[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 143 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5921-S5924]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM EXTENSION AND REFORM ACT OF 2011

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the House message is 
considered laid before the Senate.

[[Page S5922]]

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to concur, with an amendment. The 
amendment is at the desk.
  (The text of the amendment (No. 655) is printed in today's Record 
under ``Text of Amendments.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
concur in the House message with respect to H.R. 2608, with amendment 
No. 655.
  Mr. REID. I move to table that and 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. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Wyoming (Mr. Barrasso), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), 
the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Corker), and the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Corker) would have voted ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 59, nays 36, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 151 Leg.]

                                YEAS--59

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Boxer
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Conrad
     Coons
     DeMint
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Lee
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Paul
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Rockefeller
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Toomey
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--36

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Brown (MA)
     Burr
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Kirk
     Kyl
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Portman
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Thune
     Vitter
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Barrasso
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Corker
     Enzi
  The motion was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken). The majority leader.


                Motion to Concur, With Amendment No. 656

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now move to concur in the House amendment 
to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2608, with an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] moves to concur in the 
     House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2608, with an 
     amendment numbered 656.

  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                             Cloture Motion

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have a cloture motion at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented 
pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the Reid motion to 
     concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 
     2608, with amendment No. 656.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  On page S5922, September 23, 2011, the Record reads: . . . to 
H.R. 2608, with an amendment.
  
  The online Record has been corrected to read: . . . to H.R. 
2608, with amendment No. 656.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

         Harry Reid, Daniel K. Inouye, Tom Udall, Charles E. 
           Schumer, Richard J. Durbin, Mary L. Landrieu, Patty 
           Murray, Patrick J. Leahy, Richard Blumenthal, Benjamin 
           L. Cardin, Sheldon Whitehouse, Sherrod Brown, Maria 
           Cantwell, Daniel K. Akaka, Jack Reed, Debbie Stabenow, 
           Kay R. Hagan.


                 Amendment No. 657 to Amendment No. 656

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now have a second-degree amendment at the 
desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 657 to amendment No. 656.

  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end, add the following new section:
       Section __
       This Act shall become effective 4 days after enactment.


                Motion to Refer, With Amendment No. 658

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have a motion to refer the House message 
to the Appropriations Committee with instructions to report back 
forthwith, with an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] moves to refer the House 
     message on H.R. 2608 to the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     with instructions to report back forthwith, with an amendment 
     numbered 658.

  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end, add the following new section:
       Section __
       This Act shall become effective 3 days after enactment.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                           Amendment No. 659

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have an amendment to my instruction that 
is also at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 659 to the instructions of the motion to refer.

  The amendment is as follows:

       In the amendment, strike ``3 days'' and insert ``2 days''.

  Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays on that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                 Amendment No. 660 to Amendment No. 659

  Mr. REID. I have a second-degree amendment to my instructions at the 
desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 660 to amendment No. 659.

  The amendment is as follows:

       In the amendment, strike ``2 days'' and insert ``1 day''.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory 
quorum requirement under rule XXII be waived with respect to the 
cloture motion I just filed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the vote on 
the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur with an amendment 
occur at 5:30 p.m., Monday, September 26.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The minority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Reserving the right to object and with the indulgence 
of my friend the majority leader, let me make some brief remarks about 
where we are.
  For anyone who is confused about what is going on in Congress right 
now, let me make it easy. In order to keep the government running 
beyond next week, Congress needs to pass a short-term bill that funds 
government operations at a spending level to which both parties can 
agree. The good news is, we have already agreed on a spending level. 
That has already been done. Last night, the House of Representatives 
passed a bill that meets that figure we agreed on a couple of months 
ago.
  Here is the holdup. Because of some of the horrible weather we have 
had over the past several weeks, we have all agreed to add emergency 
funds we

[[Page S5923]]

didn't originally plan in this bill, and Republicans have identified a 
couple of cuts to make sure we don't make the deficit any bigger than 
it is already, including an offset Leader Pelosi has used in the past. 
The rest is from a cut to a loan guarantee program that gave us the 
Solyndra scandal. I think we can all agree this program should be put 
on hold until we get more answers, but our friends on the other side 
don't like the idea. They would rather just add these funds to the 
deficit. Why? Because, they say, that is the way we have always done 
things around here. Well, I think there is a lesson we can draw from 
the debates we have been having here over the last 6 months; that is, 
the American people won't accept that excuse any longer. The whole 
``that is the way we have always done it'' argument is the reason we 
have a $14 trillion debt right now.
  If we pass this bill, FEMA will have the funds they need--have the 
funds they need--to respond to these emergencies. That is not the 
issue. What is at issue is whether we are going to add to the debt.
  We have a path forward to get disaster funding done right here, 
today. There is absolutely no reason, in my judgment, to delay funding 
for disasters until Monday, as my friend the majority leader is now 
asking us to do. I don't think we ought to delay at all. We just 
received the amendment a few minutes ago, but we are aware of what it 
does, and I think it is important for us to try to resolve this issue 
sooner rather than later.
  Let's just walk through the next few days. If we don't have this vote 
until Monday, that leaves 24 hours or so before the Jewish holidays 
begin and then several days before the end of the fiscal year. It 
strikes me that we would be better off going ahead and having this vote 
now and entering into the discussions that will probably now be delayed 
until sometime Monday night to see how we can resolve this impasse 
between the House and Senate.
  We would be happy to have the cloture vote on the proposal of my 
friend the majority leader right now rather than Monday night so we can 
get a clear sense of where we stand. It is my view that we ought to 
have the vote today rather than wait until Monday and basically 
squander the next few days toward getting an agreement we know we have 
to reach. Therefore, Mr. President--and I thank my friend the majority 
leader for letting me explain my position--I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. First of all, my friend, I am sure, understands that this 
great piece of legislation that was sent to us by the House received 36 
votes over here. It was tabled on a bipartisan basis.
  The matter that is now before the Senate is really a nice piece of 
legislation. It funds the government until November 18. That is what 
the House wanted. There also is money in this bill to take care of 
FEMA. And even though we passed a bill here with bipartisan support 
that had $6.9 billion, which we believed was an appropriate figure, in 
an effort to compromise on this CR, we have the number the House thinks 
is a better number. That is what is before us.
  So, Mr. President, my suggestion to my friend--and he is my friend--
is that the two Democratic leaders, Reid and Pelosi, and the two 
Republican leaders, McConnell and Boehner, should just cool off a 
little bit and then work through this. There is a compromise here, and 
the compromise is now before the Senate. Everyone, once in a while, 
needs a little cooling-off period.
  The government is not shutting down. I spoke to Mr. Fugate myself, 
and FEMA is not out of money. We will come here Monday, and more 
reasonable heads will prevail. I hope over the weekend the four leaders 
can lead their troops in the right direction.
  So I again ask unanimous consent that the vote on the motion to 
invoke cloture on the motion to concur with an amendment occur at 5:30 
p.m., Monday, September 26.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Reserving the right to object, obviously, here in the 
Senate we would have a 60-vote threshold, and that is what we will have 
Monday afternoon. I see no reason why we shouldn't advance that to now 
so it can be clear whether this measure would pass the Senate. I am 
pretty confident it will not, and I don't see any purpose to be served 
by delaying the outcome of that, making the outcome clear on Monday 
when we could have a clear outcome today; therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, first of all, we have a piece of legislation 
at the desk that takes care of all the issues. It takes care of funding 
the government after October 1, and it also takes care of FEMA for the 
foreseeable future. It is a nice piece of legislation.
  It is not our number; it is the House number.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Reid motion to concur to the House 
amendment to the Senate amendment H.R. 2608 with amendment No. 656 be 
agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the 
table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements 
relating to this bill be placed in the Record at the appropriate place 
as if read. In fact, what we are asking here is the CR, with the FEMA 
language, be passed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we will have that vote on Monday. I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. REID. I renew my request. I would tell everyone--as my friend 
said, we will have the vote on Monday. We will keep the vote open, and 
if people are pressed on planes, I will work with the Republican leader 
and make sure that everyone is protected as much as possible.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the renewed request for 
Monday?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, as my colleagues know, last night the 
House of Representatives approved a continuing resolution which 
includes critical funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
FEMA. It has been reported that my friends on the other side of the 
aisle are committed to defeating this measure because the FEMA spending 
has been offset by a $1.5 billion reduction in the Advanced Technology 
Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.
  I would like to remind my colleagues that in 2009, before the change 
of leadership in the House, that body sent over a bill, H.R. 3435, to 
``Make supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for the 
Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program''--otherwise known as 
``Cash-for-Clunkers.'' That bill provided an additional $2 billion, on 
top of an already appropriated $1 billion, for a program that did 
nothing to boost long-term car sales in this country.
  And how was the second appropriation to ``Cash-for-Clunkers'' paid 
for? You guessed it, unused funds from a Department of Energy loan 
guarantee program. The former leadership in the House transferred money 
from the Department of Energy Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee 
Program that was funded by the stimulus bill.
  If ``Cash-for-Clunkers'' was important enough to transfer money from 
a loan guarantee program that was not being utilized, why not the 
disaster relief we are seeking to fund now? I would like to hear from 
my friends on the other side of the aisle as to what made ``Cash-for-
Clunkers'' so critical to our Nation's health that we could pay for it 
with money from a loan guarantee program but are unable to do the same 
with FEMA?
  And what is it about the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing 
Loan Program that the majority prioritizes over FEMA's disaster relief 
efforts?
  According to the Government Accountability Office, the Department of 
Energy has not obtained technical expertise to monitor the loan 
program, developed sufficient performance measures to ensure the loan 
guarantee program achieves its intended goals, and ``could not provide 
Congress with information on whether the program was achieving its 
goals and warranted continued support.''
  There is absolutely no excuse for not passing the continuing 
resolution approved by the House last night.

[[Page S5924]]

  Mr. REID. I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. CANTWELL. I ask consent to speak as if in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________