Establishing the Commission on Freedom of Information Act Processing Delays -- Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, whatever one's position is on the best way to cut the deficit, we all should be able to agree on this: We must raise the debt ceiling. We must pay our bills. Failing to do so is to invite economic catastrophe. The American people have had their fill of catastrophe and near-catastrophe.

Recently in Afghanistan, Admiral Mullen, Chairman of our Joint Chiefs, was asked by troops if they will be paid next month. His answer was:

I honestly can't answer that question.

He added:

I'd like to give you a better answer than that right now; I just honestly don't know.

It is inconceivable to me that we will leave our troops in limbo by driving our country over the cliff of default. Our Nation's economic life is in peril. I don't remember ever in the 32 years I have been here when the Nation has been more in need of deliberation, statesmanship, and compromise.

New York Times columnist David Brooks, who is a conservative columnist, recently wrote that too many Republicans seem to have joined a ``movement''--his word--in which ``the members do not accept the logic of compromise, no matter what the terms.'' I hope that some of our Republican colleagues will prove Mr. Brooks wrong on this matter because of its huge significance.

The time for ignoring hard truths is over. Blind resistance to compromise may play well with some, but it is no way to solve hard problems or to govern. Drawing lines in the sand and issuing ultimatums may make for ringing sound bites, but no press release ever sent a child to college or gave a working family hope for a good job.

If our Republican colleagues cannot bring themselves to support the majority leader's proposal or at least to propose modifications to it, they can vote ``no.'' But it is unthinkable to filibuster against allowing the Senate an opportunity to vote on the Reid measure itself, as this clock approaches midnight. It is one thing to vote against the Reid measure, it is quite another to deny the Senate by filibustering the opportunity to vote on the Reid measure when the issue is of such enormous importance.

Last evening, and again today, the Republican leader said they would insist on 60 votes to pass the Reid amendment. That is the definition of a filibuster threat. It is the very definition. You must have 60 votes. That is based on a threat to filibuster. Hopefully, some of our Republican colleagues will support Senator Reid's proposal. It has no new revenue. Its spending cuts match the size of the debt limit increase. Its cuts have been approved by leaders of both parties. But if our Republican colleagues don't seek to modify the Reid plan and won't vote for the plan, they at least should allow the Senate to vote on it and not filibuster. Whether Senators vote for or against the Reid legislation, the American people will not forgive a filibuster that prevents us from even voting on vital legislation as we rapidly approach a cliff.

In the critically important matter now before us, there is going to be a very strong public reaction against those who, with economic calamity looming before us, deny the Senate, through a threat of a filibuster and the filibuster itself, an opportunity to vote on the Reid motion to concur.

Compromise does not come easy with an issue such as this, but the people of this country did not elect us to do easy things. They elected us to seek practical solutions. They elected us to lead. The test of leadership in the Senate on the matter before us is allowing us to vote not just on cloture, which is what the Republican leader suggests is a vote on the Reid motion--it is not--but on the Reid motion itself. The test of leadership in this Senate is not to filibuster the Senate so we can't vote on the important Reid motion but to allow us to proceed when that cloture motion is voted on.

So I call on Senate Republicans to offer changes to the Reid proposal or vote against it, if they will, but not thwart the Senate majority from voting to adopt it, should they choose. When the cloture motion is voted on, if cloture is not invoked, and the Senate is prevented from voting up or down on the Reid proposal, under our rules, debate on the Reid proposal will continue.

I want to read from the petition we are going to vote on so everybody understands what we are voting on. We are not voting on the Reid motion to concur. We are voting on whether--and these are the words of the motion--we will bring to a close the debate on that motion; will we bring to a close the debate so we can vote on the Reid motion to concur in the House amendment.

So voting against bringing debate to a close, thereby denying the majority the opportunity to act, does not defeat the majority leader's motion. It stalls it. It stymies the Senate from acting. If an end is not brought to debate when this cloture motion is voted on, the Reid motion is still the pending matter.

If the Republicans, then, are determined to filibuster against it and not allow us to vote on it, they, I believe, will see the wrath of this country brought down upon them.

Mrs. BOXER. Would the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. LEVIN. I would be happy to.

Mrs. BOXER. I want to make sure the people listening to the Senator--because he is such an expert on what goes on around here--understand this and make sure I understand it too.

The Senator is saying that when 1 a.m. this morning comes, we will have a vote to determine whether we can stop debating the Reid amendment and actually vote on it. But if we don't get the 60 votes to do that, what will have happened is they will have stalled us, but the Reid amendment is still pending. We can't get a vote on that if the Republicans filibuster it and keep talking and talking and don't let us get to a vote; is that correct?

Mr. LEVIN. The Senator from California is exactly correct.

Mrs. BOXER. I thank my colleague because I think it is important for the people to understand. I would hope Senator Reid will keep his amendment on the floor. It is the last vehicle standing to avert a default, and I thank my colleague for yielding.

Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Senator from California for reinforcing that point.

I heard one of our colleagues tonight say the Republicans are willing to give us a vote on this bill. No, they are not. The Republicans are willing to have a cloture vote brought up earlier. They then will vote against cloture. But that will do nothing in terms of bringing us closer to a vote on the Reid amendment because if they will not end debate by voting yes for cloture, if they are going to filibuster--which, apparently, they are going to do because they are determined to filibuster this bill--all that happens, if we don't get the 60 votes the first time that cloture is voted on, is it will be voted on again and again because they are filibustering. The Republicans would then be filibustering against our being able to vote on this bill.

Everyone should be very clear. I hope the public will understand what is happening. The Republicans are not willing to give us a vote on the Reid motion. They are not willing to do that. We would be happy to have a vote on the Reid motion immediately, but they insist that we get a supermajority to vote. They want to succeed in a filibuster without even filibustering. That is something which is not only not in the Senate rules, it is also inconsistent with making progress on resolving this problem.

The American people want us to compromise, and the refusal to compromise by a few Members of this body and by a number of Members of the other body is what is stymying this resolution. We cannot tolerate that. I think what we must do is continue to offer to compromise.

The majority leader is in his office, as he has been all day, waiting to hear from the Republican leader with any suggestions he wishes to make and amendments to the majority leader's motion. It has been a long wait. It has been a fruitless wait--waiting for the Republican leader to suggest modifications.

It is not enough that the Reid motion already accepts the Republican arguments of no revenue and that cuts have to equal the amount of the increase in the debt limit. Those are key demands of the Republicans.

I have a great deal of trouble not including revenues. I think it is an outrage there is not shared sacrifice in this bill; that the wealthiest among us are still paying the reduced tax rate, for instance, that President Bush proposed; that we have loopholes in the law which give incentives to businesses to move jobs overseas; that we have hedge fund managers actually paying a lower tax rate on their very large incomes than their own employees pay on lesser incomes because of a loophole in the law.

The American people want us to close these loopholes. So I have great trouble there is no shared sacrifice in the proposal before us, but that is the way it is. It only has spending cuts. So the Republicans have gotten that--only spending cuts. They have gotten their argument also that the amount of any increase in the debt limit be matched by spending cuts. It is now time to say yes or to propose an alternative.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source