[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18386-18387]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            MORNING BUSINESS

                                 ______
                                 

                          DO-NOTHING CONGRESS

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague and friend from 
Nevada, Senator Reid, for that statement because here on the closing 
day of this week's session, as we wrap up the second week of 4 weeks, 
it really is a time to reflect on what little time is left in this 
session, and when Senator Reid refers repeatedly to a do-nothing 
Congress, it is understandable. Two weeks down and 2 weeks to go before 
the election and no budget.
  This so-called fiscally conservative leadership in the Senate cannot 
produce a budget on how we are going to spend our money this year. They 
cannot produce a budget and, if I am not mistaken, I say to the 
Democratic leader, I don't believe a single appropriations bill has 
been signed into law at this point.
  Mr. REID. That is right.
  Mr. DURBIN. Here we are days away from the end of this fiscal year, 
and we have recorded in the last 6 years, under the Bush administration 
and the Republican-led Congress, the worst deficits in the history of 
the United States. We have an administration which inherited a surplus 
from the Clinton administration--several years of surplus and paying 
down the debt of America and strengthening Social Security--and they 
squandered it, wasted it. They turned their backs on it and allowed us 
to sink deeper and deeper into debt--a debt we ultimately will have to 
pay, a debt which, sadly, is being financed by foreign countries such 
as Japan, China, Korea, and the OPEC nations. They are the mortgage 
holders of America's mortgage.
  Who will pay off this mortgage? The young people of America, our 
children and grandchildren--as this Congress heaps debt upon debt, as 
this President has the dubious distinction of being the first President 
in the history of the United States of America to call for a tax cut 
during a war. The reason no other President has done it is because it 
doesn't make sense. You have the ordinary expenses of Government that 
are increased because of the war you must fight, and this President 
then says: Let's cut taxes while we are at it, digging a deeper hole 
for America's economy and America's future.
  So there is no budget, not one appropriations bill signed by the 
President, no increase in the minimum wage--9 years now. For 9 years, 
this Republican President and Congress have refused to increase the 
basic wage for some of the hardest working people in America. It is 
$5.15 an hour. That is what it has been. It has been 9 years since we 
have increased it.
  Think about each of our own personal experiences, how the expenses of 
life have gone up in that period of time, and then put yourself in the 
shoes of a single mother I met in Rockford, who went through a brutal 
divorce. She luckily has custody of the children away from a father who 
mistreated them badly. She has them in her tiny house, and she has a 
minimum wage job. She has three kids, this mom, and she makes minimum 
wage. How does she make it? She goes to the local church, where they 
have a food pantry. She tries to get help from charities in the area. 
She looks for used clothing. She is trying to keep her family together. 
What kind of helping hand has this Congress given to her? None. For 9 
years, we have said to her: Sorry, next year's salary will be the same 
as last year's.
  I hope the cost of utilities doesn't go up or the cost of food or the 
cost of rent. Yet we know they continue to go up. So for 9 years, this 
Congress has failed to increase the minimum wage, and they are about to 
wrap up another session with that dubious distinction.
  There is a footnote to this story worth noting. In that same 9-year 
period of time, Congress has voted itself a $31,000 annual increase in 
salary. The Democratic caucus of the Senate has said that is the end of 
that story. There will be no increases in congressional pay until the 
minimum wage is increased. No excuses. Maybe that will focus the 
attention of our colleagues on a lot of people who are not as fortunate 
as those of us who serve here.
  We have had no change in the ethics rules despite the scandals of the 
latest Congress, despite the resignation of the Republican leader in 
the House who is under indictment and investigation, despite the 
reports that other Members of Congress are going to plead guilty or are 
facing prosecution. Despite all of this, there are no basic changes in 
the ethics rules that guide us here.
  There is no effort to take a look at the way we finance political 
campaigns, which I think is at the root of this whole conversation. 
Unless and until we reach a point that we take the millions of dollars 
out of political campaigns and bring it back to a point where the 
average person can seriously consider running for office, until we do 
that, sadly, all of us who are mere mortals and not millionaires will 
be spending a lot of time with special interests and wealthy people 
that we should be spending with the folks we represent and those who 
don't have well-paid lobbyists roaming the halls of the Capitol.
  There is no energy policy for America after the runup in gasoline 
prices that crippled family budgets, hurt businesses, and hurt farmers. 
Now the gas prices are starting to come down, and we can breathe a sigh 
of relief. Yet we know in the back of our minds that they can turn it 
on a dime and run the prices back up to over $3 a gallon again. Why? We 
have no energy policy.
  A President and Vice President from the oil patch have really avoided 
the obvious. We need to find a way to lessen our dependence upon oil, 
and particularly on imported oil. That means moving toward alternative 
energy sources. That means more fuel efficiency in our vehicles. For 3 
of the last 4 years, I offered an increase in the CAFE standards so 
that the cars and trucks we drive in America are more fuel efficient, 
and I have lost every time, not only because of opposition from the 
other side but some within my own ranks. I think there is now a change, 
an awakening that we have to do something about this situation.
  Of course, in this Congress, what have we done to increase the 
availability and affordability of health insurance and health care? 
Nothing. In fact, we have made it more difficult for the average 
family. We have decreased the benefits under Medicare and Medicaid, 
although we created the prescription Part D Program, which is, of 
course, a windfall for pharmaceutical companies. We didn't give the 
consumers of America the break they deserved. We have to find a way to 
make sure that Medicare Part D is affordable. To do that, Medicare 
should be able to bargain for lower drug prices.
  My friend, Senator Dorgan from North Dakota, is in the Chamber. He 
has been working on this issue for a long time, the issue of drug 
importation from Canada and other places. I salute him for his success 
in bringing the issue forward. I share his frustration that we cannot 
seem to get the Republican leadership, which has promised time and 
again an opportunity for a vote, to actually have that vote and to 
change the law so that a lot of seniors and others across America can 
get affordable prescription drugs.
  There is no effort here to make sure people who are vulnerable don't 
have to worry about whether their health care or pensions will be there 
when it is time to retire. We just don't address that in this Congress. 
You see, sadly, these people cannot afford the lobbyists that other 
special interests can. Those articulate, well-paid, well-fed, well-
dressed lobbyists who work right here in this building spend a lot of 
time in our faces. We need to talk to them because, frankly, they 
finance many of our campaigns. It is a sad reality that ought to 
change. It won't change until the leadership in Congress wakes up to 
the need for change, the need for a new direction on Capitol Hill.
  Last Monday night, we had a commemoration of the fifth anniversary of 
9/11. I guess about a hundred of us--Members of Congress--stood on the 
Capitol steps near the same place we stood 5 years ago as a Congress. 
There were some stirring remarks made, prayers said, and we closed with 
the singing of ``God Bless America.'' As we sang ``God Bless America,'' 
I thought for a moment that we needed to recapture the spirit of 5 
years ago because

[[Page 18387]]

we left that historic moment on the Capitol steps and Democrats and 
Republicans rolled up their sleeves in the House and Senate and said: 
What can we do to make America safe? In lightening fashion, we enacted 
a resolution which declared war on those who had attacked us.
  I don't vote for war lightly, but I voted for that without 
hesitation, a war in Afghanistan, against al-Qaida, against the 
Taliban. It was the right thing to do. But today it is a war that we 
know has not been won. Five years later, it still has not been won. The 
ranks of al-Qaida on 9/11/2001 were estimated to be 20,000 worldwide. 
Today our intelligence sources say it is up to 50,000 and growing. The 
trend is in the wrong direction.
  We wanted to turn the light out on al-Qaida when we voted for that 
resolution. We wanted to capture Osama bin Laden. We wanted to say to 
the world: You will pay if you attack the United States.
  But today we are still fighting, and the commanders in Afghanistan 
tell us we are not doing as well as we should. We need more military 
forces. We need more of an effort.
  Sadly, we may be losing that war, and we cannot afford to lose that 
war. Just a few months ago this administration announced it was 
disbanding the intelligence agency that was going to hunt down Osama 
bin Laden. Again, the Senators from North Dakota, Mr. Conrad and Mr. 
Dorgan, came to the floor last week and offered an amendment that was 
adopted unanimously to refund that effort to go after Osama bin Laden.
  I don't believe capturing him will end the war on terrorism. I don't 
think it will guarantee Americans are safe, but it certainly is 
something we should do as a Nation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Isakson). If the distinguished minority 
whip will cease for a second, the previous Presiding Officer of the 
Senate did not announce what should have been announced, which is, 
under the previous order, there will be a period for the transaction of 
morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes 
each. The distinguished minority whip has spoken in excess of 10 
minutes. I want to make him aware that is why I stopped him, unless he 
asks unanimous consent to continue.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 5 additional 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I know my colleague is waiting to speak, 
so I will hold myself to that 5 minutes.
  When we came back after 9/11, we gathered together on a bipartisan 
basis. We passed the PATRIOT Act. We initiated this military effort 
against those who attacked us on 9/11. There was a true spirit of 
bipartisanship.
  Sadly, things broke down. They broke down when we invaded Iraq, and 
they haven't gotten well since. The President's decision to move 
forward with the invasion of Iraq with Great Britain by our side, but 
really with the American troops in the forefront, with the American 
taxpayers paying the bill, has divided us as a Nation. A majority of 
Americans today question whether that was the right decision. I 
question whether that was the right decision. I was one of 23 who voted 
against going to war. I did not believe the intelligence supported it.
  Events that have happened since--we have lost 2,671 of our best and 
bravest and finest American soldiers. They have given their lives in 
that war in Iraq; 19,000 or more have returned seriously injured. We 
have spent over $320 billion. We spend anywhere from $1.5 billion to $3 
billion a week on a war with no end in sight.
  We went through this administration's effort to redefine torture to 
abandon the Geneva Conventions that we had stood by for decades. We saw 
the scandals of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
  Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., a noted historian, said the issue of torture 
has damaged the image of America in the world more than anything in our 
history. That is a sweeping statement from a man who has spent his life 
measuring history and its impact on the world. He believes torture 
under the Bush-Cheney administration has damaged our reputation more 
than anything in our history.
  Thank goodness Senator John McCain stood up and rallied us on a 
bipartisan basis by a vote of 90 to 9 to say torture is not part of 
America's policy. Yet again we are debating this issue, as the Bush 
administration comes to us and says: When it comes to the treatment of 
detainees, we cannot stand by the Geneva Conventions. We have to 
redefine it. And they go further.
  The Bush administration insists that if anyone in the administration 
has been guilty of wrongdoing--the use of torture, cruel, inhuman, 
degrading treatment--they should be absolved from any criminal 
liability. What does that say to the world about our standards and 
values in the United States?
  I am glad GEN Colin Powell spoke out yesterday. He hit the nail on 
the head. If this is a moral position we are taking to opposing terror, 
we cannot support the President's proposal for the treatment of 
detainees. And I salute, again, the four Republicans who stood up 
yesterday in the Armed Services Committee and had the courage to speak 
up and say there is a better way. There is a better way to protect 
America and not lose our values.
  I hope we listen to them when we bring this bipartisan measure to the 
Senate floor. The same thing happened in the Senate Judiciary 
Committee. We are adrift when it comes to this wiretapping issue. We 
reported out three different bills. The committee couldn't make up its 
mind.
  On one of the bills, we said to the President: You are Commander in 
Chief. You have the power to do what you wish. Another bill that 
Senator Feinstein has introduced, which I support and is bipartisan, 
says take the FISA law, the bill that governs wiretapping, gives the 
President the time he needs to do what is right, go after al-Qaida, 
wiretap his conversations, stop terror before it occurs, but do it in 
the framework of the law. The Feinstein bipartisan approach is a 
sensible approach. It is one that honors the tradition of the rule of 
law in America.
  We have two bipartisan approaches now to the treatment of detainees, 
as reported by the Armed Services Committee and to wiretapping as 
reported from the Judiciary Committee with the Feinstein amendment. 
Let's return to that spirit of 9/11/2001. Let's return to that 
bipartisan spirit and get this done and get it done right. At least we 
will be able to point to that achievement as this Congress draws to a 
close.
  I salute my Republican colleagues who stood up for principle and 
values that we all should share in America. I hope this administration 
over the weekend will reevaluate their position. I hope they will move 
forward with us in a bipartisan fashion to make America safe but do it 
the American way.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, are we in morning business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I advise the Senator, the Senate is in morning 
business, with speeches limited to 10 minutes.

                          ____________________