S6482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 20, 2012 

Democrats haven’t passed a budget in 

more than 3 years despite the fact that, 

as Senator SESSIONS pointed out, the 

law literally requires it. It doesn’t say, 

Don’t pass a budget if it is hard; don’t 

pass a budget if you have to negotiate 

with the House; don’t pass a budget if 

you have to vote. It says, Pass a budget. 

We haven’t passed a single appropriations bill, I say to my friend, the senior 

Senator from Mississippi. Apparently 

all these people on the Appropriations 

Committee are completely irrelevant. 

Senator ALEXANDER pointed out they 

did their work but are never going to 

bring up a single bill. 

By the way, it is not just the Appropriations Committee. All Senators are 

on committees. Does any Senator remember the last time they actually 

marked up a bill? Most committees are 

not marking up bills and not offering 

amendments. So I guess the new rule 

is: No amendments in committee and 

no amendments on the floor. 

There are a lot of Senators around 

here of both parties wondering what 

their job is. I was elected by the people 

of my State. What is this job I have? I 

am on committees that don’t do anything. Nobody votes on amendments. 

All the legislation we have, if we have 

any, is written in the majority leader’s 

office. 

Senator ISAKSON or Senator ENZI

pointed out that all we do is vote on 

bills that have fancy titles and a poison pill and, of course, only one vote. 

Because you know, if you get on the 

bill, there won’t be any amendments. 

So a lot of Members wonder why they 

are here. They fought hard for these 

jobs, defeated intelligent, well-funded 

opponents, got here ready to go to 

work, and nothing happens. And it is 

not just 1 week or a month or 6 

months, but 2 years. 

As Senator MCCAIN pointed out, no 

Defense authorization bill. We had 

managed to get around to doing that, 

no matter what our differences were, 

for half a century. This Democratically 

controlled Senate gives do-nothing 

Congresses a bad name. It is a complete 

disgrace. Never before has a Senate and 

a President done less to address such 

great challenges that we have. 

I know I can speak for every single 

member of the Republican Conference 

in the Senate. Regardless of our philosophical differences with our friends on 

the other side, we take our jobs seriously. We think the people who sent us 

here expected us to function, and we 

intend to do so. 

So if the American people decide 

they want to make a change, the commitment I make to them is the Republican Conference is going to pass a 

budget. It may be hard; we may have to 

twist a few arms; there may be some 

people who don’t want to do it. We may 

have to do it on a partisan basis if our 

friends on the other side don’t want to 

join with us. But the law doesn’t say, 

Don’t do it if it is hard. It says, Do it. 

The Appropriations Committee deals 

with the discretionary budget of the 

U.S. Government. It ought to be allowed to do its job. Not everybody is 

going to vote for every bill, but we are 

going to function. 

We owe it to the American people to 

do, at the very least, the basic work of 

government. Of course, we have problems beyond the basic work of government. Certainly we were going to have 

differences after the 2010 election— 

which could best be described as a national restraining order. 

The American people took a look at 

what this government did under this 

President’s leadership over the first 2 

years, and they said, We have had 

enough of that. They flipped the House 

of Representatives and made us a more 

robust minority in the Senate. They 

understood we weren’t going to do any 

more of what we did the first 2 years. 

They were not interested in any more 

of that. But that is not an excuse for 

not doing anything. They said, We 

don’t want to do any more of all this 

new stuff that was done in 2009 and 

2010, the massive spending and debt and 

the takeover of health care and the nationalization of the student loan bills. 

But they didn’t send us here to do 

nothing. They assumed we would at 

least do the things we ought to be able 

to agree on—the basic work of government. It is embarrassing. 

For the sake of this institution and 

for the sake of our country, we need to 

straighten out this place. We need an 

attitude change. This is not about the 

rules. The rules have remained largely 

the same over the years. This is about 

us. And this problem can be fixed. All 

we have to do is decide to operate differently. No matter who is up or who is 

down, there are basic things this institution owes the American people; that 

is, to get the basic work of government 

done. 

So the pledge we make to the American people, if they decide they want to 

try new leadership in the Senate, is we 

will do these things even if they are 

hard. 

Beyond the basics, let me say to our 

friends on the other side, we have big 

problems we are never going to be able 

to solve without some bipartisan commitment to do it. We are drowning in a 

sea of debt. We know we cannot save 

this country unless we make the entitlement programs fit the demographics 

of our country. 

We have a lot of other problems. We 

have taxes, we have sequester. But the 

way I tend to think of that is those are 

the chairs on the Titanic. You can rearrange the chairs—figure out the tax 

problems, figure out the sequester 

problems—but the ship is still going 

down unless we make our entitlement 

programs meet and fit the demographics of our country. We probably 

won’t be able to do that one party only. 

It is time for some statesmen to show 

up. 

We have had an election every 2 

years since 1788, right on schedule. At 

any point in American history, people 

could have said, Oh, we can’t do that; 

there is an election coming up. There is 

always an election coming up in America. That is what we do. The fact that 

we have an election coming up is not 

an excuse for not tackling the tough 

problems. 

So no matter what the American people decide this November, no matter 

what they decide, the problems are 

there. And our commitment to the 

American people is, if we are in the 

majority, we will do the basic work of 

government; and our hand will be out 

to our colleagues on the other side and 

whoever the President of the United 

States is. 

It is time to tackle the biggest problems in the country, the most predictable crisis in American history. 

Mr. President, I yield the floor. 

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader. 

Mr. REID. Mr. President, has the Republicans’ time expired? 

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republicans have 3 minutes 

remaining. 

Mr. MCCONNELL. I will yield back 

the remainder of our time. 

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader. 

f 

SELF-CREATED RESULTS 

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I haven’t 

been able to watch all the speeches by 

my friends on the other side of the 

aisle, but I have watched enough to understand what is going on. This has 

been a remarkable show of hubris or 

arrogance from the Republican side of 

the aisle. 

One after another, the Republicans 

have stood to complain about how the 

Senate hasn’t gotten a lot done. The 

Presiding Officer has been one of the 

leaders in having a more effective Senate, because my friend, the Presiding 

Officer, has watched what the Republicans have done. We are going to do 

something about it. The Presiding Officer knows that, I know that. 

What they have done is the very definition of chutzpah. The nerve. What 

nerve. They are complaining about a 

result that they themselves created. 

They have created the fact that we 

haven’t gotten anything done. They 

are good at it. A bill that would allow 

veterans to get jobs, they stopped it on 

a technicality. They have conducted 

filibuster after filibuster, blocking one 

bill after another, and then they complain the Senate can’t pass anything 

when they are the ones holding things 

up. The record is pretty detailed and 

deep, and I am not going to cover it all 

today because, really, it is significant. 

I said here yesterday, I have been the 

leader for 6 years. I may be off 1 or 2, 

but I have had to file motions to overcome 382 filibusters in 6 years. I know 

the Senate has changed a little bit 

since Lyndon Johnson was the majority leader, but during the 6 years he 

was the majority leader, he had to file 

cloture once. To think that they are 

here complaining we are not getting 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
September 20, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6483 

anything done when they are the ones 

who caused it? And we start from this 

point. 

I have to say, I appreciate the Republican leader being so candid and honest 

with the American people when he 

stood at the beginning of this Congress 

and said his No. 1 goal was to stop 

President Obama from being reelected. 

That is what he said. And they have 

legislated accordingly, stopping us 

from doing the most important things 

for this country. Measures to create 

jobs, they have stopped. Measures to 

stop jobs from being lost, they have 

stopped. They have done it so many 

times. 

How about this: We have lost approximately 1 million teachers, firefighters, and police officers because of 

Republicans stopping us from get 

things done, really hurting State and 

local government. So we over here 

thought it would be a good idea that 

we stop these significant layoffs of 

teachers, firefighters, and police officers. We want to make sure it is paid 

for and we agree it should be paid for. 

So we said, Okay, no more layoffs of 

teachers, firefighters, and police officers, and we are going to pay for it. 

How are we going to pay for it? Anyone 

making more than $1 million a year 

would have to pay a surtax of threetenths of 1 percent. Every Republican 

voted against that. 

The Veterans Jobs bill I just talked 

about. The cyber security bill. The 

Pentagon has said the most important 

issue facing this country is cyber security. The National Security Agency: 

The most issue facing this country? 

Cyber security. We know, they know, 

the Republicans know, because they 

were down at the same demonstration I 

had of our intelligence agency showing 

what would happen if a cyber security 

attack took place in the Northeast just 

dealing with the power grid. We know 

it can happen. 

I have heard Senator FEINSTEIN, the 

chairman of our Intelligence Committee, say several times it is not a 

question of if, it is a question of when. 

The Republicans blocked a cyber security bill, stopped it. 

They have conducted filibuster after 

filibuster, blocking one bill after another. They blocked a bill to stop outsourcing jobs—more than once. 

On all these TV ads that you see, we 

thought it would be kind of a good idea 

that the American people knew who 

was paying for these ads. But, no, twice 

they said let’s keep them secret— 

Crossroads USA or whatever name they 

have there, all these names that sound 

so good. But I think we would be better 

served if people knew the ads were 

being paid by the Koch brothers or 

Sheldon Adelson from Las Vegas or 

Simmons from Texas who is boasting 

about giving $34 million to defeat 

President Obama. And that is what the 

Republican leader wants. 

On the passage of several small business jobs bills, one July 12, just a 

month or two ago; the motion to proceed to paycheck fairness, violence 

against women—they stopped us from 

going to conference on that. On April 

16 they blocked a motion to proceed to 

a bill to reduce the deficit by imposing 

a minimum tax rate on high-income 

taxpayers, the Buffett rule, Warren 

Buffett. He wants to make sure he pays 

a tax rate comparable to his secretary’s. That is what we wanted. They 

defeated that. 

They blocked many bills dealing with 

unnecessary tax subsidies for these 

large oil companies. They have held up 

hundreds of measures out of the Energy Committee—hundreds. It used to 

be we would pass those just matter-offactly. 

Senator STABENOW had an amendment to decrease taxes on American 

businesses. She wanted to do that by 

extending expiring energy tax credits 

for energy that has created hundreds of 

jobs in America. 

They blocked the nomination for 

weeks and weeks of Richard Cordray to 

be the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. They 

blocked judge after judge. They 

blocked a motion to proceed to a bill to 

put workers back on the job while rebuilding and modernizing American infrastructure. It creates jobs. 

They blocked motions to proceed to a 

bill to keep teachers and first responders—in addition to the one I just talked 

about—and other ones. They blocked a 

bill to reauthorize the Economic Development Administration. This has been 

something we have done for 25, 30 

years. They blocked it. 

We wanted to reduce the deficit by 

doing something about these outlandish subsidies we give Big Oil— 

blocked it. We were trying to do a bill 

to create jobs. We spent weeks because 

they wanted to dictate what women 

could do dealing with contraception. 

Then they have this little—this little 

deal with the House Republicans. If we 

work and are able once in a while to 

get something done over here, such as 

a postal bill to save our postal system, 

then the Republicans block it in the 

House. The farm bill—reduces the debt 

by $23 billion—they have this deal with 

the House and now they blocked that. 

China currency? The same thing; they 

blocked it over in the House. 

The record is very clear. The party of 

trying to defeat President Obama has 

done everything they can to make the 

economy look as bad as it can because 

they think if the economy is really 

bad, it is going to help them defeat 

President Obama. 

The middle class—we know how they 

feel about the middle class. That was 

exemplified by statements that came 

out in the last few days by the Presidential nominee. 

This morning, as I said, I wasn’t able 

to listen to everything, but I listened 

to enough. One party stands for obstruction and the rich. The big lie—listen to this: How many times did we 

have the Republicans come to this 

floor and say: They have not passed a 

budget? 

I have served in this Congress for 30 

years, and I have admired two people 

very much for their knowledge of certain things. One person I have admired 

dealing with the finances of this country more than anyone else is someone 

with whom I came to the Senate 26 

years ago, KENT CONRAD. KENT CONRAD

has come here and time and time again 

said: Yes, we did not pass a budget resolution because we did not need to. We 

passed a law. That is why the CR is 

going forward. We passed a law that set 

numbers for us. 

It is a big lie for them to come here 

and say we have not passed a budget. It 

is a lie. It is untruthful. 

My friend with whom we have served 

in Congress, we came the same day, the 

senior Senator from Arizona, I have 

said before, and I will say it again: I 

admire him. I admire his service to our 

country. But for him to come and say 

that the Senate is not working well because of the Democrats, that is one of 

the big lies. 

We have tried to legislate. They are 

holding up virtually everything we try 

to do, including the Defense authorization bill. I have been waiting for 

months for them to come to me with 

an agreement. This is part of the big 

game they are playing to try to make 

us look bad when they are the cause of 

it. They are the reason we have not 

done this legislation. We can’t. We 

have spent weeks on matters that we 

would have done before in a matter of 

an hour or 20 minutes. 

Republicans are complaining about a 

result that they themselves caused. 

The Defense authorization bill—we are 

going to come back after the election, 

and we will get that done with their 

help. 

Here is the issue with Republicans, 

here is why suddenly they are all 

upset. They have been upset for some 

time, but really this week has been 

something that would upset nearly everyone because—we thought the Olympics were over, but yesterday we saw it 

in full go. 

We had Republicans running to break 

marathon records, sprint records to get 

away from their Presidential nominee 

because it makes it a little hard for 

them to have somebody running for 

President representing their party who 

says: I only have to worry about half 

the people in this country. 

We are going to continue to work to 

the best we can to move forward with 

the legislation we believe is important. 

We are going to come back after the 

election, during the lameduck. Hopefully, they will decide at that time 

maybe they have something better to 

do than try to make the President of 

the United States look bad. 

We are a very fortunate country. We 

have a two-party system that is the 

envy of the rest of the world. These 

parliamentary governments, they work 

for months and weeks and sometimes 

longer than that to try to form a government. We don’t have to do that. We 

are a government of laws, and we have 

a system that works pretty well. 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
S6484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 20, 2012 

But we know, based on some academic work that has been done—it is 

not just me talking. We have two of 

the foremost experts who have watched 

this country for more than 40 years— 

Thomas Mann from the Brookings Institute and Norm Ornstein from the 

conservative Enterprise Institute—who 

have said the problem with the government today is the Republicans. They 

said they have been here for 40 years 

and have never seen anything like it. I 

haven’t seen anything like it, and I 

have been here 30 years. 

We used to work together. When I 

came to the Senate we had Republican 

Senators and Democratic Senators. We 

joined hands and we got things done. 

But now, because they are being led by 

someone who believes the most important thing to do is to defeat Obama, we 

are getting nothing done and they are 

following him like lemmings off the 

cliff. 

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Illinois. 

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, one of 

the greatest orators in the history of 

English-speaking people was Winston 

Churchill. I can’t tell you how many 

times I have read and reread his 

speeches and heard his great efforts to 

summon the courage of the British people during World War II. 

In one respect the speech earlier this 

morning by Senator MCCONNELL was 

Churchillian, in the tradition of Winston Churchill, because they once said 

to Winston Churchill: What do you 

think history will have to say about 

you? He said: 

I’m not worried about what history has to 

say about me because I’m going to write the 

history. 

This morning Senator MCCONNELL

decided to write the history of the Senate session. Unfortunately, his version 

was a little bit different than the memory of most of us in terms of what has 

actually happened. 

This we do remember: In the beginning of the Obama Presidency, a short 

time after the President had been 

sworn in and asked to try to take this 

failing economy and put it back on its 

feet, when we were losing 750,000 jobs a 

month, when businesses were failing, 

when American families were losing 

one-third of the value of their savings, 

when the stock market was plummeting, when we ran the risk of a global fiscal crisis, when we were sending 

$800 billion to the biggest banks in 

America to save them from their own 

greed and stupidity—at that time the 

Republican leader, Senator MCCONNELL, said: ‘‘My highest priority is to 

make sure that Barack Obama is a oneterm President.’’ His highest priority. 

That is a fact. That is on the record. 

That is on tape if you want to see it. 

And he lived up to that in terms of his 

own ambition as the Republican leader. 

When the President came up with a 

stimulus bill to turn this economy 

around, we had three Republicans who 

would join us, three of them. What happened to those three Republicans? 

One of them, Senator Specter of 

Pennsylvania, was then threatened 

with defeat in the Republican primary 

for joining in a bipartisan effort to 

save the economy. He switched parties, 

came over to the Democratic side, and 

said: It isn’t the Republican Party I remember. Another, Senator SNOWE of 

Maine, announced her retirement a few 

months back and said: I can’t take the 

partisanship and division. The third, 

Senator COLLINS, still survives. Those 

three were the only three who would 

stand up with the President to try to 

get this economy back on track. 

When it came to health care reform, 

after months of effort by Senator BAUCUS to bring in Republicans to craft the 

bill, Senator GRASSLEY, who was leading the effort on the Republican side, 

went back to Iowa in August, had a 

town meeting and said: I am finished. 

No more bipartisan negotiation on 

health care reform. And they would not 

give us a single vote, not one vote to 

pass health care reform. 

The same thing was true when it 

came to Wall Street reform to put in 

oversight to avoid another fiscal crisis 

generated by the perfidy of greed on 

Wall Street. 

Time and time again the Republicans 

refused to stand with us. To my left is 

Senator CONRAD of North Dakota. He 

has been our chairman of the Budget 

Committee. He put in a sincere, bipartisan, good-faith effort to deal with the 

deficit—with Senator Judd Gregg, a 

Republican of New Hampshire, a man 

who commanded respect on his side of 

the aisle, as Senator CONRAD does as 

well. They came up with a notion. Here 

is what it was. 

We would create a commission that 

would investigate the deficit crisis, and 

if 14 of the 18 members of the commission voted to go forward it would come 

immediately to the floor for a vote. 

We had a lot of Senators who were 

cosponsoring that. Democrats and Republicans finally said that will break 

the logjam. Then we called it on the 

floor. I ask Senator CONRAD, does my 

memory serve me correctly that the 

Republican leader, Senator MCCONNELL, who was a cosponsor of this deficit commission, along with six other 

Republican Senators, changed their 

votes on the floor and defeated the 

very bill they had cosponsored to deal 

with our Nation’s deficit? 

The Senator didn’t hear that this 

morning, did he? All the speeches from 

the other side about dealing with the 

deficit. Perhaps Senator MCCONNELL

and those six other Senators, those remaining, would like to explain why 

they reversed course and said no; they 

didn’t want to be part of the effort. But 

it happened. It happened for certain. 

As Senator REID came to the Senate 

floor and explained, they have broken 

all records in the Senate for filibusters. 

Boy, I tell you what: If you have a 

cable TV at home and you have C– 

SPAN on it and you turn on the Senate, I know a lot of people across 

America are calling into the cable 

channel providers and asking for a refund. Why in the world do we have this 

channel where nothing happens except 

an occasional mention of a Senator’s 

name during a quorum call? Does anyone know why? There were 382 filibusters on the Republican side; 382 delays 

in the Senate. What sort of issues are 

they filibustering? I just saw one this 

week. It was a veterans jobs bill. A veterans jobs bill was the subject of a 2- 

week filibuster. It was a bill which 

should have passed by voice vote. If 

every Senator who went back home for 

a Fourth of July parade, grabbed the 

flag and walked down the middle of the 

street and said how much they loved 

the veterans would have voted for it, 

we would have passed it. Instead, they 

filibustered it. It was one of 382 filibusters. 

I am glad Senator CONRAD is here to 

explain this whole budget resolution 

issue. He can do it better than anyone. 

I will tell the Senator I took a look 

this morning at the 30 Senators on the 

Republican side who got up to speak 

and about 10 of them talked about the 

fact that there was no budget, that we 

didn’t have a budget this year, and we 

don’t have a budget next year. I then 

looked at the votes on the Budget Control Act. Those same 10 Senators voted 

for the Budget Control Act, a law 

which controls the budget for 2 years. 

I am calling for an official investigation by the attending physician to see 

if there is something in the coffee urn 

in the Republican cloakroom causing 

amnesia so that these Senators would 

come to the floor and forget they voted 

for the Budget Control Act and make 

speeches like they didn’t or never 

heard of it. 

Let me say something about entitlements. Senator MCCONNELL spoke to 

the issue of entitlements. He is right; 

it is an important part of what we need 

to do to right this ship to deal with our 

deficit. It would have been part of the 

conversation for the Conrad-Gregg 

commission, which seven Republican 

Senators torpedoed, including the Republican majority leader. We can go 

through the bills, as the majority leader has, and talk about the efforts we 

have made. 

We have passed bills on a bipartisan 

basis. We passed a postal reform bill to 

ensure that the best postal service in 

the world survives. We passed it with a 

bipartisan vote—dead in the House. 

We passed a transportation bill. Senator BOXER and INHOFE put it together. 

It was a strong bipartisan vote to build 

the infrastructure of America. It 

passed in the Senate. It died in the 

House. 

We passed a farm bill with Senator 

STABENOW of Michigan and Senator 

ROBERTS of Kansas. It was a bipartisan 

farm bill that gave us a good architecture for the future of farm programs 

and reduced the deficit by $23 billion. 

We passed it on a bipartisan basis in 

the Senate. It died in the House of Representatives. The tea party faction in 

the House will not allow it to go forward. 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
September 20, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6485 

Senator REID also made the point 

earlier. What was the first Republican 

amendment on the Transportation bill? 

Think about this for a second. It was 

the first Republican amendment on the 

Transportation bill. They wouldn’t let 

us move forward to that bill unless we 

considered an amendment which would 

reduce the opportunity for women 

across America to have access to family planning. That was on the Transportation bill. Now they are arguing 

that we are finding ways to slow down 

the Senate? The Blunt amendment was 

defeated, but it is an indication of the 

political gamesmanship that has gone 

on at the expense of the important bills 

such as the Transportation bill. 

The last point I wish to make is this: 

We know that if we are going to thrive 

in this country, the middle-class working families in this country need a 

chance. 

The Senators on this side of the aisle, 

as well as President Obama, want to 

give working and middle-income families a tax break. We passed a bill so 

they will have a tax reduction to help 

them as they struggle from paycheck 

to paycheck. We sent it over to the 

House of Representatives, where it is 

never going to be taken up for a vote. 

That is the sad reality. 

So as the Republicans came to the 

floor this morning and gave us this 

grand vision of when they were in control, they tried to rewrite history. 

Maybe Churchill is capable of doing 

that, but I would say the Republican 

Senators failed to meet that challenge 

this morning. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. 

BROWN of Ohio). The Senator from 

North Dakota. 

Mr. CONRAD. First, I thank my colleagues, Senator REID, our leader, and 

Senator DURBIN for their kind words. I 

very much appreciate those kind 

words. I also must say I am a little 

taken aback by what I heard earlier on 

the floor from some of my Republican 

colleagues because it truly does represent an attempt to rewrite history, 

the history I have lived in my 26 years 

in the Senate. 

I announced a little more than a year 

and a half ago that I would not seek reelection, so I don’t have a political ox 

to gore. But I am here to report what 

I have seen after 26 years of service. 

Let me start by saying our Republican 

colleagues at the leadership level decided early on that their strategy to be 

successful was to stop things from 

passing in the Senate. It is very clear 

that has been their strategy. That is 

why we have seen more than 380 filibusters in this body, which is completely unprecedented in the history of 

the Senate. 

The Republican leader made it very 

clear years ago that his highest priority was to defeat for reelection President Obama. He did not say his top priority was to solve the problems of the 

country. He did not say his top priority 

was to get our economy back on track. 

He did not say his top priority was to 

address the deficits and debt of the Nation. He did not say his top priority 

was to improve the security position of 

the United States. He said his top priority was to defeat President Obama. 

Shame on him. That should never be 

the top priority of a leader in this 

body, Republican or Democratic. The 

top priority ought to be to help solve 

the problems the country confronts. 

I am a little cranky because many of 

my colleagues know my wife and I have 

a little dog named Dakota that is suffering from cancer. Last night we were 

up from 12:30 until 5:30 as he was bleeding internally. So I must say I am a little cranky after having been up most of 

the night, and I got a lot crankier 

when I heard colleagues say things 

they know are not true. 

When they say there is no budget for 

the United States, they know that is 

not true. How do I know it is not true, 

and that there is a budget? Because I 

remember what we voted on, and it is 

in writing. It is a law. It is called the 

Budget Control Act. The Budget Control Act passed last year and contained 

the budget for 2012 and 2013. Some say 

that is not a budget. Let’s look to the 

language of the law itself and see what 

it says. 

Here is what it says: For the purpose 

of enforcing the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974, including section 300 of 

that Act, and enforcing budgetary 

points of order in prior concurrent resolutions on the budget, the allocations, 

aggregates, and spending levels set 

shall apply in the Senate in the same 

manner as for a concurrent resolution 

on the budget. 

What they are trying to do is mislead 

the American people by saying we have 

not passed a budget resolution. What 

they failed to tell people is that instead of a budget resolution, we passed 

a budget law. What is the difference? A 

resolution is purely a congressional 

document. It never goes to the President for his signature. So instead of a 

resolution, we passed a budget law 

called the Budget Control Act. It set 

out spending limits not just for 2012 

and 2013, it actually set out on the discretionary side of the budget limits for 

10 years. 

In fact, the Budget Control Act, in 

many ways, is more extensive than any 

budget resolution could provide. It has 

the force of law, unlike the budget resolution that is not signed by the President. It set discretionary caps on 

spending for 10 years instead of the 1 

year normally set in a budget resolution. It provided enforcement mechanisms, including a 2-year provision allowing budget points of order to be enforced. It created a reconciliation-like 

supercommittee process to address entitlement and tax reforms. It said if 

the special committee could not agree 

on reforming the entitlement programs 

and the tax system of the United 

States, there would be an additional 

$1.2 trillion in spending cuts. 

Let’s add it up. The Budget Control 

Act first cut $900 billion from the discretionary accounts over 10 years. 

Then it said if the supercommittee 

didn’t reform the tax system and entitlement system of the country, there 

would be another $1.2 trillion cut from 

the discretionary accounts over the 

next 10 years. That is a total of $2.1 

trillion in spending cuts over the next 

10 years. That is the biggest package of 

spending cuts in the history of the 

United States. That is a fact. 

The Budget Control Act set the 

spending limits for 2012 and 2013 and 

further set limits for 8 years beyond 

that. So when they say there is no 

budget resolution, what they fail to 

tell people is there is a budget law. 

It is interesting if we compare and 

contrast what their side presented as 

their priorities in a budget because Mr. 

RYAN, their candidate for Vice President, came before the House of Representatives and laid out his budget 

blueprint. What does that do? First of 

all, it extends all the Bush-era tax 

cuts. 

Think about this. Here we have a circumstance in which the revenue of our 

country is at or near a 60-year low. The 

first thing the Ryan budget does is extend all the Bush-era tax cuts, even 

those for the very highest income. 

Then it says that is not enough for the 

wealthiest among us. So the Ryan 

budget, after extending all the Bush 

era-tax cuts, goes and provides another 

$1 trillion of tax cuts for the wealthiest 

among us. 

I have nothing against wealthy people. I hope all Americans have the opportunity to become wealthy; that 

would be my fondest hope. That was 

why I was drawn to public service. 

What could I do that would strengthen 

the economy of the United States? It 

has always been my top priority. It is 

what I truly believe is essential to our 

democracy. But in a circumstance in 

which we are borrowing 40 cents of 

every $1 we spend, and then to say the 

answer is more and more tax cuts for 

the very wealthiest among us and try 

to pay for it by shredding the social 

safety net that is critically important 

to those who are the least fortunate 

among us, frankly, I think that fails 

the moral test. I think that fails any 

moral test of government. 

The Ryan budget, which our colleagues have endorsed, would give, on 

average, those earning over $1 million 

a year an additional tax reduction of 

$265,000 a year. 

I know if I were listening to this I 

would say, How can it be that someone 

earning over $1 million can get a 

$265,000 tax cut, because that is about 

all they would pay in taxes. Remember, 

we are talking about the average for 

those earning over $1 million a year, so 

we are talking about not just people 

who earn $1 million a year but people 

who earn hundreds of millions of dollars a year. And the average tax cut 

provided in the Ryan budget for those 

folks is another $265,000 a year. 

What does Ryan do in order to offset 

that massive additional tax cut for the 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
S6486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 20, 2012 

very wealthiest among us? Well, here is 

an interesting quote from a former top 

economic adviser to Ronald Reagan, a 

man named Bruce Bartlett, who was a 

top economic adviser to Ronald 

Reagan. Here is what he said about the 

Ryan budget that our colleagues here 

have endorsed: 

Distributionally, the Ryan plan is a monstrosity. The rich would receive huge tax 

cuts while the social safety net would be 

shredded to pay for them. Even as an opening bid to begin budget negotiations with the 

Democrats, the Ryan plan cannot be taken 

seriously. It is less of a wish list than a fairy 

tale utterly disconnected from the real 

world, backed up by make-believe numbers 

and unreasonable assumptions. Ryan’s plan 

isn’t even an act of courage; it’s just pandering to the Tea Party. A real act of courage would have been for him to admit, as all 

serious budget analysts know, that revenues 

will have to rise well above 19 percent of 

GDP to stabilize the debt. 

Those are not my words. Those are 

the words of a top economic adviser to 

President Ronald Reagan. 

The Ryan plan is a monstrosity. 

If anybody seriously studies the 

Ryan budget they would have to conclude that Mr. Bartlett is correct, because Mr. RYAN cuts taxes in a very 

dramatic way for the richest among us. 

Let me be clear. The first thing he does 

is extend all the Bush-era tax cuts. 

Then, on top of that, he cuts the top 

rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. That 

provides over $1 trillion of additional 

tax cuts for the wealthiest among us. 

And they refuse to do anything to close 

the tax loopholes that are allowing certain wealthy people to avoid paying 

taxes in this country entirely. 

I have shown on the floor of the Senate many times a picture of a fivestory building in the Cayman Islands 

called the Ugland House. The Ugland 

House claims to be the home of 18,000 

companies. A little five-story building 

in the Cayman Islands claims to be the 

home of 18,000 companies. I say that is 

the most efficient building in the 

world. Can you imagine 18,000 companies operating out of a little five-story 

building down in the Cayman Islands? 

All those companies claim they are 

doing business out of that little building for a reason. They claim they are 

doing business out of that little building in the Cayman Islands because they 

don’t want to pay taxes in the United 

States. So here is what they do, and it 

is very clever. Through paper manipulations, they show the profits of certain subsidiaries of their companies in 

the Cayman Islands rather than in the 

places where they actually earned the 

profits. Why would they do that? Because the Cayman Islands doesn’t have 

a corporate income tax. So by showing 

their profits in the Cayman Islands, 

even though in truth they were never 

earned in the Cayman Islands—through 

accounting gimmicks they show their 

profits in the Cayman Islands and they 

aren’t taxed. They avoid paying here 

what they legitimately owe here. What 

does that mean? That means all the 

rest of us get stuck paying for ourselves and them. 

I said earlier the Ryan budget fails 

the moral test, and it is not just my 

judgment that it fails the moral test. 

How can one justify cutting taxes dramatically for the wealthiest among us 

and then turn around and shred Medicare, which is what the Ryan budget 

did? The Ryan budget he initially proposed changed Medicare’s finances over 

time so that instead of Medicare paying 75 percent of health care costs for 

seniors who are eligible, the Ryan 

budget, over time, would switch that so 

Medicare would pay 32 percent. To be 

clear, under the Ryan plan, we would 

wind up with a situation in which the 

majority of one’s health care costs, if 

one is eligible for Medicare, would be 

paid by that person, not by Medicare. 

That is to make up for the massive tax 

cuts he gives the wealthiest among us. 

Here is what the Catholic bishops 

said. The Catholic bishops say the 

Ryan budget fails the moral test. I 

agree with the Catholic bishops. This is 

what they said in the Washington Post 

in 2012: 

A week after House Budget Committee 

Chairman PAUL RYAN said that his Catholic 

faith inspired the Republicans’ cost-cutting 

budget plan, the Nation’s Catholic bishops 

reiterated their demand that the Federal 

budget protect the poor and said the GOP 

measure fails to meet these moral criteria. 

In any moral test that I know of in 

any religion, we don’t take from those 

who have the least to give it to those 

who have the most. I don’t know of any 

religion that practices that as an article of faith—that we take from those 

who have the least to give to those who 

have the most. 

Anybody who knows me knows I am 

pretty conservative. I come from a 

business family. I have a master’s in 

business administration. Throughout 

my career, I have been someone who 

has been judged as fiscally conservative, someone who believes deeply in 

balancing budgets. I was the grandfather of the Bowles-Simpson Commission; served on it proudly. I was one of 

the 11 votes for its product—5 Democrats, 5 Republicans, 1 independent. 

By the way, when our colleagues said 

this morning we haven’t worked in a 

bipartisan way—well, I have spent 5 

years working in a bipartisan way trying to get our debts and deficit under 

control. Senator Gregg, the ranking 

Republican on the Budget Committee, 

and I proposed the Bowles-Simpson 

Commission. We served on it. We voted 

for it. I subsequently served in the 

group of six, three Democrats, three 

Republicans, who were given the assignment by our colleagues to come up 

with a plan to reduce the deficit. We 

worked for a year and a half to try to 

find a bipartisan solution. We have had 

the Biden group. We have had the 

supercommittee, all bipartisan efforts 

that have gone on for years to try to 

produce an agreement. So my friends 

saying there hasn’t been an effort, that 

is not true. 

What is true is when our friends on 

the other side were in charge, they 

brought this economy to the brink of 

financial collapse. That is the truth. 

Anybody who doubts it can simply go 

back to the end of the Bush administration and see where the country was. 

The stock market was collapsing. The 

housing market was collapsing. The financial system was collapsing. That is 

what President Obama inherited. He 

did not create those crises; he inherited 

them. At the time President Obama 

came into office, the economy was 

shrinking at a rate of almost 9 percent 

a year. We were losing 800,000 jobs a 

month. Now the economy is growing at 

a rate of about 2 percent a year, and we 

are gaining about 200,000 jobs a month. 

That is a dramatic turnaround. 

So when they ask the question: Are 

we better off now than 4 years ago? Undeniably, we are better off. Undeniably, 

we are better off. We have gone from an 

economy shrinking at a rate of more 

than 8 percent to one growing at a rate 

of 2 percent. We have moved from a 

time when we were losing 800,000 jobs a 

month to a time when we are gaining 

about 200,000 jobs a month. We have 

gone from a circumstance in which the 

stock market was plunging to a circumstance in which the stock market 

has about doubled during the time of 

President Barack Obama. President 

Obama inherited two wars, a war on 

terror, a financial system that was collapsing, a financial system that had 

seen, under the previous President, the 

debt double; foreign holdings of U.S. 

debt were tripling; and this President 

has ended the slide and has us going 

back in the right direction, and with 

precious little help from the other side. 

I ask the American people before 

they cast their votes to think back to 

the final days of the Bush administration. I will never forget as long as I live 

being called to an emergency meeting 

in this building with the Secretary of 

the Treasury of the Bush administration, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the leaders, Republicans and 

Democrats, in the House and the Senate, and being told by the Secretary of 

the Treasury and the Bush administration and the Chairman of the Federal 

Reserve that if they did not act, they 

expected a financial collapse within 

days—a financial collapse within days. 

Those were in the final months of the 

Bush administration. That is what 

President Barack Obama inherited. 

The hard fact is that when our colleagues were in charge of everything— 

they had the House, the Senate, and 

they controlled the White House—they 

brought this country to the brink of financial collapse. That is a fact. Thank 

goodness this President, acting with 

this Congress, was able to draw us back 

from the brink, but we have a long way 

to go. We have a long way to go. It is 

going to take everybody working together to pull us out of the ditch completely. 

I have been part of major efforts for 

the last 5 years—bipartisan efforts—including Bowles-Simpson, the group of 

six; right now the group of six has been 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
September 20, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6487 

expanded to the group of eight. We 

have been working nonstop, hundreds 

of hours of discussions, on a bipartisan 

plan—four Democrats, four Republicans—to be enacted when we return, 

to get America back on track. That is 

what is required here. 

What we saw this morning from our 

colleagues on the other side is not the 

answer; it is the problem. The same old 

tired political gamesmanship is not 

going to cut it. What we desperately 

need is Republicans and Democrats 

working together to solve America’s 

problems. That is what we owe the 

American people. I very much hope 

when we return after this election that 

colleagues on both sides will be prepared to act in that spirit. 

I thank the Chair and I yield the 

floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I 

am very proud to follow Chairman CONRAD on the floor at this time. There is 

no person in the U.S. Senate who has 

worked harder on a budget compromise 

than Senator CONRAD has. There is no 

person who has put out the hand of bipartisan friendship and cooperation 

more than Senator CONRAD has. There 

is no person who has experienced more 

frustration of having that hand rejected and slapped away than Senator 

CONRAD has, and there is no person who 

has contained that frustration and continued to work forward and seek resolution in a dignified way than Senator 

CONRAD has. 

The Senate Republicans who took to 

the floor this morning to criticize 

Democrats for failing to pass a budget 

and deal with the impending sequester 

and tax cuts expiration failed to note 

that Senate Democrats have, in fact, 

passed a budget law and a bill that extends the tax cuts for 98 percent of 

Americans and 97 percent of small businesses. It is to protect the 2 percent 

and the 3 percent at the top of the income level that Republicans have refused to allow that bill protecting 98 

percent of Americans and 97 percent of 

small businesses from tax increases 

from going forward. 

Senate Democrats also support a balanced approach to replacing the sequester and reducing the deficit. What 

they didn’t talk much about but which 

is very important in this discussion is 

the Republican Ryan plan for the budget. 

This past May, 41 of our Senate Republican colleagues voted in favor of a 

radical transformation of the America 

we know. And the Republican-controlled House passed this budget—a 

budget that would devastate the middle class. The plan would end Medicare 

as we know it for future retirees. It 

would reopen the Medicare prescription 

drug doughnut hole that we closed for 

current retirees. It would slash investments that America’s children depend 

on, from Head Start to Federal college 

aid; and it would give the average million-dollar earner a new additional tax 

cut of, on average, $285,000 each in that 

million-dollar-plus earner cohort. 

The blockade here that is preventing 

moving beyond the sequester is by Republicans, particularly in the House, 

refusing to proceed in any reasonable 

way and, instead, demanding these 

damaging radical cuts for the middle 

class. 

Let’s look a little bit behind the curtain of campaign rhetoric and examine 

the harm—the personal real-life, realperson harm—that the Ryan budget 

would inflict on millions of middleclass families and retirees. 

In what is one of the extraordinary 

examples of ‘‘say one thing, but do another’’ rhetoric, Mr. RYAN, in his recent nomination acceptance speech, 

said that ‘‘the greatest of all responsibilities, is that of the strong to protect the weak. The truest measure of 

any society is how it treats those who 

cannot defend or care for themselves.’’ 

His budget, of course, visibly does exactly the opposite. It slashes taxes for 

the most well off, while decimating the 

programs on which struggling families 

and retirees rely. 

Do not take my word for it. Following the House passage of this Ryan 

budget, the Conference of Catholic 

Bishops said: 

Congress faces a difficult task to balance 

needs and resources and allocate burdens and 

sacrifices. 

Just solutions, however— 

The bishops said— 

must require shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating 

unnecessary military and other spending, 

and fairly addressing the long-term costs of 

health insurance and retirement programs. 

The House-passed budget resolution fails to 

meet these moral criteria. 

That is what the Conference of 

Catholic Bishops said. I will state 

again: ‘‘The House-passed budget resolution fails to meet these moral criteria.’’ 

That is not me speaking. That is the 

Conference of America’s Catholic 

Bishops. 

So let’s start our look behind the 

curtain, the curtain of the budget that 

fails this moral test—that Governor 

Romney said was ‘‘marvelous,’’ to use 

his word—let’s start with the budget’s 

tax theories. 

The Ryan budget would lower the top 

tax rates for both corporations and the 

highest earning individuals from 35 

percent to 25 percent. 

According to a Joint Economic Committee analysis, this would result in an 

average tax cut of $285,000 for Americans earning $1 million a year and 

more. At the same time, middle-income taxpayers making between $50,000 

and $100,000 would see their taxes go 

up—go up—by $1,300 because middleclass deductions are stripped away to 

pay for the high-end cuts. 

RYAN would also shift, at the corporate level, to a so-called territorial 

tax system, which would mean that 

companies that ship jobs and operations overseas would no longer have 

to pay any U.S. taxes on their overseas 

profits. 

Democrats have tried repeatedly to 

offer tax incentives to companies that 

bring jobs home to the United States. 

And nobody in this body has worked 

harder on bringing jobs home to the 

United States than the Presiding Officer, the Senator from Ohio, Mr. BROWN. 

Well, the Ryan plan would do exactly 

the opposite. It would tell big corporations that if they move their business 

operations overseas, they will never 

pay taxes on those again. The Ryan 

plan is really a jobs bill for China, for 

India, for Korea, not for America. It is 

an offshoring rewards act. 

In addition to those upside down tax 

changes that harm the middle class 

and raise their taxes to cut taxes for 

the highest earners in this country, in 

addition to its inducements to offshore 

more jobs instead of bringing them 

home, the Ryan budget would slash $2.9 

trillion from our health care programs. 

Beginning for workers who retire in 

2023, Mr. RYAN would convert Medicare 

to a voucher system, which, according 

to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, would ultimately add an estimated $6,000 in annual out-of-pocket 

costs that our retirees, our seniors 

would have to fork over. 

It is hard to imagine how future seniors living on a fixed Social Security 

income will be able to maintain health 

care coverage with these substantial 

increases in out-of-pocket costs that 

Mr. RYAN’s budget envisions. 

If the Republicans are saying they 

will not make the deal that spares us 

the sequester unless that deal puts an 

end to Medicare as we know it, holding 

Medicare hostage, well, it then takes 

some ‘‘brass’’—to use President Clinton’s phrase—to say: We are for the sequester. 

The Ryan budget does not stop there. 

It would repeal the Affordable Care Act 

and take away access to affordable 

health insurance for millions of Americans of all ages. And, of course, repealing the Affordable Care Act hits seniors again by reopening that dreaded 

Medicare prescription drug doughnut 

hole that we worked so hard to close 

and that is closed over time in the Affordable Care Act. 

In 2011 alone, the Affordable Care Act 

helped nearly 15,000 people in my home 

State of Rhode Island save an average 

of $554 by beginning to close the doughnut hole—millions of dollars out of the 

pockets of Rhode Island seniors. 

That made a big difference for people 

such as Olive, who wrote to me from 

Woonsocket. Her husband fell into the 

doughnut hole last July. Thanks to the 

new law, Olive and her husband received a discount on their prescription 

drugs. They saved $2,400. If the Ryan 

budget passed, they would be stuck 

paying that full cost again: $2,400 right 

out of the pockets of Olive and her husband and into the pockets of the drug 

companies. Gee, who would be for that 

around here? 

In fact, under the Ryan budget, the 

average senior would be stuck with 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE
S6488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 20, 2012 

$4,200 in additional out-of-pocket prescription costs—a huge transfer of 

wealth from America’s seniors to the 

big drug companies. 

Repealing the Affordable Care Act 

would not just harm seniors, it would 

also mean that insurance plans would 

no longer have to cover young adults 

up to age 26 on their parents’ plans. 

This moves over 3 million young Americans—just getting out of college, still 

looking for that first job that has 

health insurance coverage—back on to 

the rolls of the uninsured. 

The radical Ryan budget would also 

hurt young people by slashing Pell 

grants, making college less affordable. 

Students and graduates are already 

struggling to pay a record trillion dollars that Americans now owe in outstanding student loans, and the Ryan 

plan would force students to take on 

even greater debt burdens. 

On top of these specific cuts, the 

Ryan budget takes an additional $1 

trillion in unspecified discretionary 

spending cuts. Domestic discretionary 

funding is the money that is used to 

keep the government operating each 

year—FBI agents investigating cases, 

Border Patrol agents working our borders, doctors and nurses treating veterans at the VA, employees mailing 

out Social Security checks, and many 

other important programs and functions. 

It is already at its lowest level as a 

share of GDP since the 1950s. It is hard 

to imagine any Federal investment— 

whether it is education or housing or 

highways or law enforcement, you 

name it—not being jeopardized by such 

Draconian cuts. 

That is why President Reagan’s— 

President Reagan’s—former economic 

adviser said about this Ryan budget 

plan: 

The Ryan plan is a monstrosity. 

Ronald Reagan’s economic advisor 

said: ‘‘The Ryan plan is a monstrosity.’’ 

The rich would receive huge tax cuts while 

the social safety net would be shredded to 

pay for it. . . . It is less of a wish list than 

a fairy tale utterly disconnected from the 

real world, backed up by make-believe numbers and unreasonable assumptions. 

If that is what Ronald Reagan’s economic advisor thought about it, think 

what regular people might think about 

it. 

Ryan’s plan isn’t even an act of courage; 

it’s just pandering to the Tea Party. 

But that is what is being held hostage on this sequester. 

I hope when the election season is 

over, no matter who wins, that Republicans will work with us—without insisting on a monstrosity, without insisting on the end of Medicare—on a 

balanced and reasonable plan to reduce 

the deficit. With a record national 

debt, now is no time for more tax giveaways to billionaires, as Mr. RYAN proposes, but, rather, it is the time to ensure an America where everyone gets a 

fair shot, everyone pitches in their fair 

share, and we go forward as a country 

together, as we always have in our best 

days. 

I thank the Chair and I yield the 

floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior Senator from Washington is recognized. 

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I 

caught some of the dog-and-pony show 

that Republicans put on this morning 

on the floor of the Senate, and I 

thought it was pretty indicative of 

their approach to this entire Congress—all politics, no participation. 

Someone must have reminded them 

this morning that they are 47 days 

away from an election and that for the 

last 624 days of this Congress, they 

have done nothing but say no. 

But I am here to say that an hour of 

speeches on the Senate floor cannot 

erase an entire Congress of obstruction. In fact, the Republicans’ show 

this morning reminded me of a move I 

have seen many times before as a 

former preschool teacher and as a mom 

who has watched a lot of kids go 

through school. It reminded me how on 

the very last day of school before summer there was always one student who 

had not done their homework all year 

long, and on that last day they showed 

up on their best behavior, homework in 

hand, hoping to leave a good impression. They thought maybe this lastditch effort could help them avoid a 

bad grade. 

Unfortunately, it does not work that 

way. 

So let me assure Republicans of one 

thing: Their record of obstruction and 

their refusal to compromise will not go 

away at the eleventh hour. One-minute 

speeches on the day before they go to 

face voters cannot paper over 100 filibusters. It will not change the fact 

that almost 2 years ago the Senate minority leader revealed that his No. 1 

priority was—not working to get 

Americans back to work, it was not 

bringing our economy back from the 

brink, it was not ensuring that America remained a leader at home and 

abroad, no—to defeat President Obama, 

it was playing politics, just as we saw 

this morning. 

There has been, seemingly, no group 

of Americans—well, with the exception 

of millionaires and billionaires—who 

have been spared in the Republicans’ 

efforts to achieve their goals—not our 

teachers, not our college students, not 

our farmers, not construction workers, 

not first responders, not even our Nation’s veterans have been spared their 

efforts to destroy the work of this Congress. 

There was no better example of that 

than yesterday here on the floor of the 

U.S. Senate. The Veterans Jobs Corps 

bill that we brought to the floor included 12 provisions to help veterans 

find jobs. 

Eight of them. Let me repeat that. 

Eight of those provisions were Republican ideas. This bill was fully paid for. 

It was based on existing grant programs that are putting Americans to 

work. It would have allowed the veterans to serve their communities. It 

would have given unemployed veterans 

the self-esteem that a job provides. It 

would have allowed them to support 

their families and help ease that transition back home. 

That bill came at a time when one in 

four young veterans today is out of 

work. It came at a time when our military and veteran suicide rates are outpacing combat deaths and when more 

and more, as we all know, veterans are 

coming home today. The American Legion supported it. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America supported it. 

The problem was, it seemed, President 

Obama supported it. So we know from 

everything we have seen and attempted 

on the Senate floor, no matter how 

good or bad of an idea, no matter which 

struggling American would benefit, it 

seems that if the President supports it, 

you can pretty much guarantee Senate 

Republicans will not. 

That is the legacy the Senate Republicans are going to take home to voters, the legacy that when middle-class 

American families needed their help 

the most, they refused to compromise 

to get things done; that when Americans were hurting, they put politics before people; that they set a goal of not 

participating, and they followed 

through on that at every single turn. 

No amount of snappy speeches is going 

to change that. No last-minute appeals 

for leniency will change that record. 

In fact, it is ironic that this morning 

all of the Republican Senators showed 

up on the floor because for the last 2 

years, when the American people have 

needed them the most, they have been 

absent. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida. 

f 

THE MIDDLE EAST 

Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I come to 

the floor of the Senate to talk briefly 

about an amendment on which we may 

or may not get a vote. It is an amendment by my colleague, Senator PAUL. 

It really is directly related to the 

issues that have happened around the 

world in the last week and a half. We 

certainly watched in horror as our Ambassador, a fantastic and honorable 

American, along with three of his colleagues in the American consulate in 

Benghazi, was murdered last week. So I 

wanted to talk briefly about that because it really is an important moment 

in our foreign policy in the region. 

Let me begin by expressing our deep 

condolences for that loss. All the members of the families of those folks who 

have died over there, our hearts are 

with them, our prayers are with them. 

We thank them for their brave service 

to our country and to the cause of freedom. 

We have the right to be angry. The 

American people are angry and rightfully so. For years we have been investing our taxpayer dollars in aid to that 

region, and yet we turn on the television and we see these protests 


tjames on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with SENATE