January 6, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S135 

(2) The rule of per se illegality forbidding 

resale price maintenance promoted price 

competition and the practice of discounting 

all to the substantial benefit of consumers 

and the health of the economy. 

(3) Many economic studies showed that the 

rule against resale price maintenance led to 

lower prices and promoted consumer welfare. 

(4) Abandoning the rule against resale 

price maintenance will likely lead to higher 

prices paid by consumers and substantially 

harms the ability of discount retail stores to 

compete. For 40 years prior to 1975, Federal 

law permitted states to enact so-called ‘‘fair 

trade’’ laws allowing vertical price fixing. 

Studies conducted by the Department of Justice in the late 1960s indicated that retail 

prices were between 18 and 27 percent higher 

in states that allowed vertical price fixing 

than those that did not. Likewise, a 1983 

study by the Bureau of Economics of the 

Federal Trade Commission found that, in 

most cases, resale price maintenance increased the prices of products sold. 

(5) The 5–4 decision of the Supreme Court 

majority in Leegin incorrectly interpreted 

the Sherman Act and improperly disregarded 

96 years of antitrust law precedent in overturning the per se rule against resale price 

maintenance. 

(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act 

are— 

(1) to correct the Supreme Court’s mistaken interpretation of the Sherman Act in 

the Leegin decision; and 

(2) to restore the rule that agreements between manufacturers and retailers, distributors or wholesalers to set the minimum price 

below which the manufacturer’s product or 

service cannot be sold violates the Sherman 

Act. 

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON VERTICAL PRICE FIXING. 

(a) AMENDMENT TO THE SHERMAN ACT.—Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. 1) is 

amended by adding after the first sentence 

the following: ‘‘Any contract, combination, 

conspiracy or agreement setting a minimum 

price below which a product or service cannot be sold by a retailer, wholesaler, or distributor shall violate this Act.’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment 

made by subsection (a) shall take effect 90 

days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

By Mr. KOHL: 

S. 149. A bill to change the date for 

regularly scheduled Federal elections 

and establish polling place hours; to 

the Committee on Rules and Administration. 

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I 

rise to introduce the Weekend Voting 

Act. This legislation will change the 

day for Congressional and Presidential 

elections from the first Tuesday in November to the first weekend in November. This legislation is nearly identical 

to legislation that I first proposed in 

1997. 

We have recently completed the most 

serious business of our democracy—a 

Presidential election in which millions 

and millions of citizens demonstrated 

an enormous amount of enthusiasm. 

We all want every eligible voter to participate and cast a vote. But recent experience has shown us that unneeded 

obstacles are placed preventing citizens from exercising their franchise. 

The debacle of defective ballots and 

voting methods in Florida in the 2000 

election galvanized Congress into passing major election reform legislation. 

The Help America Vote Act, which was 

enacted into law in 2002, was an important step forward in establishing minimum standards for States in the administration of Federal elections and 

in providing funds to replace outdated 

voting systems and improve election 

administration. However, there is 

much that still needs to be done. 

With more and more voters seeking 

to cast their ballots on Election Day, 

we need to build on the movement 

which already exists to make it easier 

for Americans to cast their ballots by 

providing alternatives to voting on just 

one election day. Twenty-eight States, 

including my own State of Wisconsin, 

now permit any registered voter to 

vote by absentee ballot. These states 

constitute nearly half of the voting age 

citizens of the United States. Thirtyone States permit in-person early voting at election offices or at other satellite locations. The State of Oregon 

now conducts statewide elections completely by mail. These innovations are 

critical if we are to conduct fair elections for it has become unreasonable to 

expect that a Nation of 300 million people can line up at the same time and 

cast their ballots at the same time. If 

we continue to try to do so, we will encounter even more reports of broken 

machines and long lines in the rain and 

registration errors that create barriers 

to voting. 

That is why I have been a long-time 

advocate of moving our Federal election day from the first Tuesday after 

the first Monday in November to the 

first weekend in November. Holding 

our Federal elections on a weekend 

will create more opportunities for voters to cast their ballots and will help 

end the gridlock at the polling places 

which threaten to undermine our elections. 

Under this bill, polls would be open 

nationwide for a uniform period of time 

from 10 a.m. Saturday eastern time to 

6 p.m. Sunday eastern time. Polls in all 

time zones would in the 48 contiguous 

states also open and close at this time. 

Election officials would be permitted 

to close polls during the overnight 

hours if they determine it would be inefficient to keep them open. Because 

the polls would be open on both Saturday and Sunday, they also would not 

interfere with religious observances. 

Keeping polls open the same hours 

across the continental United States, 

also addresses the challenge of keeping 

results on one side of the country, or 

even a state, from influencing voting in 

places where polls are still open. Moving elections to the weekend will expand the pool of buildings available for 

polling stations and people available to 

work at the polls, addressing the critical shortage of poll workers. 

Most important, weekend voting has 

the potential to increase voter turnout 

by giving all voters ample opportunity 

to get to the polls without creating a 

national holiday. There is already evidence that holding elections on a nonworking day can increase voter turnout. In one survey of 44 democracies, 29 

held elections on holidays or weekends 

and in all these cases voter turnout 

surpassed our country’s voter participation rates. 

In 2001, the National Commission on 

Federal Election Reform recommended 

that we move our Federal election day 

to a national holiday, in particular 

Veterans Day. As expected, the proposal was not well received among veterans and I do not endorse such a 

move, but I share the Commission’s 

goal of moving election day to a nonworking day. 

Since the mid 19th century, election 

day has been on the first Tuesday of 

November. Ironically, this date was selected because it was convenient for 

voters. Tuesdays were traditionally 

court day, and land owning voters were 

often coming to town anyway. 

Just as the original selection of our 

national voting day was done for voter 

convenience, we must adapt to the 

changes in our society to make voting 

easier for the regular family. We have 

outgrown our Tuesday voting day tradition, a tradition better left behind to 

a bygone horse and buggy era. In today’s America, 60 percent of all households have two working adults. Since 

most polls in the United States are 

open only 12 hours on a Tuesday, generally from 7 a.m. to 7 or 8 p.m., voters 

often have only one or two hours to 

vote. As we’ve seen in recent elections, 

long lines in many polling places have 

kept some voters waiting much longer 

than one or two hours. If voters have 

children, and are dropping them off at 

day care, or if they have a long work 

commute, there is just not enough 

time in a workday to vote. 

With long lines and chaotic polling 

places becoming the unacceptable 

norm in many communities, we have 

an obligation to reform how our Nation 

votes. If we are to grant all Americans 

an equal opportunity to participate in 

the electoral process, and to elect our 

representatives in this great democracy, then we must be willing to reexamine all aspects of voting in America. 

Changing our election day to a weekend may seem like a change of great 

magnitude. Given the stakes—the integrity of future elections and full participation by as many Americans as 

possible—I hope my colleagues will recognize it as a commonsense proposal 

whose time has come. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed 

in the RECORD. 

There being no objection, the text of 

the bill was ordered to be printed in 

the RECORD, as follows: 

S. 149 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Weekend 

Voting Act’’. 

SEC. 2. CHANGE IN CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION 

DAY TO SATURDAY AND SUNDAY. 

Section 25 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 

7) is amended to read as follows: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with SENATE
S136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 6, 2009 

‘‘SEC. 25. The first Saturday and Sunday 

after the first Friday in November, in every 

even numbered year, are established as the 

days for the election, in each of the States 

and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress 

commencing on the 3d day of January thereafter.’’. 

SEC. 3. CHANGE IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 

DAY TO SATURDAY AND SUNDAY. 

Section 1 of title 3, United States Code, is 

amended by striking ‘‘Tuesday next after the 

first Monday’’ and inserting ‘‘first Saturday 

and Sunday after the first Friday’’. 

SEC. 4. POLLING PLACE HOURS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.— 

(1) PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION.— 

Chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code, is 

amended— 

(A) by redesignating section 1 as section 

1A; and 

(B) by inserting before section 1A the following: 

‘‘§ 1. Polling place hours 

‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

‘‘(1) CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.—The 

term ‘continental United States’ means a 

State (other than Alaska and Hawaii) and 

the District of Columbia. 

‘‘(2) PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION.—The 

term ‘Presidential general election’ means 

the election for electors of President and 

Vice President. 

‘‘(b) POLLING PLACE HOURS.— 

‘‘(1) POLLING PLACES IN THE CONTINENTAL

UNITED STATES.—Each polling place in the 

continental United States shall be open, 

with respect to a Presidential general election, beginning on Saturday at 10:00 a.m. 

eastern standard time and ending on Sunday 

at 6:00 p.m. eastern standard time. 

‘‘(2) POLLING PLACES OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.—Each polling place 

not located in the continental United States 

shall be open, with respect to a Presidential 

general election, beginning on Saturday at 

10:00 a.m. local time and ending on Sunday 

at 6:00 p.m. local time. 

‘‘(3) EARLY CLOSING.—A polling place may 

close between the hours of 10:00 p.m. local 

time on Saturday and 6:00 a.m. local time on 

Sunday as provided by the law of the State 

in which the polling place is located.’’. 

(2) CONGRESSIONAL GENERAL ELECTION.— 

Section 25 of the Revised Statutes of the 

United States (2 U.S.C. 7) is amended— 

(A) by redesignating section 25 as section 

25A; and 

(B) by inserting before section 25A the following: 

‘‘SEC. 25. POLLING PLACE HOURS. 

‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

‘‘(1) CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.—The 

term ‘continental United States’ means a 

State (other than Alaska and Hawaii) and 

the District of Columbia. 

‘‘(2) CONGRESSIONAL GENERAL ELECTION.— 

The term ‘congressional general election’ 

means the general election for the office of 

Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or 

Resident Commissioner to, the Congress. 

‘‘(b) POLLING PLACE HOURS.— 

‘‘(1) POLLING PLACES INSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.—Each polling place 

in the continental United States shall be 

open, with respect to a congressional general 

election, beginning on Saturday at 10:00 a.m. 

eastern standard time and ending on Sunday 

at 6:00 p.m. eastern standard time. 

‘‘(2) POLLING PLACES OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.—Each polling place 

not located in the continental United States 

shall be open, with respect to a congressional 

general election, beginning on Saturday at 

10:00 a.m. local time and ending on Sunday 

at 6:00 p.m. local time. 

‘‘(3) EARLY CLOSING.—A polling place may 

close between the hours of 10:00 p.m. local 

time on Saturday and 6:00 a.m. local time on 

Sunday as provided by the law of the State 

in which the polling place is located.’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

(1) The table of sections for chapter 1 of 

title 3, United States Code, is amended by 

striking the item relating to section 1 and 

inserting the following: 

‘‘1. Polling place hours. 

‘‘1A. Time of appointing electors.’’. 

(2) Sections 871(b) and 1751(f) of title 18, 

United States Code, are each amended by 

striking ‘‘title 3, United States Code, sections 1 and 2’’ and inserting ‘‘sections 1A and 

2 of title 3’’. 

By Mr. LEAHY: 

S. 150. A bill to provide Federal assistance to States for rural law enforcement and for other purposes; to 

the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am 

pleased today to introduce the Rural 

Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 

2009, a bill designed to help rural communities deal with growing crime problems that threaten to become significantly worse as a result of the devastating economic crisis we face. 

Congress and the new administration 

are beginning this session focused on 

passing a stimulus bill that will provide hundreds of billions of dollars to 

restart our economy, create jobs, and 

reverse the economic downturn inherited from the Bush administration. The 

Bush administration has already provided hundreds of billions of dollars to 

rescue the financial industry, and 

President Bush released billions more 

for assistance to the auto industry. Despite our legislative efforts to protect 

jobs and the economy as a whole, little 

has been done to help the millions of 

people in rural America, who have been 

hit as hard as anyone by the devastating effects of this recession. 

We must help rural communities stay 

safe during this economic downturn. 

Rural areas, which lack the crime prevention and law enforcement resources 

often available in larger communities, 

have a particular need for assistance to 

combat the worsening drug and crime 

problems that threaten the well-being 

of our small cities and towns and, most 

particularly, our young people. The 

Rural Law Enforcement Assistance Act 

of 2009 will provide just this kind of 

help. 

This bill will reauthorize a rural law 

enforcement assistance program first 

passed by Congress in the early 1990s. 

Like so many valuable programs that 

help local law enforcement and crime 

prevention, funding for this program 

was allowed to lapse under the Bush 

administration, despite its effectiveness in contributing to the record drop 

in crime in the late 1990s. 

The program would authorize $75 million a year over the next 5 years in new 

Byrne grant funds for State and local 

law enforcement, specifically for rural 

States and rural areas within larger 

States. This support would be used to 

hire police officers, purchase necessary 

police equipment, and to promote the 

use of task forces and collaborative efforts with Federal law enforcement. 

Just as important, these funds would 

also be used for prevention and treatment programs in rural communities; 

programs that are necessary to combat 

crime and are too often the first programs cut in an economic downturn. 

This bill also authorizes $2 million a 

year over 5 years for specialized training for rural law enforcement officers, 

since training is another area often cut 

in hard times. This bill will immediately help cash-strapped rural communities with the law enforcement assistance they desperately need. 

In December, the Senate Judiciary 

Committee traveled to St. Albans, 

Vermont, to hear from the people of 

that resilient community about the 

growing problem of drug-related crime 

in rural America, and about the innovative steps they are taking to combat 

that scourge. The introduction of this 

bill is a step forward to apply the lessons learned in that hearing and in previous crime hearings in Vermont and 

elsewhere. 

Crime is not just a big city issue. As 

we heard in St. Albans last month, and 

at a hearing in Rutland, Vermont, earlier last year, the drugs and violence so 

long seen largely in urban areas now 

plague even our most rural and remote 

communities, as well. As the world 

grows smaller with better transportation and faster communication, so do 

our shared problems. Rural communities also face the added burden of 

fighting these crime problems without 

the sophisticated task forces and specialized squads so common in big cities 

and metropolitan areas. In fact, too 

many rural communities, whether in 

Vermont or other rural States, don’t 

have the money for a local police force 

at all, and rely almost exclusively on 

the state police or other state-wide 

agencies for even basic police services. 

In this environment, we must do more 

to provide assistance to those rural 

communities most at risk and hardest 

hit by the economic crisis. 

Unfortunately, for the last 8 years, 

throughout the country, State and 

local law enforcement agencies have 

been stretched thin as they shoulder 

both traditional crime-fighting duties 

and new homeland security demands. 

They have faced continuous cuts in 

Federal funding during the Bush years, 

and time and time again, our State and 

local law enforcement officers have 

been unable to fill vacancies and get 

the equipment they need. 

This trend is unacceptable, and that 

is why we must restore funding for 

rural law enforcement that proved so 

successful in 1990s, when crime fell to 

record lows in rural and urban areas 

alike. 

As a former prosecutor, I have always advocated vigorous enforcement 

and punishment of those who commit 

serious crimes. But I also know that 

punishment alone will not solve the 

problems of drugs and violence in our 

rural communities. Police chiefs from 

Vermont and across the country have 

told me that we cannot arrest our way 

out of this problem. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with SENATE