[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 17287-17288]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 1

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, despite the fact that we are fast 
approaching the 6-year anniversary since the terrible terrorist attacks 
of September 11, it is painfully clear we have much work left to do to 
protect this Nation from these awful attacks. Osama bin Laden and his 
No. 2 still remain at large, and al-Qaida has grown in strength and is 
determined to attack globally. The administration's failed Iraq policy 
has catalyzed a whole new generation of extremists who can be expected 
to carry out attacks against the U.S. and our friends around the world. 
Objective analyses, including the final report of the 9/11 Commission, 
conclude that this Nation has failed to take the steps necessary to 
protect America from terrorist attacks.
  We need only go back to look at the report card the Bush 
administration received in implementing the 9/11 Commission Report: Ds 
and Fs. The threats the 9/11 Commission talked about and are 
encompassed in this bill are real and growing. When Democrats took 
control of the Congress at the start of this year, we said we would 
finally and fully implement the unanimous recommendations of the 
bipartisan 9/11 Commission. It is something we fought for when we were 
in the minority, and it was one of the first bills we passed at the 
start of this session of Congress.
  The House passed its version early this year, January 9, by a vote of 
299 to 128--broad bipartisan support. We passed our bill on March 13. 
It, too, had bipartisan support, passing 60 to 38.
  As my colleagues know, Democrats and Republicans who serve on the 
House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over this bill have 
worked tirelessly to resolve the differences in these two bills. I have 
had numerous conversations with Chairman Lieberman. This preconference 
process has carried on for months, on a bipartisan basis, with full 
transparency and good-faith efforts to produce a final bill. Progress 
has been made.
  The American people, though, don't expect progress. They expect 
results, and that is what we need. We need to finish the work on this 
bill yesterday--as soon as possible. That is why I believe we need to 
take the next procedural step to finish these negotiations, to appoint 
conferees. That is what we normally would do.
  When this bill is finally signed into law, it will make America more 
secure. It will improve the morale, training, and efficiency of the TSA 
screening workforce, allowing them to work more effectively to protect 
air travelers. It will improve the screening of all maritime cargo--all 
maritime cargo--so Americans can be assured we are doing all we can to 
prevent the smuggling of weapons--even a nuclear weapon--through 
America's ports. It will improve the congressional oversight of 
intelligence to be sure we are building the best capabilities possible 
to stop terrorist attacks. It will improve communication sharing and 
communications interoperability among first responders so they can work 
swiftly to protect us from terrorist attacks. It will ensure that 
transportation and mass transit infrastructures are hardened against 
terrorist attacks.
  We need to work together to protect the American people from 
terrorism, and we need to do so immediately. We asked numerous times in 
the last Congress to be able to finish the 9/11 bill, and we were 
denied that ability. I

[[Page 17288]]

would hope that this unanimous consent request allowing us to go to 
conference would be granted.
  I am told the minority is going to object to this request that we go 
to conference. That is too bad. Although Senate Republicans have thrown 
procedural hurdles in front of virtually everything we have tried to do 
in the Senate this year, I was hoping they would reconsider their 
obstruction when it comes to getting through legislation that makes 
America more secure. There have been issues raised, but couldn't we 
handle these in conference?
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs Committee be discharged from further consideration 
of H.R. 1, and that the Senate then proceed to its immediate 
consideration; that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the 
text of S. 4, as passed by the Senate on March 13, 2007, be inserted in 
lieu thereof; that the bill be read a third time, passed, and the 
motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that the Senate insist on 
its amendment, request a conference with the House on the disagreeing 
votes of the two Houses, and the Chair be authorized to appoint 
conferees on the part of the Senate, with the above occurring without 
intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, on behalf of the minority, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I say to my distinguished friend, the 
Senator from Oklahoma, we are glad to have you back. We are glad the 
medical procedure went well and that you are back with the same 
fighting spirit you had the first day you came here. We are happy to 
have you back.
  Mr. President, I will renew my request at a subsequent time, and 
probably a few more times, until we get this done. I think a number of 
people have had calls from the 9/11 survivors, those people who lost 
loved ones in the 9/11 attack. They want us to get this done. We need 
to get this done. This is an issue that affects the safety and security 
of our Nation.
  So I would hope that there would be a reconsideration of this 
objection at a subsequent time because I am going to continue to offer 
this until we are able to go to conference.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________