[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 24, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5973-S5974]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                PROGRAM

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have a very busy schedule this week. We 
have some work we need to complete. We have, of course, FISA, the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act; we have the supplemental 
appropriations bill; we have the tax extenders; we have Medicare we 
need to complete; and, of course, we are on housing today. Regarding 
that, following any remarks I make and those of the Republican leader, 
we will return to the House message to accompany H.R. 3221, the housing 
reform legislation. There will be up to an hour of debate equally 
divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees prior 
to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Dodd-Shelby substitute 
with respect to the housing reform bill. Senators have until 10:30 a.m. 
today to file amendments to the Dodd-Shelby substitute.
  By virtue of the previous order, the Senate will be in recess from 
12:30 until 2:15 today for our weekly business luncheons.
  Mr. President, let me say a couple of other things. We are going to 
do a number of judges this afternoon, the exact number of which we 
don't have worked out just yet, but we are going to do three circuit 
court judges and some district court judges. I have to confer with 
Senator Leahy on the number of district court judges.
  I would also say to my friend the distinguished Republican leader 
that I spoke to Senator Feingold this morning regarding the FEC 
nominations, and it appears very clear we should be able to do them 
today. In regard to that, I wish to underscore my desire--our desire--
to constitute the Federal Election Commission so it is working.
  Just a brief history, Mr. President. Before Memorial Day, there were 
four FEC nominations pending--two Republicans, two Democrats. At that 
time, we offered to confirm those nominees by unanimous consent. The 
Republicans did not take me up on that offer. There would have been 
five FEC Commissioners today had that been done. In fact, it would have 
been prior to that recess. There would have been enough to conduct all 
official business. There was a thought, I assume, on the part of the 
Republicans that they wanted a full six, and I understand that. So they 
rejected the offer I made. They wanted to wait until a replacement for 
the failed nomination of Hans von Spakovsky was received in the Senate. 
I told the Republicans in December that von Spakovsky would not be 
approved by this body. Someone should have been cleared to replace him 
long before now. Nonetheless, I pledged to swiftly move that new 
nominee, and we have done that. I implored my Republican colleagues to 
confirm the four who were ready to go so there would be five to restore 
the agency so it would be workable. That offer was not accepted. The 
new nominee has now been nominated, and we have waived both the hearing 
and the markup to speed this up. That makes good

[[Page S5974]]

on the pledge we made to swiftly review the nominee, and we did that, 
again without a hearing and without a markup.
  As I discussed on Friday, Senator Feingold--I didn't mention his name 
at the time, but it is out in the press since then--would like to meet 
with each of the nominees. That will be completed today. These meetings 
are important to the Senator. He has the right to do that. I certainly 
compliment him for caring so much. Four of the five FEC nominations now 
pending are relatively new to the Senate, and it is certainly within 
Senator Feingold's right to speak with them prior to their 
confirmation. This is not unusual. So I look forward to completing 
that, unless something comes up that I don't understand, and we should 
be able to do that today. It is very important.
  There has been some concern raised by my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle that the Democrats have set out to delay this FEC being 
reconstituted so that the Democratic National Committee's lawsuit 
against Senator McCain may be heard in the court. The DNC sued McCain, 
alleging that he violated campaign finance laws in the treatment of his 
primary campaign funding. The court dismissed that suit without 
prejudice, saying the DNC needed to give the FEC 120 days to act on its 
complaint before coming to court. The 120 days expires today, June 24.
  There is simply no truth to the argument that we are playing this 
game with the FEC. Democrats have been trying to get the FEC running 
since it went dark in December. Repeatedly, the Republicans have 
objected to consent request after consent request. This lawsuit of the 
DNC's has been out there many months. The decision for setting the 
deadline for FEC action was made prior to our Memorial Day recess, and 
the offer to confirm the pending nominations was made before that time.
  What this means is that Democrats offered to confirm the four pending 
FEC nominees--which would have stopped the DNC suit--before Memorial 
Day. If we were trying to help the DNC's suit, would we have made that 
offer? I don't think so. Would we offer to waive the hearing and the 
markup for both Republican nominees so it would be moved quickly? The 
answer would be no. Of course we wouldn't have done that, Mr. 
President. As I have told my colleagues, Democrats want a functional 
agency as soon as possible. That could have happened in May. It could 
happen today. We want to do everything we can to reconstitute the FEC. 
It is extremely important to do that.
  I have mentioned the matters we need to complete, and, of course, the 
one thing I didn't mention was the FAA extension. I asked unanimous 
consent to do that, and that was objected to yesterday by my friend 
Senator Kyl on behalf of Senator DeMint. I hope we can get that done. 
The House is going to pass that today as a temporary extension.
  We also are going to bring before the body, within the next 24 hours, 
the PEPFAR legislation. What is that? It is the AIDS legislation that 
the President is in favor of and which we have been trying to move. It 
has been held up on the other side by a Senator or two, and we hope we 
can complete that. Again, I will ask unanimous consent that be passed 
today. It is my understanding, having spoken with Senator Enzi, that he 
and Senator Biden have worked something out on that, and hopefully the 
Senator on the other side who is objecting to this will no longer 
object to it.

                          ____________________