[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16609-16611]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   ADVANCING AMERICA'S PRIORITIES ACT

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, there is a woman who lives in Sparks, NV. 
Her name is Kathie Barrett. She is married and has two children. Sparks 
is a suburb of Reno, NV. When you are there, you cannot tell whether 
you are in Sparks or Reno. The demarcation between the two over the 
years has become insignificant. You cannot tell most of the time 
whether you are in Reno or Sparks.
  Kathie, after taking several years off to raise her children, went 
back to work as a librarian's assistant. Six years ago, Kathie was 
diagnosed with ALS, Lou Gehrig's disease. Of course, she was declared 
unable to continue to work.
  Her breathing capacity is extremely limited and getting worse every 
day, but in spite of tremendous muscle loss and coordination in her 
neck and back, she and her husband Martin traveled to Washington, DC, 
from Sparks to ask Congress to pass the ALS Registry Act.
  She is one of 5,600 Americans who are newly diagnosed every year with 
this fatal disease, Lou Gehrig's disease. There is no cure for the 
disease, and the one FDA-approved drug works for only 20 percent of the 
patients, and even then it merely extends life for a few months.
  Lou Gehrig's disease has proven particularly hard for scientists and 
doctors to research, much less cure. One reason is that there is a 
problem: There is no centralized place where the data on this disease 
is collected. Researchers have only a patchwork of information to work 
with.
  I introduced the ALS Registry Act last year to create a database at 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to centralize research 
and information on Lou Gehrig's disease. This legislation would not 
guarantee a cure for Kathie and thousands of other Americans who 
suffer, but for the first time it would give them hope for new 
treatment and the prospect of a cure.
  I was happy to see the House of Representatives embrace my 
legislation by an overwhelming vote of 411 to 3--411 to 3. When the ALS 
Registry Act reached the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
Committee here in the Senate, it passed unanimously. It seemed at the 
time this worthy initiative was headed toward swift passage. Yet one 
Republican Senator prevented it from passing. Kathie Barrett continues 
to wait for Congress to act. Tens of thousands of others continue to 
suffer, as doctors and scientists are unable to gather and access the 
information that could help them.
  The same Republican Senator who continued to hold up passage of the 
ALS Registry Act has, unfortunately, done the same for dozens of other 
worthy and overwhelmingly bipartisan bills. A few of these bills 
include, in this package alone, the Emmitt Till Unsolved Crimes bill. 
Emmitt Till's brother was here testifying about the importance of this 
legislation within the past week or so. This bill would help heal old 
wounds and provide the Department of Justice and the FBI tools needed 
to effectively investigate and prosecute unsolved civil rights era 
murders, and there are lots of them.
  Another one of the bills is the runaway and homeless youth bill, 
which would provide grants for health care, education, and workforce 
programs, and housing programs for runaways and homeless youth, which 
is essential. We need that passed.
  Another one of the bills is the combating child exploitation bill, 
which would provide grants to train law enforcement to use technology 
to track individuals who trade in child pornography and establish an 
Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.
  Another one of the bills is the Christopher and Dana Reeve Paralysis 
Act, which would enhance cooperation in research, rehabilitation, and 
quality of life for people who suffer from paralysis.
  We tried to pass each of these bills separately, but we have had to 
face approximately 90 filibusters in the last 18 months. Each one of 
these filibusters takes about--if you put them together, it takes over 
a week. So we have been unable to do these one at a time.
  Our efforts to pass these bills separately have been stalled by the 
objection of one Senator. All Senators should refuse to let that 
senseless objection be the last word on these important measures.
  We have packaged these and other bills in the Advancing America's 
Priorities Act, to give the Senate the chance to overcome this 
senseless obstructing of our Nation's business.
  Not a single one of the 35 bills in this package that has been 
packaged into one are partisan, nor are they controversial.
  These bills have been passed by the House of Representatives 
overwhelmingly and their respective Senate committees with overwhelming 
support from Democrats and from Republicans.
  The prime Republican obstructor to these bills asserts that he 
opposes them because they cost too much. That argument reflects an 
intentional mischaracterization of the legislative process. This is an 
authorization bill, not an appropriations bill. For those uninitiated 
in the ways of Congress, an authorization bill does not create 1 penny 
of spending. The Senator preventing this legislation from passing knows 
this, but he continues this facade. Spending decisions are made through 
an entirely separate budget and appropriations process. The 
appropriations process is when our limited Federal resources are 
divided. If Republicans or this Senator want to argue against any of 
these programs during the appropriations process, they have every right 
to do that.
  In fact, the appropriations process affords them three separate 
opportunities: in the subcommittee, the full committee, and the Senate 
floor.
  All these authorization bills do is move these initiatives forward in 
the legislative process. It allows them to be considered for the 
appropriations process. If we do not authorize them now, they will not 
be eligible for consideration during the appropriations process. Voting 
against them now would deny Congress the opportunity to fund any of 
them.
  So do I hope that most, if not all, of these initiatives will be 
funded during the appropriations process? Absolutely.
  I no longer am a member of the Appropriations Committee. I had been 
for 25 years or so, but I am not now because of my other 
responsibilities. So I hope they are all funded, but that is a 
different arm. I don't make that decision.
  Congress must always be watchful and prudent with the taxpayers' 
dollars, and the person objecting to these is no more prudent than any 
of the other 99 Senators regarding the taxpayers' dollar.
  I am as alarmed as anyone that President Bush and his Republican 
allies in Congress have allowed the national debt to increase by over 
$3 trillion over the last 7\1/2\ years. I am as alarmed as anyone that 
we continue to spend $5,000 a second in Iraq, funding a $12 billion war 
every month with borrowed money, putting it on credit--a big credit 
card--and sending the bill to our children and our grandchildren. I am 
as alarmed as anyone to hear this morning that there will be a record 
budget deficit in 2009 of about half a trillion dollars. The fiscal 
irresponsibility of this administration will be President Bush's 
legacy.
  However, this package of bills, including the ALS registry I have 
talked about, helping runaways and homeless children, providing the 
Justice Department with tools to fight unresolved crimes, and cracking 
down on child pornography--these are all priorities, and priorities of 
all of us, Democrats and Republicans. We should all embrace these 
priorities. They will not add a single penny to the Bush budget 
deficit.
  You don't have to take my word for it. The independent Congressional 
Budget Office, which is not partisan, has reviewed the Advancing 
America's Priorities Act and reports this:

       Those authorizations do not cause changes in Federal 
     spending or revenues.

  I ask unanimous consent that the statement--in fact, it is a letter 
from the Congressional Budget Office, signed by Peter Orszag, who is 
the Director, copies of which were sent to two members of the 
committee, one to Chairman Conrad and one to Judd Gregg. I

[[Page 16610]]

ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                                    U.S. Congress,


                                  Congressional Budget Office,

                                    Washington, DC, July 25, 2008.
     Hon. Harry Reid,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Leader: The Congressional Budget Office has 
     reviewed S. 3297, a bill to advance America's priorities, as 
     introduced on July 22, 2008. The bill includes numerous 
     provisions that would affect health care, criminal statutes, 
     laws to protect wildlife and the environment, international 
     aid programs, efforts to promote commerce, ocean research, 
     and other government programs.
       Most of the bill's provisions would specifically or 
     implicitly authorize increased appropriations for purposes 
     specified in the bill. By themselves--that is, in the absence 
     of subsequent legislation--those authorizations do not cause 
     changes in federal spending or revenues.
       Although CBO has not completed a comprehensive review of S. 
     3297, we have previously prepared cost estimates for numerous 
     pieces of legislation that are similar or identical to most 
     of the major provisions in this bill. Based on those previous 
     estimates and on a preliminary review of S. 3297, CBO 
     estimates that, in total, the bill would authorize the 
     appropriation of approximately $10 billion over the 2009-2013 
     period. CBO estimates that, if those sums are appropriated in 
     future legislation, implementing the bill would cost about $8 
     billion over the 2009-2013 period.
       Some provisions of S. 3297 would establish new federal 
     crimes. Because those prosecuted and convicted under S. 3297 
     could be subject to criminal fines, the Federal Government 
     might collect additional fines if the legislation is enacted. 
     Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, then deposited in 
     the Crime Victims Fund, and later spent. CBO expects that any 
     additional revenues and direct spending would not be 
     significant because of the relatively small number of cases 
     affected.
       S. 3297 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
     in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The bill would 
     impose a private-sector mandate on certain entities that 
     handle nonhuman primates, but CBO expects that the cost of 
     the mandate would fall well below the annual threshold 
     established in UMRA for private-sector mandates ($136 million 
     in 2008, adjusted for inflation).
       If you wish any further details, we will be pleased to 
     provide them. The CBO staff contact is Kim Cawley.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Peter R. Orszag,
                                                         Director.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, this is an indisputable fact. Any efforts to 
portray this legislation as a spending bill--much less a reckless 
spending bill--are indisputably false.
  We have been down this road before. Earlier this year, the same 
Republican Senator who is the leading obstructor of these bills did the 
same thing for a package of lands bills. We acted in good faith and 
negotiated a set of amendments with him so that his concerns would 
receive full and fair consideration on the Senate floor. Those familiar 
with our negotiations would surely agree that we offered him a far more 
generous arrangement for amendments than many Democrats or Republicans 
would have thought his objections merited. But after spending 
considerable time negotiating in good faith, it became clear this 
Senator was not serious about reaching an agreement. Then, like now, we 
tried to pass the more than 60 initiatives in the lands package as 
stand-alone legislation. Those efforts were obstructed by the 
Republican side. After months of delay, we finally voted on the lands 
package. This package passed the Senate by a vote of 91 to 4. Every one 
of them is now law. The American people are benefiting from each one of 
them.
  Some Republican Senators take another approach to explain their 
obstruction to this legislation. They say it is an effort to preserve 
minority rights.
  Democrats have been more than willing to open debate on amendments, 
even on legislation such as this where we are baffled by Republican 
opposition. If the Republican Senator or Senators who are blocking this 
legislation are serious about having concerns heard on the floor, they 
should offer an opportunity to do that--they are certainly entitled to 
it--but it is clear that the ultimate goal is to make political points 
at the expense of millions of Americans who would be assisted by these 
very important pieces of legislation. Republican Senators have acted 
within their rights to block and delay action, but simply being within 
their rights does not make it right.
  Some Republicans make one final spurious argument for opposing this 
legislation: that it takes us off the energy legislation.
  As we learned a few minutes ago, I offered unanimous consent that we 
would stay on the Energy bill and that this would not set it aside. If 
we worked on this, we would be right back on Energy. Democrats have 
tried again and again to legislate on energy prices. We have introduced 
proposals that would lower gas prices in the short term while 
addressing the root cause of the problem in the long term. We have even 
offered Republicans exactly what they claim to want: votes on drilling, 
oil shale, nuclear energy, and their entire package.
  In Congressional Daily today, this appeared on the back page. It 
says:

       Cheaper, faster, safer options exist to solve the oil 
     crisis. Don't buy Big Oil's lie.

  Then it has a picture of a big oil rig out in the middle of the 
ocean. It says:

       Drilling for oil in America's precious natural areas will 
     NOT lower gas prices. But Big Oil's profits will skyrocket 
     even higher.
       The U.S. Department of Energy's truth: The Energy 
     Information Administration says offshore or Arctic Refuge oil 
     won't flow for ten years and prices won't be affected until 
     at least 2027.

  This is from President's Bush's Department of Energy.

       The impact on price? ``Insignificant.''
       The U.S. Department of the Interior's truth: The number of 
     drilling permits on federal lands doubled in the last five 
     years while the price of gas almost tripled. More drilling 
     does not lower prices.
       The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources's truth: Oil 
     and gas companies hold leases to millions of acres of Federal 
     land and waters. These leases are producing no oil.
       Legendary oil man T. Boone Pickens's truth--

  And this is a direct quote--

       I've been an oil man all my life, but this is one emergency 
     we can't drill our way out of.

  He said that about a month ago.

       The plain truth: While the American public struggles to pay 
     record-breaking gas prices, big oil companies rake in record-
     breaking profits.
       The U.S. holds 2 percent of all the oil reserves, but 
     consumes 25 percent of the world's oil. We can't drill our 
     way to energy independence. Energy efficiency, renewables, 
     and technological advances are the cheaper, faster, safer way 
     to meet America's energy needs, while reducing the threat of 
     global warming.
       Tell them you don't buy Big Oil's lie and they shouldn't 
     either.

  This has been paid for by a number of organizations. Some are 
strictly environmental. Some of them are concerned about other things. 
Ocean Conservancy helped pay for this. League of Conservation Voters, 
Friends of the Earth, National Audubon Society, Sierra Club, Defenders 
of Wildlife, Pacific Environment, Waterkeeper Alliance, Gulf Coast 
Environmental Defense, Ocean Protection Coalition.
  So we have even offered the Republicans exactly what they claim to 
want--votes on drilling, oil shale, and nuclear power--and they have 
said no to this point. Hopefully, they will say yes. They have said no. 
So if the American people are wondering why Congress has not passed 
legislation on gas prices, it is because Republicans refuse to take yes 
for an answer.
  Democrats will continue to propose ideas to address the energy 
crisis. Unlike our Republican colleagues, we are offering solutions. 
Democrats await the day that Republicans tire of endlessly talking 
about the energy crisis and decide it is time to join us in actually 
getting something done. Any Republican effort to confuse the debate on 
this package of bills with the debate over energy is disingenuous.
  So I hope we will see this unfortunate obstruction end the way the 
lands package ended in April: After a delay and Republican political 
gamesmanship and unnecessary headaches, the legislation passed 91 to 4.
  Everyone should understand our legislative days are very limited. 
Last week, the Republicans killed for the year LIHEAP legislation. I 
don't know what we are going to do to help those senior citizens, 
disabled, and low-income people come these cold winter

[[Page 16611]]

months. We also have these 34 bills packaged together today that we 
will not be able to pass. We will have to wait until we get a new 
Congress and a new President. It would be wrong and unconscionable to 
defer the hope of many people--the hope of Kathie Barrett from Sparks, 
NV, and all of those who suffer from Lou Gehrig's disease--any longer. 
For them--for the victims of unresolved civil rights-era crimes, for 
homeless children, for victims of child pornography, and for the 30 
other meritorious bills sponsored by Democrats and Republicans--it is 
time to put aside the delay, put aside the politics, put aside the 
obstruction, and pass the Advancing America's Priorities Act into law.
  I say again, those Senators who walk down here and vote no on these 
proposals, they are going to have to answer to their constituents, to 
voters. How do you justify voting against these measures?

                          ____________________