n  No one should have to remind us how decimated the Department of\nJustice was during recent years, or how important it is that it be\nrestored. I think it was Senator Specter who called it dysfunctional\nand said that morale was in disarray. We understand that it is all too\nimportant that the Department have its senior leadership in place\nwithout delay. We must act on this nomination; the Attorney General is\nthe top law enforcement officer in the country and a key member of the\nnational security team.\n  When President Bush nominated Michael Mukasey last year, Senator Kyl\nsaid: ``Since the Carter administration, attorney general nominees have\nbeen confirmed, on average, in approximately three weeks, with some\nbeing confirmed even more quickly. The Senate should immediately move\nto consider Judge Mukasey's nomination and ensure he is confirmed\nbefore Congress\n\n[[Page S10973]]\n\nrecesses for Columbus Day.'' I held that hearing within 30 days. We\nshould not change the standards now that a Democrat is making the\nselection.\n  During my time in the Senate, serving during 8 presidential terms,\nthere has been an average of 29 days between announcement of an\nAttorney General designation and the start of hearings, and 37 days on\naverage from the announcement of the nominee to the Committee vote. The\nHolder hearing was set for 39 days after announcement, with the hope\nthat he can be considered by the Committee within 50 days. That does\nnot seem unreasonable. I do appreciate that we and our staffs will be\nworking over the holidays, but we have been called upon many times to\ndo so during the last several tumultuous years.\n  This is not the occasion to convert our consideration of an executive\nbranch nomination into the kind of searching scrutiny we rightly\nprovide for lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court, which is\napparently what the Republican side is intent upon doing.\n  This is no ordinary time. Over the last 8 years, political\nmanipulation and influence from partisan political operatives in the\nWhite FIouse have undercut the Department of Justice in its mission,\nseverely undermined the morale of its career professionals, and shaken\npublic confidence in our Federal justice system. During those 8 years,\nwe experienced the attacks of September 11 and have retooled the\nJustice Department and the FBI to work closely with the intelligence\ncommunity in our efforts to prevent terrorism. Never has it been more\nimportant to have an experienced hand as Attorney General.\n  I hope our Republican Members will resist the temptation toward\npartisanship and join with us to consider this appointment fairly and\npromptly.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10973-2", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "HONORING LAWRENCE MCHUGH", "SENATE", "SENATE", "HONORING", "S10973", "S10974", "[{\"name\": \"Christopher J. Dodd\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10973", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10973-S10974]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        HONORING LAWRENCE MCHUGH\n\n Mr. DODD. Mr. President, in these times of financial\nuncertainty, today I would like to take the time to commend Mr.\nLawrence McHugh of my State, and to recognize his 25 years of\nleadership at the Middlesex County Chamber of Commerce.\n  In Larry's quarter century as the president of the organization,\nmembership has grown from 282 to a total of 2,400 members who employ\nover 50,000 individuals in central Connecticut.\n  The Chamber itself now employs 22 people and increased its annual\nbudget from $109,000 in 1983 to over $2 million in 2007.\n\n[[Page S10974]]\n\n  Mr. McHugh has served as the president of the Connecticut Association\nof Chamber of Commerce Executives and vice chair of both the\nConnecticut Employment and Training Commission and the Connecticut\nTourism Council, as well as on many other boards of organizations that\nseek to improve businesses and communities across the State.\n  Impressive as these figures may be, the true measure of his\ncontributions to his community cannot be measured by statistics or\nfigures.\n  Larry McHugh has shown remarkable leadership in protecting not only\nthe local businesses of central Connecticut, but also the future of our\nState through his extensive work with our youth.\n  Following an injury that ended his football career with the AFL's New\nYork Titans, Larry took a position as the football coach for Xavier\nHigh School in Middletown, CT where he spent 20 years inspiring his\nathletes to great success both on and off the field. He would later\ncombine his interest in achieving the best for his students and\nathletes with his business savvy in spending 8 years as the head of\nfund raising for Mercy and Xavier High Schools.\n  Fortunately for the youth of Connecticut, Larry has continued to\ninvest in their futures in the years since his retirement from\ncoaching. Under Larry's leadership, the Middlesex County Chamber of\nCommerce has consistently promoted programs seeking to partner\nbusinesses with the young people of the State, both equipping the youth\nwith real life experiences and business opportunities and providing\nlocal businesses with the ability to reinvest in the futures of their\ncompanies. Larry has placed a premium on establishing a vital\nconnection between businesses and the community's greatest asset--its\nhuman capital.\n  Despite great worries over our national economy, it is of the utmost\ncomfort to me to know that the businesses of central Connecticut are\nunder the leadership of a man who has a proven record of doing great\nthings for his Chamber and for his community. I would like to join my\nvoice with those across Connecticut that already speak of his success\nwith the greatest respect, and commend Larry McHugh for his 25 years of\nservice. His continued focus on the promise of the future convinces me\nthat there is none better to be leading the local industries at such a\ntime as this.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10973", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "ALAN NEWMAN: CONDUCTOR OF COSMIC SYMPHONIES", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10973", "S10973", "[{\"name\": \"Patrick J. Leahy\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10973", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10973]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              ALAN NEWMAN: CONDUCTOR OF COSMIC SYMPHONIES\n\n Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Burlington Free Press recently\npublished a profile of Alan Newman, a habitual entrepreneur who has be\nthe genius and force behind a number of companies established in and\naround Burlington, VT. Anyone who has met Alan is immediately embraced\nby his creative exuberance. That creativity combined with his unique\nvision and style create a special brew that has resulted in an\nincredible run of establishing successful companies.\n  I wish to recognize Alan for his accomplishments and I ask that a\ncopy of the entire Burlington Free Press article be printed in the\nRecord.\n\n                  [Burlington Free Press, Dec. 8, 2008]\n\n                          Alan Newman Opens Up\n\n                            (By Dan McLean)\n\n        South Burlington.--Alan Newman, co-founder and president\n     of Magic Hat Brewing Co., has helped create about a half-\n     dozen Vermont-based companies. During his decades of building\n     businesses, he has learned where he excels--and when he has\n     reached his limit.\n       ``My skill appears to be starting and growing businesses,''\n     including building a brand and a culture for the company,\n     Newman said. When businesses hit about $7.5 million in annual\n     revenue and reach about 50 employees, Newman says he has\n     arrived at his ``level of incompetence.''\n       Newman said he reached that modified Peter Principle with\n     Magic Hat about six years ago. Newman said if he remains at\n     the helm after a company has hit that threshold, ``the\n     organization starts to fall apart.''\n       ``We started having trouble shipping things that people had\n     ordered. Communication within staff starts to falter.\n     Planning doesn't happen properly,'' he said. ``As you hit a\n     certain size, you need a little more discipline. You need a\n     little more management. That's where I start not performing\n     well.''\n       ``I'm really an opportunity junkie,'' Newman said. ``I'm\n     very good at seeing opportunities and going for them . . .\n     but at some point you need to stop chasing every possibility\n     and focus on a plan.''\n       That's where Martin Kelly comes in. Kelly served as CEO of\n     Magic Hat and is now CEO of Magic Hat's parent company,\n     Independent Brewers United Inc., which was formed when Magic\n     Hat bought Seattle-based Pyramid Breweries Inc. last spring\n     for $35 million.\n       Newman said Kelly has been a crucial part of the operation\n     during the past few years. ``I create chaos and he tries to\n     control it,'' he said.\n       Newman is president of Magic Hat, but prefers his informal\n     title, ``conductor of cosmic symphonies.'' ``\n       That's really my title,'' he said.\n       Newman, who had a hand in the creation of Gardeners Supply\n     Co., Seventh Generation and Magic Hat, says he has no secret\n     to starting successful ventures.\n       ``I really don't. It really started by accident,'' Newman\n     said in an interview in his office located in a modestly\n     appointed trailer, named Sweet Lillian, next to the South\n     Burlington brewery.\n       ``I was sick and tired of getting fired,'' he said,\n     recalling his time in Vermont in the mid-1970s. ``I just\n     figured I better figure out how to support myself if I wanted\n     to stay in Vermont. I just kind of followed my nose.\n        ``I irritate people. I'm really not a good employee. I'm\n     highly insubordinate,'' he said, explaining that starting a\n     business was a better option than working for someone else.\n     ``It's been a constant theme in my life and career.'' Newman\n     insists he is in an unlikely executive.\n       ``Honestly,'' he said, wearing bright-yellow glasses and a\n     tie-dye shirt. ``There is nothing in my background. I never\n     had any interest in business. I never had any interest in\n     starting businesses.\n       ``I've never taken a business course in my life,'' he said,\n     downplaying the importance of an MBA. ``I'm not an education-\n     driven guy. I believe in experience.''\n       Newman, 62, was born in Brooklyn and grew up on Long\n     Island. He attended Long Island University with a major in\n     psychology and minors in sociology and English. ``I have\n     always been interested in culture. I grew up in the '60s.''\n       Newman said his strengths are creating culture, branding\n     and a vision for the companies.\n       ``The business, to me, is secondary. I'm more interested in\n     painting pictures,'' he said. A crucial part of forming a\n     company's ``painting'' is culture and philosophy. ``It's\n     never been about making money.''\n       ``It's about trying to create a picture, trying to create a\n     culture and trying to marry them. This is kind of what I do\n     know,'' he said.\n       For Magic Hat that philosophy is: ``to be a good neighbor\n     in our community,'' he said.\n       Magic Hat, he said, assists a series of nonprofits\n     including Vermont Cares, Committee on Temporary Shelter and\n     The Women's Rape Crisis Center. ``That's the part I get\n     addicted to,'' he said.\n       ``I make things more complicated'' by connecting events\n     with charities, he said. The Women's Rape Crisis Center, for\n     example, gets about $20,000 from the annual Mardi Gras\n     parade, which Magic Hat created in the mid-1990s.\n       Not all of Newman's ventures have been a success.\n       But he said he learns lessons--the best lessons--from the\n     failures.\n       He and a friend created a yacht time-sharing company,\n     Highland International in Hanksville, in the late 1970s.\n     Highland International never generated any revenue. Newman\n     and his partner burned through $300,000 of seed money in\n     about 18 months. Reflecting on the business misfire, Newman\n     said he should have purchased one boat with the funds,\n     instead of trying to leverage it into millions. Lesson\n     learned: proceed slowly.\n       Another one of Newman's business mistakes was Magic Hat's\n     Ale of the Living Dead, a garlic beer.\n       One of the bottles sits on Newman's desk. The beer, he\n     said, was often returned as ``undrinkable.'' The lesson with\n     the garlic beer: ``Don't let me drive recipe creation.''\n       The acquisition of Pyramid gives Magic Hat the potential to\n     place its bottles of brew on shelves in many more states.\n     Magic Hat is sold in 18 states now, mostly on the East Coast.\n     Pyramid's beers are sold in 28 states.\n       Newman said they had no choice but to expand Magic Hat\n     because the company ``had already passed through the overhead\n     level where small could work.''\n       Newman said the idea for Magic Hat emerged in 1993 with co-\n     founder Bob Johnson. The next year the pair were making beer\n     on Flynn Avenue in Burlington. After three years, Magic Hat\n     moved to a larger operation in South Burlington. When Magic\n     Hat left Flynn Avenue, 6,000 barrels were being brewed a\n     year. This year, Magic Hat will brew about 130,000 barrels at\n     the South Burlington location, Newman said. A barrel is 31\n     gallons.\n       Not including brew pubs, there are 300 to 400\n     microbreweries in the U.S. fighting for a 5 percent share of\n     the beer market, Newman said.\n       ``In order to be a survivor, we think you have to get\n     bigger. You can't stay small,'' he said.\n       Perhaps, recalling the lessons learned from his failed\n     yacht time-share company decades ago, when he learned to\n     ``start small and grow,'' Newman said Magic Hat's expansion\n     ``will be slow and methodical.''\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-12-pt1-PgS10974", "2008-12-12", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS UNTIL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2008, AT 11 A.M.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10974", "S10974", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10974", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 187 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10974]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          RECESS UNTIL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2008, AT 11 A.M.\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate stands in recess until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, December 16, 2008.\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 10 and 54 seconds a.m., recessed until\nTuesday, December 16, 2008, at 11 a.m."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1320", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1320", "D1321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"SCONRES\", \"number\": \"107\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"664\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"710\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"728\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3501\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3732\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3741\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7005\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7327\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1320", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1320-D1321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                        Thursday, December 11, 2008\n\n[[Page D1320]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\nRoutine Proceedings, pages S10889-S10958\nMeasures Introduced: Ten bills and one resolution were introduced, as\nfollows: S. 3732-3741, and S. Con. Res. 107.\n  Page S10946\nMeasures Reported:\n  Report to accompany S. 3501, to ensure that Congress is notified when\nthe Department of Justice determines that the Executive Branch is not\nbound by a statute. (S. Rept. No. 110-528)\nPage S10946\nMeasures Passed:\n  Technical Corrections: Senate passed H.R. 7327, to make technical\ncorrections related to the Pension Protection Act of 2006, clearing the\nmeasure for the President.\n  Pages S10914-15\n  United States Capitol Complex Tours: Senate agreed to S. Con. Res.\n107, expressing the sense of Congress regarding the rights of Members\nof Congress (or any employee of a Member of Congress authorized by that\nmember) to lead tours of the United States Capitol complex.\n                                                            Page S10957\n  Union Station, Washington, D.C. Centennial: Committee on Environment\nand Public Works was discharged from further consideration of S. Res.\n664, celebrating the centennial of Union Station in Washington,\nDistrict of Columbia, and the resolution was then agreed to.\n                                                            Page S10957\n  National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Week:\nCommittee on the Judiciary was discharged from further consideration of\nS. Res. 710, designating the week of February 2 through February 6,\n2009, as ``National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention\nWeek'', and the resolution was then agreed to.\n  Pages S10957-58\n  National Mentoring Month: Committee on the Judiciary was discharged\nfrom further consideration of S. Res. 728, designating January 2009 as\n``National Mentoring Month'', and the resolution was then agreed to.\n                                                        Pages S10957-58\nMeasures Considered:\nAlternative Minimum Tax Relief Act--Cloture: Senate continued\nconsideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of H.R. 7005,\nto amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide alternative\nminimum tax relief for individuals for 2008.\n  Page S10931\n  During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action:\n  By 52 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 215), three-fifths of those Senators\nduly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, Senate\nrejected the motion to close further debate on the motion to proceed to\nconsideration of the bill.\nPage S10931\n  Senator Reid entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture\nwas not invoked on the motion to proceed to consideration of the bill.\n                                                            Page S10931\nAppointments:\n  Congressional Award Board: The Chair, on behalf of the Majority\nLeader, pursuant to Public Law 96-114, as amended, appointed the\nfollowing individual to the Congressional Award Board: Major General\nRobert Newman of Virginia.\n  Page S10958\nAuthorizing Leadership to Make Appointments--Agreement: A unanimous-\nconsent agreement was reached providing that, notwithstanding the\nrecess or adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the\nPresident Pro Tempore, and the Majority and Minority Leaders be\nauthorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards,\nconferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by\nconcurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.\n                                                            Page S10958\nPro Forma Sessions--Agreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was\nreached providing that Senate meet in pro forma sessions with no\nbusiness conducted on the following days and times: Friday, December 12\nat 10 a.m.; Tuesday, December 16 at 11 a.m.; Friday, December 19 at 10\na.m.; Tuesday, December 23 at 11 a.m.; Friday, December 26 at 11 a.m.;\nTuesday, December 30 at 10:30 a.m.; and Friday, January 2 at 10 a.m.;\nand that at the close of the pro forma session on Friday, January 2,\nSenate stand adjourned sine die under the provisions of H. Con. Res.\n440.\n  Page S10958\n\n[[Page D1321]]\n\nNomination Received: Senate received the following nomination: Matthew\nW. Friedrich, of Texas, to be an Assistant Attorney General.\n                                                            Page S10958\nMessages from the House:\n  Pages S10944-45\nExecutive Communications:\n  Pages S10945-46\nAdditional Cosponsors:\n  Page S10947\nStatements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions:\n  Pages S10947-51\nAdditional Statements:\n  Pages S10943-44\nAmendments Submitted:\n  Pages S10951-57\nAuthorities for Committees to Meet:\n  Page S10957\nRecord Votes: One record vote was taken today. (Total--215)\n                                                            Page S10931\nRecess: Senate convened at 10 a.m. and recessed at 11:50 p.m., until 10\na.m. on Friday, December 12, 2008. (For Senate's program, see the\nremarks of the Acting Majority Leader in today's Record on page\nS10958.)"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1321-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1321", "D1321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"440\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. D1321", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\n  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at\n11 a.m. on Saturday, January, 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 440."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1321-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1321", "D1321", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1321", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\nSTATES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES--IMPACT OF RECESSION\nCommittee on Appropriations: Held a hearing on the Impact of Recession\non States and Local Communities. Testimony was heard from the following\nGovernors: Jon Corzine, New Jersey; Jim Doyle, Wisconsin; and Jim\nDouglas, Vermont; and public witnesses.\nOVERSIGHT--ADMINISTRATION'S LAST-MINUTE RULEMAKINGS\nSelect Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming: Held a\nhearing entitled ``Approaching Midnight: Oversight of the Bush\nAdministration's Last-Minute Rulemakings.'' Testimony was heard from\npublic witnesses."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1321-4", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR 2008-12-12", "", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDCOMMITTEEMEETINGS", "D1321", "D1321", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1321", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR FRIDAY,\n\n                           DECEMBER 12, 2008\n\n        (Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)\n\n                                 Senate\n\n  No meetings/hearings scheduled.\n\n                                 House\n\n  No committee meetings are scheduled."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1321-5", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1321", "D1322", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1321", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1321-D1322]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087\ufffd09390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through GPO Access, a service of the Government Printing Office,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The online database is updated each\n\u0000 day the Congressional Record is published. The database includes\n\u0000 both text and graphics from the beginning of the 103d Congress,\n\u0000 2d session (January 1994) forward.  It is available through GPO\n\u0000 Access at www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess. Customers can also access this\n\u0000 information with WAIS client software, via telnet at\n\u0000 swais.access.gpo.gov, or dial-in using communications software\n\u0000 and a modem at 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091661. Questions or comments regarding this\n\u0000 database or GPO Access can be directed to the GPO Access User\n\u0000 Support Team at: E-Mail: gpoaccess@gpo.gov; Phone 1\ufffd09888\ufffd09293\ufffd096498\n\u0000 (toll-free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091530 (D.C. area); Fax: 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091262.\n\u0000 The Team's hours of availability are Monday through Friday,\n\u0000 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,\n\u0000 except Federal holidays.\n\u0000\u0014The Congressional Record paper and 24x microfiche edition will\n\u0000 be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, at the\n\u0000 following prices: paper edition, $252.00 for six months,\n\u0000 $503.00 per year, or purchased as follows: less than 200 pages,\n\u0000 $10.50; between 200 and 400 pages, $21.00; greater than 400 pages,\n\u0000 $31.50, payable in advance; microfiche edition, $146.00 per year,\n\u0000 or purchased for $3.00 per issue payable in advance.\n\u0000 The semimonthly Congressional Record Index may be purchased for\n\u0000 the same per issue prices. To place an order for any of these\n\u0000 products, visit the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at:\n\u0000 bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250\ufffd097954, or phone orders to\n\u0000 866\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (toll free), 202\ufffd09512\ufffd091800 (D.C. area), or fax to\n\u0000 202\ufffd09512\ufffd092104. Remit check or money order, made payable to the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover,\n\u0000 American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000\n\u0000POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000Congressional Record,\n\u0000U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 Along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1322]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                     10 a.m., Friday, December 12\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Friday: Senate will meet in pro forma session.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                   11 a.m., Saturday, January 3, 2009\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Saturday: To be announced."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgD1321", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1321", "D1321", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. D1321", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\nWEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION PROLIFERATION AND TERRORISM PREVENTION\nREPORT\nCommittee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: Committee\nconcluded a hearing to examine a report from the Commission on the\nPrevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism,\nafter receiving testimony from former Senators Bob Graham and Jim\nTalent, Chairman and Vice Chairman, respectively, and former\nRepresentative Tim Roemer, and Robin Cleveland, each a Commissioner,\nall of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction\nProliferation and Terrorism."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "H10977", "H10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. H10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page H10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2008\n\nNo. 186"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgH10977-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "OMISSION FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2008, AT PAGE 10870", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H10977", "H10977", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"602\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1193\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2040\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5714\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"6867\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. H10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page H10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nOMISSION FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2008,\n                             AT PAGE 10870\n\n                                 ______\n\n                ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 4 of rule I, the\nfollowing enrolled bills were signed by the Speaker on Thursday,\nNovember 20, 2008:\n  H.R. 5714, to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in\nrecognition and celebration of the establishment of the United States\nArmy in 1775, to honor the American soldier of both today and\nyesterday, in wartime and in peace, and to commemorate the traditions,\nhistory, and heritage of the United States Army and its role in\nAmerican society, from the colonial period to today.\n  H.R. 6867, to provide for additional emergency unemployment\ncompensation.\n  S. 602, an act to develop the next generation of parental control\ntechnology.\n  S. 1193, an act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to take into\ntrust two parcels of Federal land for the benefit of certain Indian\npueblos in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes.\n  On Friday, November 21, 2008:\n  H.R. 2040, to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in\ncommemoration of the semicentennial of the enactment of the Civil\nRights Act of 1964.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgH10977-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "OMISSION FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2008, AT PAGE H10957", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H10977", "H10977", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2040\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5714\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"6867\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. H10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page H10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nOMISSION FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2008,\n                             AT PAGE H10957\n\n                                 ______\n\n                         ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED\n\n  Ms. Lorraine C. Miller, Clerk of the House, reported and found truly\nenrolled bills of the House of the following titles, which were\nthereupon signed by the Speaker on Thursday, November 20, 2008:\n\n       H.R. 5714. An act to require the Secretary of the Treasury\n     to mint coins in recognition and celebration of the\n     establishment of the United States Army in 1775, to honor the\n     American soldier of both today and yesterday, in wartime and\n     in peace, and to commemorate the traditions, history, and\n     heritage of the United States Army and its role in American\n     society, from the Colonial period to today.\n       H.R. 6867. An act to provide for additional emergency\n     unemployment compensation.\n           On Friday, November 21, 2008:\n       H.R. 2040. An act to require the Secretary of the Treasury\n     to mint coins in commemoration of the semicentennial of the\n     enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgH10977-4", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "SENATE ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ENROLLEDSIGNED", "H10977", "H10977", null, "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"602\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1193\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. H10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page H10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                      SENATE ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED\n\n  The Speaker announced her signature to enrolled bills of the Senate\nof the following titles, which were thereupon signed by the Speaker on\nThursday, November 20, 2008:\n\n       S. 602. An act to develop the next generation of parental\n     control technology.\n       S. 1193. An act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to\n     take into trust 2 parcels of Federal land for the benefit of\n     certain Indian Pueblos in the State of New Mexico, and for\n     other purposes."], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgH10977", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H10977", "H10977", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. H10977", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[House]\n[Page H10977]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page H10977]]\n\nHouse of Representatives\n\nThe House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held\non Saturday, January 3, 2009, at 11 a.m.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS-FrontMatter-5", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "FRONTMATTER", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                              S E N A T E\n\nVol. 154\n\nWASHINGTON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2008\n\nNo. 186"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "prayer", "SENATE", "SENATE", "PRAYER", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 prayer\n\n  The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:\n  Let us pray.\n  Lord God, You open to us horizons of hope through faith's resources.\nLet Your grace undergird our Senators' lives, as You fill their days\nwith a knowledge of Your will. Guide them to solutions that best honor\nYou, as they find in You a resource for every need. Deepen their desire\nto please You, opening to them new opportunities to obey Your commands.\nStrengthen their worthy desires and be for them a shelter in the storm.\nMay they grow in grace and in knowledge of You.\n  We pray in Your strong Name. Amen.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "PLEDGE", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE\n\n  The Honorable Mark L. Pryor led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:\n\n       I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of\n     America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation\n     under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889-4", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to\nthe Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).\n  The assistant legislative clerk read the following letter:\n\n                                                      U.S. Senate,\n\n                                        President pro tempore,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 11, 2008.\n\n     To the Senate:\n\n       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the\n     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable\n     Mark L. Pryor, a Senator from the State of Arkansas, to\n     perform the duties of the Chair.\n                                                   Robert C. Byrd,\n                                            President pro tempore.\n\n  Mr. PRYOR thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro\ntempore.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889-5", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889-6", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "SCHEDULE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SSCHEDULE", "S10889", "S10890", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Bob Corker\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7005\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7005\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10889-S10890]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                SCHEDULE\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will\nproceed to a period of morning business, with Senators allowed to speak\nfor up to 10 minutes each. Following morning business, the Senate will\nresume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 7005, the\nlegislative vehicle for the auto industry's financing and\nrestructuring. Rollcall votes are possible during today's session in\nthe Senate.\n  When we left here a few weeks ago, the decision was made that there\nwould be 1 week for the automobile industry to make presentations to\nthe two committees of jurisdiction, the House and the Senate Banking\nCommittees, to determine what would take place during the following\nweek. That was last week, and hearings were held in both committees,\nand evidence, in fact, was taken. There have been weeks and weeks of\nwork put into coming up with a piece of legislation on which we can\nvote. That matter is before the Senate in H.R. 7005.\n  I have had calls from a number of Senators today--frankly, mostly\nRepublican Senators--telling me that they have the solution to all of\nthe problems of the auto industry; they need a few amendments. A few\namendments. We have done our very best to include everyone who wants\nany input into this legislation. The White House, President Bush and\nhis people have been heavily involved in this legislation. This is, in\neffect, the White House's legislation.\n  There was a decision made that the minority would not participate in\nthe preparing of this legislation. But the White House was heavily\ninvolved. Negotiations took place over days between Chairman Frank and\nChairman Dodd and the White House, and we now have a piece of\nlegislation. Some have asked: Well, what we want is to set up a\nprocedure where we have lots of amendments, and then we will ultimately\nvote on the final version.\n  I think it is only fair that if the minority, the Republicans, want\nto have a better bill, then they should offer an alternative. I invite\nthem to do it. The House passed a bill last night. It would be my\nsuggestion that we perhaps have a vote on the substitute or the\nalternative the Republicans would put forward, vote on the House bill,\nvote on the Senate bill. If there is no agreement that can be reached\non that, we have danced this tune long enough.\n  What we will do, we can have a motion to proceed to this tomorrow,\nand if the Republicans want to come and say, well, you know, you have\nnot allowed us any opportunity to offer amendments--that is what has\ntaken place for the last 2 years, and look what it got the Republicans:\nlost seven or eight Senate seats, lost the Presidency. We want to\nlegislate, and we are doing the very best we can to do that.\n  I have reached out to my Republican colleagues. As soon as the\nelections were over, I called a number of Republicans and said: We want\nto work with you. We cannot continue doing what we have done in the\npast. But we are right back where we have been for 2 years, the same\nplace we have been for 2 years.\n  So, again, I suggest that if the Republicans have an alternative, let\nthem\n\n[[Page S10890]]\n\noffer that. It would be very easy to do. We could vote on a Republican\nalternative, we would have a vote on the White House proposal now\nbefore the Senate, and we would vote on the bill that passed the House\nand leave here. If that is not something the Republicans choose to do,\nthen we will vote tomorrow on a motion to proceed to the bill that has\nbeen prepared, drafted, and had input on by the two committees and the\nWhite House. If we are not allowed to proceed to that, then we, in\nfact, will be through with this, as we have been through with numerous\npieces of legislation through the past year.\n  So, again, I invite the Republicans, if they have an alternative, to\nput it forward. They have had ample opportunity to do that. Again, I\nhave received a number of phone calls from Republicans today saying: I\nhave just the thing that needs to be done to make this a great piece of\nlegislation. Well, I would hope they would be ready to do that. If not,\nwe will have a vote tomorrow on a motion to proceed to H.R. 7005.\n  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10889", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S10889", "S10889", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10889", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10889]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S10889]]\n\nSenate\n\n(Legislative day of Wednesday, December 10, 2008)\n\n  The Senate met at 10 a.m., on the expiration of the recess, and was\ncalled to order by the Honorable Mark L. Pryor, a Senator from the\nState of Arkansas.\n                                 ______"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10890-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SMBUSINESS", "S10890", "S10890", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10890", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10890]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nSenate will proceed to a period of morning business for 1 hour, with\nSenators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10890-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "ORDER OF PROCEDURE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SORDER", "S10890", "S10890", "[{\"name\": \"Bob Corker\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"James M. Inhofe\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10890", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10890]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           ORDER OF PROCEDURE\n\n  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, my understanding was that if possible--I\nmade some calls earlier today that that may be waived and that I go up\nto 25 minutes.\n  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I ask\nunanimous consent that the Senator from Tennessee be given the amount\nof time he wants, and immediately following that, that I would be\nrecognized for such time as I shall consume.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Oklahoma have\na sense for how much time that will be?\n  Mr. INHOFE. About 15 minutes.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n  The Senator from Tennessee is recognized.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10890-4", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "AUTOMOBILE CRISIS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10890", "S10894", "[{\"name\": \"Bob Corker\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Johnny Isakson\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"James M. Inhofe\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Ensign\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Benjamin L. Cardin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3683\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. S10890", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10890-S10894]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           AUTOMOBILE CRISIS\n\n  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about where we are in\nthis auto bailout. In essence, it is show time here. A bill came over\nfrom the House last night. It is the end of the year. There is an\nimpending crisis we are dealing with here in the country. So today we\nwill be debating that and hopefully in the next few days take a vote.\n  I spent a lot of time in the committee talking with certain and\nvarious parties involved. I spent a lot of time outside the committee\ndoing the same thing. There is no doubt we are going through an\neconomic time that is very difficult for the auto industry. It is also\ndifficult for businesses and families all across this country as they\ntry to make their budgets work out.\n  As we have looked at this issue, I know there has been a lot of\nnegotiation that has taken place between the White House and House\nDemocrats. I really think the product that has been developed is a very\npoor product.\n  I don't blame that on my Democratic colleagues who negotiated because\nthe White House is actually at a point where they are looking for the\nnext flight out of town on January 20. Basically, they want to kick the\ncan down the road and let some other administration and some other\nCongress deal with this issue. All of us are going to be here next\nyear. It is our responsibility to deal with this issue in a\nprofessional and a competent manner and actually solve the problem.\n  I say to my colleagues on both the left and right, on the Democratic\nand Republican sides, we have a historic opportunity to actually solve\nthis problem. The solution is very simple.\n  I have looked at this legislation that has come over. It is similar\nto so many things we do around here. It is akin to a three-humped\ncamel. You couldn't make it more ineffective and more complicated. We\nhave put in place a czar. It seems like with everything we do around\nhere, we try to find a person who can save us from the crisis that is\nhappening. We did the same with the financial rescue package not long\nago. I have looked at the actual responsibilities of this czar. I said\nyesterday I had a banking staff person who actually could fulfill those\nresponsibilities. She read that in the paper this morning and came in\nand said she is overqualified, that in essence this is not something\nshe would want to take on. I think we can use some help, certainly,\nfrom the outside, and there may be a role for somebody such as this.\nBut what we are looking at is a fairly simple transaction. It is a lot\nof money, a fairly simple transaction.\n  Here is what we have. We have three companies. Two of the companies\nare on the verge of bankruptcy. As a matter of fact, I would say two of\nthe companies are in bankruptcy. I know Chrysler, today, is meeting\nwith their supplier group. I know if they don't win concessions today,\nthey are in great trouble. General Motors has told us if they don't\nreceive funding by the end of this year, they will have to file\nbankruptcy. I believe that.\n  We have a lot of Republicans who would like to see that happen, would\nlike to see chapter 11 occur and to see them go through the laws that\nexist for reorganization in a way that is clean and allow them to move\nahead in a financially stable way. As a matter of fact, many\nRepublicans would actually agree to something called debtor-in-\npossession financing after that occurred so these companies could\nevolve. There are people on the other side of the aisle who have\ndecided that is a cost that is too great to bear.\n  I started out along the path that I believed the best way for us to\nsolve the problem was to actually cause these companies to go through\nreorganization and any role we might play as the Federal Government\nwould be in the way of debtor-in-possession financing. After listening\nto the testimony and after talking to people all across the country who\nare involved, I do believe the supply chain is in great stress. They\nare undercapitalized. The three companies have already been utilizing\nthe supplier chain for financing by paying late and carrying payments\nfor lengths of time. I do think the supply chain is fragile.\n  What I have tried to do is figure out a way to create a piece of\nlegislation that is elegant, simple, actually solves the problem, and\ncauses these companies to be in great shape and for us to be able to\nmove ahead and know that has been done.\n  There are a lot of times I have heard people say: We are from the\nGovernment, and we are here to help you. When people hear that, they\nusually run for the hills. This is a case where if we will take a\nmoment, we can actually do something that is great for these companies.\nWe have a big stick. These companies cannot get financing anyplace\nexcept from the Federal Government. So we have an opportunity to sort\nof thread the needle in a simple way and cause these companies to be\nsuccessful.\n  Let me say, other than the economic issues, these companies have\nthree major issues. Each one of them is different. We know that\nbasically we are talking about General Motors here. We wouldn't be\nhaving this discussion if it weren't for General Motors. Chrysler would\nnot be here if it weren't for that. They are in serious trouble but\nwouldn't have the clout to be able to talk to us in this way. Ford has\nmoney today because of refinancing they did back in 2006. They are not\neven part of the discussion today. They might be down the road, but\ntoday they are financially viable, although burning cash at a rate that\nis almost equal to that of General Motors. We are talking--to make this\nclear to people--\n\n[[Page S10891]]\n\nabout three entities we need to talk to: General Motors, Cerberus or\nChrysler, and the UAW.\n  There are three things that are basically causing these companies\ndifficulty. One is the capital structure. The debt these companies have\nis not sustainable. It doesn't matter how much money we were to put\ninto General Motors; with the $62 billion in debt they have today,\nthere is no way they can sustain their company. They cannot. GM only\nhas a market cap today of around $2 billion. Toyota has a market cap of\n$130 billion. BMW has a market cap of $14 billion. So this is a company\nthat has a huge amount of debt and very little value. Chrysler probably\nhas no value. They are privately held. So we have two companies we need\nto deal with in a similar way, as it turns out.\n  Let me lay something out. Right now the capital structure in both\nplaces is too high. Cerberus and Chrysler can't withstand its debt. GM\ncannot withstand its debt. Secondly, the labor costs are out of line. I\nknow there is a lot of talking about the UAW. Candidly, I will admit,\nin some cases they get a bad rap. A lot of the people who are my\nfriends would not like me saying that, but in some cases they actually\nget a bad rap as to the way the comparisons go.\n  The third issue is the dealership issue. I don't think we can deal\nwith that today. There are two issues we can deal with in this loan and\nsolve the problem. One is the capital structure. The other is the labor\nissue. Here is what I propose. We will be putting this forward, as\nSenator Reid mentioned. We have some alternative legislation. I hope it\nis something both Democrats and Republicans can embrace. It is very\nsimple. Let's go ahead and fund the money. Let's fund the money that\nhas been requested. To Republicans, that is like debtor-in-possession\nfinancing anyway because these companies are basically bankrupt. To\nDemocrats, the funding is in place to cause these companies to be\nwhole. Let's go ahead and fund the request that has taken place.\n  Let's have three covenants. We can do this with a very short bill\nwhich we drafted. The first covenant is that by March 15, the\noutstanding indebtedness at the two companies that are going to apply\nfor this has to be reduced by two-thirds or the companies have to file\nfor bankruptcy on March 15. That gives the companies, the bondholders,\nwhich we have talked to on the phone, plenty of incentive to make sure\nthe debt is reduced by two-thirds so these companies have a capital\nstructure that allows them to go forward. This is the only way they\nwill be successful. We have had plenty of people testify that if we put\nour money on top of the $62 billion in debt GM has, there is no way\nthey can be successful, even if we are selling 20 million cars a year.\nToday, we know, we are selling at a 10 million rate. That is No. 1.\nGive them the money. If by March 15 they haven't reduced their capital\nstructure in that regard--and we have talked to people on all sides who\nbelieve this can happen, but it can only happen with the stick of\nGovernment, meaning we are going to force them into bankruptcy if they\ndon't do it. That is the first covenant.\n\n  The second covenant is, I have listened to Mr. Gettelfinger's\ntestimony and talked to him on the phone this morning. He says the only\nway the UAW can make concessions is if they see the bondholders have\ndone so first. This legislation makes that happen by March 15. So,\nsecondly, after the UAW has seen that the bondholders have taken a\n``haircut,'' a word that is used around here a lot, they have to do two\nthings: No. 1, they have to convert half the VEBA obligation, the\nVoluntary Employee Benefit Association obligations. They have to\nconvert half those to equity. If the company goes bankrupt, these\nfuture payments are never going to happen anyway. Again, that reduces\nthe debt at GM by another $10.5 billion, and it gives the UAW equity in\na company that actually has value now because the debt by the\nbondholders has been reduced. That is the second covenant--very simple.\n  The third action they have to take is at that same public meeting\nwhere they take a vote, they have to agree to have a contract in place\nthat puts them in parity with companies such as Toyota and Nissan and\nVolkswagen and other companies here. Before everybody goes crazy over\nthat, that is as certified by the Secretary of Labor. That is not\nsomething we prescribe. I realize there will be subtleties in that.\nThere are comparisons that have to be made. To my friends on the left,\nthat would be a Secretary of Labor by the Obama administration who has\nthe ability to look at the various differences and nuances to actually\ncertify that.\n  I have talked to Ron Gettelfinger this morning. Because of the\ndebates we have had recently, I am probably not on his Christmas card\nlist this year. I realize that. But he actually is talking with his\nleaders about this. I have talked to the COO at General Motors last\nnight and this morning. He was the former chief financial officer. He\nagrees this will work. This gives the stick to the Government to make\nthem have to do the things they need to do to actually cram down their\nbondholders.\n  I have heard a lot about Main Street and Wall Street. For those\npeople who want to take an ounce or a pound of flesh from Wall Street,\nthose are mostly the people who own these bonds. They will be taking\nthis huge haircut, two-thirds. In GM's case, it is about $20 billion\nthat would be converted to equity and take away a face amount of debt.\n  I plan to be here all day today. I would like to take 30 minutes off\nfrom 12:30 to 1 to give a talk someplace. But I would ask any Democrat,\nany Republican to please come down to the floor, call me, e-mail me,\ntell me why we couldn't put in place these three covenants which are\nvery reasonable. They are the only actions that can happen in real time\nto make these companies successful. Let's pass a bill that causes these\ncompanies to be strong, gives them the money to breathe.\n  By the way, we had somebody testify the other day in Banking who said\nthat if we give money to these companies in the form they are in today,\nwe will end up giving $75 to $125 billion. I talked to the President of\nGM this morning. He says if we can make this happen--of course, the\nbondholders say we can, he says we can--that they will be limited in\ntheir request to only what they have asked for. They do not believe any\nmore U.S. dollars will be required.\n  I ask my colleagues, why would we not take a simple piece of\nlegislation, put it in place. It acts like debtor-in-possession\nfinancing. It does what we need to do to make sure the bondholders and\nthe UAW themselves do the things they need to do to make the company\nwhole. Management is already hamstrung by the bill. It lays out the\nitems management must forgo for these loans to be in place. Let's leave\nhere having done something that actually causes these companies to be\nhealthy, vibrant, able to go into the future in a strong way for the\nfirst time in 30 years. We can do something great today, if we will\nonly sit down and do it.\n  I ask my colleagues to do one other thing. We have tried to make this\nso complicated. There are three groups each of you can call to see if\nthis will work. Call Chrysler, call General Motors, call the UAW and\nask them if this will work. If there is a sentence we need to change, a\ncomma we need to put in place, let's do it. But it is very simple. We\nhave drafted a bill as if we are saving the world. We are talking about\nthree companies alone, actually two companies today alone and three\ncovenants can solve this problem, put them on a solid foundation, move\nthem ahead. We will have done the right thing for the American\ntaxpayers. We will have done the right thing for these companies, and\nwe will have acted responsibly together in concert, doing something\nthat, again, is right for our country.\n\n  Mr. President, thank you for the great length of time. I hope my\ncolleagues on both sides of the aisle will come down and tell me why\nthis will not work. Thank you very much.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Georgia.\n  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield for\na question through the Chair?\n  Mr. CORKER. Yes.\n  Mr. ISAKSON. First of all, Mr. President, I commend the distinguished\nSenator for all the work he has done on this issue over the last 2\nmonths. But I\n\n[[Page S10892]]\n\nhave one question. Is it not true that almost all those conditions in\nthose three conditions you outlined were in whole or in part verbally\ncontemplated by the automakers in terms of what it is going to take for\nthem to come back and be profitable in the first place?\n  Mr. CORKER. No question. I say to the Senator from Georgia, they have\ncome in our offices and actually--they have advisers. Their financial\nadvisers have told them that they need for us to craft this legislation\nthis way so they have the hammer they need to make the bondholders\nreduce their debt so they can be healthy. Without this kind of hammer,\nnothing is going to happen.\n  Look, you have read this bill. This bill says they have to have a\nplan to show a net present value in place by March 31--a plan. It does\nnot say when it has to be accomplished. We can solve this problem so\nsimply for them, for the United Auto Workers, for the State of\nMichigan.\n  By the way, for the record, I want to say I have a General Motors\nplant in my State. It is very important. It is modern. It has been\ninvested in. We have a Nissan plant, and we have a Volkswagen plant\ncoming.\n  The automobile industry is very important to me, as I know it is to\nyou, I say to the Senator from Georgia. I thank him for that question.\n  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Tennessee, I\nthank you for your hard work.\n  Mr. President, I yield back.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oklahoma.\n  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I also thank the Senator from Tennessee\nfor all his labors and what he has been through. Quite frankly, I came\nback from the Horn of Africa and Afghanistan on Saturday or Sunday--\nanyway, over the weekend--and when I saw all this stuff coming up, I\nknew from my experience in the Senate that nothing was going to happen\nfor a few days, so I did not stay and work hard like my friend from\nTennessee. I went back to Oklahoma. I do that now and then just to talk\nto normal people, to hear what these people have to say, as opposed to\nthe bureaucrats and the stuff we get in Washington.\n  In a way, it is a little bit humorous. We went through the $700\nbillion bailout. I can remember everybody talking about Secretary\nPaulson coming down and saying: The world is going to come to an end if\nwe do not do this. He said: We are going to have to do it.\n  Well, we did some calculations, and I do not think most of the\nAmerican people realize when we talk about these numbers--whether it is\n$14 billion or $700 billion--how much it really is. If you did your own\nmath when this stuff comes up--this is what I always do--there are 139\nmillion families in America who file tax returns. If you take the 139\nmillion families and divide that number into $700 billion, that is\n$5,000 a family. Now we are talking about something that is serious.\nWhen I tell people in Oklahoma that, that gets their attention.\n  So here we are talking about $14 billion right now. Nobody seemed to\ncare before, and we just passed that matter by a huge margin: 75 to 24.\nI was one of the 24 who voted against the $700 billion bailout. But we\npassed it by that huge margin, more than 2 to 1. It is something that\nis so much bigger than the $14 billion we are talking about now. We are\nmaking a big issue about the $14 billion. Where was all the concern and\noutrage when we were talking about $700 billion?\n  So we watched it come along, and we saw that we gave the Secretary of\nthe Treasury all the money that he was asking for. Then we find out\nthat as to what he was going to use the money for, it was not used for\nthat at all. He said, and I heard it myself--everyone in here heard it:\nthe Democrats heard it; the Republicans heard it--if we don't have this\n$700 billion to buy out troubled assets, this whole country is going to\ngo down--this doom and gloom. Once he got it, he did not do it. He did\nnot come to us and say: Well, there is a different plan now. We are\ngoing to use it in some other way because I don't think this is going\nto work.\n  So that got my attention. I decided at that time: Well, if they are\ngoing to go ahead and give him this $700 billion, let's see what there\nis in that law that we passed that might be to the benefit of people\nwho are concerned about this issue. I saw that it was broken into two\nparts. The first $350 billion pretty much was given to him to use at\nhis discretion, which he did. He did not come to us and say he was\ngoing to use it in a different way. He just went ahead and did it. It\nis the first time in the history of America that anything close to $350\nbillion was spent in such a way.\n  Then we have in the law that was passed a provision that says if he\nneeds the other $350 billion, he can go ahead and do that, and if there\nis not an objection--as a matter of fact, if he does this, and does\nthis when we are out of session, we would be helpless to try to do\nanything to stop it.\n  So I introduced a bill. It is S. 3683. It is not going to be\nconsidered. I am not a member of the club, so that is not going to come\nup, although we have made an effort and we actually have some Democrats\non the bill. That is something that uses the rules that are out there\nand says we can change the second $350 billion so it will take a\npositive act of Congress to allow them to access the second $350\nbillion.\n  Now, let's quickly jump back to the current issue. I wanted to put\nthat in perspective because when we talk about $14 billion, compared to\n$700 billion, I just wish there was that much outrage when we were\nmaking that commitment. So here we are talking about one unelected\nbureaucrat to be known as the car czar--get ready for the car czar. We\nhave only had one good czar in the history of America that I know of,\nand that was Bill Bennett when he was the drug czar. However, he was\nnot given a blank check to spend a whole bunch of money. He is just a\nbrilliant guy who was going to try to stop some of the stupid things we\nwere doing in this country. That was back in the 1980s when the drug\nproblem first surfaced as a major problem. He did a great job. I draw\nhim out as an exception when I talk about czars. Now we are talking\nabout a car czar. This guy is going to have the same bureaucratic power\nthat Secretary Paulson had during the time he pulled off this $700\nbillion bailout.\n  Now, this bill makes the U.S. Government, the taxpayers, part owners\nof these companies. This $14 billion bill is one that is going to\nsurface probably today. People are talking about, and the leader talked\nabout, maybe we will go all the way through the weekend if we do not\nget something done. But the instrument that came over from the House\nyesterday to the Senate is most likely what we are going to be\nconsidering, and it is one that makes the Government part owners of\nthese companies.\n\n  The car czar does not have any specific instructions, such as\nrenegotiating some of the union contracts and some of the things that\nwill have to be done. I looked at this early on, and I thought, as\nundesirable as bankruptcy is, I do not know of any other way you can\nactually force the tough negotiations that will have to take place. It\nhas to be management and labor. It is not just labor; it is not just\nmanagement. There has been mismanagement. But they would have to\nsatisfy the courts that we have a system that will work.\n  I read an article in the New York Times from the middle of November,\nand it was entitled ``A British Lesson on Auto Bailouts.'' It discussed\nthe British treatment of the Leyland automobile in the 1970s and 1980s.\nThe article reported that the British Government ultimately spent--\nwell, transferring this or putting this in U.S. dollars--they spent\n$16.5 billion--that is comparable to what we are talking about now--to\nbailout the British automobile company called Leyland.\n  The article quoted a top official from the Thatcher government, which\nreluctantly but ultimately backed the bailout. He said:\n\n       I'm not telling the U.S. what to do, but the lesson of the\n     British experience is don't throw good money after bad.\n     British Leyland carried on for a few more years, but they are\n     not there now, are they?\n\n  No, Mr. President, they are not. They are bankrupt after burning\nthrough the taxpayers' bailout dollars.\n  Now, why we now believe Government bailouts and Government ownership\nof shares of these companies is going to be a successful venture\nwithout a clear idea of what these companies would do to significantly\nalter their business models, and at least until well into next year--I\ndo not\n\n[[Page S10893]]\n\nknow why we think this because it has not happened. It has not happened\nsuccessfully before.\n  In the New York Times, just a few days ago, Jeffrey Garten, who\nserved as Under Secretary of Commerce during the Clinton\nadministration, and who is now a professor at Yale University, was\nquoted as saying this:\n\n       We're at this moment in history, in which the Chinese are\n     touting that their system is better than ours with their mix\n     of capitalism and state control and our response, it looks\n     like, is to begin replicating what they've been doing.\n\n  Now, that is what he says we are doing: replicating now what the\nChinese have been doing. I have to say this: I am very much concerned\nabout the Chinese. I have spent quite a bit of time in Africa and other\nparts of the world. But in Africa, the Chinese, I think, pose the\ngreatest threat to us. It is an economic threat as well as a military\nthreat. But, nonetheless, does that mean we should be doing what they\nare doing? And we are replicating their system, according to Jeffrey\nGarten.\n  I cannot support Congress using taxpayer dollars to bail out yet\nanother industry. I can remember when we were talking about this a few\nweeks ago with the $700 billion bailout. We were talking about this as\nif this were something that was going to be a one-shot deal. I said,\nstanding on this Senate floor, that as soon as this goes through, they\nare going to start lining up.\n  I said: You are going to get not just the bankers, you are going to\nget the auto dealers and the airlines and everybody else out there\nsaying, well, if this is what is out there, bail me out, too. I want to\nbe bailed out.\n  So this is what is happening. We are now looking at one unelected\nbureaucrat administering a brandnew Government program with taxpayer\ndollars buying ownership in an industry. I think we have heard this one\nbefore. I know the American people have heard this before also.\n  This is exactly what Secretary Paulson did. I am talking about the\nmassive $700 billion financial bailout legislation. Let's keep in mind,\nwe are talking about an amount that is far less than that. We are\ntalking about $14 billion.\n  I remember talking on the Senate floor when it looked as though we\nhad $350 billion that was not going to be used. In fact, Secretary\nPaulson said--this was interesting--right before we went into recess,\nSecretary Paulson said: We have no intentions of using, no reason to\nuse the other $350 billion. We have a reserve that we have not spent\nyet of about $15 billion.\n  I responded and said: Well, if you do not have any intentions of\nusing it, let's go ahead and change the system so you cannot use it. I\ndo not want to have us adjourn and find out: Oh, I think we will use\nanother $350 billion, which is comparable to about $2,500 per family\nfiling a tax return.\n  Well, the Congress gave Secretary Paulson the $700 billion in two\ninstallments, and we all know how that second installment is. I have\nauthored two bills. One of them is S. 3683, sponsored by, of all\npeople, Bernie Sanders, the one who is a self-proclaimed socialist, a\nguy who is on the opposite end of the philosophic specter from me. Yet\nhe knows this is something that is wise: to have accountability for the\n$350 billion. I do not have her name on here, but I think Senator\nMikulski might also have been on here because I was on the Senate floor\nwith her, and she said it would be a good idea. We have Senators\nBarrasso, Wicker, DeMint, Roberts, and Vitter.\n  This legislation would freeze the unexpended expenditures of the\noriginal $350 billion and require an affirmative vote--is that asking\ntoo much--an affirmative vote to access the remaining $350 billion. It\nis automatic now. That is all we are asking for.\n  So I think that as we talk today--and, hopefully, this will be over\ntonight; I anticipate that it will because it goes on and on and on,\nand nobody, right before Christmas, wants to be working over the\nweekend when it looks like nothing meaningful is going to happen--let's\nbring it on, bring on the bill. Let's have a vote on it. Let's get it\nover with today, and, hopefully, we can reject it. think a lot of\nMembers in this body, some of those who supported the $700 billion\nbailout, have a chance at redemption right now by opposing this\nlegislation.\n\n  So, once again, let me just put it back in perspective. I came back\nfrom Afghanistan on the weekend and I saw the discussion take place,\nand I had an idea, through the experience I have on the Senate floor,\nthat nothing was going to happen for the next 2 or 3 days, so I went\nback to Oklahoma and talked to real people.\n  By the way, I have to say this: I talked to a lot of dealers in\nOklahoma about the idea of a car czar, and because of the prospect of a\nWashington bureaucrat telling the car manufacturers how to run their\nbusinesses and what kind of cars to make, it did not give them hope for\nthe future. These people were opposed to it. I know a lot of the car\ndealers are for this. They are concerned about keeping the parts\ninventories and all of that, but I look at this, and I don't see any\nother way it can happen.\n  By the way, I would say concerning this bailout bill, I don't think\nthey did anything to address the California waiver. This is something\nthat has to be done if they are really sincere about this bill that\ncame over from the House. Someone can correct me if they have corrected\nthe problems of the California waiver; I don't think they have. Right\nnow, there is litigation out there, where California wants to be able\nto determine what its tailpipe restrictions are. It is in the courts\nright now, but if they are successful, then that would mean we have 50\nStates that can determine what their emission requirements are in their\nState. You talk about one factor driving up the price of cars, that\nwould be it.\n  Again, I don't know for sure what all is in this thing from the\nHouse, but I do know this: The basic bill is the same bill that we had\nbefore. It is based on a concept that the bureaucracy can run the free\nenterprise system better than the free enterprise system can, and it\ndoesn't work. Let's solve the problem of the $14 billion, but let's get\nsome people to join in with me on the Senate bill that will allow us to\nrequire an affirmative vote for the second $350 billion.\n  Let's put that in perspective: $350 billion as opposed to $14\nbillion. I think it deserves the attention of the Members of the\nSenate.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the possible\nbailout of the Big 3 automobile manufacturers. General Motors,\nChrysler, and Ford have come before this Congress asking for tens of\nbillions of dollars from the taxpayers. This bailout, however, raises a\nnumber of questions that concern me greatly.\n  The economy of the United States is rooted in free-market principles.\nThese principles, coupled with our Nation's entrepreneurial spirit,\nhelped America become the richest and most innovative country in the\nworld. Even though our economy is struggling right now, we cannot\nabandon those principles.\n  American automobile company executives have made many poor decisions\nover the past few decades. Those decisions combined with a poor\neconomy, have put them in a desperate situation, particularly General\nMotors. It seems to me that this is exactly why we have Chapter 11\nbankruptcy. Now, when I say bankruptcy, I am not talking about\nliquidation. That is Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Chapter 11 bankruptcy\nprovides struggling companies with the opportunity to restructure\nresponsibly so that they can transform into efficient and profitable\nfirms. Chapter 11 exists to protect both the employees and the company\nitself by giving them a chance to get things right. The Big 3 should\nnot view Chapter 11 as some sort of death sentence. Instead, they\nshould see it as the best opportunity to put themselves on the same\ncompetitive footing with companies such as Toyota and BMW. Venerable\ncompanies in America such as Macy's and Continental Airlines have filed\nfor Chapter 11 and have emerged as stronger, more viable companies. So\nwhy should the Big 3 be treated any differently?\n\n[[Page S10894]]\n\n  I know these companies would say they are somehow unique and that\nbankruptcy simply will not work for them. I am not so sure about that.\nThe Big 3 worry that today's financial environment would prevent them\nfrom securing debtor-in-possession financing from the private sector.\nThey would need such funding to keep operating through a bankruptcy\nproceeding. This is where the government can step in. This would ensure\nthat automakers have the funds to complete the Chapter 11 process.\n  The Big 3 also worry that few consumers would buy a car from a\ncompany that might not be around in a few years to stand by the car's\nwarranty. Again, the government could step in and guarantee the\nwarranties. After all, what is a better backup of a warranty than the\nfull faith and credit of the U.S. Government? And if the government\ntook these steps, wouldn't that give the Big 3 a good chance to\nsuccessfully reorganize through Chapter 11 bankruptcy?\n\n  The Big 3 have testified before Congress that they would require\nabout $34 billion to avoid liquidation. They would need this help over\nthe next year or two. Many independent analysts, however, believe that\nnumber may triple that. Frankly, I am more inclined to believe the\nindependent estimates are closer to reality. After all, the Big 3 have\ntime and again proven unable to adequately plan for the future. Why\nshould we believe their projections now? With the deficit reaching $1\ntrillion or more next year, why aren't we having a debate over the true\ncost of such a bailout? We should be worried about the U.S. taxpayer.\n  In this legislation, there has been talk about creating a ``car\nczar'' to oversee any restructuring that would accompany a bailout.\nThis czar, however, would not have nearly the same sort of powers a\nbankruptcy court judge would have under Chapter 11. Injecting a\ngovernment bureaucrat into the process is not a serious solution. If\nyou have been around Washington long enough, you know it is more like a\nserious problem. Wouldn't it be better to have an expert such as a\nbankruptcy court judge oversee the process?\n  Not only would a bankruptcy judge have more tools than a car czar,\nbut the judge would not be influenced by the political process. A\nbailout would invite all sorts of meddling from lawmakers to have the\ncompanies carry out their own pet policies. We should not be using this\nbailout as a vehicle to implement domestic social policy.\n  Not to mention that creditors or stakeholders will just lobby\nCongress to make the sort of concessions that would be required of them\nunder the bankruptcy. We see this sort of lobbying right now with the\nTARP program. Everyone is trying to tweak the program to benefit their\nown narrow self-interest. Why would we expect the auto unions or\nsuppliers or dealers to behave any differently? I worry that\npoliticizing the restructuring of the Big 3 would jeopardize any\nchances of success they may have.\n  All this talk of government-directed restructuring also raises bigger\npicture questions. Why does Congress think we can succeed where so many\nbusinessmen have already failed? What sort of experience in the car-\nmaking business does this Congress have? Last I checked, none of my\ncolleagues have a background in running a car company. And this car\nczar seems doomed to failure too. One government bureaucrat to oversee\nthe reorganization of three massive companies? What track record can we\npoint to that makes us think this will work?\n  This strikes me as a questionable intervention by the government into\nthe private sector. We have the government thinking it can run these\nbusinesses better than they can. Heck, we cannot even run the\ngovernment. We also have the government choosing which individual\ncompanies deserve help and which do not. This is not what the\nGovernment should be doing. Government should not be picking winners or\nlosers in the private sector. For the long-term health of the country's\nentrepreneurial-based economy, this could be a dangerous precedent.\n  One of the companies asking for a bailout is Chrysler, which is owned\nby an investment fund known as Cerberus. Some reports indicate Cerberus\nmay have significant asset holdings, into the billions of dollars. But\nit appears Cerberus has done nothing to infuse any emergency cash into\nChrysler to save it. Why should the government bail out Chrysler, when\nits own parent company seems unwilling to offer any help?\n  If we bail out the car companies, what does that mean for other\nstruggling industries? The automakers are not the only ones suffering\ntoday in this bad economy. Would we have to bail out every large\ncompany in every major industry? Tourism is one of America's biggest\nindustries and has a high employment multiplier, much like the auto\nindustry. Hotel rooms are going empty as consumers cut back on travel.\nMany state economies, such as in my own State of Nevada, are hurting\nbecause of the downturn in consumer travel. Should the hotels receive a\nbailout? How about the newspaper industry? We know their businesses are\nhurting too. The Tribune Company filed for Chapter 11. Should we be\nbailing them out as well? Where do we draw the line? Can we even draw a\nline once we have given the Big 3 a bailout?\n  The proposed automaker bailout is indicative of a big-government\napproach to dealing with our economy. We are in the midst of a\nrecession, yet we have come back for a late session of Congress to talk\nabout saving just three companies. Why aren't we considering pro-growth\npolicies to help the larger economy? We should be considering long-\nterm, pro-growth tax cuts rather than searching for ways to spend more\nof the taxpayers' money. For instance, lowering the corporate tax rate\nwould put more money back into the hands of companies all across\nAmerica. This would help companies stay afloat and to avoid cutting\njobs during these difficult times. Instead, the Democrats are looking\nto spend money on bloated, uncompetitive automakers.\n  As we debate whether to loan billions of dollars to the automakers, I\nurge my colleagues to consider all the important questions I have\nraised today. This issue is not as simple as answering ``how many jobs\nmight be lost?'' or ``how much it will cost the government?'' We must\nalso consider questions such as ``what is the Government's proper role\nduring this economic downturn?'' ``What could be the unintended\nconsequences of our actions?'' ``Are we setting a dangerous precedent\nfor needless political intervention?'' ``How might this affect our\nballooning deficit?'' ``Are we taking the best course of action for the\nlong-term health of the U.S. Government?''\n  We would do America a disservice by approving any bailout package for\nthe Big 3 before finding at least some consensus on these questions.\nFurthermore, I believe we must look more closely at Chapter 11 as a\nviable option for the automakers. Chapter 11 reorganization for any of\nthe Big 3 is far from ideal, but we do not live in an ideal world nor\nduring ideal times. We should not dismiss one of the most powerful\ntools available to us so readily.\n  I hope my colleagues will think long and hard about the issues I have\nraised today before making any decisions about the possible bailout. If\nthis bailout package that is before us today fails, we can rewrite the\nbill and do it in a way that is better for the U.S. auto manufacturing\nindustry. American taxpayers deserve nothing less.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10890", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10890", "S10890", null, null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10890", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10890]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME\n\n  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the\nleadership time is reserved.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10894", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10894", "S10895", "[{\"name\": \"Benjamin L. Cardin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"David Vitter\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10894", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10894-S10895]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the period\nfor morning business be extended until 12 noon, with Senators permitted\nto speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n\n[[Page S10895]]\n\n  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10895", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10895", "S10901", "[{\"name\": \"David Vitter\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mitch McConnell\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Barbara Boxer\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10895", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10895-S10901]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS\n\n  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I stand to again address the key issue\nbefore us that affects so many Americans, American families, and indeed\nall of us, through our economy: the proposed U.S. auto industry\nbailout.\n  Yesterday, I stood here and announced two conclusions I was driven to\nreach. First, I would have to strongly oppose the bailout package in\nits present form because I don't think it demands the fundamental\nrestructuring it will take for those companies to survive. Second,\nbecause of that very point, I would use every procedural tool available\nto block, stop, and delay that package from passing into law.\n  I, again, reached those conclusions. I restate that commitment for\none very simple, very compelling reason--because so much is at stake;\nbecause we need to get it right; because millions of individual workers\nand families, and indeed all of us, through our economy, will suffer\nthe consequences of our not taking appropriate action.\n  Again, let me be clear, I am not trying to block this package in\nspite of job losses that would occur if these companies went down. I am\ntrying to block this package because of that, in light of that, because\nthis package doesn't demand the fundamental core restructuring that is\nabsolutely necessary for these companies to survive.\n  This package puts those companies down a road where I believe that is\nunlikely to ever happen. It would throw a lot of taxpayer dollars at\nthe problem to buy time, but it doesn't change the endgame, in my\nopinion.\n  Let me also make clear, having said all that, I am not for doing\nnothing. I am not for going home and forgetting about this and walking\naway. This is a serious crisis we must address. I am for doing\nsomething, but the right thing, the right way, something that will\nensure, demand the fundamental core restructuring it will take for\nthese American companies to survive.\n  What do I mean by that? I could support a few alternatives. Let me\noutline two specific alternatives that are being worked on now, that\nhave been developed, that are being discussed by many Members that I\ncould support. First of all, I could certainly support a strong,\ncomprehensive alternative being developed by Senator Bob Corker of\nTennessee and others. That proposal wouldn't throw $14 billion at the\ncompany before any outline of a restructuring plan is agreed to. It\nwould say: No, we need to agree and nail down and ensure some of those\nfundamentals now, before any taxpayer dollars go to those companies.\n  What are those fundamentals? Senator Corker outlines four that I\nagree are at the core of the issue and must be nailed down before any\ntaxpayer dollars should go to those companies.\n  First, his proposal would require that participating companies reduce\ntheir outstanding debt obligations by at least two-thirds by forcing\nthe companies' bondholders to accept an equity swap or debt for debt\nand equity swap--in other words, for the taxpayer dollars we would be\nsending to those companies not to boost the take, not to boost the\nvalue of bonds for those bondholders, but for the bondholders to\ncontribute something up front to reduce the debt of the companies. That\nis crucial because right now those companies, particularly GM, are\ndrowning under unbelievable debt, and that alleged loan would be on top\nof that. So that is crucial.\n  Second, we would agree up front that the companies would become more\ncompetitive by requiring that all-in labor costs and work rules would\nbe immediately on par with other automaking companies such as Nissan,\nToyota, and Honda. Obviously, a major source of the uncompetitiveness\nof the three U.S. automakers is their labor costs. They cannot possibly\ncompete in this global marketplace when their costs are way, way\nhigher, 80 percent higher than competitors such as Toyota, Honda, and\nNissan. This aspect of the Corker plan would ensure that is nailed down\nup front.\n  Third, the legislation would require that changes in payments to the\nUAW VEBA accounts occur to help the companies' cash flow, specifically\nthat at least half of any scheduled payments be made in stock. There\nagain, it would reinforce the sense that the workers and the union have\na real stake in all of this working and in those companies surviving.\n  Fourth, any compensation, outside of customary severance pay, that\ngoes now to workers who have been fired or laid off or furloughed would\nend. Again, a major cost to these U.S. companies, a major source of\ntheir uncompetitiveness is they are paying lots of money, tens of\nmillions or billions of dollars for people not to work, for people not\nto work.\n  That is a plan I could support. That is not putting the cart before\nthe horse. That is getting things in the right order, nailing down that\nessential restructuring now before any taxpayer dollars go out the\ndoor.\n  A second alternative I could support would involve a formal\nbankruptcy process. A lot of folks make the argument that bankruptcy is\nnot an option, that consumers will never buy a car of a company in\nbankruptcy; they don't know if the warranty will be there or be good 6\nmonths or a year from now. We can fix that problem. We can address that\nproblem with appropriate limited Government assistance and\nparticipation in the formal bankruptcy.\n  Specifically, I would support a plan whereby the Government could\nplay that role in two limited, specific ways: one, backing up the\nwarranty obligations of the companies with the full faith and credit of\nthe U.S. Government so consumers can retain that confidence and, two,\nproviding debtor-in-possession financing if that is necessary. I\nbelieve the Government playing that crucial role, or something akin to\nthat, can make a traditional bankruptcy process work.\n  Again, Mr. President, I stand before you and my colleagues in the\nSenate--indeed, all the American people--to urge us to adopt one of\nthose alternative paths, to urge us to think outside the tiny\nconstricted box folks have tried to put us into and find a third way, a\nbetter way which does exist. There are folks who argue it is this or\nbust. Quite frankly, that is baseless fear mongering. There is another\nway. There is a third path and a better way. I have outlined two just\nin the last few minutes. Let's choose that better path. Let's do the\nresponsible thing. Let's demand the fundamental core restructuring it\nwill take for these companies to survive. And let's demand it and nail\nit down now, not throw billions of taxpayers' dollars at them simply\nupon the request that they sit down to begin to think about such\nrestructuring. That is the plan before us. That is unreasonable. That\nis not an appropriate role for the taxpayers. But these two\nalternatives I outlined would be far different, would demand and ensure\nthat core fundamental restructuring happens.\n  Mr. President, I urge all of my colleagues, Democrats and\nRepublicans, to join me in voting no on the important vote tomorrow\nmorning on the present plan and to say yes to real restructuring,\nfundamental core restructuring that can save a maximum number of these\njobs in America.\n  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, these are, indeed, turbulent times for\nthe U.S. economy. Over the past several months, Americans have seen\ngiant companies fail, significant job losses, and, after unprecedented\nproblems in the credit markets, the frightening prospect of total\ndisarray within our Nation's mainstream economy.\n  The crisis in the credit markets came at us quickly. We were told\nthat urgent Government action was needed in order to shore up the\nbroader economy and that failure to act would lead to a complete\ncollapse of consumer credit, the very lifeblood of our Nation's\neconomy. Under ordinary circumstances, I would have opposed such a\nmeasure. Government intervention in the marketplace,\n\n[[Page S10896]]\n\nfrankly, cuts against all my ordinary impulses. But this was not an\nordinary event. I and many others believed that extraordinary action\nwas needed to protect millions of ordinary Americans from the colossal\nand far-reaching mistakes of a few. And action was taken. The systemic\nbreakdown some envisioned has not occurred. So there is reason to\nbelieve the medicine has had some effect. But on the whole, the overall\neconomy continues to struggle. Some industries have been hit harder\nthan others, and one of them certainly is the auto industry.\n  The problems in the auto industry have been long in the making. But\nlast month the situation grew so dire that American automobile makers\ncame to Washington with an urgent appeal for Federal help. Over the\npast few weeks, lawmakers have taken the time to examine the problems\nof these companies and the solutions that have been proposed. Now the\nAmerican taxpayers are being asked to put their money behind a plan\nthat is aimed at helping these companies survive.\n  Republicans received that plan late yesterday morning, about this\ntime yesterday. We reviewed it closely to see if it meets the criteria\nI have laid out repeatedly for taxpayer protections and for an\neffective strategy for securing the long-term viability of these\ncompanies. In the end, I concluded that it does not.\n  In some ways, the proposal that was worked out by the White House and\ncongressional Democrats appears tough. It calls on struggling auto\ncompanies and auto workers to make the sort of sacrifices they have not\nbeen accustomed to making in the past. It also includes time limits as\na way of hastening necessary reforms. But in reality, this proposal is\nnot nearly tough enough. A primary weakness relates to the so-called\ncar czar who has nearly unlimited power to allocate taxpayer dollars\nbut limited ability to force the kinds of tough concessions long-term\nviability would require. Another problem lies outside the proposal\nitself, and here I am referring to the type of Government action that\nis being contemplated.\n  Somewhat lost in the recent debate over the auto industry is the\nfundamental difference between it and the financial rescue plan\nCongress approved in October. While that plan was intended to rescue\nthe entire economy, this one is intended to save a single industry.\nThat plan was intended to help everyone from small business owners to\ncollege students, and every lawmaker who voted for it acted in the\nbelief that is exactly what it would do. A failure to appreciate this\ndistinction has caused a number of other industries and even a number\nof municipalities across the country to prepare their own proposals for\nGovernment rescue, as all Americans weather the tough economy. It has\nalso created the impression in some minds that the Federal Government\nis picking favorites and that favorite businesses get help while others\ndo not. A lot of struggling Americans are asking where their bailout\nis. They wonder why one business would get support over another. When\nit comes to the auto industry, many Republicans in Congress have asked\nthese same questions.\n\n  There are many principled reasons to oppose this bill. But the\nsimplest one is also the best--a government big enough to give us\neverything we want is a government big enough to take everything we\nhave. This is as true for individuals as it is for business. It is the\nprimary principle upon which American industry, including the auto\nindustry, was built. Even in turbulent moments such as this--perhaps\nespecially at moments such as this--it is a principle worth defending.\n  Now, some argue the effects of the auto industry collapse would be\ntoo acute and far-reaching for an already struggling economy to bear.\nThis is impossible to know. Even if we grant that these companies would\nfail without taxpayer help, we would still have to ask ourselves\nwhether the proposal before us achieves the goal everyone claims to\nembrace; namely, the long-term viability of ailing car companies. In my\nview, it does not.\n  I have already enumerated some of the weaknesses in the plan. But in\nthe end, its greatest single flaw is it promises taxpayer money today\nfor reforms that may or may not come tomorrow. We would not be serving\nthe American taxpayer well if we spent their hard-earned money without\nknowing with certainty that their investment would result in stronger,\nleaner automobile companies that would not need additional taxpayer\nhelp a few months or weeks down the road. We simply cannot ask the\nAmerican taxpayer to subsidize failure.\n  Now, all Americans, including myself, are worried about the future of\nour Nation's automakers. These companies have a venerable place in the\nstory of modern America. They continue to provide hundreds of thousands\nof jobs across the country, including 50,000 auto-related jobs in my\nhome State of Kentucky. But many Americans are also worried about the\nprospect of the Government intervening on behalf of some industries and\nnot intervening on behalf of others, especially when there is no\nguarantee--no guarantee--that the interventions will work. They wonder\nwhen the spending stops. If I were to vote in favor of this bill, I\nwould not have a very good answer for them.\n  The best route for the long-term viability of ailing car companies\nmay be a rocky one. Government help is not the only option. It is not\neven the best option. Long-term viability is still possible, but it is\nonly possible if these companies are forced to make the tough choices\nnecessary for their survival.\n  My colleague, Senator Corker, has proposed an amendment that would go\na long way toward improving this bill. In keeping with the principles I\nhave outlined before in these comments this morning, the Corker\namendment does not just encourage reform--it doesn't just encourage\nreform--it requires reform. It does so with crucial specificity. First,\nparticipating companies would be required to reduce their outstanding\ndebt by at least two-thirds through an equity swap with bondholders.\nThe Corker amendment also requires that labor cost at participating\ncompanies be brought on par with companies such as Nissan, Toyota--\nwhich I also have in my State--and Honda, not tomorrow but immediately\nbecause it is delusional to think a company which spends $71 per labor\nhour could compete with a company in the same industry that spends $49\nper labor hour.\n  The Corker amendment would improve the liquidity and cash flow of\nautomakers by requiring that a portion of the payments made to the\nunion accounts consist of company stock. Finally, the Corker amendment\nwould require participating companies to file for chapter 11\nreorganization if any of these conditions--if any of these conditions--\naren't met by a fixed date.\n  The Corker amendment forces necessary reforms, holds companies\naccountable, and assures taxpayers that these companies will not be\nback for more. If legislative action were necessary, the Corker\nproposal would make many much needed and dramatic improvements to the\nunderlying bill.\n  I, similar to all my colleagues, want the U.S. auto industry not only\nto survive but to thrive. By cutting costs, streamlining production,\nincreasing fuel efficiency, and investing in new technologies and\nattractive, more competitive designs, American auto companies will once\nagain make cars people all over the world will want to buy. Then,\nAmericans would be able to say, again, with pride that our cars are the\nbest.\n  In addition, protecting the taxpayer is a goal Republicans have been\nfighting hard for in this debate, and in my view it is a goal that is\nwell worth our efforts.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.\n  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, what is the order?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in morning business, with a 10-minute\ntime limit. There is no unanimous consent request on the order of\nspeakers.\n  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 20\nminutes.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I have to say we are now here, approaching\nChristmas, in a deepening recession. On December 1, the National Bureau\nof Economic Research said that, in fact, the recession had begun in\nDecember 2007.\n\n[[Page S10897]]\n\n  How many jobs have been lost in the last year? Almost 2 million jobs\nhave been lost in the last year. So we are here today on the heels of a\nloss of 2 million jobs. The unemployment rate stands at 6.7 percent,\nand it is growing. In my State, it is 8.2 percent. Today, the Labor\nDepartment reported that initial applications for jobless benefits rose\nto 573,000, the highest number in 26 years.\n  So when I hear someone come to the floor and say: Gee, I didn't get\nall the language until a couple days ago and this is a problem; you\nknow, sit down and read the language. We cannot afford to say we are\nnot going to do something and act to turn around this recession because\nsomebody didn't have the time to read the bill.\n  Consumer confidence has plunged to its lowest level since the survey\nbegan in 1967. Gross domestic product has dipped, personal spending\ndecreased 3.7 percent in the third quarter, and according to the CBO--\nthe Congressional Budget Office--American workers lost more than $2\ntrillion over 15 months as the stock market decline devastated\nretirement accounts. Let me say that again. American workers lost more\nthan $2 trillion over 15 months as the stock market decline devastated\nretirement savings accounts. So we are dealing with a crisis.\n  Compared to a year ago, U.S. foreclosure filings increased 71 percent\nin the third quarter. The Institute for Supply Management Index, which\nis a key gauge of U.S. manufacturing activity, fell to a 26-year low in\nNovember. Manufacturing activity fell to a 26-year low in November.\nHome prices, tracked by S&P's 20-city housing index, dropped 17.4\npercent in September. That is a record--the fastest decline on record.\nDo you hear what I am saying? The job losses, the jobless claims, the\nforeclosures, the stock market, everything is going in the wrong\ndirection. For people who don't know what the fundamentals of the\neconomy mean, that is the fundamentals of the economy. That is the\nfundamentals--unemployment, housing prices, stock market, retirement\nincomes.\n  Construction spending fell by 1.2 percent in October, much more than\nwhat was expected--another fundamental of the economy. Construction of\nsingle-family homes plunged 4.6 percent from September. Sales at the\nwholesale level plunged by 4.1 percent in October. That is nationwide.\n  My State of California trails only Michigan in the total number of\nauto-related jobs. In fact, there are nearly 200,000 Californians\nemployed by auto dealers, manufacturers, and wholesalers whose\nlivelihoods are at stake.\n  At the Vehicle Accessory Center in Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 50 workers\nmanufacture auto parts for GM cars.\n  The general manager, Russell Hoyt, writes that without a bridge loan\nto the Big Three, ``we run the risk of losing all of the gains we've\nmade over the years to make our company more competitive and to build\nnew technologies and cars that will benefit consumers and improve our\nnation's energy security.''\n  Gina Underwood, the controller of a Saturn dealership that employs 48\npeople in Ontario, CA, wrote to me about the impact the credit market\nis having on her business.\n  She says ``the potential trickle down into my community borders on\ncatastrophic.'' She adds that ``helping our industry in the short-term\nwill have a much lower cost than addressing the effects of a failed\nindustry in the midst of an economic turnaround.''\n  The Los Angeles Federation of Labor says the decline in the auto\nindustry is ``responsible for nearly 11 percent of California's job\nloss in the past year. It has also robbed millions of dollars from\nstate and local treasuries that are responsible for funding some of our\nmost crucial public services.''\n  The California chapter of the United Auto Workers writes that ``these\nloans will enable domestic auto companies to continue operations and\nwill avoid putting thousands of people out of work.''\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record\nthe California recession figures.\n  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in\nthe Record, as follows:\n\n                      California Recession Figures\n\n       In California, the unemployment rate is at 8.2 percent--the\n     highest in 14 years.\n       California has lost 101,000 jobs over the past year and\n     487,000 more people were looking for work in October than\n     were doing so a year ago.\n       1.5 million Californians are out of work.\n       The University of the Pacific Business Forecasting Center\n     has predicted that the state's unemployment rate will peak at\n     9.6 percent the end of next year and won't dip below 9\n     percent until 2011.\n       Through the first three quarters of 2008, more than 189,000\n     California homes were lost to foreclosure.\n       The number of California homes in foreclosure totaled\n     79,511 in the third quarter--more than triple last year's\n     number.\n       In cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego,\n     housing prices have declined more than 25 percent.\n       In October 51 percent of homes sold in Southern California\n     were in foreclosures, compared to 16 percent the year before.\n       A recent report stated that over 27 percent of California\n     homeowners are already ``underwater,'' or have negative\n     equity in their home.\n       The Joint Economic Committee estimates that California\n     state-wide home prices will fall 17 percent between 2007 and\n     2009, resulting in a net loss of over 1 trillion in housing\n     wealth.\n       The state budget shortfall for next year could reach $28\n     billion.\n\n  Mrs. BOXER. Suffice it to say that 1.5 million Californians are out\nof work, and in the third quarter we had 79,000 foreclosures, more than\ntriple last year's numbers. We have a State budget crisis, some of it\nemanating from this downturn, and we have to step up to the plate and\ndo our part. Whether we live in a city, whether we live in a county,\nwhether we work for the people as a member of a city council, whether\nwe work as a county supervisor, whether we work as a mayor or a House\nMember or a Senator, all of us who work for the people have to step up\nto the plate.\n  I did something interesting, and it might be of interest to you. I\nworked with my staff. We have 58 counties in California and we got on\nthe phone and we talked to the leaders of each of those counties and\nthe 10 major cities in our State. We do have 38 million people in our\nState. They told us what is happening on the ground there, and it is\nnot a pretty picture. Now, some of them are doing better than others. A\nlot of them are facing unemployment rates in their cities of 13\npercent, 12 percent, and 9 percent. In the inland empire area, which is\njust east of Los Angeles, we have the highest unemployment rate in the\nNation, about 9.1 percent.\n  So the point of my setting the stage for my remarks by giving a broad\nlook at what is happening is to make sure people understand we are not\ntaking up this auto rescue plan in normal times. If it was normal\ntimes, that would be one thing. I wouldn't be that sympathetic to the\nbig three in normal times. I have had my arguments with them since the\n1980s. I think their fighting California and the 19 other States that\nwant better fuel economy is a huge mistake on their part, and I don't\nwant to reward them for that. But I have to tell you, when you look at\nthe times we are in, you recognize we need to bridge these troubled\ntimes right now, bridge these troubled times with a loan so we can take\na look at this when we have a new President, a new Congress, and,\nfrankly, when we begin to see a light at the end of this tunnel, which\nI believe is going to come when our new President comes to us in\nJanuary and we start to put together a plan for economic recovery.\n  How tragic would it be if we lost this manufacturing base at this\npoint in this recession, just as I do believe we are going to pull\nourselves out of this mess we are in. We need a bridge to better times\nfor the auto industry. By the way, other countries around the globe are\ndoing the same for their auto industries. Because there are two things\nhappening here. Detroit got in trouble because, in my view, they built\nthose big cars, they didn't diversify their fleet, and they fought us\non fuel economy. Believe me, I was in that fight against them every\nstep of the way. They won that fight. But now they are losing at the\nend of the day because they made a mistake in fighting us.\n  But we don't want to lose this manufacturing base at this time. We\nwould be the only industrialized nation in the world not to have a\ndomestic auto industry.\n  When I hear my colleagues say I don't like this little sentence here\nor that sentence there, I understand that. Believe me, there are a lot\nof things in\n\n[[Page S10898]]\n\nthese bills I do not like at all. But we have to step back and say, in\nthese troubled times, unparalleled since the Great Depression, do we\nwant to leave here and risk the chance that we could wake up without a\nmanufacturing base in our great Nation? I say the answer is no.\n  I have three reasons for voting for this rescue package: Jobs, jobs\nand jobs. When we were hit with foreclosures, the first round of them,\nthey had to do with predatory lending. They had to do with some things\nthat were outrageous--people put in these subprime loans who could have\nbeen in prime loans. They woke up one day when they were paying $400 a\nmonth and suddenly it is $1,000 a month. They couldn't do it. We hope\nthose loans could be restructured. That is one set of difficult\ncircumstances for going into foreclosures. The far worse set of\ncircumstances is when you lose your job and your family cannot make it.\nThat is the thing I wish to avoid.\n  My focus is on this economy and making sure we are doing everything\nto save, preserve, and create jobs. With each passing day, we realize\nwhat a crisis we are in. Again, today we found out more people filed\nfor unemployment compensation, a bigger number than we have seen in 26\nyears. When I heard we lost 533,000 jobs last month, it sent shivers up\nand down my spine. If we don't act, we risk seeing another 2 to 3\nmillion jobs that could be at risk. We know even the collapse of one of\nthe big three could cause that.\n  In my home State, we have 200,000 auto-related jobs, second only to\nMichigan.\n  At the Vehicle Accessory Center at Rancho Cucamonga, our general\nmanager there writes that without a bridge loan to the big three:\n\n       We run the risk of losing all the gains we've made over the\n     years to make our company more competitive and to build new\n     technologies and cars that will benefit consumers and improve\n     our nation's energy security.\n\n  Gina Underwood, a controller at Saturn of Ontario, employing 48\npeople in Ontario, CA, wrote to me about the impact of the credit\ncrisis. She says:\n\n       The potential trickle down into my community borders on\n     catastrophic.\n\n  She adds:\n\n       Helping our industry in the short-term will have a much\n     lower cost than addressing the effects of a failed industry\n     in the midst of an economic turnaround.\n\n  The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor says the decline in the\nauto industry:\n\n       . . . is responsible for nearly 11 percent of California's\n     job loss in the past year.\n\n  The California chapter of the United Auto Workers writes:\n\n       These loans will enable domestic auto companies to continue\n     operations and will avoid putting thousands of people out of\n     work.\n\n  I ask unanimous consent to have these letters printed in the Record.\n  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in\nthe Record, as follows:\n\n                                     Vehicle Accessory Center,\n\n                          Rancho Cucamonga, CA, November 12, 2008.\n     Senator Barbara Boxer.\n       Dear Senator Boxer: I own a company that exclusively\n     provides goods and services to General Motors Dealerships in\n     Southern California. I am writing to urge you to support GM\n     and America's domestic auto industry. Our company employs up\n     to 50 people and there are millions more Americans among\n     suppliers, dealers, retirees and communities that depend on\n     our industry for their livelihood and well-being.\n       All of us need your support now. We cannot sustain our\n     industry because of the worst financial crisis to hit our\n     country in over half a century. We run the risk of losing all\n     of the gains we've made over the years to make our company\n     more competitive and to build new technologies and cars that\n     will benefit consumers and improve our nation's energy\n     security.\n       Our industry is the real economy that runs through Main\n     Street. I call on you and your Congressional colleagues to\n     help preserve jobs and help the domestic auto industry\n     weather this financial storm. With your support, I know my\n     company will emerge stronger and more competitive. And, that\n     means a stronger economy and a more competitive America.\n       I have attached an industry fact sheet that really\n     demonstrates the critical nature of this industry to our\n     economy. I look forward to seeing you take an active role in\n     passing legislation to support this critical economic need.\n           Sincerely,\n                                                  Russell R. Hoyt,\n     General Manager/Partner.\n                                  ____\n\n                                            Saturn of Ontario,\n\n                                    Ontario, CA, December 2, 2008.\n     Hon. Barbara Boxer,\n     Washington, DC.\n       Dear Senator Boxer: My name is Gina M Underwood and I am\n     the Controller at Saturn of Ontario. My dealership employs 48\n     with an annual payroll of $1,986,059. Our business also\n     supports dozens of local suppliers that are intertwined in\n     our community providing multiple more jobs. I am writing\n     because I fear much of this will be lost and the impact to my\n     community severe if the domestic auto industry is allowed to\n     fail under the weight of the current economic chaos. I\n     believe I have good reason to request your support.\n       The negative effects of the global credit crisis have\n     caused a huge downturn in consumer confidence that I see play\n     out on my car lot every day. I have seen my sales plummet to\n     levels not seen since World War II. The manufacturers who\n     supply me can't get credit to complete their restructurings\n     and put advanced technologies into production, my customers\n     can't get credit to buy the new cars off my lot and I can't\n     get credit to finance my monthly inventory. The potential\n     trickle down into my community borders on catastrophic.\n       Hundreds of jobs in my community will be lost.\n       Multiple suppliers will go under.\n       On a broader scale, billions of dollars already invested in\n     asserting U.S. technological leadership for advanced\n     propulsion systems--in batteries, fuel cells, hybrids and\n     biofuels--will be lost.\n       Our manufacturing ability, critical for our national\n     security is threatened which only exacerbates our dependence\n     on foreign oil.\n       The critics say that the industry has not done enough to\n     save itself. They could not be more wrong. The auto\n     manufacturers have been investing $10 billion in plants and\n     equipment each year. The quality gap has been all but erased\n     between U.S.-based and foreign manufacturers. And new labor\n     agreements that will put the domestic industry in line with\n     our foreign competitors will take effect in 2010.\n       I cannot urge you strongly enough to take action on behalf\n     of my community and my industry. Helping our industry in the\n     short-term will have a much lower cost than addressing the\n     effects of a failed industry in the midst of an economic\n     turnaround. Sadly, I fear the price of inaction is greater\n     than my business can bear. Thank you for your time to hear my\n     concerns.\n       Sincerely,\n     Gina Underwood.\n                                  ____\n\n                                                Los Angeles County\n\n                                 Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO,\n\n                                Los Angeles, CA, December 5, 2008.\n     Senator Barbara Boxer,\n     Los Angeles, CA.\n       Hon. Barbara Boxer: I write to you out of concern for the\n     millions of autoworkers who will lose their good jobs if\n     federal emergency aid isn't passed for automakers and because\n     the industry's downfall is responsible for nearly 11 percent\n     of California's job loss in the past year. It has also robbed\n     tens of millions of dollars from state and local treasuries\n     that are responsible for funding some of our most crucial\n     public services.\n       While we in Los Angeles are fortunate not to be home to an\n     industry that is on a verge of collapse, we are the nation's\n     capitol of the working poor. In my many years leading the\n     union representing hotel workers, I have come to witness how\n     low-wage workers struggle just to get by. They struggle to\n     feed their children, pay their bills and rent. When their\n     children fall ill they rely on home remedies instead of\n     taking them to the doctor because they simply can't afford\n     it.\n       My concern for workers if the emergency assistance fails to\n     pass is not whether they will find another job elsewhere, but\n     what will become of them in that next job. I worry that it\n     will force them into our nation's ranks of the working poor.\n     In my 30 years in the labor movement I've come to learn that\n     poverty in our communities doesn't stem from a lack of jobs.\n     It stems from a lack of good jobs that provide middle class\n     wages and benefits--jobs that provide the pathway to reach\n     the American dream.\n       As leaders, you as a public servant and I as a labor\n     leader, have a moral responsibility to fight for good jobs\n     that allow men and women to raise their families with pride,\n     dignity and with the piece of mind that a secure retirement\n     brings. We must do everything possible to ensure that the\n     industry that was once the backbone of our middle class rises\n     to those heights once again, So I urge you today to vote for\n     government aid to automakers.\n           In solidarity,\n                                               Maria Elena Durazo,\n     Executive Secretary-Treasurer.\n                                  ____\n\n                                                 UAW Region 5,\n\n                                    Fremont, CA, December 1, 2008.\n     Re Bridge Loan for the Big Three.\n\n     Hon. Barbara Boxer,\n     San Francisco, CA.\n       Dear Senator Boxer: On behalf of the UAW postdoctoral\n     research members who reside in San Francisco, we would\n     greatly appreciate it if you would take some time away from\n     your busy schedule to meet with us before December 8, 2008,\n     here in the City.\n       The purpose of our meeting is to help you understand the\n     serious issues that the UAW is facing concerning the Big\n     Three auto loans. These loans will enable domestic auto\n     companies to continue operations and will avoid putting\n     thousands of people out of work. We also need to remember\n     that suppliers who make certain parts for auto companies will\n     be affected by this as well. Let's\n\n[[Page S10899]]\n\n     not forget that the auto industry has been woven into the\n     fabric of the United States of America, and without it, we\n     will fail.\n       This is an extremely important issue to all of us. Please\n     would you contact my secretary, Veronica Morgan, at (510)\n     656-9901, and let her know the date and time you will be\n     available. You can also contact me on my cell, xxxxxxxxxx\n     xxxx.\n           Sincerely,\n                                                      Pat Caccamo,\n                                 UAW CAP Representative, Region 5.\n\n  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, the unemployment rate in my State, again,\nis 8.2 percent in California; 8.2 percent. It is rising. Losing another\n200,000 jobs at this time is catastrophic. If we leave and we risk\nthat, then it is our fault. The people who vote this way will have to\nanswer to their own consciences. Failure to act is not an option.\n  Here's the thing, there is a huge cost of inaction. I understand my\ncolleagues are very concerned about the cost to taxpayers. I share that\nconcern. I never heard them talk about that when their States were\ngiving all kinds of incentives to foreign car companies to come in. I\nwill get to that later. But here is what happens in addition to the\nmassive job losses if the big three fail. The burden on taxpayers to\npick up the pieces would be much more costly than these loans. Losing\nGM, Ford or Chrysler would add billions of dollars in costs to the\nalready depleted Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Taxpayers would\nhave to provide health care, unemployment benefits, and other related\nservices. Unfunded health care liabilities would be forced into\nMedicare and Medicaid with costs reaching $50 billion. If the\nautomakers file for bankruptcy, it could lead to a $108 billion loss to\nthe Treasury because of reduced individual income.\n  My colleagues say let them go bankrupt, as if it is a magic solution.\nIt is not a magic solution because the polls tell us 80 percent of the\npeople will not buy a car from a bankrupt automaker because of obvious\nreasons. If you want to keep your car 3, 4, 5 years--I keep mine 9 or\n10 years--you want to make sure you have the parts available to fix\nyour car. You want to make sure you have someone who understands the\ncar and can service the car.\n  This is not similar to a dress company going out of business and\ndeclaring bankruptcy. That is sad and it is tough but, you know, you\nare not going to worry about it. If you have a dress by someone and the\ncompany goes out of business, you are not going to be dealing with that\nmanufacturer. You are if you buy a car. By providing $14 billion in\nloan authority now with requirements that the money be paid back, we\nare taking steps to protect taxpayers from at least $150 billion in\nfuture liabilities, should the auto companies shut down.\n  Then there are people who say isn't this the first of what could be\nmany interventions? I can't predict that. I am just saying at this\ntime, now, with what we know about the state of this economy, with what\nwe know about the state of the lost equity in the market, with what we\nknow about the state of housing, of construction, of the number of\npeople filing--this the Christmas season. My goodness, let's take a\nchance on this. Let's take a chance on this.\n  The administration gave $150 billion to an insurance company. I never\nheard anybody at that time say: Well, the workers in that insurance\ncompany make too much money. That is the problem. You never heard a\nword about that from my Republican friends. Blaming the workers for\nthis is outrageous. They have given back and they have given back and\nthey have given back.\n  What would happen to the thousands of other associated businesses\nthat rely on GM, Ford, and Chrysler if they went belly up? The big\nthree share 80 percent of the supplier base in this country. If one of\nthe companies goes bankrupt, these small- and medium-size businesses\ncould lose significant revenue and be forced to make layoffs or close\ntheir doors.\n  I wish to talk about other countries taking significant steps to\nsupport their domestic auto manufacturing base. Countries throughout\nEurope and Asia are providing assistance to their auto manufacturers\nduring this time of crisis. You take all the auto companies now--take\nToyota. Their sales are way down. Everybody is hit by this recession.\nThe question is, Do we abandon this manufacturing base? Credit markets\nare still frozen. For that, I have to say, and let me be clear--I don't\nunderstand what Mr. Paulson has done since we gave him that authority\nfor $350 billion. Why are the credit markets still as frozen as they\nare?\n  The answer comes back: It could have been worse. I believe that. It\ncould have been worse. But we need to do a better job there. Let me be\nclear, I am not voting--if I have to vote today, tomorrow, next week--\nto release the next $350 billion to this administration. So let me put\nthat on the line.\n  Other countries are recognizing that, with the credit markets frozen,\nthey need to maintain their strong manufacturing base. We are the\ngreatest country in the world. How could we ever continue our\nleadership if we lose that manufacturing base? I know Senator Stabenow\nhas been quite eloquent on the point, about how integrated the\nmanufacturing base is with our military and national defense\ninfrastructure. The big three automakers are the biggest customers for\nmany of the major suppliers of parts and technology for the armed\nservices. From onboard computer devices to tires to engine machinery,\nthese suppliers often rely on the big three to sustain their\nbusinesses.\n  I say to my colleagues on the other side who are taking the lead\nagainst this: Think about it. We all stand for a strong defense. If you\nlose this manufacturing base, whom are you going to rely on if we have\nmore national emergencies, international emergencies? We know we cannot\nafford to lose this base.\n  I mentioned before that some of my colleagues on the other side--the\nSenator from Alabama, the Senator from Tennessee--they have been very\noutspoken against helping the auto companies. Where were they when\nAlabama provided $258 million in taxpayer-funded incentives to the\nforeign automaker Mercedes-Benz to build an auto manufacturing plant in\nthe State of Alabama? I never heard them speak up. Do they only speak\nout against American workers who work for American companies here? They\nsupport the foreign companies, not the American companies.\n  Tennessee offered at least $200 million in incentives to Toyota to\nbuild an assembly plant in Chattanooga. Instead, they landed in\nMississippi. Mississippi provided Toyota $296 million in taxpayer-\nfunded initiatives. Why don't I hear my colleagues from Tennessee or\nMississippi out here saying: Oh, that was a mistake. Taxpayers should\nnot have been on the hook.\n  Something is wrong. Is this about not helping these workers because\nthey are tough and they joined a union? Is that it? What is this? It\ndoesn't smell right. You can't support giving money to lure foreign\nmanufacturers into your State, foreign auto companies into your State,\nand then suddenly turn on folks who are trying to save the domestic\nautomobile industry.\n  It is not that I am against what those States did. I am just talking\nabout being consistent. If you didn't oppose giving money to foreign\ncar companies, why do you oppose giving a bridge loan to our own\ndomestic manufacturing base at a time of great economic peril?\n  We will live to fight another day on this, that is for sure. As I\nsaid, if this were a different time, if this were a different place, if\nthe economy were thriving and one of those companies had problems due\nto their own ineptitude, I would not be here now. This is a worldwide\nrecession. Other countries are moving forward. I hope the American\npeople understand this.\n  If we are to add 2 to 3 million more unemployed people onto the list,\nwe are going to be in a downward spiral. It is going to be very hard\nfor us to recover in the near term.\n  Again, the big three have made a lot of mistakes. I met with them in\nthe 1980s. I will never forget it. I was over in the House and I was on\na committee that was dealing with fuel economy. I said: Why don't you\nmake more of these fuel-efficient cars? At that time, I said: My kids\nare in college. I see their friends are all buying these smaller cars.\nThey want to buy American, but they cannot. They cannot afford the gas.\nThat was after we had this crisis in the 1970s.\n  They said: You don't know what you are talking about. Those small\ncars, you don't make enough money on\n\n[[Page S10900]]\n\nthem, they are no good. People want big cars. That is good. We make\nmore money. They said to me: We are giving up those small cars to other\ncompanies, to foreign companies.\n  I believed that was wrong. I said you need to have diversity.\n  They decided to go their way.\n  I don't have a great deal of sympathy for the management over there\nresponsible for this. They didn't take the lead in research and\ndevelopment of advanced technology vehicles. They put too many of their\nresources into gas guzzlers.\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for another 10 minutes.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mrs. BOXER. They ignored signs that their future success would depend\non an ability to adapt to a changing business climate with innovation\nand new technologies. When I learned of the financial problems facing\nGM, Ford, and Chrysler, I viewed a possible rescue plan as an\nopportunity to help Detroit embrace new technologies that could lead\nthem toward a strong and prosperous future. I still think, because of\nthe White House's objection, the bill before us is making a big mistake\nbecause I wanted to make sure we could say in this bridge loan the\nfunds could not be used to pursue litigation related to the California\nwaiver.\n  Well, the administration will not go for that. We know where they\nstand on energy independence, we know where they stand on fighting\nglobal warming, on clean cars. They stand nowhere--or I should say they\nstand somewhere in a bad place. If the big three would embrace the\nCalifornia waiver, understanding that 19 other States are with us, and\nproduce cars to meet the goals, the very clean-air goals we have there,\nI think we would be a leader in the world. I see that in our future. I\nreally do.\n  I know in your State, Mr. President, we are seeing a whole new range\nof manufacturing dealing with solar panels. It is very exciting. This\nis the future. This is the future. Our big three should be leading the\nway. I hope they got the message in this last runup of gas prices. I\nhope they get the message that there is global warming and that we are\ngoing to have to deal with it if our planet is to survive.\n  I am confident that President-elect Obama is going to approve the\nwaiver. I am confident that when he does that, it is going to be a big\nhelp to the big three because they will really buckle down.\n  By the way, we are going to reimburse this technology fund, they are\ngoing to move ahead and they are going to meet the requirements with\nthe cleanest cars possible, and it will be a new day. Now, if all three\nof them do it and two of them survive in the future, that may be the\nway. We do not know. But what we do know is that today, this day,\nDecember 11, so close to Christmas, we do know that to walk away\nwithout helping this important industry could lead--could lead--to a\nfar deeper recession and even toward a depression.\n  With this auto retooling program from which these funds are being\nborrowed, this will be replenished. Speaker Pelosi has indicated to me\npersonally that they will be replenished. I call on my colleagues in\nthe Senate to support quick replenishment of the program, which is\nessential to the effort of repositioning the U.S. at the forefront of\nnew transportation and advanced battery technologies.\n  You know, we have startup companies in my State--very exciting. One\nof them is called Tesla Motors and the other is Fisker Automotive. That\nis two of them. They are leading the effort to develop advanced\ntechnology batteries, zero-emission cars, and high-performance plug-in\nhybrid electric vehicles. I have driven some of these cars. They are\nextraordinary. These companies and others, including the big three, are\nprocessing section 136 loan applications to retool manufacturing plants\nand speed up the development of technology that will put the United\nStates right out in front, leading the way to clean cars and clean\ntechnology.\n  I wish to point out that no bill is perfect. I could write a bill\nthat would be far better for me. Every Senator could. But there is\nsignificant taxpayer oversight in this bill, as well as benchmarks that\nthe big three must meet in order to continue to receive Government\nassistance.\n  By January 1, the car czar will develop benchmarks to determine how\nto assess each company's progress in turning its plans submitted to\nCongress into long-term restructuring plans. The benchmarks will focus\non how the big three will restructure their businesses for long-term\nviability, increased fuel efficiency, advanced technology, managing\ndebt, capitalization, and future cost requirements.\n  So to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who say: Let them\ngo bankrupt, it is better, they will restructure, we are going to make\nsure they restructure without declaring bankruptcy and without\nunloading all of the cost of that bankruptcy onto the backs of\ntaxpayers. If any of the big three fail to submit long-term\nrestructuring plans by March 31, 2009, the car czar has the authority\nto call the loan or cancel the loan commitment within 30 days,\nrequiring the loan to be paid back at an accelerated rate.\n  Taxpayers will recover the cost of these loans over 7 years at a rate\nof 5 percent for the first 5 and 9 percent thereafter. The car czar\nwill have access to all financial records of the big three and will\nhave the ability to prohibit asset sales or possible investments over\n$100 million, which will protect U.S. jobs being outsourced. The\nGovernment will have senior debt status for repayment of the loans,\nmeaning we are in the front of the line to recover loan payments\nregardless of the companies' success. Stock warrants will ensure the\ntaxpayers benefit from any future growth these companies may\nexperience. The bill prohibits golden parachutes, puts limits on\nexecutive compensation and bonus compensation to top employees, and it\nrequires the companies to divest from any private jet investments. The\npayment of dividends to shareholders will be prohibited during the loan\nperiod. In other words, there is every incentive for these companies to\nturn their companies around. They want to pay dividends to\nshareholders, they want to get bonuses, they want to get back to\nbusiness as usual. But we say: Before you do, you have to pay us back.\nThey have a lot of reasons to make this turnaround.\n  The loan program will be subject to strict auditing by the\nComptroller General and the GAO. The car czar will be tasked with\nfacilitating agreements between unions, retirees, debtholders,\ncreditors, suppliers, auto dealers, and shareholders to reduce costs\nand ensure long-term viability.\n  Again, I say to my colleagues who are saying let them go bankrupt,\ntake a look at this bill. You are saying let them go bankrupt because\nthey will have to restructure. We say restructure without the\nbankruptcy because if, in fact, there is a bankruptcy declared, 80\npercent of the American people say they will not buy a car from a\ncompany that has gone bankrupt. I understood that. So this avoids the\nbankruptcy and allows them to restructure. If we fail to do this, we\nare playing Russian roulette with this recession. In times of crisis,\nyou have to see opportunities.\n  I believe, as a major critic of the car companies since the 1980s\nwhen I was here in the House of Representatives, they have finally\ngotten the message. It has taken them too long. They have been too\narrogant. They have not seen the world changing. They have not noticed\nglobal warming. They have been blinded to so many things that were\nhappening around them. They were hostile to California and the 19 other\nStates that want to clean up our environment and get better fuel\nmileage, have clean cars. Instead of embracing those States and working\nwith those States--by the way, those 19 States and California represent\na majority of the American people. A majority of the American people\nwant clean cars.\n  Now, it may have taken this horrific turn of events to get the\nmessage through, but clearly the message must be getting through.\nJeffrey Sachs wrote recently in the Washington Post:\n\n       American-made fuel-cell cars may be a large-scale reality\n     within a decade. Success would dramatically improve energy\n     and national security and U.S. global competitiveness.\n\n  Now, this is the opportunity. But guess what. If we do not act, if we\ndo not act and this recession keeps deepening, we will not have this\nchance. We will be the only industrialized democracy without a domestic\nauto company\n\n[[Page S10901]]\n\nand without that manufacturing base. So we have to do what is necessary\nto push Detroit toward a stronger, more efficient future. It may be\nthat at some point in the future, that industry will have a different\nlook to it. Maybe it will have a different look to it. We do not know\nthat. But what we do know now is that what has hit Detroit is far more\nthan making the wrong choices about what cars they produce. I think\nthey made those wrong choices, but it is far bigger than that because\nevery company in America and outside of America that is making cars is\nsuffering today because of the terrible recession we are in, because of\na lack of consumer confidence, because of a loss of equity in the stock\nmarket, because of home foreclosures, because of all of these things.\n  So I say you never know what could happen in the future. I am not\nable to predict it because I cannot. But I know what I have to do now.\nI have to think about those three things: jobs, jobs, and jobs. When I\nthink about that, and I recognize that just today we had more filings\nfor unemployment insurance than we have had in 26 years, I say for us\nto walk away from this without this scaled-down bridge loan would be\nplaying Russian roulette with this recession. I love my country too\nmuch to do that. With all of the problems I have with Detroit, I will\nsupport helping them in this fashion.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10901-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "ORDER OF PROCEDURE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SORDER", "S10901", "S10901", "[{\"name\": \"John Barrasso\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10901", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10901]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           ORDER OF PROCEDURE\n\n  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I also ask unanimous consent that\nSenator Nelson of Florida be allowed to speak after me.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Madam President.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10901-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "CLEANUP OF NUCLEAR MISSILE SITE IN CHEYENNE, WYOMING", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10901", "S10901", "[{\"name\": \"John Barrasso\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10901", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10901]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          CLEANUP OF NUCLEAR MISSILE SITE IN CHEYENNE, WYOMING\n\n  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I stand here today holding a 500-page\nreport, a report that was sent to my office yesterday by the Army Corps\nof Engineers. I will not read the whole report, I am happy to say, but\nI want to call attention to the Senate and to the country, as well as\nto the people of Wyoming, what is contained within this report.\n  This report, at a cost of who knows how many taxpayer dollars, says\nsomething I have known and the people of Wyoming have known to be true.\nIt says the Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for the\ncontamination of the water wells of the city of Cheyenne. Now, let me\nclarify. The report does not actually say the words ``we are\nresponsible.'' Washington could never admit its faults so directly. No.\nInstead, the report states that other potential sources of\ncontamination, other potential sources of this trichloroethylene--the\ncontaminant, the chemical that is in our city's wells--it says that\nother potential sources ``may be limited.'' I guess that is\nWashington's way of saying: It was us.\n  The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and the city of\nCheyenne found evidence of trichloroethylene in the water supply in\n1998--10 years ago. The culprit is a dormant Cold War-era nuclear\nmissile area. It is a missile site and has been there for a long time.\nThe Army Corps of Engineers admits that over 1,800 gallons of this\ncontaminant, TCE, was dumped at the Atlas 4 nuclear missile site each\nyear--each year--of the operation of the missile site, beginning in the\nmid-1960s.\n  Well, the discharge of TCE the Army Corps admits to is a mere 1\nmile--1 mile--from the water wells of the city of Cheyenne. The Wyoming\nDepartment of Environmental Quality has claimed there is one giant\nplume of TCE emanating from the former nuclear missile site, working\nits way into and then contaminating the city's water wells. The missile\nsite is currently being cleaned up under the Superfund laws by the Army\nCorps of Engineers. Unfortunately, the Army Corps only admits\nculpability for TCE contamination directly emanating from the nuclear\nmissile site. They allege that there is actually a gap between the\nplume they admit to at the nuclear missile site and the one around the\ncity's water wells--1 mile apart.\n  Now, you might think it odd that the Department of Defense, given the\nvolume of this chemical that has been dumped year after year in rural\nWyoming, would not admit that it was the responsible party for\ncontaminating the city's wells. That would just make sense. They would\nsay: Yes, we dumped it here. It is right here, a mile away in the\nwells. It is our fault. No. It would just make sense to us that they\nwould admit it. But, in fact, the Army Corps over the last few years\nhas looked to blame almost anyone else, has looked to blame others than\nto say they are responsible for contaminating the city's wells. Well,\nsuch claims have included that there might have been a train derailment\nand the train might have been carrying TCE into the area. They said it\nmight have been from a nearby oil rig, it might have been from a local\nshooting range. The Army Corps said: Anybody but us.\n  I became involved in this issue after I felt the city of Cheyenne and\nthe Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality were being ignored by\nWashington. As ranking member of the Superfund and Environmental Health\nSubcommittee, I pushed for testing of the ground in that 1-mile area\nbetween the nuclear missile site and the water wells of the city of\nCheyenne. The Army Corps finally agreed to do the testing and said it\nwould also look into the historical use of this chemical in the\nCheyenne area to make sure there was not another responsible party for\nthe contamination.\n  The final results--all 500 pages--were finally released this week. To\nno one's surprise who lives in Wyoming, to no one's surprise who is\nfamiliar with this issue, to no one's surprise but the Army Corps of\nEngineers, the contaminating chemical, TCE, was found in the ground\nbetween the nuclear missile site and the city's water wells, right\nwhere we said it would be. The report also revealed they found no other\npublic records of TCE use in the Cheyenne area for any other reason. It\njust makes sense to us, and the cause is clear. Given these findings,\nit is time for the Army Corps to provide the funding the city needs to\nmanage and to complete the current cleanup efforts.\n  Now, let me be clear. The city of Cheyenne's water is safe. Untold\nthousands of taxpayer dollars have gone to keep TCE out of the water\nsupply. The city of Cheyenne and the State of Wyoming have implemented\nthe effective procedures to protect the folks in Cheyenne. Those\nefforts have been completely successful. But the Army Corps of\nEngineers and the U.S. Government have the responsibility to fund the\ncleanup. They have responsibility to fix the problem, and this report\nsays it is so. It is time to do so.\n  Madam President, I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10901-4", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO SENATORS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TRIBUTETO", "S10901", "S10902", "[{\"name\": \"Bill Nelson\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Sheldon Whitehouse\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10901", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10901-S10902]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          TRIBUTE TO SENATORS\n\n                              John Warner\n\n  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I wish to take this\nopportunity to pay tribute to a true patriot and a dear friend, Senator\nJohn Warner of Virginia.\n  It has been an extraordinary experience for me to serve with Senator\nWarner on the Armed Services Committee and the Intelligence Committee.\n  In the capacity of his service on the Armed Services Committee, which\nhas been upwards of three decades, serving as its chairman, the insight\nand guidance he has provided has been invaluable. Over and over, you\nwill hear the\n\n[[Page S10902]]\n\nmembers of that committee speak as I, as if with one voice, how we\nappreciate his public service. He has great knowledge. He has great\nwisdom. It is tempered with a wonderful personality that is most\nstudious and deliberative. Few have done as much to champion the cause\nof our men and women in the Armed Forces of the United States as John\nWarner.\n  This Senator admires him for his sense of fairness, for his mutual\nrespect of all the Members of the Senate. We know there has to be\ncivility in the Senate for it to function. There has to be mutual\nrespect. There has to be respect for the truth. There has to be respect\nfor the dignity of individuals and those Senators' families. All of\nthat is certainly apropos of the senior Senator from Virginia. Over and\nover, I have been in situations with him that could have been\nadversarial. Yet his calm judgment and reason have brought people\ntogether. Of course, that is the admonition of the Good Book: ``Come\nlet us reason together.''\n  Over and over, as I have sought his counsel on matters of some of the\nNation's highest secrets, John Warner has provided the leadership and\nthe clarity, as we have made those decisions, sometimes making those\ndecisions together.\n  So it is with a great reluctance on my part that I see our colleague,\nSenator Warner, retire after a very distinguished and long career. It\nhas been a privilege to serve with John. I will miss him as a\ncolleague. I will miss his leadership, his fairness, and his great\ncapacity as a gentleman of the Senate.\n  Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a\nquorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the\norder for the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for\nup to 15 minutes as in morning business.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10901", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10901", "S10901", "[{\"name\": \"Barbara Boxer\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Barrasso\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10901", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10901]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period\nfor morning business be extended until 2 p.m., with Senators permitted\nto speak for up to 10 minutes each.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskill). Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n  Mrs. BOXER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10902", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10902", "S10904", "[{\"name\": \"Sheldon Whitehouse\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Claire McCaskill\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10902", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10902-S10904]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY CRISIS\n\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I rise today to address what I feel\nis an unfortunate omission from our economic rescue strategy to date.\nThis week, we are considering another bailout which would give $15\nbillion in so-called bridge loans to America's struggling automakers.\n  Now, when we debated a bailout program to protect our Nation's\nfinancial system back in September, we created legislative branch roles\nand executive branch roles. We ultimately passed legislation that\nempowered the Department of the Treasury to invest up to $700 billion.\nDebate was rushed. The Treasury Secretary came to us on a Friday in\nSeptember and told leaders of both parties in both Houses that our\neconomy would collapse if we did not take immediate action. With the\nthreat of immediate financial calamity and the apparent good faith of\nSecretary Paulson, Congress moved quickly to pass the best bill we\ncould. Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut and my colleague from Rhode\nIsland, Senator Jack Reed, worked heroically, almost around the clock,\nto negotiate for taxpayer protections and several levels of oversight.\nIn the end, we created a program of congressional and executive roles\nbut no judicial role. We ignored the role that courts can play here or,\nmore correctly, that executive agencies can play when supported by\njudicial or even quasi-judicial due process. We are about to ignore\nthat role again in the auto bailout.\n  Why is this point important? This is important because under our\nAmerican system of government, there are important powers of government\nthat can only be exercised after due process opportunity for a hearing.\nThe famous Supreme Court case of Fuentes v. Shevin is on point. I\nquote:\n\n       The constitutional right to be heard is a basic aspect of\n     the duty of government to follow a fair process of decision-\n     making when it acts to deprive a person of his possessions.\n\n  That is citation 407 U.S. 67 at 82.\n  In other words, some means of restructuring require due process if\nthey involve adjusting people's financial rights and claims. When we\nfail to provide that process, we unilaterally disarm government's\nresponse, taking away its ability to restructure using those means.\n  The price of this repeated omission has been high. Going back before\nwe even got into this current mess, when there was only a subprime\nmortgage problem, Senator Durbin of Illinois proposed a bill that would\nhave empowered bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of a mortgage on a\nperson's primary residence. One needed a due process hearing such as\nthat in order to adjust the rights within that mortgage of the banks\nand the myriad investors who bought strips of that mortgage when it was\ncarved up and sold to the four winds. Our Republican colleagues stymied\nthis provision which we now see could have kept tens of thousands of\nfamilies in their homes. Because the clarity and finality of a court\ndecision on a troubled mortgage was not available, there was little\nalternative to foreclosure, and troubled mortgages, by the tens of\nthousands, cascaded into foreclosure--numbers never before seen in our\nhistory. Our fault. Bad design. And every day we don't get it right,\nevery day we don't pass Senator Durbin's bill, that foreclosure problem\nworsens.\n  Similarly, as part of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, we could\nhave addressed lavish and indefensible executive compensation by\nproviding for some judicial power to restructure these packages.\nBecause we didn't, these grotesque liabilities remain on the books of\nthe bailed out entities as obligations to their disgraced management.\nAccording to an analysis by the Wall Street Journal, the executive\ndeferred compensation obligations of bailed out Wall Street firms\namount to more than $40 billion. Banks participating in the bailout\nprogram carried these obligations on their books, and the cash from our\nbailout is being used to pay them--or will be used to pay them.\nTaxpayer dollars will end up in the pockets of the scoundrels who\ntanked those firms. I contend we have to find ways in which the court\nsystem, due process, can be brought to bear on this problem. But again,\nthe inaction on that so far is our fault. Bad design. Unilateral\ndisarmament in the face of the Wall Street meltdown.\n  Now we have the auto bailout plan with its provision for a ``car\nczar,'' but once again, lacks a role for those due process powers of\ngovernment. Once we are committed to this deal--once we are in--the\nonly tool we will have at that negotiating table is Uncle Sam's\ncheckbook--that, and the somewhat improbable threat to walk away and\ntank the auto companies after having put $15 billion into them. So now\nwe will have to negotiate about the companies' continuing lavish\nexecutive and board compensation packages and other obligations\nimpeding a fair and rational recovery. As for looking backwards at\npreexisting obligations, as we say in Rhode Island, forget about it.\nThat requires due process. We have created no process to even invoke\ngovernment's power to review those. So the effect of all of this is to\nencourage special interests to play the holdout in the auto\nnegotiations and dare us to tank the companies. It is going to be a\nhigh stakes game of chicken and, no matter who wins, the taxpayers\nlose.\n  We created this ``hold out'' problem by not providing a judicial role\nin the restructuring. We could, for example, give the car czar the\npowers of a judicially appointed conservator or receiver--those are\nroles I have held--and the power to go to court for an order approving\nhis plan or her plan over the objections of any holdouts. If we did\nthat, it would change the bargaining position of the holdouts. This\njudicial due process would allow the strong powers of government that\nrequire due process to be brought to bear on this mess. We do this in a\nlot of different contexts.\n  Bankruptcy courts oversee restructuring all the time and so do other\nquasi-judicial bodies. For example, the FDIC has the power under\ncurrent law to place a troubled bank into receivership and wind it down\nas if in chapter 7, or put it under conservatorship to restructure it\nas if in chapter 11. The bankruptcy courts and the FDIC possess the\ntools necessary to cut through whatever Gordian knots may snarl\nrestructuring plans absent that power.\n\n[[Page S10903]]\n\nThe judicial imprimatur will also increase public confidence in the\nfairness and the propriety of these plans. There is flexibility about\nhow we do this. We don't have to have it be the FDIC. We don't have to\nhave it be a bankruptcy court to recognize the due process powers of\ngovernment.\n  Fuentes v. Shevin again, and I quote:\n\n       Due process tolerates variances in the form of a hearing\n     ``appropriate to the nature of the case,'' and ``depending\n     upon the importance of the interests involved and the nature\n     of the subsequent proceedings, if any.''\n\n  I hope my colleagues will recognize the importance of authorizing\njudicially supervised powers in these bailout plans. I pledge to work\nhard with anyone who wants to achieve this goal. It is vital, I\ncontend, to recognize that directed judicial oversight expands\ngovernment's powers and authorities to do the things the public and the\ncircumstances demand. It gives us a means to unsnarl the foreclosure\nmess on Main Street, to restructure obscene executive compensation on\nWall Street, and to force good-faith negotiations in Detroit.\n\n  We cannot ignore the judicial power in restructuring companies and\nindustries. We must not let that sword sleep in our hands. Times are\nbleak in Detroit, as they are around the country. The automobile\nindustry stands on the brink of collapse, and the jobs of thousands--\nsome say millions--of workers hang in the balance.\n  Michigan shares the sad distinction with my home State of Rhode\nIsland in having the Nation's highest unemployment rate, 9.3 percent,\nin October. Families are struggling in Rhode Island and across the\ncountry. That is the background against which we must consider whether\nto bail out yet another industry. In making such a weighty decision, I\nimplore my colleagues, we must not consider just whether but how we go\nabout doing this.\n  I contend that we should empower our Government to take steps that we\nhave, to date, foreclosed--steps that exercise the power of Government\nthat can be only exercised after due process of law. I hope we consider\nthat.\n  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Wall Street Journal\narticle to which I referred be printed in the Record.\n  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in\nthe Record, as follows:\n\n              [The Wall Street Journal, October 31, 2008]\n\n                    Banks Owe Billions to Executives\n\n                         (By Ellen E. Schultz)\n\n       Financial giants getting injections of federal cash owed\n     their executives more than $40 billion for past years' pay\n     and pensions as of the end of 2007, a Wall Street Journal\n     analysis shows.\n       The government is seeking to rein in executive pay at banks\n     getting federal money, and a leading congressman and a state\n     official have demanded that some of them make clear how much\n     they intend to pay in bonuses this year.\n       But overlooked in these efforts is the total size of debts\n     that financial firms receiving taxpayer assistance previously\n     incurred to their executives, which at some firms exceed what\n     they owe in pensions to their entire work forces.\n       The sums are mostly for special executive pensions and\n     deferred compensation, including bonuses, for prior years.\n     Because the liabilities include stock, they are subject to\n     market fluctuation. Given the stock-market decline of this\n     year, some may have fallen substantially.\n       Some examples: $11.8 billion at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.,\n     $8.5 billion at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., and $10 billion to\n     $12 billion at Morgan Stanley.\n       Few firms report the size of these debts to their\n     executives. (Goldman is an exception.) In most cases, the\n     Journal calculated them by extrapolating from figures that\n     the firms do have to disclose.\n       Most firms haven't set aside cash or stock for these IOUs.\n     They are a drag on current earnings and when the executives\n     depart, employers have to pay them out of corporate coffers.\n       The practice of incurring corporate IOUs for executives'\n     pensions and past pay is perfectly legal and is common in big\n     business, not limited to financial firms. But liabilities\n     grew especially high in the financial industry, with its\n     tradition of lavish pay.\n       Deferring compensation appeals both to employers, which\n     save cash in the near term, and to executives, who delay\n     taxes and see their deferred-pay accounts grow, sometimes\n     aided by matching contributions. In some cases, firms give\n     top executives high guaranteed returns on these accounts.\n       The liabilities are an essentially hidden obligation. Even\n     when the debts to their executives total in the billions,\n     most companies lump them into ``other liabilities''; only a\n     few then identify amounts attributable to deferred pay.\n       The Journal was able to approximate companies' IOUs, in\n     some cases, by looking at an amount they report as deferred\n     tax assets for ``deferred compensation'' or ``employee\n     benefits and compensation.'' This figure shows how much a\n     company expects to reap in tax benefits when it ultimately\n     pays the executives what it owes them.\n       J.P. Morgan, for instance, reported a $3.4 billion deferred\n     tax asset for employee benefits in 2007. Assuming a 40%\n     combined federal and state tax rate--and backing out\n     obligations for retiree health and other items--implies the\n     bank owed about $8.2 billion to its own executives. A person\n     familiar with the matter confirmed the estimate.\n       Applying the same technique to Citigroup Inc. yields\n     roughly a $5 billion IOU, primarily for restricted stock of\n     executives and eligible employees. Someone familiar with the\n     matter confirmed the estimate.\n       The Treasury is infusing $25 billion apiece into J.P.\n     Morgan and Citigroup as it seeks to get credit flowing. In\n     return, the federal government is getting preferred stock in\n     the banks and warrants to buy common shares. The Treasury is\n     injecting $125 billion into nine big banks and making a like\n     amount available for other banks that apply.\n       It's imposing some restrictions on how they pay top\n     executives in the future, such as curtailing new ``golden\n     parachutes'' and barring a tax deduction for any one person's\n     pay above $500,000. But the rules won't affect what the banks\n     already owe their executives or make these opaque debts more\n     transparent.\n       Asked about the Journal's calculation, the Treasury said,\n     ``Every bank that accepts money through the Capital Purchase\n     Program must first agree to the compensation restrictions\n     passed by Congress just last month--and every bank that is\n     receiving money has done so.''\n       Bear Stearns Cos., the first financial firm the U.S.\n     backstopped, owed its executives $1.7 billion for accrued\n     employee compensation and benefits at the start of the year,\n     according to regulatory filings. When Bear Stearns ran into\n     trouble after investing heavily in risky mortgage-backed\n     securities, the government stepped in, arranging a sale of\n     the firm and taking responsibility for up to $29 billion of\n     its losses.\n       The buyer, J.P. Morgan, says it will honor the debt to Bear\n     Stearns executives, which it said is shrunken because much of\n     it was in stock that sank in value.\n       J.P. Morgan will also honor deferred-pay accounts at\n     another institution it took over, Washington Mutual Inc. It\n     couldn't be determined how big this IOU is. J.P. Morgan's\n     move will leave the WaMu executives better off than holders\n     of that ailing thrift's debt and preferred stock, who are\n     expected to see little recovery. J.P. Morgan's share of the\n     federal capital injection is $25 billion.\n       Obligations for executive pay are large for a number of\n     reasons. Even as companies have complained about the cost of\n     retiree benefits, they have been awarding larger pay and\n     pensions to executives. At Goldman, for example, the $11.8\n     billion obligation primarily for deferred executive\n     compensation dwarfed the liability for its broad-based\n     pension plan for all employees. That was just $399 million,\n     and fully funded with set-aside assets.\n       The deferred-compensation programs for executives are like\n     401(k) plans on steroids. They create hypothetical\n     ``accounts'' into which executives can defer salaries,\n     bonuses and restricted stock awards. For top officers,\n     employers often enhance the deferred pay with matching\n     contributions, and even assign an interest rate at which the\n     hypothetical account grows.\n       Often, it is a generous rate. At Freddie Mac, executives\n     earned 9.25% on their deferred-pay accounts in 2007,\n     regulatory filings show--a better deal than regular employees\n     of the mortgage buyer could get in a 401(k). Since all this\n     money is tax-deferred, the Treasury, and by extension the\n     U.S. taxpayer, subsidizes the accounts.\n       In addition, because assets are rarely set aside for\n     executive IOUs, they have a greater impact on firms' earnings\n     than rank-and-file pension plans, which by law must be\n     funded.\n       Bank of America Corp.'s $1.3 billion liability for\n     supplemental executive pensions reduced earnings by $104\n     million in 2007, filings show. By contrast, the bank's\n     regular pension plan is overfunded, and the surplus helped\n     the plan contribute $32 million to earnings last year.\n       While disclosing its liability for executive pensions, the\n     bank doesn't disclose its IOU executives' deferred\n     compensation, and it couldn't be calculated. The bank's share\n     of the federal capital injection is $25 billion.\n       Bank of America has agreed to acquire Merrill Lynch & Co.\n     Merrill is a rare example of a firm that has set aside assets\n     for its deferred-pay obligation: $2.2 billion, matching the\n     liability. Morgan Stanley also says its liability for\n     executives' deferred pay is largely funded.\n       To be sure, deferred-compensation accounts can shrink.\n     Those of lower-level executives usually track a mutual fund,\n     and decline if it does. Often the accounts include restricted\n     shares, which also may lose value, especially this year. To\n     the extent financial-firm executives were being paid in\n     restricted stock, many have lost huge amounts of wealth in\n     this year's stock-market plunge.\n       The value of Morgan Stanley Chief Executive John Mack's\n     deferred-compensation account declined by $1.3 million in\n     fiscal 2007, to $19.9 million; much of it was in company\n     shares. Mr. Mack didn't accept a bonus in 2007.\n\n[[Page S10904]]\n\n       Executives can even lose their deferred pay altogether if\n     their employer ends up in bankruptcy court. When Lehman\n     Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for bankruptcy last month, most\n     executives became unsecured creditors. The government didn't\n     come to Lehman's aid.\n       In assessing liabilities, the Journal examined federal\n     year-end 2007 filings by the first nine banks to get capital\n     injections, plus six other banks and financial firms\n     embroiled in the financial crisis. In many cases, the firms\n     didn't report enough data to estimate their obligations to\n     executives. As for identifying amounts due individual\n     executives, company filings provided a look at only the top\n     few, and not a full picture of what they were owed.\n       Just as banks aren't the only financial firms getting\n     federal aid amid the crisis, they aren't the only ones facing\n     scrutiny of their compensation programs.\n       Struggling insurer American International Group Inc. agreed\n     to suspend payment of deferred pay for some former top\n     executives pending a review by New York state Attorney\n     General Andrew Cuomo. Mr. Cuomo is also demanding to know\n     this year's bonus plans for the first nine banks getting\n     federal cash, as is House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry\n     Waxman.\n       Among the payouts AIG agreed not to make are disbursements\n     from a $600 million bonus pool for executives of a unit that\n     ran up huge losses with complex financial products. AIG also\n     is suspending $19 million of deferred compensation for Martin\n     Sullivan, whom AIG ousted as chief executive in June. His\n     successor as CEO, Robert Willumstad, who left when the U.S.\n     stepped in to rescue AIG in September, has said he's forgoing\n     $22 million in severance because he wasn't there long enough\n     to execute his strategy for AIG.\n       However, the giant insurer--whose total liability for its\n     executives' deferred pay couldn't be calculated--says most of\n     the managers will receive the compensation. ``Of course,\n     we'll be looking at all these to make sure they're consistent\n     with the requirement of the program,'' said spokesman\n     Nicholas Ashooh.\n       AIG isn't eligible for the government's capital-injection\n     plan, since it's not a bank, but it's getting plenty of U.S.\n     aid of another sort. The Treasury has made $123 billion of\n     credit available, a little more than two-thirds of which MG\n     has borrowed so far.\n       Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also don't get in on the\n     capital-injection plan for banks. But under a federal\n     ``conservatorship,'' the Treasury agreed to provide each with\n     up to $100 billion of capital if needed. In return, the\n     government got preferred shares in the firms and the right to\n     acquire nearly 80% of them.\n       Their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, says\n     it will bar golden-parachute severance payouts to the\n     mortgage buyers' ousted chief executives. The executives\n     remain eligible for their pensions.\n       Fannie Mae had a liability of roughly $500 million for\n     executive pensions and deferred compensation at the end of\n     2007, judging by the size of its deferred tax assets. A\n     spokesman for the firm wouldn't discuss the estimate or\n     whether the executives would get the assets.\n       At Freddie Mac, most will. ``Deferred compensation belongs\n     to the officers who earned it,'' said Shawn Flaherty, a\n     spokeswoman.\n       Indeed, in September Freddie Mac made its deferred-\n     compensation plan more flexible, allowing executives to\n     receive their money earlier than initially spelled out.\n     ``Officers were nervous about market changes,'' said Ms.\n     Flaherty. ``We wanted a retention tool for top talent.''\n\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I thank the Chair, yield the floor, and I suggest the\nabsence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the\nPresiding Officer, the Senator from Missouri, be recognized for up to 5\nminutes, and that I be recognized for 30 minutes in morning business.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. LEVIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Levin). Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n  Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I know we have an important piece of\nlegislation that we are going to vote on today. I desperately want to\nsupport that legislation. I wish to ask first and most importantly if\nanyone has the information as to whether the CEOs of Wells Fargo or\nBank of America or Citigroup have taken private jets in the last month.\nHas anyone asked the CEOs of Citigroup, Wells Fargo--all of these\nfinancial companies--to take a cut in compensation? Has anyone asked\nabout their workers and how much money they make and whether they are\noverpaid and whether they are competitive with the salaries of\ncommunity bankers across the country?\n  Every one of the institutions I named has gotten $15 billion or more\nof taxpayer money. Think about that for a minute. Citigroup has gotten\n$50 billion. Have we checked on their private jets? Have we checked on\ntheir CEO compensation? Have we checked on their work rules and whether\ntheir workers are given enough flexibility?\n  It is unbelievable to me that we are setting this double standard.\nThe thousands of jobs and families who build great American cars do not\ndeserve this incredible hypocrisy in terms of the different treatment\nthey are getting. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.\n  I say let's call in those CEOs of those big companies that have\ngotten more than $15 billion of our money and ask them when they are\ngoing to take a dollar in pay, ask them if they got here on a corporate\njet, ask them if their workers have cut their pay to $14 an hour, ask\nthem if they have talked about cutting their pension costs and their\nhealth care costs. Until we do that, we ought to be quiet about the\nAmerican autoworkers, and we ought to be quiet about these companies\nthat have reduced fixed costs, that have agreed to sell corporate jets,\nthat have agreed to cut executive compensation.\n  I want to support this bill on behalf of manufacturing in the United\nStates of America, on behalf of wonderful, hard-working families in\nMissouri. However, there is one problem that has arisen, and that is,\nunfortunately, in this bill right now, as written, is a provision to\nincrease the pay of Federal judges. Wrong time, wrong place.\n  We have unemployment numbers today that show we have the highest\nunemployment in this country we have had in decades. We have families\nall over this Nation who are scared today, who are not buying Christmas\npresents. Federal judges get lifetime appointments and they never take\na dime's cut in pay. They die with the same salary they have today. My\nphone is ringing off the hook from people who want to be Federal\njudges. I am having to have staff work overtime to handle all the phone\ncalls I am getting from people who think there may be a Federal\njudgeship opening in the eastern district of Missouri and how badly\naccomplished, wonderful, smart lawyers want that Federal appointment.\n  We are not hurting for qualified applicants for the Federal\njudiciary. Is it fair that they have not gotten a cost-of-living\nincrease like every other Federal employee? Probably not. But you know\nwhat is a lot more unfair is to give somebody with a lifetime\nappointment, great health care, no cut in pay when they actually\nretire, what is unfair is to give them a pay raise on this day in this\nbill at this time. It is not the right time. And if it is in the bill,\nI regrettably will have to vote against this legislation because I feel\nso strongly that it sends the wrong message to the United States of\nAmerica at this scary moment in our economic history.\n  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskall). Without objection, it is so\nordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10904-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "DOMESTIC AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10904", "S10909", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Warner\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10904", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10904-S10909]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                      DOMESTIC AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, the bill that has been filed by the\nchairman\n\n[[Page S10905]]\n\nof the Banking Committee would do for the U.S. domestic auto industry\nwhat governments around the world are doing: providing emergency\nassistance to their auto industries because their survival is\njeopardized by a worldwide recession which has resulted in plunging\nauto sales.\n  That global recession is not the making of the auto industries around\nthe world, including our own domestic industry. Past mistakes of the\nbig three are not the cause of the worldwide recession and resulting\ncredit freeze. People who want to make large purchases, such as\nautomobiles, are unable to get credit, and 90 percent of the people who\nbuy automobiles buy on credit. Many people simply are afraid to make\nlarge-scale financial commitments in these scary economic times. So the\nU.S. domestic auto industry is not alone in needing loans to make it\nthrough the global economic calamity we are in. Look at the rest of the\nauto-producing world. Here are some headlines in the news recently:\n\n  ``Facing a Slowdown, China's Auto Industry Presses for a Bailout From\nBeijing.''\n  Brazil. ``In Brazil, Whiplash on Assembly Lines.'' ``The Government\nstepped in with a $3.5 billion aid package for the auto industry by\nfunding banks to boost the amount of credit available for car loans.''\n  ``European Carmakers Get $50 Billion in Aid.''\n  ``European governments poised to help their automakers.''\n  ``Automakers in other nations get more government help. Requests for\naid made worldwide''--another headline.\n  These are all headlines in papers across the country.\n  Reuters, ``Spain to support car industry.''\n  ``France's stimulus plan includes carmakers.''\n  ``Portugal rolls out loan.''\n  ``Auto industry faces massive job losses without aid,'' according to\nthe chairman of one of the largest automobile industries--not one of\nthe big three.\n  Now, why are nations around the world stepping in to support their\nauto industries? It is because of the drastic decline in sales across\nthe industries around the world--not just domestic, not just the big\nthree--leaving no alternative to every other auto-producing country and\nits government but to support its industry. Hyundai sales are down 40\npercent; Toyota sales are down 34 percent; Honda, down 32 percent;\nNissan, down 42 percent; Mercedes, down 38 percent. These are not the\nbig three. These are automobile makers around the country that are in\nthe same situation as the big three. But the difference, so far, is\nthat other governments are stepping in. We have not yet stepped in to\nsupport our industry.\n  In arguing against these loans for the big three, some continue to\ndescribe the domestic companies of the 1970s and 1980s when fuel\nefficiency was not high on the list of the big three as big three goals\nor achievements. Some would have us ignore dramatic gains in quality\nand vastly greater numbers of fuel-efficient vehicles now being offered\nby the big three. In the area of quality, big three autos are equal to\nor better than their foreign competitors. For example, the J.D. Power\nInitial Quality Study scores the overall quality of Buick, Cadillac,\nChevrolet, Ford, Mercury, Pontiac, and Lincoln--these are objective,\noutside studies on quality for those American brands, Buick, Cadillac,\nChevrolet, Ford, Mercury, Pontiac, and Lincoln--as high or higher than\nAcura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, VW, and Volvo. J.D. Power rates the\nChevrolet Malibu as the highest quality midsize sedan on the market,\nand both the Malibu and the Ford Fusion score better than the Honda\nAccord or the Toyota Camry.\n  On the fuel efficiency side, here are some facts that hopefully\ncolleagues will consider. Long before the credit crisis hit, GM laid\nthe groundwork to offer 15 hybrids by 2012. Thanks to investments they\nhave already made, GM already has 20 models that achieve 30 miles per\ngallon or better--twice the number of its nearest competitor. All the\nbig three are working to ensure that at least 50 percent of their\nAmerican production is capable of running on biofuels by 2012. Domestic\nautomakers produce numerous cars that have equal or better fuel\nefficiency than their foreign competitors. And again, the most fuel\nefficient Chevy Malibu gets 33 miles per gallon on the highway, which\nis 2 miles better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel efficient\nFord Focus has the same highway fuel efficiency ratings as the most\nfuel efficient Toyota Corolla.\n  In the area of productivity, Chrysler tied Toyota as the most\nproductive automaker in North America this year, according to the\nHarbor Report on Manufacturing, which measures the amount of work done\nper employee. Eight of the ten most productive vehicle assembly plants\nin North America belong to Chrysler, Ford, or General Motors.\n  Now, there are also some who want to ignore the reduction in benefits\nthat have been taken already by UAW workers and retirees. In the\ncollective bargaining agreements negotiated in 2005 and 2007, the UAW,\nalong with GM, Ford, and Chrysler, achieved billions of dollars in cost\nsavings and set the companies on the course to bring labor costs,\nincluding benefits, in line with their foreign competitors in the\nUnited States by 2012. Wages were cut and pension and health care\nbenefits were greatly reduced as well.\n  The UAW is taking responsibility for managing its own retiree health\ncare benefits beginning in 2010 by setting up its own voluntary\nemployee beneficiary association, or VEBA. The VEBA plan will transfer\nresponsibilities for health care benefits for existing employees from\ncompanies to an independent trust. This eliminates half of the\ncompanies' liabilities for retirees' health care, with billions of\ndollars of savings.\n  The memory of mistakes made decades ago lingers and remains the\nimpression that many have of the big three despite all the facts I have\njust outlined. Beliefs are always hard to change. So the facts I have\njust shared about improved quality and more fuel efficient vehicles and\nalternative-energy vehicles being produced by the big three may not be\nreadily accepted by people who have beliefs that are to the contrary.\nBut one fact is indisputable and will hopefully influence some who are\nopen to argument: Auto industries around the world are seeking the\nsupport of their governments through loans and other methods and are\ngetting it. I went through that series of headlines, from Brazil to\nEurope, all the way to China. The Chinese automobile industry is asking\nfor loans from the Chinese Government. No other auto-producing country\nthat I know of in the world is failing to act to make sure its industry\nis alive when the deep global recession is over, and we shouldn't\neither.\n  There is also a national security aspect to the American auto\nindustry, and I wish to spend some time on this because there was\ntestimony that was prepared for delivery to the Banking Committee when\nthey met on this subject by the Director of the U.S. Army Tank\nAutomotive Research, Development and Engineering Center, called TARDEC.\nSo this is the Army R&D and engineering center. It is located in Macomb\nCounty, MI. TARDEC develops, integrates, and sustains the right\ntechnology solutions for all of our manned and unmanned Department of\nDefense ground vehicle systems and combat support systems in order to\nimprove force effectiveness and provide superior capabilities for the\nfuture forces of this country.\n  The Director of TARDEC is Grace Bochenek. Because of the security\nimportance of what I am going to relate, I am going to read from her\nprepared testimony, and this is going to take some time. I am going to\nread from her prepared testimony, though it wasn't actually delivered.\nIt ended up that they had too many witnesses, and so she wasn't\ninvited, but this testimony is a compelling story of the continuing\nrelationship between the big three, the domestic auto industry, and our\nU.S. Army vehicle program.\n  We all look back--some of us nostalgically--to what Detroit did\nduring World War II. That is the past. There is a present which is\ncritically important in terms of the security of this country. Some\nhave pointed out the need to have a manufacturing base in order to\nquickly expand in the case of need, and that is a powerful argument--a\nnational security argument for keeping our big three auto industry\naround the way other countries keep their auto industries around. Some\nother colleagues\n\n[[Page S10906]]\n\nhave pointed out in some detail the relationship between the suppliers\nof the big three and the suppliers of vehicles for the Army and how\nmuch trouble those suppliers would be in--these are Army vehicle\nsuppliers--if the big three did not survive, and that is another\npowerful national security argument. But I am going to focus on what\nGrace Bochenek focused on, the Director of TARDEC, which is the\nrelationships, the synergies that exist between the big three now and\nthe Army in terms of current products and current technologies which\nare inserted into our vehicles and future technologies which are being\ndeveloped as we speak.\n  I am going to quote from her testimony, and this will all be quotes\nexcept where I insert my own words, which I will try to make clear. But\nthis will be a long quote, for those who are listening to this\ntestimony and, hopefully, reading it.\n\n       The synergies between TARDEC and the U.S. automotive\n     industry and the collective challenges we face. TARDEC's\n     connection to the automotive industry dates back to 1947,\n     when the Tank Automotive Components Laboratories, now known\n     as TARDEC, was established. The level of cooperation between\n     the Army and the auto industry was strengthened by the\n     Secretary of the Army's charter of the National Automotive\n     Center, NAC, in 1992 to champion the development of dual-use\n     automotive technologies and their application to military\n     ground vehicles. Today, the NAC remains the connective piece\n     and continues to engage through many different mechanisms to\n     leverage the capabilities, skills, and facilities of the\n     automotive industry.\n\n  Referring to the Department of Defense and the domestic automobile\nindustry, she continued:\n\n       For the past 70 years, we have shared common research\n     goals, leveraged investments in technology, mutually\n     benefitted from those technical developments, and\n     collectively owned the responsibility for our Nation's next\n     generation of automotive engineers and scientists.\n     Technologies may have changed, but the importance of working\n     together to collectively drive innovation has not. The Army's\n     specific challenges are as follows: First, significantly\n     increasing fuel efficiency to reduce the logistics burden on\n     our troops. In some cases, fuel is 70 percent of the bulk\n     tonnage that we take to war. Second, substantially increasing\n     electric power available on the battlefield and developing\n     the next generation of electronic warfare tools. Third,\n     increasing soldier protection through the development and\n     application of advanced light-weight material solutions.\n     Fourth, utilizing sensor technology throughout our vehicle\n     platforms to collect prognostic data allowing for overall\n     improved reliability and reduced sustainment costs. Fifth,\n     engaging the enemy without putting soldiers in harm's way\n     through the fielding of unmanned systems.\n\n  Another word for that is robotics.\n  Continuing now with Grace Bochenek's prepared testimony.\n\n       Often the only difference between military and commercial\n     automotive technologies is a matter of scale both with regard\n     to the market (quantity) and component durability (military\n     specifications). The goals and the technologies leading to\n     their accomplishment, however, remain very similar. Our\n     motivations may differ, but our technological goals are\n     shared ones. Both the Army and the automotive industry seek\n     to achieve technical advances in the areas of power and\n     energy, vehicle intelligence, robotics, safety, advanced\n     lightweight materials and leading-edge manufacturing methods.\n\n  Then she goes into examples in each of those areas, where there is a\nworking together, a cooperation, a synergy between the American\nautomobile industry and the Army vehicle program. She continues:\n\n       In 1997, TARDEC began a commercially based tactical truck\n     program focused on leveraging GM, Ford and Chrysler's\n     commercial truck platforms to meet some of the military's\n     light tactical vehicle requirements. Chrysler and GM provided\n     hybrid electric vehicles that included start-stop operation\n     and vehicle exportable power providing TARDEC with\n     information critical to defining future requirements.\n       A Cooperative Research & Development Agreement (CRADA)\n     between Ford and TARDEC launched the development of a thermal\n     management software modeling tool. This further matured under\n     multiple Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contracts\n     utilizing tri-service investment. The dual use software\n     produced has been fully commercialized and is now sold\n     worldwide by one of the SBIR, recipients, resulting in a new\n     Michigan business with revenues of about $10M per year.\n     Ford's initial investment was absolutely critical in the\n     development of this world class product the application of\n     which has also become the Army, Navy, and Air Force standard.\n     This is an example of how an Automotive OEM--TARDEC\n     partnership was able to leverage resources to create jobs and\n     develop useful technologies.\n       TARDEC continues to partner with automotive industry OEMs\n     and suppliers on advanced powertrain technologies including\n     fuel cell technologies, power and thermal management, and\n     advanced automotive batteries all of which are necessary for\n     the next generation of military systems. TARDEC leverages\n     fuel cell developments primarily through the automotive\n     supplier base with companies such as Ballard, Delphi, and\n     United Technologies. TARDEC also has a longstanding\n     relationship with General Motors in the demonstration and\n     evaluation of light duty commercial fuel cell vehicles. This\n     program has allowed TARDEC to assess multiple generations of\n     fuel cell technologies.\n       Batteries are critical to implementing advanced automotive\n     powertrains. As such, there is a growing body of\n     collaborative work between TARDEC, the automotive OEMs, and\n     their suppliers. The cornerstone of TARDEC's efforts in this\n     area is the development of manufacturing technologies needed\n     to mass-produce high power and energy density Lithium-Ion\n     (Li-Ion) batteries--particularly critical for the Army's\n     Future Combat Systems platforms. Additionally, there are many\n     ongoing military battery technology development efforts that\n     leverage emerging automotive battery technology providers\n     such as Al23, AltairNano, Boston Power, GS Yuasa,\n     Inanovation, EnerDel, EnerSys, Firefly, Kokam America,\n     Quallion, and SAFT America. With the help of the Automotive\n     OEMs and the Department of Energy, TARDEC is escalating\n     efforts to define the boundaries for dual-use commercial and\n     military applications of advanced battery technologies\n     through the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium. Additionally,\n     General Motors is supporting TARDEC advanced battery\n     requirements through direct, individual collaboration through\n     a CRADA and an additional newly awarded contract.\n       TARDEC and the automotive OEMs have both identified\n     advanced automotive batteries as a key area for collaboration\n     going forward. In the support of expanding collaboration in\n     advanced batteries, TARDEC has worked with the automotive\n     OEMs and suppliers of battery technologies to assess the\n     scope of effort around establishing a robust, diverse\n     manufacturing base for advanced automotive batteries. This\n     effort recently culminated in a two-day Battery Summit, which\n     involved over 70 participants from industry and government.\n     Discussions covered the technology, policy and manufacturing\n     implications of having a domestic base for the manufacture of\n     advanced batteries. TARDEC intends to continue to work with\n     key stakeholders to identify near term opportunities in the\n     area.\n\n                          Vehicle Intelligence\n\n       The Army faces high operating and support costs in its\n     aging fleet of vehicles. Currently the Army reduces this\n     heavy cost burden through periodic scheduled inspections and\n     sustainment efforts. To further reduce this cost burden, the\n     Army must move towards an intelligent vehicle architecture.\n       Both the Army and the automotive industry have vested\n     interest in enhancing their platforms by providing predictive\n     maintenance enhancements through prognostic capabilities.\n     This requires equipping vehicles with computing devices,\n     sensors, middleware, and wireless infrastructure. Through\n     these enabling technologies, vehicle intelligence is made\n     possible. This could ultimately enhance operational readiness\n     and reduce lifecycle maintenance costs for ground vehicle\n     platforms by reducing the heavy cost burden of periodic\n     scheduled inspections and automating the supply chain to\n     proactively provision for part replacements to optimize the\n     maintenance repair process.\n       Vehicle intelligence is also an enabling technology for\n     Condition Based Maintenance and (vehicle) Health Monitoring\n     technologies. It is related to existing developments in the\n     commercial automotive industry such as the installation of\n     electronic control units (ECU) and electronic control modules\n     (ECM), computing devices, and sensors. These devices\n     facilitate diagnostic analysis at the vehicle subsystem\n     level. This in-vehicle network provides the ability to\n     diagnose such components as the powertrain, ABS, and critical\n     safety systems. GM Diagnostics has taken this a step further\n     by enabling cellular transmission of data off platform for\n     off-board analysis and status updates through their OnStar\n     system. The Army is working with commercial automotive\n     partners to develop this technology for military use via\n     secured communication pipelines.\n\n  Robotics--now she addresses robotics in her prepared testimony. I am\ngoing into this at some length because what has not been focused on\nenough in this debate is the security implication of the failure of the\nbig three. There has been a lot of discussion about why it is essential\nthat we not allow the big three to go under in terms of this economy.\nBut what has not yet been focused on specifically, other than general\nstatements about the connection, the current and future connection, is\nthe essential synergy between the big three and the Army particularly\nbut also the military in general.\n  People's minds tend to go back and say that was all World War II,\nthat was all the ``arsenal of democracy,'' and yes, it was, and we are\nproud of it. But\n\n[[Page S10907]]\n\nit is also 2008, 2010, 2015, 2020. What kind of equipment our troops\nwill have will depend upon whether we have the kind of connection\nbetween our military and our commercial worlds. In the area of\nvehicles, to disconnect that connection, to rip it apart, to allow the\nbig three to go under, has a massive negative security impact on this\ncountry and on the well-being and survival of America's troops.\n  She goes on:\n\n                       robotics, unmanned systems\n\n       The U.S. Army has a long history of working with the\n     automotive industry on the development of enabling\n     technologies for manned and unmanned systems. Unmanned\n     systems are key resources for our fighting men and women in\n     the Global War on Terrorism.\n       Many of the key technologies currently used on ground\n     robots have their start in cooperative programs between the\n     U.S. Army and the Big 3 Automotive and their tier suppliers.\n     The Army and the automotive companies have several aligned\n     activities in unmanned systems. For example, the Army has\n     several overriding objectives we are trying to achieve for\n     the development and deployment of future unmanned vehicle\n     systems. Primary among these goals are Safe Operations (Safe\n     Ops) and Total Situational Awareness (SA) around the\n     vehicles, necessary because a robot operates by sensing the\n     environment around it at any given moment. Safe Ops and 360\n     degree SA are also critical for the safe operation of\n     passenger cars on automated highways, which means our goals\n     are aligned perfectly with the programs in the auto industry.\n       Recently, both GM and Ford participated in the series of\n     DARPA Autonomous Vehicle Grand Challenges. The 1st Grand\n     Challenge was held at the California Motor Speedway and it\n     tested the ability of vehicles to move autonomously over\n     structured roads. The 2nd Grand Challenge was a 170 mile\n     cross-country road race in the deserts of Nevada. The 3rd and\n     final challenge, called the DARPA Urban Challenge (DUC), was\n     designed to push the state-of-the-art in autonomous\n     navigation in urban environments, where each competitor had\n     to obey the rules of the road and contend with other robots\n     and driven cars. Many of these robust automotive sensing\n     methodologies are being transitioned to Army programs for\n     integration into both manned and unmanned systems.\n       In every one of these competitions both Ford and GM\n     partnered with leading universities in the U.S. to put\n     together winning teams that finished in the top 5 percent of\n     race finishers (the GM-Carnegie-Mellon team won the DUC in\n     2007). The close coupling of robotic sensors, actuators and\n     intelligence was enhanced by the collaboration of automotive\n     engineers at the OEMs.\n\n  Then she goes on with her description of safety issues.\n\n       There are multiple overlapping safety goals between the\n     commercial automotive industry and the military ground\n     vehicle fleet. Just as injury risk mitigation and thorough\n     modeling and simulation of technologies is important to the\n     commercial automotive manufacturers; these precautions must\n     be taken to reduce the impact to our Soldiers, Sailors,\n     Airmen, and Marines.\n       Automotive industry OEMs and key suppliers have worked with\n     TARDEC in the development of advanced modeling and simulation\n     efforts to characterize occupant impact during rollover and\n     side impact crashes. TARDEC recently developed ground-\n     breaking full vehicle underbody blast models and\n     methodologies to both accurately predict occupant injury\n     during an energetic event such as a mine/IED blast, and to\n     develop new countermeasures. This effort would not have been\n     possible without heavy leveraging of automotive tools and\n     methodologies from the automotive crashworthiness area.\n     TARDEC's commercial partners have also been critical in\n     advanced technology product development, testing and\n     validation, design studies, and developmental tests. Finally\n     TARDEC relies on the commercial partners for prototyping and\n     large quantity manufacturing capabilities.\n\n  Advanced lightweight materials is the next subject that she took up\nin her prepared testimony.\n\n       One of TARDEC's mandates is to research, develop, engineer,\n     and to leverage lean, agile, advanced manufacturing\n     technologies used by the U.S. Auto Industry, Academia, and\n     other segments of the U.S. Industrial Base. This is\n     accomplished through partnerships and contracts with\n     manufacturers, suppliers, and universities, taking advantage\n     of manufacturing capabilities developed to service the high\n     volume needs of the auto industry and adapt the technologies\n     for manufacturing the low volume production of military\n     components.\n       With the auto industry leading the charge, TARDEC is\n     pursuing several advanced manufacturing processes such as\n     friction stir welding, laser additive and subtractive\n     manufacturing, flexible manufacturing cells using robotics,\n     and water-based environmentally safe painting processes.\n\n  Then she addresses automotive expertise, knowledge, and education.\n\n       To maintain technological superiority now and in the\n     future, we need top quality scientists and automotive\n     engineers in our workforce. Alongside the automotive\n     industry, we have always had a shared commitment and felt the\n     collective responsibility to develop the next generation of\n     engineers, and recognized the challenge to do so.\n       TARDEC has long recognized that a scientifically and\n     technologically literate citizenry is our Nation's best hope\n     for a diverse, talented, and productive workforce. To achieve\n     this goal, we have partnered with the automotive industry and\n     universities to develop curriculum that will benefit both\n     TARDEC and the American automotive original equipment\n     manufacturers.\n       We have also been able to address this challenge through\n     our Automotive Research Center, which has created ways for us\n     to partner with universities and allow students the\n     opportunity to develop and work on relevant automotive\n     engineering challenges.\n       Over the years, the automotive industry has made\n     significant contributions to the Army through technology\n     exchange processes available in the ARC [which is the\n     Automotive Research Center]. And in recent years, an\n     increased emphasis on research involving high mileage, low\n     polluting vehicles, as well as the new high technology needs\n     for large trucks, off-road vehicles and robots has provided\n     invaluable data and resources for us towards the Army's long\n     term transformation goals and objectives.\n       In 2007 and 2008, TARDEC supported 52 ARC research projects\n     spanning Power, Mobility, Survivability, Modeling and\n     Simulation technology areas. Ford, Chrysler and General\n     Motors and at least 12 Tier-1 suppliers provided their\n     resources and expertise towards 36 of the 52 research\n     projects. The remaining projects had industry involvement\n     from Tier-2 and Tier-3 suppliers such as large software\n     companies, industry consultants and automotive small\n     businesses.\n       The fact remains [and I will conclude with this] that the\n     need for partnerships and the consistent leveraging of\n     resources is critical for continued innovation, technological\n     breakthroughs. American automotive original equipment\n     manufacturers partnership with TARDEC in events such as [then\n     she lists a whole lot of events] inspires young engineers to\n     consider careers in math and science and helps to develop\n     many needed automotive skill with applicability in DOD's\n     ``real'' workforce environments.\n       Automotive industry support has been crucial in developing\n     the educational infrastructure that has allowed the\n     development of an automotive engineering talent base here in\n     the United States. And that talent base will be central to\n     future efforts to create a safer Nation and a robust\n     manufacturing environment.\n       At this time, when we have to [these are her last words] at\n     this time, when we have to break the dependency on foreign\n     oil, provide energy security for the Nation, and increase\n     soldier protection, it becomes even more critical, [even more\n     critical] to leverage investments, exchange technical ideas\n     to drive innovation, and provide the breakthroughs that are\n     necessary to maintain the dominance of the American military.\n\n  I very much appreciate the time that I have taken to share with this\nbody the statement of the head of the organization in the Army which is\nresponsible for the technologies in current vehicles and future\nvehicles.\n  I have done this because there is kind of yet the unstated critical\nneed for the survival of the big three. The stakes for our economy\nnationally are huge. The failure of the big three would send a tsunami\nthrough this already battered economy.\n  Millions of workers would lose their jobs. Dealers in every town and\non every Main Street are already reeling from the economy's plunge.\nAutomotive component suppliers, who are in fully half our States, are\non the knife's edge already, waiting for us to act.\n  Men and women who work for steel mills and textile factories and\nglass factories and computer chip factories are waiting and hoping.\n  The financial industry would be at risk as well. A collapsed auto\nindustry would lead to defaults on over $1 billion in corporate bonds,\ncredit default swaps and other financial instruments tied to the auto\nindustry and could send the stock market into another, deeper tailspin.\nMajor additional damage to U.S. financial institution balance sheets\nwould result, throwing our credit markets into even deeper turmoil.\n  Despite these facts, there are still some who say, ``let them go\nbankrupt, let them go under,'' even though 1 in 10 jobs in this country\nare tied to the auto industry. In addition to hoping that they will ask\nthemselves why no other government is allowing that to happen to their\nauto industry, I would also hope they would listen to some experts on\nthe subject of bankruptcy for the auto industry.\n  A recent report released by J.P. Morgan titled, ``Cost of the\nAlternative,'' described the scenario where one or\n\n[[Page S10908]]\n\nmore of the Big Three are left to file for bankruptcy as ``Credit\nCrisis Part II.'' It indicated that unemployment would shoot up by 2\npercent if one of the Big Three failed, and this failure scenario would\nrequire the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to take over more\nthan $100 billion in obligations that the Big Three currently hold. It\nnoted that Ford and GM and their financial arms ``comprise over 10% of\nthe high-yield bond market and the auto sector represents one of the\nlargest sectors in leverage finance for banks.''\n  Another recent report by the Anderson Economic Group and BBK\ncalculated the costs in the first year following the failure of two of\nthe Big Three. Such a scenario would cost States $12 billion in tax\nrevenues; it would cost the Federal Government $40 billion in income\nand Social Security taxes, and it would cost an additional $8 billion\nin unemployment insurance and $5 billion in significantly increased\ncosts to the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. The report\nindicates a high risk that inaction by Congress would result in a\npermanent shift of manufacturing jobs out of the United States and a\ndependence on foreign technology.\n  Mr. President, these are risks we cannot take. We must pass this\nlegislation. Without this legislation, one or more of the Big Three\nwill likely collapse in the coming weeks. The U.S. taxpayers would\nprovide a bridge loan to avoid this catastrophe under this bill, but\nwith important protections for their investment, including stock\nwarrants for the Government; limits on excessive executive\ncompensation; a prohibition on golden parachutes; and a prohibition on\npayments of dividends until the loans are fully repaid. And the so-\ncalled auto czar has the ultimate power under this legislation to\nenforce compliance with the long-term plans of the auto companies that\naccept these loans: he can call or cancel the loans if he disapproves\nthe auto companies' restructuring plans.\n  We cannot afford to further destabilize Wall Street, and we cannot\nafford to allow millions of jobs on Main Streets in communities across\nthe country to disappear. The domino effect of failure would ripple\nacross our entire Nation and add untold suffering to an already dire\nsituation.\n  I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.\n  As chairman of the Armed Services Committee, I wanted to focus on an\naspect of this debate that has not achieved adequate attention. That is\nthe tight, important connection between our domestic auto industry and\nthe future security of this Nation and our men and women in uniform.\n  We have no greater responsibility than that. That factor, that\nsynergy, that relationship, that connection, is an essential component\nof this debate.\n  I hope when our colleagues look at all of the factors, they will\nconsider that important reason for sustaining and supporting an\nautomobile industry in this country. Again, no other Nation is allowing\ntheir automotive industry to go down in this global economic disaster\nwe are all in. They have all taken steps to support their industry.\n  We should too, for many reasons. But one of those reasons, one of the\nmost important reasons we are here in the Senate is to make sure that\nour men and women in uniform always have the best equipment that can be\nproduced in the world. They put their lives at risk. They are entitled\nto every advanced technology we can give them.\n  Part of the production of those technologies the big three is playing\ntoday, tomorrow, and hopefully in the future, is a critical role.\n  Mr. WARNER. Would the Senator entertain a question?\n  Mr. LEVIN. I did not see my dear friend from Virginia come to the\nfloor. I wish I had, because I wanted to put those parts of my\nremarks--and they were lengthy, but at a time when he might be hearing\nthem either here or in his office.\n  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we had the opportunity to speak on this\nsubject earlier today. And I reminded my good friend of the\nextraordinary chapter in American history that was performed by the\nindustrial base in your State and elsewhere across America under the\nleadership and guidance of those companies manufacturing automobiles\nafter Pearl Harbor, I mean who were in the business of manufacturing at\nthe time of Pearl Harbor. They shut those lines down very quickly and\nturned to full military production. That is a great chapter in American\nhistory. And, fortunately, I am old enough to remember it quite well as\na young man.\n  But today, it is a different industrial base in the automobile\nindustry. Whereas they had a very dominant position in the production\nof vehicles, particularly tanks, and they did some aircraft and so\nforth, that has given way to the high-tech aspects which the Senator\nfrom Michigan addresses here on the floor for the benefit of our\ncolleagues.\n  That is a great chapter in American history. I would hope this Nation\nwould never again be faced with as serious a problem as it was in World\nWar II, namely that we had let our Armed Forces get down to very small\nlevels and the equipment was old and tired.\n  You remember the pictures that they used broomsticks to practice\ntheir military maneuvers with and the Model T and Model A automobiles\nthat were used for tanks. But that chapter reflects the potential of\nnot just the companies themselves but the workers and how quickly they\ntook their knowledge and their skilled hands to swing into action and\nproduce the war materials that we needed very quickly.\n  Today our military is much stronger, well equipped, thanks to the\ndistinguished chairman and others who have served with us on that\ncommittee. I think the likelihood of our Nation ever being confronted\nwith a conflict that would have to require that enormous buildup is\nnot, hopefully not there, but nevertheless we should remember that\nchapter.\n  It documents the capabilities of the workers and the families in this\nindustry. I think you pointed with great pride to that era. I might add\nto my colleague's comment, he closed by asking all Senators to consider\nthis very carefully. As I finish up my 30 years, I have been to a lot\nof Republican caucuses. We had one yesterday at noon. We just completed\nanother. And the gravity of this issue is reflected in the gravity of\nthe careful, very careful consideration being given by every member in\nour caucus. I can tell you that without any question. I am not\nsuggesting exactly which way they are going to go. But I know that they\nhave the best interests of the country in mind, and the gravity of the\nsituation is enormous. You can detect it as you hear the colloquies\ngoing on on our side. I am sure the same is taking place the Senator's.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first, I thank my dear friend from\nVirginia. This will probably be, we keep saying, the last opportunity\nwe have to speak with each other on the floor of the Senate. It may be,\nit may not be, as it turns out. But I know of no Member of this body\nwho has put the interests of this Nation more deeply in his heart than\nthe Senator from Virginia.\n  There are others who probably share that with him; I know there are,\nbut the focus which I gave here today outlining the current\nrelationship between the big three and the technologies that are\nembedded right now in our vehicles, and the effort in a collaborative\nway between our domestic automobile industry and our Army vehicle\nindustry, to give us lighter vehicles, more survivable vehicles,\ncrashworthy vehicles, vehicles that use less gasoline, vehicles that\nhave the global positioning devices that can say exactly where they are\nand communicate that, these technologies are embedded now and will\ncontinue hopefully to always be at the forefront, at the cutting edge\nof technology to give our troops what I know the Senator from Virginia\nhas devoted his life to; that is, to giving our troops every edge we\ncan.\n  The big three not only has been part of that on the vehicles, as the\nSenator notably points out in terms of looking back, but that is the\ncurrent situation--deep connections, synergies, collaboration going on\nas we speak, and planned for the years ahead.\n  If we rip apart that connection, by allowing the big three to go\nunder, that tremendous capability they have to join with the Army on\nvehicles, particularly, will be rendered useless or will no longer\nexist. That would be a terrible tragedy for our Nation's security.\n  Again, I am glad my great friend from Virginia was able to come to\nthe\n\n[[Page S10909]]\n\nfloor to share with me some thoughts about this relationship that is\nnot only historical and one which we take great pride in as a nation,\nthat ability to quickly expand, to turn a manufacturing, an industrial\nbase into an arsenal of democracy.\n  That hopefully will not happen, as the Senator points out. Maybe it\nis less likely to happen. But we must be there when it does. That\naspect has been focused on by others, the need to be able to have a\nmanufacturing base for our national security and to have a base of\nsuppliers for our national security. I have tried to add another aspect\nto this argument that points to the relationship between the survival\nof our big three and our national security by pointing out the ongoing\nrelationship in the area of research and development, which has\nproduced critically important technologies currently in our vehicles\nand developing today the technologies which will make future vehicles.\n  Mr. WARNER. Our military vehicles.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Absolutely.\n  Mr. WARNER. I wish to make that clear because that technology has\nbeen available in the open market to those manufacturers, other than\nthe oil industry, which have, in a remarkable way, taken these up-\narmored vehicles, that general category we have today, very quickly, to\nthe great credit of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary Gates, he put\ntogether a structure of five companies to get into immediate production\nof those vehicles and into those vehicles has gone the development and\ntechnology that our distinguished colleague from Michigan has\ndescribed.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Thankfully, we still have a few colleagues, including the\ngreat Senator from Virginia, who have a personal connection to that\nwar.\n  Mr. WARNER. It was very minor, but it was a privilege to have been\nassociated with that generation.\n  Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10904", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "ORDER FOR RECESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10904", "S10904", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10904", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10904]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            ORDER FOR RECESS\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at the\nconclusion of my remarks, the Senate stand in recess until 3 p.m.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10909-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10909", "S10909", "[{\"name\": \"Barbara A. Mikulski\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10909", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10909]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the\nperiod for the transaction of morning business be extended until 5\np.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10909-3", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "SILO TAX SHELTER", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10909", "S10913", "[{\"name\": \"Max Baucus\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Chuck Grassley\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jim Bunning\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10909", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10909-S10913]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            SILO TAX SHELTER\n\n  Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, the House bill before us contains a\nprovision that causes me great concern. The provision would make the\nU.S. Government an active participant in an abusive tax shelter\ntransaction.\n  In the past, Congress has voted to shut that tax shelter down. And\nthis week, I sought to offer an amendment to strike the provision from\nthis bill. But I have been prevented from offering that amendment. That\nthis provision will remain in the bill makes this bill a far less\nattractive measure.\n  Section 18 of the bill requires the United States to serve as a\nguarantor of obligations incurred by domestic subway and other\ntransportation systems. These obligations arise from the systems'\nparticipation in leasing arrangements called lease in/lease out, or\nLILOs, and sale in/lease out, or SILOs.\n  LILOs and SILOs are sham transactions. The IRS has designated them as\n``listed'' tax shelters. That means that these tax shelters are among\nthe most egregious abuses of the tax law.\n  LILOs and SILOs are very complicated deals, designed to look like\nlegitimate leasing transactions. But in reality, they are shams.\n  In a SILO, a tax-exempt entity nominally ``sells'' an asset, like a\nsubway system. The other party to the deal is an investor who is\nsubject to taxation and who needs a tax write-off. The investor\nnominally ``buys'' the asset. The investor then nominally ``leases''\nthe asset back to the tax-exempt entity.\n  In truth, the benefits and burdens of ownership never shift. And the\nsale and the lease have no economic reality.\n  These parties purport to make purchase payments and rent payments.\nBut in reality, these payments are just paper entries, facilitated by a\nbank that is in on the deal. The investor pays the tax exempt entity an\nup-front fee in exchange for its willingness to participate in the\ndeal. But other than that, no real money changes hands.\n  There is little, if any, risk to any party to these transactions.\nThat is because the deal is cooked from the beginning. It is planned so\nas to eliminate any risk.\n  But there are significant tax benefits to the investor. The investor\ngets interest and depreciation deductions. And those deductions\ngenerate tax losses. Employing these tax losses, the investor pays less\ntax on income that the investor earns elsewhere.\n  This chart illustrates how a SILO transaction works. You do not have\nto understand all the details to see how complicated the transaction\nis.\n  As Chairman of the Finance Committee, I have had these deals on my\nradar screen for quite some time. In 2003, the Finance Committee held a\nhearing with a confidential informant. The witness risked his\nprofessional reputation to tell us how abusive LILO and SILO\ntransactions are.\n  I pushed for legislation to shut these deals down. The 2004 Jobs Act\neliminated the tax benefits for most of the investors who had entered\ninto these transactions.\n  Since 2005, I have worked to shut down the remaining deals that the\nJobs Act failed to address. Unfortunately, our efforts have met with\nresistance. Some argue that shutting down these transactions would be\napplying law retroactively. But I believe that these transactions\nalways violated the law, as they lack any economic substance.\n  In the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005,\nCongress imposed excise taxes on tax-exempt entities and their managers\nwho entered into tax shelter transactions. That law recognized the role\nthat some tax exempt entities, including transit agencies, played as\n``accommodating parties'' to tax shelter deals.\n  Since 1999, the IRS has devoted considerable resources to shutting\ndown these deals. The IRS has designated both LILOs and SILOs as\n``listed'' tax shelter transactions. The IRS has audited every one of\nthese transactions that it could find. The IRS has litigated four\ncases, and won every time. Recently, the IRS announced a settlement\ninitiative to shut down the remaining cases and reports an 80-percent\nparticipation rate.\n  We have been trying to stop these tax shelters for years. So how does\nthe Government end up guaranteeing this kind of tax shelter? The\ncomplicated structure of LILOs and SILOs plays a part.\n  Under the terms of the agreements, transit agencies are required to\nobtain a guarantee from an insurer. The insurer guarantees that the\nagencies will be able to buy back the subway at the end of the lease\nperiod. The agreements require that the insurer have a very high credit\nrating.\n  The current economic crisis has caused downgrades of insurers' credit\nratings. That has put the tax-exempt entities into technical default on\ntheir agreements. Under the agreements, when the tax-exempt entities\ndefault, the investors have a right to terminate the lease.\n  The investors are taking advantage of this legal opportunity. They\nare trying to cash in. The investors are attempting not just to recoup\nthe nominal purchase price of the assets. They are also demanding that\nthe transit agencies pay over the value of the tax benefits that the\ninvestor will lose as a result of the premature unwinding of\n\n[[Page S10910]]\n\nthe deal. The value of the tax benefits can be many times the putative\npurchase price.\n  This chart that I referred to earlier is an exhibit from a lawsuit,\nHoosier Energy v. John Hancock Life Insurance. In that case, the Monroe\nCounty Circuit Court in Indiana issued a temporary injunction barring\nJohn Hancock from collecting on the technical default.\n  Transit agencies do not have lots of excess money just sitting\naround. So they have come to the Congress asking for a guarantee from\nthe U.S. Government.\n  Now I do not want our Nation's subway systems to be at risk. I am\nopen to considering ways to help keep them financially sound.\n  But I am unwilling to do so at the expense of American taxpayers. The\nbill before us today asks taxpayers to put their tax dollars at risk.\nThe bill asks taxpayers to guarantee transit agencies who knowingly and\nwillfully entered into deals that had no economic substance and were\ndesigned for the sole purpose of avoiding taxes.\n  The Government has come under much criticism for actions it has taken\nto jump-start our economy. But deliberately involving the U.S.\nGovernment in a tax shelter scam would add fuel to that fire.\n  We must not add legitimacy to an abusive transaction that the\nCongress, the courts, the Treasury, and the IRS have spent years trying\nto shut down.\n  We must not undermine the good efforts of the IRS to prosecute these\ncases. We need the IRS to accomplish as much work as it can to\neliminate these and other scams.\n  We must not ask American taxpayers who struggle to pay their taxes to\nunderwrite deals set up to help wealthy investors attempting to shelter\ntheir income.\n  The approach in the bill before us today is not a solution. Stepping\nin to guarantee these deals exposes American taxpayers to ongoing risk.\nSome event could trigger a requirement that the Government pay the\ninvestors. This bill puts taxpayers on the hook for a long time.\n  In addition, I understand that this proposal applies to only 80\npercent of the transit agencies that entered into these tax shelter\ndeals. What about the other 20 percent of the systems who are not\ncovered? What happens to them? We need a fair and balanced approach to\nresolve this issue.\n  We would do better to figure out a way to discourage investors from\nacting on the technical default simply because the insurer's credit\nrating has been downgraded. A downgrade does not mean that the insurer\nis not good for the money. I intend to explore options with this goal\nin mind. We need a solution that protects both the transit agencies and\nthe American taxpayer.\n  Finally, this is an auto bill. We should not forfeit the opportunity\nto bolster our automotive industry by cluttering up the bill with\nunrelated and controversial proposals.\n  There is a proper time and place for everything. This is neither the\ntime nor the place to divert attention from our immediate task, helping\nour automakers.\n  This provision has no business in the auto bill. The Senate should\ntake the provision out. And if the Senate does not take the provision\nout, it will only add to the burdens that are weighing this bill down.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask unanimous consent to speak for 15 minutes.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I come to the floor to back up the\nchairman of the committee, Senator Baucus, who has spoken on the very\nsame issue. We have had a close working relationship for 8 years as\neither chairman and ranking member, and those changed from time to\ntime. Part of our effort of working together has been to close down\nabusive tax shelters. So I am here to support what he said and to say,\nin my own words, my reasons for wanting this provision out of the bill.\nThe bottom line of what I am saying is the bottom line of what Senator\nBaucus has already said. This tax provision has no business being in\nthis bill.\n  There is a provision in this auto bailout bill that deals with a\nnumber of transit agencies that assisted corporations in tax shelters.\nThis provision in the auto bailout bill has nothing to do with\nautomakers. It would prop up a tax shelter that Senator Baucus and I\nshut down in the year 2004. Shutting down that tax shelter saved\nAmerican taxpayers $26.56 billion, according to the nonpartisan Joint\nCommittee on Taxation. That is real money. So we should be very\nprotective of making sure money that by subterfuge was not going to\ncome into the Federal Treasury comes back to the Federal Treasury and\nis not used in the future. This tax shelter is commonly referred to as\nsale-in, lease-out, or by the acronym SILO, or another program lease-\nin, lease-out that we refer to by the acronym LILO. This tax shelter\nbailout within the automaker bailout bill would have the Federal\nGovernment guarantee obligations that public transit agencies now face\nbecause they entered into shady deals with corporations, including\nforeign corporations, where they sold things such as the transit\nagencies' own train cars and then magically leased them back from these\ncorporations to do what they were doing all the time anyway, hauling\npeople.\n  This was not done to change the way the transit agency operated but,\ninstead, to collect a fee for assisting the tax shelter, where the\ncorporations could take advantage of the tax deduction for depreciation\nof things such as these train cars.\n  As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee in 2004, I worked hard to\nshut down these tax shelters as a matter of tax fairness, and Senator\nBaucus was there working closely with me to do that. The Internal\nRevenue Service has been working to recover money from these deals. If\nthis tax shelter bailout were to pass, it would interfere with the\nworking of the IRS in these efforts to collect money that should never\nhave been deducted in the first place.\n  This tax shelter bailout can change the cost-benefit analysis for\nthose tax shelter corporations that are considering settling their\ndisputes with the IRS over the SILO/LILO tax shelters. It is wrong for\nthe auto bailout bill to bail out transit agencies from participating\nin these shady tax shelters. The Federal Government should not\nguarantee the transit agencies' obligations to corporations, including\nforeign corporations, when doing so allows the tax shelter to continue\nas it did before 2004, and these corporations, including foreign\ncorporations, to continue taking tax shelter deductions for things such\nas transit agencies' train cars.\n  If the Federal Government is called upon to pay the guarantees of the\ntransit agencies' obligations to these tax shelter corporations,\nincluding foreign tax shelter corporations, then the hardworking U.S.\ntaxpayer will be sending money directly to these foreign corporations\nand others. I don't know how many, but we know foreign corporations are\nvery much involved.\n  These tax shelters were, in fact, set up so corporations were able to\ntake large depreciation deductions. However, the tax shelter needed a\nnontaxpaying entity that had large amounts of assets that could be\ndepreciated. So that is where the transit agencies come in. The transit\nagencies were paid millions of dollars to do nothing, simply sign\npapers and go about business as usual of transiting people within\ncities or between cities, as they were doing before this tax shelter\nwas ever thought up. The transit agencies are called accommodation\nparties in tax shelter lingo. They are called this because, in exchange\nfor their fee, they helped make tax shelters work for corporations that\nwere bilking the U.S. taxpayers out of billions of dollars, and those\nbillions of dollars were lost revenue to the Federal Treasury.\n  This auto bailout bill proposes to bail out the transit agencies from\nthe consequences of their bad judgment of entering into tax shelters. I\nsay ``bad judgment'' because they ought to know this doesn't make\nsense. Some lawyer might tell you: We can get by with this because we\nfound this loophole in the tax laws. But, in fact, lawyers can find\nanything. The English language is not so perfect that we write perfect\npieces of legislation that somebody who is wise can't find a way\naround. That is what happened prior to 2004, before Senator Baucus and\nI shut it down.\n  As the transit agencies have found out--and that is why they are\ncoming to the bailout bill for some help--when\n\n[[Page S10911]]\n\nyou lie down with dogs, you get fleas. Now that the transit agencies\nhave fleas due to their participation in this tax shelter scheme, they\nwant the Federal Government to be their flea remover. If this provision\nis enacted and if the Federal Government guarantees the transit\nagencies' tax shelter obligations, it will actually help these shady\ntax shelter deals stay alive longer and, who knows, encourage more of\nthis in the future. We are trying to shut down a business I consider\nillicit, people going through the Tax Code and seeing where they can\nfind a tax loophole and writing a program and go out and sell it. They\ngo out and sell it to somebody else, then flee to the woods, and some\ncorporation or individual has to defend it themselves, and they can't.\nThey get stuck with the tax bill from the IRS. We want to shut down the\ntax shelter-writing business.\n  I will not help the transit agencies avoid the consequences of their\nparticipation in these tax shelters. I do not want to put U.S. taxpayer\nmoney on the line to support tax shelters that have been stealing from\nthese same taxpayers.\n  I am aware that as early as February 2000, we had a Federal\ninitiative from the executive branch. In the year 2000, the Federal\nTransit Administration, under the Clinton administration, used to\nadvocate these tax shelter deals to transit agencies as innovative\nfinancing. The Federal Transit Administration's promotion of these tax\nshelters was shameful, and it gave a legitimacy to it. I suppose it\neven encouraged further tax shelter people to write. But in 2004,\nSenator Baucus and I said: Enough is enough. That is why the\nlegislation was passed in 2004, shutting down these and saving the\ntaxpayers that $25 billion the Joint Committee on Taxation said could\nbe saved; in other words, paid into the Federal Treasury, instead of\nsome sharp lawyer finding a way to keep it out of the Federal Treasury.\n  Going back to when these were first being instituted by the Federal\nagency or encouraged by the Federal agency, we did have the IRS\nresponding to that. So you had one agency promoting something. You had\nthe IRS issue a revenue ruling that came out against these tax\nshelters. But between that 1999 March 1 date and the time Senator\nBaucus and I finally concluded this needed to stop in 2004, we still\nhad a bunch of these deals consummated. Even if the transit agencies\nwere not aware of the IRS's position, the transit agencies should have\nrealized that getting money for essentially doing nothing ought to be\ntoo good to be true. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is\nnot the right thing to do. That is common advocacy to any consumer in\nAmerica met by some snake oil salesman who comes along to sell a\nproduct. If it sounds too good to be true, you ought to raise questions\nabout it.\n  We even have a situation where every court that has considered these\ntransactions has ruled they are abusive tax shelters and has not\nallowed the tax breaks claimed by the corporation that engaged in the\ntax shelters. Three of these court cases are BB&T Corporation, the\nFifth Third Bancorp, and AWG Leasing Trust. In a recent court opinion\ninvolving John Hancock Life Insurance Company, Chief Judge David\nHamilton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of\nIndiana wrote that the SILO deal at issue was ``pure, abusive tax\nshelter,'' was ``rotten to the core'' and was ``a sham without economic\nsubstance.''\n  Additionally, in February 2004, Senator Baucus and this Senator sent\nletters to Washington, DC, New York City, and Chicago transit agencies\nasking for their assistance in an investigation of these abusive tax\nshelters.\n  I ask unanimous consent that these three letters be printed in the\nRecord.\n  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in\nthe Record, as follows:\n\n                                                February 12, 2004.\n     Richard A. White,\n     CEO, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 600\n         Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC.\n       Dear Mr. White: We are writing to enlist the assistance of\n     the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority in our\n     ongoing investigation of abusive tax shelters. On October 21,\n     2003, the Committee on Finance held a hearing regarding the\n     continuing proliferation of abusive tax shelters. During that\n     hearing, we learned that shelter promoters are engaging in\n     transactions with U.S. municipalities and other state and\n     local governmental units, which allow major U.S. corporations\n     to depreciate state and local infrastructure assets, such as\n     railways, subways, dams, water lines, and air traffic control\n     systems. Our subsequent investigations have disclosed that\n     federal agencies have endorsed these transactions, even\n     though the Department of the Treasury had classified them as\n     abusive tax shelters.\n       Under this scheme, municipalities are paid an up-front cash\n     fee to enter into a long-term lease of their infrastructure\n     to the tax shelter promoters. The cash received by the\n     municipality, however, pales in comparison to the federal tax\n     benefits received by the corporations, which will be able to\n     depreciate taxpayer-funded bridges, subways, and rail systems\n     as a result of the lease. As part of the same agreement, the\n     promoters will agree to simultaneously lease the assets back\n     to the municipality. The obligations of the promoters and\n     municipalities are prepaid through ``phantom'' debt, and\n     neither the tax promoters nor the municipality assumes any\n     credit or ownership risk. At the end of the lease term, the\n     infrastructure assets revert back to the municipality. In\n     reality, nothing changes regarding the ownership or use of\n     the infrastructure. One municipal manager described these\n     transactions as ``People giving him money which he never had\n     to pay back, for doing something that he was already doing.''\n       In March 1999, the Department of the Treasury under the\n     Clinton Administration initiated enforcement actions against\n     these transactions, which are called LILOs--an abbreviation\n     of their industry name ``lease-in-lease-out'' transactions.\n     We have further learned that these transactions have\n     continued, albeit in a different form, and that other federal\n     agencies may be approving these transactions. The LILO\n     transactions have now been replicated through service\n     agreement contracts and transactions called SILOs--``sales-\n     in-lease-out.'' Other variations on these transactions have\n     involved qualified technology equipment (QTEs).\n       We are certain that you share my concern that subway\n     systems, water lines, waste treatment plants, and air traffic\n     control systems constructed with taxpayer dollars are being\n     used by big corporations to shelter billions of dollars in\n     taxes through bogus depreciation deductions. In order to\n     assist us in assessing the scope and scale of this problem, I\n     request that the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority\n     submit to the Committee on Finance copies of all LILOs,\n     SILOS, QTEs, and similar transactions that have been\n     approved, funded, or otherwise reviewed by the Washington\n     Metropolitan Area Transit Authority from the year 1995 to\n     present. If you have any questions regarding this request,\n     please contact Ed McClellan or Matt Genasci of the Senate\n     Finance Committee at (202) 224-4515.\n       We appreciate your cooperation in our ongoing efforts to\n     combat abusive tax shelters, and look forward to receiving\n     these materials as soon as possible.\n           With best personal regards,\n     Charles E. Grassley,\n       Chairman.\n     Max Baucus,\n       Ranking Member.\n                                  ____\n\n                                                February 12, 2004.\n     Lawrence G. Reuter,\n     President, New York City Transit,\n     Jay Street, Brooklyn, NY.\n       Dear Mr. Reuter: We are writing to enlist the assistance of\n     New York City Transit in our ongoing investigation of abusive\n     tax shelters. On October 21, 2003, the Committee on Finance\n     held a hearing regarding the continuing proliferation of\n     abusive tax shelters. During that hearing, we learned that\n     shelter promoters are engaging in transactions with U.S.\n     municipalities and other state and local governmental units,\n     which allow major U.S. corporations to depreciate state and\n     local infrastructure assets, such as railways, subways, dams,\n     water lines, and air traffic control systems. Our subsequent\n     investigations have disclosed that federal agencies have\n     endorsed these transactions, even though the Department of\n     the Treasury had classified them as abusive tax shelters.\n       Under this scheme, municipalities are paid an up-front cash\n     fee to enter into a long-term lease of their infrastructure\n     to the tax shelter promoters. The cash received by the\n     municipality, however, pales in comparison to the federal tax\n     benefits received by the corporations, which will be able to\n     depreciate taxpayer-funded bridges, subways, and rail systems\n     as a result of the lease. As part of the same agreement, the\n     promoters will agree to simultaneously lease the assets back\n     to the municipality. The obligations of the promoters and\n     municipalities are prepaid through ``phantom'' debt, and\n     neither the tax promoters nor the municipality assumes any\n     credit or ownership risk. At the end of the lease term, the\n     infrastructure assets revert back to the municipality. In\n     reality, nothing changes regarding the ownership or use of\n     the infrastructure. One municipal manager described these\n     transactions as ``People giving him money which he never had\n     to pay back, for doing something that he was already doing.''\n       In March 1999, the Department of the Treasury under the\n     Clinton Administration initiated enforcement actions against\n     these transactions, which are called LILOs--an abbreviation\n     of their industry name ``lease-in-lease-out'' transactions.\n     We have further learned that these transactions have\n     continued, albeit in a different form, and that\n\n[[Page S10912]]\n\n     other federal agencies may be approving these transactions.\n     The LILO transactions have now been replicated through\n     service agreement contracts and transactions called SILOs--\n     ``sales-in-lease-out.'' Other variations on these\n     transactions have involved qualified technology equipment\n     (QTEs).\n       We are certain that you share my concern that subway\n     systems, water lines, waste treatment plants, and air traffic\n     control systems constructed with taxpayer dollars are being\n     used by big corporations to shelter billions of dollars in\n     taxes through bogus depreciation deductions. In order to\n     assist us in assessing the scope and scale of this problem, I\n     request that New York City Transit submit to the Committee on\n     Finance copies of all LILOs, SILOs, QTEs, and similar\n     transactions that have been approved, funded, or otherwise\n     reviewed by New York City Transit from the year 1995 to\n     present. If you have any questions regarding this request,\n     please contact Ed McClellan or Matt Genasci of the Senate\n     Finance Committee at (202) 224-4515.\n       We appreciate your cooperation in our ongoing efforts to\n     combat abusive tax shelters, and look forward to receiving\n     these materials as soon as possible.\n           With best personal regards,\n     Charles E. Grassley,\n       Chairman,\n     Max Baucus,\n       Ranking Member.\n                                  ____\n\n                                                February 12, 2004.\n     Frank Kruesi,\n     President, Chicago Transit Authority, Merchandise Mart Plaza,\n         Post Office Box 3555, Chicago, IL.\n       Dear Mr. Kruesi: We are writing to enlist the assistance of\n     the Chicago Transit Authority in our ongoing investigation of\n     abusive tax shelters. On October 21, 2003, the Committee on\n     Finance held a hearing regarding the continuing proliferation\n     of abusive tax shelters. During that hearing, we learned that\n     shelter promoters are engaging in transactions with U.S.\n     municipalities and other state and local governmental units,\n     which allow major U.S. corporations to depreciate state and\n     local infrastructure assets, such as railways, subways, dams,\n     water lines, and air traffic control systems. Our subsequent\n     investigations have disclosed that federal agencies have\n     endorsed these transactions, even though the Department of\n     the Treasury had classified them as abusive tax shelters.\n       Under this scheme, municipalities are paid an up-front cash\n     fee to enter into a long-term lease of their infrastructure\n     to the tax shelter promoters. The cash received by the\n     municipality, however, pales in comparison to the federal tax\n     benefits received by the corporations, which will be able to\n     depreciate taxpayer-funded bridges, subways, and rail systems\n     as a result of the lease. As part of the same agreement, the\n     promoters will agree to simultaneously lease the assets back\n     to the municipality. The obligations of the promoters and\n     municipalities are prepaid through ``phantom'' debt, and\n     neither the tax promoters nor the municipality assumes any\n     credit or ownership risk. At the end of the lease term, the\n     infrastructure assets revert back to the municipality. In\n     reality, nothing changes regarding the ownership or use of\n     the infrastructure. One municipal manager described these\n     transactions as ``People giving him money which he never had\n     to pay back, for doing something that he was already doing.''\n       In March 1999, the Department of the Treasury under the\n     Clinton Administration initiated enforcement actions against\n     these transactions, which are called LILOs--an abbreviation\n     of their industry name ``lease-in-lease-out'' transactions.\n     We have further learned that these transactions have\n     continued, albeit in a different form, and that other federal\n     agencies may be approving these transactions. The LILO\n     transactions have now been replicated through service\n     agreement contracts and transactions called SILOs--``sales-\n     in-lease-out.'' Other variations on these transactions have\n     involved qualified technology equipment (QTEs).\n       We are certain that you share my concern that water lines,\n     waste treatment plants, and air traffic control systems\n     constructed with taxpayer dollars are being used by big\n     corporations to shelter billions of dollars in taxes through\n     bogus depreciation deductions. In order to assist us in\n     assessing the scope and scale of this problem, I request that\n     the Chicago Transit Authority submit to the Committee on\n     Finance copies of all LILOs, SILOs, QTEs, and similar\n     transactions that have been approved, funded, or otherwise\n     reviewed by the Chicago Transit Authority from the year 1995\n     to present. If you have any questions regarding this request,\n     please contact Ed McClellan or Matt Genasci of the Senate\n     Finance Committee at (202) 224-4515.\n       We appreciate your cooperation in our ongoing efforts to\n     combat abusive tax shelters, and look forward to receiving\n     these materials as soon as possible.\n           With best personal regards,\n     Charles E. Grassley,\n       Chairman.\n     Max Baucus,\n       Ranking Member.\n\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. I have been fighting against SILO/LILO tax shelters for\na long time, as has Senator Baucus. In October 2003, the Finance\nCommittee held hearings on the status of abusive tax shelter\nactivities. During that hearing, we received anonymous testimony from a\nleasing industry executive that used the name Mr. Janet. He described\nhow U.S. corporations were able to take tax deductions for such things\nas the Paris, France, sewer lines and the New York subway system. Major\ncorporations were claiming tax deductions on taxpayer-funded\ninfrastructure located in the United States and overseas.\n  Imagine our surprise when we learned that U.S. taxpayers were\nsubsidizing the cost of electric transmission lines in the Australian\noutback. I find it hard to believe that a corporation was actually\ntaking a tax deduction for the New York City transit car pictured here.\nHowever, that is exactly what greedy corporations were doing. Just like\nthe greedy tax shelter promoters who were handing out U.S. taxpayer\nmoney to greedy corporations by selling these shady tax shelters to\nthem, the House voted last night to put U.S. taxpayer dollars on the\nline to bail out tax shelter participants and perpetuate these abusive\ntax shelters.\n  If we look at all the key congressional players on this deal, we will\nfind that, perhaps not by coincidence, nearly all of them represent\nareas where these transit shelter deals were done. These tend to be the\nbiggest cities. They tend to be the areas where the shops that hired\nthe sharpies that manufacture these tax shelters do business. Most of\nthese key congressional players for years, especially when Republicans\nwere in the majority, railed against tax shelters. Now we find that for\nthese key congressional players, the imperatives of the transit lobby\ndecisively outweigh the importance of cracking down on a tax shelter\nthat a Federal judge rightly described as ``rotten to the core.''\n  This reminds me of the Joker from the 1989 version of ``Batman,'' who\nsays: ``I'm giving out free money.'' You know the Joker, as shown on\nthis chart. You have seen him. ``I'm giving out free money.'' As we all\nknow, money is not free. Unfortunately, the joke here has been--and\nwill again be if we do not do something about it--on the American\ntaxpayer. Literally, the guarantee continues the cruel tax shelter joke\non the American taxpayers' dime.\n  I urge my colleagues in the Senate to not allow this cruel joke to be\nplayed on the American taxpayers. I have fought against these tax\nshelters in the past, and I will continue to fight against them in the\nfuture. This provision puts taxpayers' dollars on the line and\nperpetuates an abusive tax shelter. In fact, it puts the U.S.\nGovernment in the position of guaranteeing tax benefits that\ncorporations, including foreign corporations--again, I want to\nemphasize--hope to reap from engaging in these tax shelters. So as\nSenator Baucus has just done--and I thank him for his leadership--I\nurge my colleagues to vote against this bill which contains a bailout\nfor tax shelter participants.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). The Senator from Kentucky.\n  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, are we as in morning business?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in morning business, Senator.\n  Mr. BUNNING. Thank you.\n  Mr. President, I rise to speak on the auto bailout proposal before\nthe Senate. But before talking about any legislation, I wish to say\nthat I am very concerned, as everybody in the United States is, about\nthe state of the auto industry, not only in Detroit but other States\nthat have a great deal of auto workers and related industries.\n  As I said at the first Banking Committee hearing on this issue, I am\nnot concerned about any sense of American pride or because of the great\nhistory of the American auto industry. What concerns me is the\nworkers--the men and women who assemble our cars and trucks, who sell\nand service the vehicles, and those who work for the suppliers who keep\nthe industry running.\n  Auto manufacturing is the largest manufacturing sector in my\nCommonwealth. That is the Commonwealth of Kentucky. I know Detroit's\npain is felt in many towns and cities in Kentucky. In many counties,\njobs supplying parts to GM, Ford, or Toyota are some of the best jobs\nanywhere in Kentucky. Those jobs are in danger, and I am concerned for\nthe workers and their families.\n  The question facing Congress is what, if anything, we can and should\ndo about the industry's current problems.\n\n[[Page S10913]]\n\nAs I understand it, one of the two bills that is going to come before\nthe Senate--as soon as this afternoon--one is the bill passed by the\nHouse, and the other is a similar Senate proposal. Unfortunately, much\nlike the other bailouts we have passed, those bills rely on hopes and\npromises of future actions and do not require serious concessions.\nThose bills do not address the immediate problems facing the industry,\nwhich is a lack of funding for car loans and dealer floor plans, and\nmany other related issues.\n  While the Detroit manufacturers were forced by the economic crisis to\ncome to Congress for aid at this time, their problems are not just the\nresult of problems in our current financial markets. The companies are\nsimply uncompetitive in today's marketplace because of decades of bad\nbusiness decisions by both the corporate management and the labor\nunions. What is needed is a serious restructuring of the companies that\nbrings their costs in line with the costs of cars made by manufacturers\nsuch as Honda and Toyota and their capacity in line with the true\ndemand for new cars, not the artificially inflated demand of the last\nfew years.\n  Neither the House bill nor the Senate bill forces these companies and\ntheir stakeholders to make the changes necessary to force\nrestructuring. The so-called car czar has no real power to make the\ncompanies and stakeholders reach an agreement accomplishing the cost\nand capacity changes that must be made. Because the companies would not\nsurvive in the long term without those changes, they would be back\nbefore Congress next year asking for more money to get them through the\nnext few months, and back again and again. That is an irresponsible use\nof taxpayer dollars and would ultimately lead to the death of the\ncompanies and many thousands and thousands of jobs permanently being\nlost. Because I care too much about the workers, I cannot support\neither of these bills as they are currently written.\n  I have previously said I would support Federal assistance for\ncompanies if they undertake a chapter 11 bankruptcy restructuring.\nFederal financing and warranty guarantees would enable the companies to\nemerge from that restructuring successfully and more quickly than they\nwould otherwise. Senator Shelby and Senator Ensign have an amendment to\ndo just that, and I will be supporting their amendment if they are\nallowed to have a vote on it on the floor of the Senate.\n  However, chapter 11 bankruptcy is not the ideal solution, and I know\njust the word ``bankruptcy'' causes many people whose jobs, retirement,\nand health care depend on the companies to shudder. A similar\nrestructuring that accomplishes significant changes outside of\nbankruptcy would work as well. Senator Corker has an amendment that\nwould require those significant changes as a condition of Federal\nassistance provided in the majority's bill. If the majority allows a\nvote on Senator Corker's amendment, I will support it. If the amendment\nis adopted to the Senate version of the bill, I will support passage.\nIf the majority blocks any minority amendments, as they have done for\nnearly the entire Congress, I will oppose the bill and any cloture\nmotions.\n  I will go ahead and state for the record that if the Corker amendment\npasses and the bill becomes law, I will oppose any and all attempts to\nweaken its requirements. Now, I say that knowing full well that I am\nvery concerned that come January 20, the majority might try to rewrite\nthe requirements so that the companies are not forced to make painful\nchanges that are necessary for them to survive in the long term. I hope\nthat will not be the case.\n  For these companies to survive and thrive, there must be painful\nchanges made, and we all know some jobs will be lost. However, with a\nsuccessful restructuring, the Corker amendment being included, more\njobs will be preserved for the long term than if we just prop up the\ncompanies with taxpayers' dollars for a few short months and hope for\nthe best.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor.\n  Mr. President, since no one else is in the Chamber, I suggest the\nabsence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I would like to speak for less than 10\nminutes as in morning business.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. I thank the Chair.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10909", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "RECESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S10909", "S10909", "[{\"name\": \"Barbara A. Mikulski\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10909", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10909]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 RECESS\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in\nrecess until 3 o'clock.\n  Thereupon, at 2:17 p.m., the Senate recessed until 3:03 p.m. and\nreassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Ms.\nKlobuchar).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. In my capacity as a Senator from the State of\nMinnesota, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10913", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "HOLDER NOMINATION HEARING SCHEDULE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10913", "S10914", "[{\"name\": \"Chuck Grassley\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10913", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10913-S10914]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   HOLDER NOMINATION HEARING SCHEDULE\n\n  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I would like to discuss Eric Holder's\nnomination to be the U.S. Attorney General. While Mr. Holder appears to\nhave the appropriate credentials and work experience, it is important\nthat the Judiciary Committee be able to fully and carefully vet the\ncandidate for this important position because this is the Nation's top\nlaw enforcement officer.\n  I was surprised to hear that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee\nnoticed Mr. Holder's confirmation hearing for January 8, 2009. Mr.\nHolder was only formally announced as the prospective Attorney General\nnominee on December 1 of this year. I understand the Judiciary\nCommittee has a large number of boxes of archived documents relating to\nhis employment at the Justice Department, and those materials need to\nbe reviewed. We have not even gotten Mr. Holder's questionnaire,\nnomination materials, or FBI background investigation yet. Judiciary\nCommittee members just sent a letter to the Justice Department and the\nClinton Library requesting documents relating to issues that Mr. Holder\nwas involved in during his tenure in the Clinton Justice Department.\nOnce we get these materials and once these documents come to us, it\nwill take some time for committee members to review them.\n  While it is not unprecedented for the Judiciary Committee to hold a\nhearing prior to the inauguration of a President, such as the one held\nfor former Attorney General John Ashcroft, there are significant\ndifferences. First, the Ashcroft nomination hearing was held from\nJanuary 16 to January 19, 2001, obviously giving committee members more\nbreathing room to review his record. Moreover, Attorney General\nAshcroft was a well-known quantity to us because he served as our\ncolleague in the U.S. Senate and he was a prominent member of the\nJudiciary Committee. Of course, this was all prior to his nomination\nfor Attorney General. Even then, my colleagues on the other side of the\naisle insisted on 2 days of testimony from the nominee and 2 days of\ntestimony from 23 other outside witnesses, for a total of 4 days of\nhearings.\n\n  The bottom line is that the proposed January 8 hearing timetable\ndoesn't give members a full and fair chance to consider Mr. Holder's\nbackground as thoroughly as we should. We must have time to\ncomprehensively examine all of Mr. Holder's information, materials, and\ndocuments, most of which we haven't even received yet. There is no need\nto jump the gun and undermine our oversight responsibilities.\n  This is all the more important because Mr. Holder is not a nominee\nfree and clear of issues. The fact is Mr. Holder played a very key role\nin some very controversial matters, and since his nomination, a number\nof newspapers, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, and\nthe Wall Street Journal, have all published articles reminding the\npublic of those controversies and raising serious questions about Mr.\nHolder's role in them. These issues need to be fully considered by\nmembers of the Judiciary Committee and eventually by the full Senate.\n  For example, red flags about Mr. Holder's judgment and independence\ninclude his role in securing pardons or clemency for an unrepentant\nbillionaire fugitive tax cheat such as Marc Rich or terrorists such as\nmembers of the FALN and Weather Underground. A lot of people--including\nthis Senator--have found these facts to be troubling. As I previously\nmentioned, a number of editorials have been written asking questions\nabout how those facts impact Mr. Holder's ability to serve as U.S.\nAttorney General. I expect to question Mr. Holder at his confirmation\nhearing about these and other controversial matters he has been\ninvolved with.\n\n[[Page S10914]]\n\n  In addition, Mr. Holder has been in private practice since he left\nthe Clinton Justice Department over 8 years ago. It is important that\nwe know what Mr. Holder has been doing in those 8 years, which cases he\nhas been involved with, and who his clients are, what speeches he has\nmade, and so forth. For example, public reports have emerged that in\n2004, the Governor of Illinois hired or sought to hire Mr. Holder. We\ncertainly need time to learn what that is all about. Mr. Holder has not\nprovided the committee with all of this information yet. Again, it is\nnot unreasonable for members of the Judiciary Committee to want to\nreceive all of these materials and have ample opportunity to study them\nbefore holding the nomination hearings. As such, I, then--this Senator,\nthen--is in support of Senator Specter's request that Chairman Leahy\nmove the hearing to a later date in January so committee members can do\ntheir duty and review Mr. Holder's nomination in a responsible manner.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have been working, as I think the country\nknows and the Senate knows, for the last many weeks trying to come up\nwith some way to resolve the issue of dealing with Detroit and the\nautomobile manufacturers. We thought we were at a place today where we\nwould have a series of votes and we were almost there when another\nSenator submitted another idea. As a result of that, there are good-\nfaith negotiations going on as we speak. The last I heard is that they\nwould have something completed by 5:30. I kind of smile when I say\nthat, because considering the years I have spent here in the Senate,\nsometimes I don't know if they are referring to ``5:30'' meaning 10\nminutes from now or 12 hours and 10 minutes from now, but they said\n5:30. If they are able to work that out, then the bill will\noverwhelmingly pass the Senate. I have told the House and the House\nwill have to do whatever they do with that. But right now, that is not\ndone.\n  As I indicated, they said they thought a half hour or so ago it would\nbe done by 5:30. I hope that is the case. I know it is late. I know\npeople want more definite definitions of when this is all going to\nhappen, but that isn't the way the Senate works, as much as we would\nall like it to be. So if everyone will be patient, there is still a\npossibility--and even maybe a probability--that sometime this evening\nwe would be able to vote.\n  Now, Senator McConnell and I don't know at this stage what we will be\nvoting on. If the negotiations which are going forward now bear fruit,\nthen that will be the issue that I think would pass with a significant\nmargin here in the Senate. There may be some other Senators who want to\noffer alternatives. I think there may be some suggestions for that to\ntake place. At this stage, I think it is pretty clear that there is no\nneed to vote on the House measure, because it is pretty clear there\naren't enough votes to pass that, but those decisions we will make\nshortly. I think what we are going to be voting on is a series of\ncompeting alternatives. There is not going to be an opportunity to\noffer a lot of individual rifleshot amendments to these different\nproposals, but I know that a number of Senators have one proposal. We\nhave the one we talked about we will probably vote on today, and then\nwe have the bipartisan issue that is being worked on right now. If we\nare fortunate, maybe we could wind up having three votes or maybe only\ntwo votes. But, anyway, we are doing our best to resolve this issue.\n  There is no need to talk about all of the Senators involved. We will\ndo that if we can work something out and they will get all the\naccolades they need. We have had a lot of cooperation today. That\ndoesn't mean we are going to be able to work something out, because\nthis is a very important issue. But right now, I think we are a lot\nfurther down the road than I thought we would be. I was trying to\nthink: Down the road distance, so it should be ``farther'' down the\nroad. But, anyway, I wish to alert everyone they should be patient\ntonight. We hope to have some votes before the night is out.\n  If everything falls apart, then we will be left with having a cloture\nvote on the Democratic version. Regardless of whether we work something\nout, that would be tomorrow morning, as early as we want to come in,\nbut hopefully, that is not the resolution of this because that may not\nbe the best way to solve the problem of Detroit.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10914-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS RELATED TO THE PENSION PROTECTION ACT OF 2006", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TECHNICALCORRECTIONS", "S10914", "S10915", "[{\"name\": \"Max Baucus\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jon Kyl\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7327\"}, {\"congress\": \"110\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"7327\"}]", "154 Cong. Rec. S10914", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10914-S10915]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS RELATED TO THE PENSION PROTECTION ACT OF\n                                  2006\n\n  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, in a moment I will ask unanimous consent\nthat the Senate proceed to passage of H.R. 7327, the pension bill.\nBefore I do that, I wish to say this is very important relief for\nseniors and for the country. The bill includes a provision that would\nallow seniors who are 70\\1/2\\ years of age not to have to make\nwithdrawals from their IRA accounts that the current law requires.\nUnder current law, if you are 70\\1/2\\ or older, you must begin to\nwithdraw significant amounts from your 401(k) accounts or IRA accounts\nand if you don't, you pay a big penalty. At these times it is not wise\nto require that, because the accounts are lower in value and they\nshould not have to make those withdrawals if they don't want to.\n  In addition, this legislation would allow companies to postpone\nmaking increased contributions to their pension plans also required by\nthe recent pension law. When we revised pension law a short while ago,\nwe were pretty strict to protect employees by requiring companies to\nmake contributions to the pension plans at a much faster rate. That\nmade sense then, but given the economic downturn, with the market\nvalues down so much lower than they were back then, it makes sense, I\nbelieve--and I think most Senators agree--that those contributions\nshould be postponed or later modified in order to keep companies\nviable.\n  A lot of companies need this to meet payrolls in these difficult\ntimes, and this will prevent them having to freeze their benefits.\n  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate\nconsideration of H.R. 7327, which was received from the House.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.\n  The legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A bill (H.R. 7327) to make technical corrections related to\n     the Pension Protection Act of 2006, and for other purposes.\n\n  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.\n  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, we are living through an unprecedented\neconomic downturn. Over the past 15 months, the Dow Jones Industrial\ncompanies have lost more than one-third of their value. An end does not\nappear in sight.\n  This sharp market decline hurts more than just Wall Street. It hurts\nevery American with a retirement plan. When the market drops, so do the\nassets in pension plans.\n  Over the past 15 months, because of the current financial crisis,\nretirement accounts have lost as much as $2 trillion in assets due to\nthe current financial crisis. That is $2 trillion that disappeared from\nthe retirement accounts of American workers. And that is $2 trillion\nthat disappeared from the accounts of pension plans.\n\n[[Page S10915]]\n\n  Congress must act now to protect individual retirement accounts and\npension benefits and assets.\n  This bill provides relief for seniors age 70\\1/2\\ and older whom\ncurrent law requires to take distributions from their retirement plans.\n  Individuals would have the option to keep their retirement savings\nwhere they are. We should not force them to take out huge portions of\ntheir savings when the market is down.\n  This bill also contains a number of provisions to help ease the\nstrain on pension plans. And this bill would help to prevent the need\nfor some plans to reduce benefits or make extraordinary funding\ncontributions due to the market downturn.\n  If we fail to act and provide short-term funding relief, pension\nplans would be unable to afford their increased contributions. By one\nestimate, current law would require 350 of the Fortune 500 companies to\ncontribute an extra $100 billion or more to their pension plans next\nyear, even if the market rebounds. If these companies did this, they\nwould reduce their investment spending by $60 to $70 billion next year.\nThat is something that our economy cannot afford.\n  This bill provides relief for single-employer plans that fall below\nthe set funding target percentage set in the Pension Protection Act of\n2006.\n  And the bill provides analogous relief for multi-employer plans that\nare faced with significant underfunding due to market losses. This\nrelief would allow them to temporarily freeze their current funding\ncertification or extend the time period that they have to restore their\nfunding levels.\n  The bill also helps prevent benefit restrictions for those single-\nemployer plans that may be significantly underfunded next year due to\nthe market downturn.\n  This bill also contains a number of critical technical amendments to\nthe Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Pension Protection Act of 2006\narguably marks the most sweeping changes to the pension laws since the\nenactment of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.\n  Like many complicated pieces of legislation, technical corrections to\nthe law must be made.\n  Technical corrections to the law are often time sensitive. That is,\nmany of them must be passed by both Houses of Congress before the\neffective date of the statute.\n  Many of the rules under the Pension Act were effective January 1,\n2008. This means that the time for passing technical corrections has\ncome and gone.\n  If we were not to act and pass these time-sensitive provisions now,\nthe pension community and the Department of the Treasury--the agency\ntasked with interpreting the statute and providing the necessary\ndetails on how the new law works--would be placed in a very tough spot.\n  That is, the Department of the Treasury would not have the necessary\ncorrections and clarifications of the original intent of the act to\nsufficiently issue the details necessary to allow the pension community\nto achieve proper compliance. This would not be fair to the pension\ncommunity or the Treasury Department.\n  Failing to pass these technical corrections would therefore be\nirresponsible.\n  Here in the Senate, we passed the technical corrections contained in\nthis act back in December 2007. We already said that these corrections\nare good pension policy.\n  Americans need real help from Congress to make sure that their\nretirement savings are safe and sound and available to them when they\nneed it. This bill contains a number of provisions that would help to\nprovide relief to individuals and pension plans and move the economy\ntoward recovery.\n  Individuals and the pension community warned that individual\nretirement account holders and pension plan participants could be\nadversely affected without the provisions contained in this bill.\nPassing this pension package sends the right message to individuals,\nplan sponsors, and pension plan participants.\n  I thank my colleagues for helping to make passage of this bill\npossible today.\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read the\nthird time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table,\nwith no intervening action or debate, and that any statements related\nto the bill be printed in the Record.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The bill (H.R. 7327) was ordered to a third reading, was read the\nthird time, and passed.\n  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10914", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10914", "S10914", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Max Baucus\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10914", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S10914]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the period of\nmorning business be extended until 6:30 p.m. tonight with Senators\nallowed to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.\n  Of course, the Senators are always very cooperative. If, in fact,\nthere is something that Senator McConnell and I have been able to work\nout, then we will ask that the person be interrupted and we will try to\nmove forward with a unanimous consent agreement.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. REID. I note the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "truncated": false, "filtered_table_rows_count": 63484, "expanded_columns": [], "expandable_columns": [], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "units": {}, "query": {"sql": "select granule_id, date, congress, session, volume, issue, title, chamber, granule_class, sub_granule_class, page_start, page_end, speakers, bills, citation, full_text from congressional_record where \"congress\" = :p0 order by date desc limit 101", "params": {"p0": "110"}}, "facet_results": {"chamber": {"name": "chamber", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110", "results": [{"value": "HOUSE", "label": "HOUSE", "count": 36582, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&chamber=HOUSE", "selected": false}, {"value": "SENATE", "label": "SENATE", "count": 26618, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&chamber=SENATE", "selected": false}, {"value": "", "label": "", "count": 284, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&chamber=", "selected": false}], "truncated": false}, "granule_class": {"name": "granule_class", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110", "results": [{"value": "SENATE", "label": "SENATE", "count": 25412, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&granule_class=SENATE", "selected": false}, {"value": "HOUSE", "label": "HOUSE", "count": 20055, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&granule_class=HOUSE", "selected": false}, {"value": "EXTENSIONS", "label": "EXTENSIONS", "count": 15598, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&granule_class=EXTENSIONS", "selected": false}, {"value": "DAILYDIGEST", "label": "DAILYDIGEST", "count": 2419, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&granule_class=DAILYDIGEST", "selected": false}], "truncated": false}, "congress": {"name": "congress", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110", "results": [{"value": 110, "label": 110, "count": 63484, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json", "selected": true}], "truncated": false}}, "suggested_facets": [{"name": "date", "type": "date", "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&_facet_date=date"}], "next": "2008-12-11,CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10914", "next_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=110&_next=2008-12-11%2CCREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10914&_sort_desc=date", "private": false, "allow_execute_sql": true, "query_ms": 5250.650301983114, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}