[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 195 (Saturday, December 19, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13472-S13477]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the House message with respect to 
H.R. 3326, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       House message to accompany H.R. 3326, a bill making 
     appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the 
     amendment of the Senate to the bill.
       Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the 
     amendment of the Senate with amendment No. 3248 (to the House 
     amendment to the Senate amendment), to change the enactment 
     date.
       Reid amendment No. 3252 (to Reid amendment No. 3248), to 
     change the enactment date.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the time 
until 7:20 a.m. shall be equally divided and controlled between the two 
leaders or their designees, with the final 10 minutes reserved for the 
two leaders, and with the final 5 minutes controlled by the majority 
leader.
  The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding the time until 7:10 
is equally divided and controlled; is that right?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I designate the majority whip, the Senator 
from Illinois, Dick Durbin, to have control of that 10 minutes on our 
side.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
  The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, how much time do we have on this side?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Ten minutes.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, please let me know when 1 minute 
remains.
  Mr. President, we are here on this early Saturday morning, as we lead 
up to Christmas Day, to finish work on the Defense appropriations bill. 
But the country knows the focus of our attention, the reason we are 
here, is because of the health care debate. We are in our 20th 
consecutive day of considering health care, and we still do not have a 
final bill. In other words, we do not yet know what we are voting on, 
how much it costs, or how it affects the American people.
  On October 6, 2009, eight Democratic Senators wrote the majority 
leader a letter which expressed the view also of all 40 Republican 
Senators, and it said what ought to be obvious: that when debating even 
a minor bill, but certainly a major bill of this magnitude, the 
``public's participation in this process''--so the letter went--``is 
critical to our overall success of creating a bill that lowers health 
care costs and offers access to quality and affordable health care for 
all Americans.''
  The letter from the eight Democratic Senators continues:

       Every step of the process needs to be transparent, and 
     information regarding the bill needs to be readily available 
     to our constituents before the Senate starts to vote on 
     legislation that will affect the lives of every American.

  The letter continues:

       The legislative text and complete budget scores from the 
     Congressional Budget Office of the health care legislation 
     considered on the Senate floor should be made available on a 
     website the public can access for at least 72 hours prior to 
     the first vote to proceed to the legislation. Likewise, the 
     legislative text and complete CBO scores of the health care 
     legislation as amended should be made available to the public 
     for 72 hours prior to the vote on final passage of the bill 
     in the Senate. Further, the legislative text of all 
     amendments filed and offered for debate on the Senate floor 
     should be posted on a public website prior to beginning 
     debate on the amendment on the Senate floor. Lastly, upon a 
     final agreement between the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate, a formal conference report detailing the agreement 
     and complete CBO scores of the agreement should be made 
     available to the public for 72 hours prior to the vote on 
     final passage of the conference report in the Senate.

  Mr. President, that is wise advice from Senator Lincoln, Senator 
Bayh, Senator Landrieu, Senator Lieberman, Senator McCaskill, Senator 
Nelson, Senator Pryor, and Senator Webb. What they are saying is, 
before we vote on a health care bill that affects nearly every 1 of all 
300 million Americans we ought to have 72 hours to read the bill and 
know what it costs. We know the current version, when fully 
implemented, will spend $2.5 trillion, which the Chief Actuary of the 
government says insofar as we know it will increase the cost of health 
care rather than reduce it. We know that the version we have seen so 
far will take $1 trillion out of Medicare when the bill is fully 
implemented and not use it to strengthen Medicare--which is becoming 
insolvent in the years 2015 to 2017, according to the trustees of 
Medicare--but instead would spend that money on some other program. We 
know it would--as David Brooks in a New York Times column said 
yesterday--create a huge tax, $1.42 trillion in the second decade of 
its operation to help pay for this, which the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office has said would inevitably be passed along 
to consumers and cause premium costs to go up, not down. And we know it 
would expand Medicaid, the other large government program we already 
have for low-income Americans, sending a bill of $25 billion to the 
States that has been roundly denounced by almost every Governor in the 
country, Democratic and Republican.
  Because at a time when the States are struggling more than they have 
since the Great Depression with their own budgets, when they cannot 
print money, when they have to balance their budgets, we are expanding 
health care and sending them a huge bill to help pay for it. This 
inevitably will force States to raise taxes, raise college tuition; 
and, in my State, the Governor is considering releasing up to 4,000 
nonviolent offenders from the prisons as a result of some of the 
budgetary pressures that are on him.
  So that is what we do know about the bill. But we do not have the 
final version of the bill. Yet it is said we should vote on this by 
Christmas when, in fact, most of the provisions of the bill do not take 
effect until 2014. That is 4 years from now. Only a few provisions 
start right away. Mr. President, $73 billion in taxes start right away. 
Medicare cuts start right away. Mandates start right away. A few 
benefits start right away.
  But, basically, the thrust of this massive legislation that affects 
17 percent of our economy does not take effect for 4 years. So if we do 
not have the bill, and if most of the legislation does not take effect 
for 4 more years, then why are we spending this time staying up all 
night, rushing to enact the bill by Christmas?
  I believe it is because the majority knows the longer the public sees 
the bill, the more they know about it, the less they will like it, and 
they want to try to pass it before people know what is in it. 
Otherwise, we would already have the bill. Otherwise, we would be 
taking the time we took with the farm bill, with the Education bill, 
with the Energy bill, with other major legislation that takes 5, 6, 8, 
10 weeks. Otherwise, we would have worked across party lines and had 
many different kinds of views. So this is a rush.
  There has been a lot of talk about making history on health care. The 
problem is, there are different kinds of history. In this case, the 
Democratic majority seems to be determined to pursue a political 
kamikaze mission toward an historic mistake. If it succeeds, the 
results will be disastrous for the Democrats in 2010, I would predict. 
But, unfortunately, it will be a bigger disaster for our country.

[[Page S13473]]

  Now, this will not be Congress's first historic mistake. The Smoot-
Hawley tariff of 1930 ``to buy American'' sounded pretty good. It 
sounded like a good way to protect jobs by keeping foreign products 
out. But historians agree it was an historic mistake, setting off 
retaliatory waves, tariffs, and making the Great Depression worse.
  The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 sounded good too. The idea was, 
let's protect the country from enemies within our midst, mostly French 
then. But that turned out to be an historic mistake encouraging more 
protests and offending our traditions of free speech.
  In 1969, the Congress found 155 Americans who were not paying taxes 
and said: Let's have a millionaires tax. That sounded good too. It 
turned out to be another historic mistake. Last year, it caught 28 
million Americans before we rushed to patch it, to fix it for a year.
  More recently, there was the Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 to 
help seniors deal with financial losses. The trouble is, seniors 
resented paying for it, and angry crowds surrounded the chairman of the 
House Ways and Means Committee in his home district. Congress repealed 
that mistake, and the leader of those angry seniors is now a 
Congresswoman from Illinois.
  Then there was the luxury tax on boats in 1991. That sounded good: We 
are going to get all those people who have boats that cost more than 
$100,000. The trouble was, it raised about half the revenue projected, 
and it nearly sank the boat industry, putting 7,600 people out of work. 
A change in Congress repealed that one too. Rather than make history of 
this sort, Congress should learn from history. We should take Governor 
Schwarzenegger's advice this week.
  He suggested:

       So I would say, be very careful to the federal overnment 
     before you go to bed with all this. Let's rethink it. There's 
     no rush from one second to the next. Let's take another week 
     or two and come up with the right package.

  The Governor, of course, was concerned about the Medicaid expansion 
costs in his State--$3 billion for California. He said:

       [The] last thing we need is another $3 billion of [state] 
     spending when we already have a $20 billion deficit.

  So why the rush? We do not have the bill. We have plenty of time to 
deal with this. Most of it does not take effect for 4 more years. And 
what if in trying to fix everything all at once we get it wrong--will 
Congress be rushing back to fix health care again? Because if Congress 
makes another historic mistake, it will not be nearly as easy to fix as 
repealing a boat tax.
  I thank the Acting President pro tempore, and I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The assistant majority leader is 
recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, we met before 7 a.m. on this Saturday 
morning, and I am reminded of the famous quote:

       Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays 
     these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed 
     rounds.

  A snowstorm has struck Washington, DC. Yet 100 Members of the Senate 
will be called on in less than half an hour to be on the floor of the 
Senate to vote at this early morning hour. And for any who are hale and 
hearty and up watching or following this debate, the obvious question 
is, why? Why is the Senate in? What is it doing?
  Well, we are in because the Republican Senators are filibustering the 
Department of Defense appropriations bill. This is the money for our 
troops, for our military, for their families, for their health care, 
for their equipment, for their paychecks. It is a bill which usually 
passes with a few patriotic speeches and little controversy. Yet the 
Republicans have held us now. This is the third day on the floor 
because they are filibustering the Department of Defense appropriations 
bill.
  You might ask yourself: What is happening? Has the Republican Party 
turned on America's military? I do not think so. I think, in fact, they 
support America's military. But they are willing to use them and use 
their spending bill as part of their parliamentary procedure.
  We know what this is all about. It is about delaying the business of 
the Senate and not just health care. They want to delay everything in 
the Senate. That is their strategy. That is what they have to offer to 
the American people. Not ideas, not alternatives, not solutions, but 
delay.
  I suppose they think that is a winning way. The Senator from 
Tennessee just predicted in the next election the American people will 
rally behind this strategy of theirs of doing nothing, of failing to 
respond to the challenges facing America. I see it otherwise. I have 
this simple analysis of why I am here. The people of Illinois sent me 
here to try to do a good job for them and make some good judgments on 
the Senate floor, but basically to help improve their lives. If you do 
nothing, if you deny, if you filibuster, if that is all you do, you 
don't have much to show for it at the end of the day.
  The record is pretty clear. We have been debating health care reform 
for more than 2 weeks, about 19 or 20 days of debate, on a 2,000-page 
bill. The Senator from Tennessee complains: Well, we just don't know 
what is in this bill. This bill has been posted on the Republican 
Senate Web site for more than 2 weeks. I think they know what is in it.
  Do you know how many amendments they came up with to change the 
language of this bill in the span of 20 days? How many bright, creative 
Republican ideas came up to change this bill in 20 days? Four, four 
amendments in 20 days. The combined wisdom of the Republican Senate 
caucus came up with four amendments to this bill of 2,000 pages in 20 
days and six different motions to send the bill back to committee and 
stop talking about it.
  Now the Senator tells us: We just need more time.
  You have had time. You have had plenty of time. You have had time to 
offer your substitute. We have been waiting on the Republicans to come 
forward, if they think America's health care system could be improved, 
with their ideas. The Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Coburn, has said he 
has a plan. He never offered it. I don't know if he tried to offer it, 
if the Republican leadership turned him down. He never offered it.
  Senator Grassley from Iowa said on the Senate floor: We have a plan.
  Where is this secret plan? Where is the Republican plan for reforming 
health care? Carefully hidden, secreted away in a cloakroom? Is it 
under a snowdrift in a parking lot? What have you done with your plan? 
You don't have one. If you go to the Republican Senate Web site and 
look for health care reform, you will find it. You will find the 
Democratic bill because, frankly, they have nothing to offer.
  Now comes the Senator from Tennessee and he says stop what we are 
doing. Let's stop right now. Our plan is to slow down, filibuster the 
Defense appropriations bill, and then slow down everything that comes 
after it in the hope that we will stop and do nothing. He argues that 
is good for the American people. Let me tell my colleagues what the 
Senator from Tennessee will risk for the American people if he has his 
way.
  We know immediately--immediately--the doughnut hole in the Medicare 
prescription Part D for seniors is going to be filled across America. 
What it means is seniors who have a gap in insurance coverage for 
prescription drugs will have that filled. Eight million seniors in 2007 
hit that doughnut hole because they had medical bills more expensive 
than what Medicare covered. We are going to fill that doughnut hole. By 
2010, seniors across America, immediately, will see the benefit.
  The Senator from Tennessee says: This bill will destroy Medicare. Not 
quite true. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office says this bill 
will put Medicare on sound footing. Medicare untouched will go broke in 
about 8 years. Medicare, because of this bill, will have another 10 
years of sound financial footing--exactly the opposite of what has been 
stated on the floor of the Senate.
  How many parents get worried because their kids are in college and 
they are on their family health care plan and they are about to 
graduate and they wonder if they are going to have health insurance. 
Well, in most places across America, most policies, by age 24 your 
dependent child is no longer covered by your family plan. Immediately, 
with the passage of this bill, we are going to extend coverage, 
providing immediate help for 13 million to

[[Page S13474]]

14 million young Americans no longer in college and not covered by 
their own employment insurance, not eligible for their parents' 
coverage. They are going to have coverage under this plan.
  Only 6 months after the enactment of this bill, insurers will be 
required to permit children to stay on family policies until age 26, in 
the year 2010. So when the Senator from Tennessee says nothing happens 
until 2014 except collecting taxes, he is mistaken. That happens. 
It happens immediately.

  Free prevention services are going to be available as well--
prevention services that will help a lot of people avoid serious 
illness. Today, many Americans pay 20 percent of the cost of many 
preventive services. Millions have no access to them at all. The Senate 
bill will require coverage of prevention and wellness benefits. For 
seniors, the Senate bill is going to provide free annual wellness 
checkups, immediately.
  There is insurance reform as well. The Senator from Tennessee keeps 
overlooking this, and he shouldn't. One of the biggest ripoffs for 
American consumers are health insurance companies that turn you down 
because of preexisting conditions and a variety of other reasons they 
find not to cover you. This Senate bill will give Americans the 
opportunity to focus on healthy living, will put patients first. It 
will eliminate abuses by insurance companies. It immediately bans 
rescissions, the practice where health insurance companies cancel your 
policy. Six months after enactment in 2010, insurers are prohibited 
from imposing lifetime limits on benefits. These are immediate 
benefits.
  We know what the Republican playbook is because they gave it to us--
maybe not intentionally. But early on, 8 months ago, the Republican 
strategist Frank Luntz sent out a memo before the bill was even written 
and said: Here is how we can defeat health care reform. That suggests 
to me there was never a good-faith effort at the top in the Republican 
Party to even consider health care reform. Frank Luntz went through all 
the things to defeat health care reform even before the bill was 
introduced, talking about rationing and denial and talking about 
government programs and so forth and so on--buzz words. Then, the 
current inspiration of the Republican National Party, Michael Steele, 
the Republican National Committee chairman, a man I am sure the Senator 
from Tennessee holds in the highest esteem, recently shared with us the 
following in a memo. Chairman Steele wrote:

       I urge everyone to spend every bit of capital and energy 
     you have to stop this health care reform. The Democrats have 
     accused us of trying to delay, stall, slow down, and stop 
     this bill. They are right.

  Chairman Steele says, his words: ``Delay, stall, slow down, and 
stop.'' And for 8 months that has been the Republican strategy.
  Unfortunately, that strategy now applies to the Department of Defense 
appropriations bill which we will vote on this morning. One hundred 
Senators will trek through the snow and come in early this morning to 
vote on a bill which we should all support unanimously. They will try 
parliamentary efforts to stop the bill, derail the bill, even though 
the continuing resolution expired last night.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. DURBIN. I hope we can gather enough bipartisan support for our 
troops this morning, have a cup of coffee, and go home to our families 
soon to celebrate the holiday season.
  I reserve the remainder of my time and yield the floor.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 5 of the 10 
minutes I have be reserved for the Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. President, I withdraw that request.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas is 
recognized.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I will be using some of the leader's 
time, and if the leader decides to step in, all he has to do is signal.
  I wish to, first of all, say how much I appreciate the leader, 
Senator McConnell, the Republican leader for the heroic efforts he has 
made in the last few weeks to try to assure that the American people 
know what is in the bill that will be put before us very soon. Now, I 
say put before us very soon because we don't know what the substitute 
bill is that has been worked on for the last few days. We haven't seen 
it yet. I think that brings up an important point.
  I am hoping the distinguished majority leader, who is also on the 
floor, will allow America, as well as Senators certainly, to see the 
managers' amendment which includes all of the changes in the bill that 
is before us before we are forced to vote on this monumental piece of 
legislation.
  When I am talking to my constituents back home, my friends, the 
people who just come up to me on an airplane, they say: What are you 
doing? Why is this being rushed through when it is one-sixth of our 
economy, when it is quality of life for every American, when we are 
talking about jobs in the private sector that will be sacrificed for a 
big government takeover, more government jobs, fewer private sector 
jobs. People are saying: What are you doing?
  When I was talking about the taxes that are going to take effect in 2 
weeks, before the bill takes effect 4 years from now, people were 
surprised. Even very informed people who read all the major newspapers, 
they said: What? The taxes are going to take effect 4 years before the 
bill takes effect? I mean, what are you all doing? Has Congress ever 
done that before?

  I couldn't remember a time when Congress would pass taxes for 4 
years, purporting to put together a new program, and then all of a 
sudden, after 4 years, the program would start but the taxes have 
accumulated, and it is going to be $75 billion that will have 
accumulated before any implementation of the bill that is before us.
  So I have heard the criticism on the floor that Republicans are 
trying to slow this down, that they are trying to stop this bill. It is 
very important that this health care bill be slowed down so that not 
only the Senate but the people of America can look at this and 
determine how it affects them personally, so they can look at what the 
proposed options are going to be. They can look at the taxes. They can 
look at the mandates. They can look at the small business requirements 
that could actually cost jobs.
  Now, one might say: Well, if it costs a few jobs, maybe there is a 
greater good. We are in the toughest recession we have been in since 
the 1940s, since World War II. We are in the toughest recession we have 
been in, and here we are maybe stopping job increases or maybe adding 
to the unemployment figures which are the highest in 40 years in our 
country.
  So I know the American people are saying: Why? Why push this through? 
Why push it through so fast when we are talking about maybe losing jobs 
in an economic downturn, when people are already hurting. Even the 
people who are employed are afraid that maybe they are going to be laid 
off because times seem to be getting tougher out there. We hear that 
the buying season, the Christmas season, is not going as well as 
retailers have come to expect to try to make their yearly requirements 
to make their profits.
  What does that mean? If we do not make those profits, then people are 
not buying and people are not going to be hired and maybe people are 
going to be laid off.
  I do not think this is the time to be talking about losing jobs, 
something that is going to increase the burden and the mandate and the 
taxes on our business.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I strongly support the Defense 
appropriations conference report for 2010, H.R. 3326. This bill 
provides funding for our troops in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. I 
thank the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Appropriations 
Committee, Senators Inouye and Cochran, as well as other committee 
members, for their efforts to develop this vital legislation.
  This bill keeps our commitments to our troops and military families. 
The bill provides a 3.4-percent military pay raise, $29.2 billion for 
the Defense Health Program, including $120 million for traumatic brain 
injury and psychological health research. The measure also includes 
$472 million for family advocacy programs which include quality 
childcare, job training for spouses, and expanded counseling for 
families experiencing stress due to deployments.

[[Page S13475]]

  In order for our military to continue to perform at its best, we must 
continue to provide ample funds for training and readiness accounts. 
This bill provides $154 billion to increase the readiness and training 
of our troops. Funding is being adjusted to ensure that we are training 
for the conflicts of today and those in the future.
  Continuing our strong support for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
the bill includes over $23 billion for equipment to be used in the 
region. This includes $6.3 billion to complete procurement of over 
6,600 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, MRAP, all-terrain vehicles to 
protect our troops; $1.1 billion for High Mobility Multi-Purpose 
Wheeled Vehicles, HMMWVs; and $950 million for the National Guard and 
Reserve equipment accounts.
  I am also pleased that this bill includes just under $200 million for 
defense projects in the State of Hawaii including many of the projects 
which I requested. This includes a standoff improvised explosive 
device, IED, detection program, a virtual combat training program, and 
an anti-corrosion effort to extend the life of weapons systems. These 
are examples of programs in which innovators in Hawaii produce systems 
and products which will enhance military capabilities.
  In addition to doing right by our troops, this bill also includes 
measures that will help other segments of our country.
  Small business represents a vital part of our economy, but many small 
business owners are having difficulties securing loans in today's 
economic climate. This bill includes a measure which will allow the 
Small Business Administration, SBA, to extend enhancements to its loan 
guarantee program which will free up capital by making loans more 
attractive.
  The bill also includes an extension of unemployment insurance 
benefits. As many of our citizens continue to navigate a difficult 
labor market, it is vital that we continue to provide benefits for the 
unemployed.
  In addition, this bill includes an extension for COBRA subsidies. It 
extends from 9 to 15 months the 65-percent COBRA health insurance 
subsidy for individuals who have lost their jobs. This vital program 
will help those who have lost jobs keep their health insurance.
  These are just some of the projects and programs this important bill 
will fund for the 2010 fiscal year. I appreciate the hard work of 
Chairman Inouye, Ranking Member Cochran, and the rest of the 
Appropriations Committee for bringing this conference report before us, 
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I strongly oppose this fiscally 
irresponsible and misguided bill. While the bill includes many good 
provisions, it will also fund a massive troop surge in Afghanistan that 
will overburden our troops and will likely hurt, not help, our efforts 
to eliminate the global threat posed by al-Qaida and its affiliates. 
And it is stuffed with earmarks and wasteful spending, such as $2.5 
billion for 10 C-17s that the Defense Department does not want and $130 
million for a Presidential helicopter program that has been cancelled.
  While I will vote against the Defense appropriations bill, I am not 
going to be part of a partisan and cynical effort to delay passage of 
the Defense bill in order to block the Senate from considering health 
care reform. That is why I voted to end debate on the Defense 
appropriations bill, so the Senate could conduct a final vote on that 
bill and return to debating and voting on health care reform 
legislation.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The minority time has expired.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I hope we can have a bill that will be bipartisan 
that we can all support.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, my understanding is there is 5 minutes 
remaining.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is correct.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I direct this question to my distinguished 
colleague, Senator McConnell, who is on the floor. Is my distinguished 
friend going to use any of his leader time this morning?
  Mr. McCONNELL. No.
  Mr. REID. To my friend from Texas, whom I care about a great deal--
she is a member of the Appropriations Committee. I am disappointed she 
spent all morning not talking about the bill before us; namely, the 
bill that is going to fund our troops. That is why she is here. It is 
just after 7 in the morning in Washington. It is just after 4 a.m. in 
Nevada. Those watching around the United States may be wondering why we 
are voting at this rare hour, early on a Saturday morning, in what is 
shaping up to be the worst snowstorm in Washington's history.
  The reason is very simple. We have work to do. We are going to 
support the troops, to make sure they have all the resources they need. 
I am confident my Republican colleagues will join with us in that 
regard.
  I also say to my friend from Texas and others, it is as if they are 
in some other universe. First of all, we offered a unanimous consent 
request as soon as these proceedings started dealing with health care. 
I said:

       I ask unanimous consent that no amendment be in order to 
     the Reid substitute amendment . . . unless the text . . . of 
     the amendment is posted on the home page of the official 
     Senate Web site of the Member of the Senate who is sponsoring 
     the amendment prior to the amendment being called up for 
     consideration by the Senate and the amendment is filed at the 
     desk. Further, that this unanimous consent request be in 
     effect for the duration of the consideration of [this bill].

  That is pretty direct. Offer an amendment and people should be able 
to see it. Guess what. The Republicans objected to that. Here is 
exactly what the senior Senator from Wyoming said:

       In light of some of the trust problems and transparency 
     problems we have, while this appears to lead to greater 
     transparency . . . I object.

  Something that creates transparency, they object because it does not 
create transparency.
  Let me just say, we are going to finish this Defense bill. We are 
going to move on, at the appropriate time, and vote on the so-called 
managers' package, which will save lives--along with the other bill 
that is now before the Senate on health care--save money, and save 
Medicare. There are immediate deliverables.

  I don't know what in the world the Senator from Texas was talking 
about. Something that is picked up on talk radio? I don't know. But it 
is not anything that deals with reality. We are going to do away with 
preexisting disabilities. The letters we receive from around the 
country, what insurance companies do is incredible. We will insure 31 
million new people--pretty good, 31 million. Thousands of primary care 
physicians will be created and thousands of community health centers, 
which we should have been doing a long time ago.
  I can remember, as a new Senator, that seat right there in the back 
of the Chamber was held by the famous Pat Moynihan. We were, at that 
time, dealing with homelessness. That was the issue of the day. He 
turned around to me, a new Senator, and said: This is ridiculous. The 
reason there are so many homeless is because we did not do our job. 
When the insane asylums, the mental institutions were emptied, because 
we had medicine that would take care of these people in institutions, 
part of the deal was we would have community health centers to have 
them come and get their medication, have them taken care of. We didn't 
do that, and that is why we have so many homeless people. This bill is 
going to alleviate most of that.
  We have something in this legislation called the CLASS Act, which 
will offer for the first time in the history of this country for people 
who are working to plan ahead in case they become disabled. It is fully 
paid for. CBO said, in the far future, decades and decades into the 
future, it is paid for. I did not use a penny of that money for the 
bill that is before the Senate.
  Again, I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, I am sorry 
this has been such a method of just saying no to everything--
everything, everything. It is too bad we didn't have a little more 
help. We received none. We hope they will join with us, the minority, 
as did the Republicans in the House of Representatives, and support the 
troops, 395 to 34. Out of 435 Members, only 34 voted against that bill. 
Democrats and Republicans--overwhelming majorities--over 90 percent of 
Democrats and Republicans in that

[[Page S13476]]

House supported that bill. That is what we need to do in a show of good 
faith for the men and women fighting around the world.
  For example, in Afghanistan, I read the morning news from Nevada. The 
Nevada National Guard, in the mountains of Afghanistan, had a vicious 
firefight lasting more than a day, chasing these evil people through 
villages. Many of them were killed. One Nevadan was wounded. That is 
what this legislation before this body is about.
  I hope we can do what needs to be done.
  Mr. President, I move to table the motion to concur in the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment with amendments, and I ask for the 
yeas and nays.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman), is necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from New Hampshire, Mr. Gregg.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the 
Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 63, nays 35, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 382 Leg.]

                                YEAS--63

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burris
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--35

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennett
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Kyl
     LeMieux
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Risch
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Gregg
     Lieberman
       
  The motion was agreed to.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oklahoma is 
recognized.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, the pending motion to concur to the House 
amendment would cause an aggregate level of outlays for fiscal year 
2010, as set out in the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution 
on the budget, S. Con. Res. 13, to be exceeded.
  Therefore, I raise a point of order under section 311(a)(2) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive all applicable sections of the 
Budget Act for purposes of the pending motion, and I ask for the yeas 
and nays.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman) is necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from New Hampshire, Mr. Gregg.
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 63, nays 35, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 383 Leg.]

                                YEAS--63

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burris
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--35

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennett
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Kyl
     LeMieux
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Risch
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Gregg
     Lieberman
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskill). On this vote the yeas are 63, 
the nays are 35. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn 
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion to concur in the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment.
  Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman) is necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from New Hampshire, Mr. Gregg.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 88, nays 10, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 384 Leg.]

                                YEAS--88

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burris
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     LeMieux
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                                NAYS--10

     Barrasso
     Burr
     Coburn
     DeMint
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Johanns
     McCain
     Sessions
     Thune

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Gregg
     Lieberman
       
  The motion was agreed to.


                            vote explanation

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Madam President, I regret that I was unable to be 
present to vote for the final passage of H.R. 3326, the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010, but had I been 
present, I would have supported it.
  This Act will provide $636.3 billion in funding for the Department of 
Defense, including nearly $125 billion in funds that will directly 
support the men and women fighting at the frontlines of this Nation's 
wars. I am honored to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee, 
which drafted the law authorizing these funds, and thank my colleagues 
on the Senate Appropriations Committee, led by Chairman Daniel Inouye, 
for their hard work guiding this bill to its final approval.
  This bill will do much to both protect our service members overseas 
and improve their lives at home. It will provide $6.3 billion to 
procure additional

[[Page S13477]]

mine resistant ambush protected, MRAP, vehicles and more than 6,600 
MRAP all-terrain vehicles, MRAP-ATVs, which will save countless lives 
in Iraq and Afghanistan. For our service members and their families, it 
will also provide a 3.4-percent pay raise, additional funding for the 
Defense Health Program, and $120 million to support research for 
traumatic brain injury and psychological health research.
  I am particularly proud of the critical role that Connecticut plays 
in supporting our Nation's defense, a role that this act reaffirms. 
Connecticut workers are essential to building critical equipment and 
systems that account for nearly 15 percent of the $104.4 billion in 
procurement funds provided in this bill. These include the Virginia 
class submarine, the Blackhawk family of utility helicopters, the 
engines that power the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the powerful radar on 
the Joint STARS aircraft, and even the Colt carbine that our soldiers 
carry at the frontlines of battle. There truly is a Connecticut worker 
supporting every member of the U.S. Armed Forces.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Could we have order?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. First of all, to the Senate: This is a good, strong message 
we have sent to our men and women in uniform around the world as 88 
Senators voted. It was a little bit of a struggle to get here, but we 
got here, and I am so grateful we were able to do that.

                          ____________________