[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 14428-14431]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I paid attention to the remarks made by 
the majority leader concerning the upcoming schedule for the next week 
or 2 or 3 and the fact that we are now considering the motion to 
proceed to a bill pertaining to Chinese currency.
  I understand very well that it is the prerogative of the majority 
leader to set the legislative agenda of the Senate, and I respect that 
prerogative. But I have to express some amazement that the issue of the 
Chinese currency is taking precedence over the myriad of other 
important issues we should be acting on.
  One of the articles in today's CQ Today says:

       Last year, it looked like the time was right for Congress 
     to confront China.

  ``[A] similar bill'' was passed by the House.

       This year, the expected bulwark against the measure is the 
     GOP-controlled House, where top Republicans are echoing 
     concerns from the business community that enacting the 
     measure could spark a trade war.
       Republican leaders uniformly voted against the China 
     measure last year, bucking the majority of their party, while 
     Democrats voted . . . for the bill.
       Schumer--

  Speaking of the Senator from New York--

     argues that a strong Senate vote this time around would make 
     it ``hard for the House to block it.''
       But an aide to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of 
     Virginia says there are no plans to vote on China currency 
     legislation.

  So with over 9 percent unemployment, with the debt and deficit 
continuing to run out of control, with the 12 or 13 appropriations 
bills not acted on, with the Defense authorization bill, perhaps for 
the first time in 41 years, not being taken up by the Senate, now, in 
its wisdom, under the leadership of the majority leader, we will be 
taking up the China currency bill.
  China currency is an important issue. I think it is worthy of debate 
and discussion in happier times. But if one has any curiosity about the 
low esteem with which Congress is being held, then no better example of 
that is the way we have addressed the issues, including not passing a 
budget, which is against our own law, for the second consecutive year; 
including going through a continuing resolution rather than authorizing 
and appropriating the functions of government, as is the responsibility 
of the Congress of the United States.
  Here we are, as I said, unemployment is 9.1 percent, with an 
estimated 14 million Americans out of work; 228,098 homes are in 
foreclosure nationwide, a jump of 7 percent from July to August of this 
year. In my home State of Arizona, 1 in every 248 homes is in 
foreclosure, the third worst in the Nation. In the majority leader's 
home State--No. 1 in the Nation--1 in every 118 homes is in 
foreclosure.
  Mr. President, 22.5 percent of the homes in America are 
``underwater,'' meaning their mortgage is more than their home is 
worth. In Arizona, that number is 49 percent. In Nevada, 60 percent of 
the homes are underwater.
  We have a $1.3 trillion deficit. We have a debt of nearly $14.8 
trillion. It represents $43,357 for every man, woman, and child in 
America.
  So we will take up before the Senate the China currency bill--the 
China currency bill. Then someone in this body may wonder why the 
approval rating of Congress is--one I saw was 12 percent, one 13 
percent. I think proceeding in this fashion we may be able, with some 
success, to drive that down into single digits.
  I hold townhall meetings, as most of my colleagues in Congress do as 
well, and people are very angry at Congress. We, understandably, look 
at the President's approval ratings. I would urge my colleagues to look 
at those approval ratings of Congress. As I have often said, and have 
probably worn out the line, we now have such high rates of disapproval 
that we are down to blood relatives and paid staffers.
  So here we are, with the fiscal year having begun on the first of 
October, for the first time in 41 years, apparently, we are not going 
to schedule or pass a Defense authorization bill. The Defense 
authorization bill, in my view--and it is a biased view because of my 
membership on that committee for so many years; but not totally 
biased--authorizes pay and personnel. It budgets training and equipping 
the Afghan security forces. It fully supports the budget request of 
$1.75 billion in coalition support. It fully supports the budget 
request to support the activities of the Office of Security Cooperation 
in Iraq. It increases the funding for cybersecurity initiatives. It 
provides a provision that would require DOD to acquire and incorporate 
capabilities for discovering previously unknown cyber attacks on its 
networks. It covers missile defense, strategic capabilities, nuclear 
safety, and nuclear proliferation. It supports crucial defense 
modernization programs.
  My friends, there is no more compelling requirement than that of the 
defense of this Nation. The Armed Services Committee, of which I am a 
proud member, and work in a bipartisan fashion with the distinguished 
chairman, Senator Levin from Michigan--puts in long hours, and we 
scrutinize and we study and we have hearings and we try to do the 
people's work in the vital and important mission of defending this 
Nation.
  So now the fiscal year has expired. We are operating on a 
``continuing resolution,'' and what is the issue before the body, the 
august body, the world's greatest deliberating body, according to some? 
The China currency bill--the China currency bill--which we expect to 
take up for the entire week, which according to any reliable report 
will never see the light of day in the other body.
  Now, there have been controversies surrounding the Defense 
authorization bill not only this year but in previous years. I 
strenuously objected last year to the repeal of the don't ask, don't 
tell being included in the Defense authorization bill until we had a 
chance to assess the effect on morale, readiness, recruitment, and 
battle effectiveness, which was the view of the majority of the chiefs 
of the services.
  The year before, we took up a hate crimes bill and put it on the 
Defense authorization bill. My objection was that it had nothing to do 
with our Nation's defense. But there are many issues that need to be 
addressed, many issues concerning detainee treatment, concerning other 
issues, which are controversial.
  But the job of the Senate is to debate and to amend and to pass 
legislation. What is more important--what is more

[[Page 14429]]

important--than the security of this Nation and the care for the men 
and women who are serving in the military?
  I note the presence of the majority leader on the Senate floor. I 
have urged him privately on several occasions to bring up the Defense 
authorization bill. He responded to me--and I am sure he may respond--
that there are issues concerning detainees, about trials in the United 
States, about Guantanamo Bay. My response to the majority leader has 
been, those are issues the Senate should debate; those are issues the 
Senate should make its judgment on; and I assured him--and I assure him 
again--that I will consider the objections and reservations that the 
President and the executive branch have to some provisions in the bill, 
particularly concerning detainee treatment. I give great deference to 
the view of the executive branch and the President of the United 
States. But that does not mean we should not take up the bill. It does 
not mean we should not take up the Defense authorization bill and the 
appropriations bills following.
  First, we authorize. Then we are supposed to appropriate. The Senator 
from Nevada, the distinguished majority leader, and I came to the 
Senate together more years ago than we would like to remind some of our 
colleagues. But 20-some years ago, when we came to this body, we 
regularly took up authorization and appropriations bills. We took them 
up one by one, we had debate, and we had amendments.
  By the way, the practice of filling up the tree, which both sides of 
the aisle in this body are guilty of, was not heard of in those days.
  I know the majority leader's time is valuable. I would just remind my 
friends that the legislative calendar, which is here, is waiting 
consideration.
  Here are just a few of the authorizing bills waiting consideration. 
The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2012. The Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs has approved the Department of 
Homeland Security Authorization Act. The Senate Finance Committee has 
approved the Airport and Airway Trust Fund Reauthorization Act. The 
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has approved the Surface 
Transportation Extension Act.
  Today is October 3--the third day of fiscal year 2012--and guess how 
many of the 12 annual appropriations bills have passed this body? The 
answer is one. It is not as if the bills are not ready for floor 
consideration. They have been cleared and placed on the legislative 
calendar. So why not bring them to the floor for debate and 
amendments--the Agriculture appropriations bill, the Commerce, State, 
and Justice appropriations bill. All of these, by the way, should have 
been preceded by authorizing legislation.
  What has happened around here, unfortunately, for the majority of the 
Members of the Senate is that by virtue of the fact that we do not take 
up authorization bills for the functions of various branches of 
government, it renders the appropriations process transcendent in the 
deliberations and conclusions this body has made, thereby making 
members of the Appropriations Committee have an unwarranted, in my 
view, but certainly far more impactful role in the Senate than the 
members of the authorizing committees.
  I intend to continue to work in this body and with some of the newer 
Members to change that process, to require appropriations bills to 
reflect the authorizing committees' legislation, that the 
Appropriations Committee not be permitted to authorize, which is not 
their role, which over the years has become more and more prevalent and 
routine.
  My office resides in the Russell Senate Office Building, which is 
named after a distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee--a 
committee of which I am the ranking member. He was a distinguished 
chairman of the Armed Services Committee, a distinguished Member of 
this body. I am sure if he were on this floor today, that former 
distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee would be making 
the same remarks I am today.
  The responsibilities--not the privileges but the responsibilities--of 
those of us on the authorizing committees, including the Armed Services 
Committee this year, have been abrogated and overcome by a process 
which is clearly gridlocked.
  I recognize the presence of the majority leader on the floor. I yield 
to the majority leader and then will return to my remarks following 
his.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the speech given by my friend, the senior 
Senator from Arizona, is a speech I could give, because he is 
absolutely right. We have so much we have to do. But we have had a 
problem because of the Republicans in the Senate. We have spent 
basically 100 percent of our time these last 9 months on 2 issues that 
should have taken a matter of a few hours but have taken months and 
months, the continuing resolutions.
  We voted on the continuing resolution--for 1 week, 2 weeks, on and on 
for months, trying to fund government--2 or 3 days ago, the 1st of 
October. It took months to get that done. Then as soon as we finished 
that, that little exercise is only preparation for the longstanding 
time that we had to spend on raising the debt ceiling, something we had 
done with ease scores of other times. During the 8 years of President 
Reagan, for example, we raised the debt ceiling for him 18 times. But 
we spent months--months--on this continuing resolution and on this debt 
ceiling, and it prevented us from doing our work. So the words my 
friend from Arizona has given about all of the work that needs to be 
done do not include all of the work we have to do.
  I do not think there could be a more important piece of legislation 
right now, with the jobs being the way they are, than China currency. 
Everyone knows how they have manipulated their currency, which has been 
very difficult for our country. We have lost in the last 10 years, 
because of that, 2 million jobs; jobs that should be our jobs if the 
currency were fair. But it is not. It is manipulated.
  This is a jobs bill we are on today. It is a bipartisan piece of 
legislation that has been supported by large numbers of Democrats and 
Republicans. We have put this off for a long time. Now is the time to 
do this. We must send a message to the Chinese that we are serious.
  We have for 50 years every year passed a Defense authorization bill. 
We need to do it this year. It is extremely important for a number of 
reasons. One is these programs are important. We need to take care of 
our soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen. It sets funding levels for 
weapons and ammunition programs and authorizes activities of the Armed 
Forces around the world. It contains authorizations--new 
authorizations--for programs that are extremely important to this 
country, including counternarcotics efforts that are critical to our 
efforts around the world.
  This Defense authorization bill is also a bill that has some of the 
best oversight of any of the work that we do. The Armed Services 
Committee does good work in looking at the oversight of the military. 
This is a civilian oversight responsibility we have and we need to 
complete that.
  I agree with my friend from Arizona, it is vital that we get to this 
bill and pass it. But I also say that in its present form, I am going 
to have some difficulty bringing this bill to the floor. It contains 
provisions relating to the detention of terrorism suspects, which in 
the words of National Security Advisor John Brennan:

     would be disastrous. It would tie the hands of 
     counterterrorism professionals by eliminating tools and 
     authorities that have been absolutely essential to their 
     success.

  To show you how extremely important it is that we do something about 
these provisions in this bill that are just wrong, both the Judiciary 
Committee in the Senate and the Intelligence Committee in the Senate 
have asked for hearings on this provision in this bill.

[[Page 14430]]

  Going back to my original subject on China trade, the House of 
Representatives is going to pass China trade. Everybody knows that now. 
A couple of months ago that may not have been the case, but they will 
pass that as soon as we do.
  I would hope my friend from Arizona, who we all have such admiration 
and respect for--we know how much he cares about our country and 
particularly about the Armed Forces of our country. I wish he would 
consider doing what we did last year. We had another problem with the 
Defense authorization bill, not from our perspective, as it is today, 
but it was from his perspective, because he felt very strongly that 
don't ask, don't tell should not be in the Defense authorization bill. 
I disagreed with him vehemently. But we agreed to take that out of the 
bill and have a separate vote on don't ask, don't tell. It worked out 
fine. I moved that during the lameduck session. People criticized me 
for bringing it up. But it is something I felt I had to do because that 
was an agreement I had with people who cared a great deal about that. I 
received lots of criticism because I took it out of the Defense bill or 
had it taken out of the Defense authorization bill.
  I would say to my friend, the Senator from Arizona--and he is my 
friend--that we take this provision out of this bill and bring it up, 
have an up-or-down vote on however you want to handle that. Let the 
Judiciary Committee and Intelligence Committee do their work on this 
provision. It is not a good provision.
  Since it was put in that bill, we have had some significant changes 
around the world, and it would be such a detriment to what we need to 
do to get these bad guys, to keep this provision in the bill. So I 
would hope my friend would treat this provision as I treated don't ask, 
don't tell. He complained about that. I did not think he was right, but 
I thought it was so important that we move to this Defense 
authorization bill that it was taken out.
  We need to do that with this. It would be better for our country, it 
would be better for the Senate, and it would be better for the 
bipartisanship work we have to do around here. I do not in any way 
criticize my friend for bringing this up. I have talked to him 
privately. I have talked to Senator Levin, the chairman of that 
committee, on a number of occasions. I have expressed in the recent 
weeks that we have a problem with this provision. And, in fact, I did 
not know the Senator from Arizona was going to be here today. I have a 
letter in my office I have been looking over. I was going to have it 
hand-delivered to Senator McCain and Senator Levin today, and I will 
continue doing that. The whole subject of my letter was to explain to 
them the problem with this.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the majority leader for his comments. First of 
all, on the issue of China currency, I believe it is correct that the 
administration itself objects to this legislation, much less the other 
body taking it up. I say with great respect to the majority leader and 
his knowledge of the economy and the jobs that have been lost to China, 
China currency may be part of the problem, but it is certainly not the 
reason for the 2 million jobs lost. Certainly the majority of the 
reason for that is for other reasons which have been well ventilated.
  I say to the majority leader, I would be glad and will continue to 
sit down with the administration and with the majority leader and with 
Senator Levin on this issue of detainee treatment. The fact is that the 
President of the United States began his tenure as President of the 
United States with the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay. I want to 
close Guantanamo Bay. I have made that very clear. But Guantanamo Bay 
cannot, for all practical purposes, be closed at this time. That brings 
in other issues such as treatment of people who are apprehended and 
attempting to inflict damage and mayhem on the people of the United 
States.
  I think it is something we can work out. I would hope we would be 
able to debate and amend, which is the usual way we address issues in 
this body, rather than refusing to bring legislation to the floor 
because there is a particular objection to it.
  Last year, as the majority leader pointed out, I was opposed to the 
repeal of don't ask, don't tell on the grounds that the same view I had 
was that of the service chiefs, that we needed to assess the impact of 
repeal on retention readiness and battle effectiveness. But that should 
not, in my view, be the reason for us not to take up the legislation 
this year.
  I am sure the majority leader is aware, this would be the first time 
in 41 years we are in two wars. We have to address the issues that only 
the authorizing committee is capable and chartered to do. So I hope the 
majority leader would observe that we could take up this legislation, 
debate it, amend it. The President always has veto authority if he 
wishes to veto it. We also have the other body on the other side of the 
Capitol that would play a role in this. We would go through the normal 
process of passing the Defense authorization bill, which has been a 
tradition for some 41 years here in the Senate.
  I do appreciate the majority leader taking the time from his busy 
schedule to come to the floor and express his reasoning behind the 
schedule that he has set for the Senate, which is well within his 
authority.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, as I was saying, we have only 1 of the 12 
authorization bills that has been considered by the Senate to date, 
which was the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs appropriations 
bill. The Senate passed that bill on July 20. Congress did not enact a 
single one of the annual appropriations bills through regular order 
last year or a budget last year or this year. What kind of message do 
we send the American people when they are suffering under unprecedented 
and unacceptable economically difficult times? We are sending the 
message that either we are unable or unwilling to address the issues 
that are affecting their very lives.
  When I go home and find people without jobs and with half of the 
homes underwater, when I find people out of work, when I pass by the 
shuttered and closed strip malls throughout my State of Arizona, and 
then hold a townhall meeting, obviously my constituents are angry and 
frustrated. I do not know of a single townhall meeting that I have had, 
not a single one, where someone stood up and said: Pass the China 
currency bill and then our lives will be improved.
  I am sure that with some the China currency bill is one of some 
importance and priority.
  Certainly, I don't think it is in the top 10 priorities of the people 
I represent in the State of Arizona, but our Nation's security is 
important to my constituents. We have a sizable military presence in 
Arizona. The national defense authorization bill that has passed 
through the Armed Services Committee is very important to the people of 
this country and our security in these very uncertain times.
  I hope the majority leader will agree to change his priorities and 
bring the bill to the floor. I will continue to work to resolve 
concerns he or the administration has expressed concerning the 
legislation itself. But because the executive branch has concerns about 
legislation and objections to legislation, that should not prevent it 
from coming to the floor of the Senate. That should not be a reason why 
the Senate should not exercise its responsibilities to debate, to 
amend, and to authorize all these much needed priorities for the men 
and women who are serving our country with courage and efficiency. It 
is our job to provide them with whatever they need to do their job in 
the most efficient fashion.

[[Page 14431]]

  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________