and i want to start off by commending both senator kerry and senator lieu tkpwarbgs who as the -- senator lugar, as the chairman and ranking member on the foreign relations committee have worked long and hard on this particular measure. this treaty was signed by the president after negotiations were completed back in the spring. by the time we got the text and then the additions to the text, i would say it was probably in, i don't know, april or may or whenever it was. since that time i know both senator kerry and senator lugar have worked very hard, and they have been open for discussion. i've had several discussions with senator lugar about it and have explained my problems with it early on to him, and he's been very receptive. i got another letter from him today, further explaining some of the issues that are out there. but that is an indication of how complex this issue is. and as a member of the armed services committee and the intelligence committee, i've had the taoubt to have -- opportunity to have any number of briefings. i've been in hearing after hearing. i've been in meeting a

and you know why, rachel, there are senate republicans, folks like senator collins, senator snow snow snowe, senator murkowski, and senator brown from massachusetts, who have now come forward, advocating the time now to repeal don't ask, don't tell. we need to get after it in the senate. i'm confident they're going to do it. i understand that they must be celebrating festivus or something, that they can't do any other work, but the reality of it is this, we need to make sure we're doing everything we can for our heroes in harm's way. now is not the time to be kicking them out just because they happen to be gay. >> congressman, you were defeated in this last election, you had 47% of vote in your home district. do you think the work you did on this issue hurt you politically? was this a political sacrifice for you? >> you know, i don't think so. but my dad was a cop and a navy veteran and, you know, he taught my brother and sister and i when we were young children, if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. and at the end of the day, i have two little kids, maggie murph

senate. being together and working together is an incredible blessing and we have to make sure that we realize that. our country is certainly at its best when we are collectively working together for a goal. all you have to do is listen to your parents or your grandparents talk about victory gardens or rationing nylons or anything else that happened during the war when people were working collectively together. our country is facing many, many challenges. there is no doubt, the american people are frustrated. they are frustrated with our lack of productivity and they are anxious, so anxious, to be a part of the solution that needs to happen here, the coming together, the finding of the solutions to the problems that we face and the results that we need to have. i'm confident that together we can overcome them, all of these differences, continue to be the leader of the rest of the world as we have been and should be. i leave this body with confidence that we can provide our citizens with the t

senator after senator -- senator according to on be, the distinguished senator from north dakota; senator biden, now vice president biden, but then senator from delaware; senator reed from rhode island, a distinguished expert on the armed services committee and national security matters; senator conremarked the other senator from north dakota -- to a man, they noted and expressed concern about the failure to deal with tactical and nuclear weapons in the moscow treaty of 2003. the senator from california, senator feinstein, also noted the absence of any dealing with nuclear -- tactical nuclear wessments i mention this, mr. president, to say again, no one is talking about the visions among us. we are talking about a unified concern request the threat that tact -- with the threat that tactical nuclear weapons poses. so i think it is simply a mistake. but it is a correctable mistake that the negotiators of this treaty and the administration have excluded tactical nuclear weapons. as others have stated, the united states has an advantage at this time of strategic nuclear weapons, so basically

senate. we met with them while they were negotiating. at least five times. senators from the armed services committee, senators from the intelligence committee. senators from the said national security working group which i co-chair with senator kyl. when senator kyl wanted to meet that group we call the meeting and that and called scott muller and others and sat and talked. the said the senate committee on intelligence went to work and if you counted up more than 60 united states senators were able to follow the negotiations in detail over a 1-year period. senators also had additional opportunities to meet with the negotiating team and the delegation of senators even traveled to geneva with the administration helped make happened in order to meet with the negotiators while the negotiations were going on. even though the new s.t.a.r.t. was formally submitted to the senate in may the fact is congress about this treaty before it was even signed. the president made certain we were being briefed

in this case it would be senator conrad, senator gregg is leaving, obviously, senator crapo, senator coburn, and myself, if we could reach the point where we come together in a bipartisan budget resolution based on that deficit commission, if we have a senate budget resolution, take the word bipartisan out of it, but a senate budget resolution that reflects the feelings of that deficit commission, then that commission will have been a success, will have put us on the right track and we can stand strong together. and i hope that you agree that would be the best thing for this country. i hope we can reach that point and i thank you for your kind word earlier. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i want to congratulate my colleague from tennessee, senator corker, for his usual common sense as well as the assistant democratic leader, senator durbin, for his courage on the debt commission. i -- i believe that the decision made tonight about the omnibus bill is the best for the country but there could have been a bet

so, gentlemen, yesterday, the senate did exactly what everybody knew the senate was going to do. we got these votes out on whether to extend the bush tax cuts for the people who make $250,000 or less. and the senate did... voted exactly the way we knew it would come out. they voted no. because the republicans say they want these tax cuts for everybody. so here we are. we've got the posturing out of the way. you might call it something different. but now, senator kyl, is the senate going to get down to business and resolve this whole business of the tax cuts? >> i hope so. we can. we should. i would just make one point. nobody is talking about tax cuts. we're talking about extending the rates that have been in existence for the last decade, so just to be sure. i think that most folks believe that the recipe would include at least an extension of unemployment benefits for those who are unemployed, and an extension of all of the tax rates for all americans for some period of time. >> schieffer: at every level >> schieffer: at every level including those who make $250,000 or more. le

and then senator kyl and senator mccain, such time as they will use, and senator kerry, such time as i choose to use. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. mccain: and senator sessions for an additional -- mr. kerry: and senator sessions for an additional 30 minutes as such time between senator kyl and senator mccain as they would allow. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, i just want to say a couple of things. first, the treaty is important but it's -- mr. kerry: mr. president? i apologize and i apologize to the senator. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. kerry: the senator from new york has informed me that he would like five minutes somewhere in there and i would ask, according to the unanimous consent, that he be permitted to speak after senator kirk -- or, actually, if he could be permitted to speak for five minutes after senator sessions. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the senator from alabama. mr. kerry: i thank the chair.

of the aisle -- senator kyl, senator mccain, senator lindsey graham, senator isakson, senator corker, particularly, all of whom have been working in good faith and consistently. i think senator kyl and i are talking almost every single day. it has been a constructive process. obviously there are points of disagreement here and there on substance, and we're trying to work through those. i want to say to my colleagues that senator kyl has worked with us, i think, calmly, quietly and in good faith in an effort to try to resolve some very legitimate questions for members on his side of the aisle. and he's been consistent and persistent in hammering home those differences and the needs that need to be met as we go through this process. vice president biden has been particularly engaged in this and particularly helpful in helping us to move the process forward so that the administration has a voice that is directly engaged in these discussions and is working very, very hard to meet the concerns that have been raised by senator kyl and by others. but i'm encouraged by the process is -- the

i certainly think it's a glimmer of hope that senator werner, senator chambliss and significant senators of both political parties will keep pushing in 2011, but we'll have our work cut out for us. >> you won't have to answer to this vote fot a the ballot box for another six years. you may be hoping that it's a forgotten vote by then. because when you go back to oregon after this vote, you are going to have to answer people who will be saying to you why did you vote against an extension of unemployment benefits? why did you vote for a tax increase for every tax bracket? >> larry, first of all, i campaigned on exactly the program i'm outlining tonight, and that i pushed forward with the president of the united states. i told everybody in this past fall election campaign when i was re-elected, i said what i wanted to see was a short term extension of the bush tax cuts, then finally end this culture of delay and procrastination in 2011. this town will never do anything because there's always an election coming up, special interest groups that have to be satisfied and polls, unless you have

mccain ten minutes, senator chambliss five, senator inhofe ten, senator kyl five. and one more thought, mr. president. we have it within our power to fix the broken immigration system. last year approximately 600,000 people were arrested entering our country illegally. that's lower than it has been. but a determined leadership from the president, from the congress came within a matter of one or two years end this problem, and then we can begin to wrestle with the difficult question of those who have been in our country for some time. i thank the chair and would yield the floor. the presiding officer: without objection, the time will be allocated as suggested. the senator from michigan. mr. levin: mr. president, how much time has been used by senator sessions? the presiding officer: the senator used 14 minutes. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that now the senator from oregon be recognized for 3 minutes and then i be recognized for 6 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: i would like to have you amend that to include me to h

the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: i thank the senator from oklahoma. it is a great pleasure for me to be able to make an announcement from the floor of the united states senate, and i would ask unanimous consent to go as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. enzi: i would ask unanimous consent to have my whole statement appear if i don't make it through it. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. enzi: i got an early christmas present on the day it was actually expected. wednesday, december 15. allison was born to my daughter and her husband mike. i have been able to hold each grandchild on the day they were born. this baby,al son, was -- allison, was a bit more difficult. i voted and made a dash to dulles airport. i flew to denver, rented a car, and drove to cheyenne, wyoming. i got to the hospital, it was late enough that all the desks were shut down. but i found my way to the maternity ward and i got help to find the right room and once again got to hold another grandchild on the day that she was born. there's n

senate. a long list of colleagues have sang his praises, and here just a few. senator bob dole said, he has set a standard as a senator, as a legislative leader, and as a statesman that will stand among the best as long as there is a senate. [applause] and his beloved dear friend ted kennedy, senator ted kennedy, said that he personifies what our founding fathers were thinking of when they were thinking about a united states senate. [applause] he has been called a patriot and warrior of the united states constitution. however, the best way that i can describe the senator is that the architect of the alachua. he is the most historic figure to ever call west virginia home and will forever live in our hearts and those of our children. no one can replace our senator, no one. [applause] [applause] no one can fill his shoes, and we must never forget his tireless dedication as we humbly to follow in his footsteps. senator byrd, you have toiled and triumphed on behalf of your beloved mountain state,

after senator demint, senator thune, according to the list. i would ask unanimous consent, since there were three opponents in a row, if we could insert -- i've been asked by senator mccain to put senator are issue in and i'd like to to put senator shaheen before that. so after senator thune, i'd ask that senator shaheen be recognize the for 10 minutes, subsequent to that senator are issue for 10 minutes, and senator sessions would follow that for 30 minutes. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. kerry: finally, i would just -- quickly, before the senator from south carolina begins, just say to my friend from illinois that i would point out to him that actually the russians have helped israel by cooperating with us, as a result of this cooperative arrangement that we've reached. they refuse to sell the s-300 interceptor -- air interceptor missile to the iranians, and that actually is very significant with respect to israel. so the impact of this treaty is very positive for israel in the long run, and i t

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. a senator: mr. president, we have heard here in -- in speaking with senators here on the floor about a really appalling action that has been taking place. mr. udall: i have a letter here signed by all of the republicans that have really threatened to bring this place to a halt. completely bring it to a halt. and they've written a letter to senator reid. and in the letter they say, "we write to inform you that we will not agree to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed for any legislative item -- any legislative item until they get what i would characterize is these taxpayer funded bonuses for millionaires and billionaires. so they're going to bring the entire senate to a stop. and here we are, as the letter says, they quote president obama saying, "we owe it to the american people to focus on those issues that affect their jobs." well, i have a bill right here that will affect the jobs of american people. this is a -- it's called a clean energy bill. this is a clean energy bill. it's s. 1574, clean

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. a senator: mr. president, fellow senators, i rise today to speak very briefly about this issue. mr. risch: this easily could be "the" most serious issue that we deal with in recent years and in future years. we have an enemy today that is at the door. this is an enemy that is out there somewhere and you can talk about philosophically. it's an enemy that is at the door. last year, the federal government spent around $3.8 trillion. that really doesn't mean anything to me or probably much to anybody because nobody knows what $3.8 trillion is. if you say it's a little over $7 million a minute, it starts to sound a little bit more like you could understand it. but none of that is important. it's how much do you have. and the federal government was short 41% of that money. 41 cent out of every dollar -- 41 cents out of every dollar that the united states government spent it borrowed. i hope everyone listened closely to the senator from nebraska when he said that if we funded only social security, medicare

and then if senator reid wishes to bring the start treaty to the senate floor, he can sure do that. he can do that today. but the bottom line is the president said, the day after the election, "we owe is it to the american people to focus on things that are important to them and that's jobs, and we have been in this session now a month since the election. we only have one more month until the new senate and house is sworn in and the democrats have ignored jobs, the economy, the debt and the spending, and that's what the american people care about. >> ifill: explain to me what the reasoning was behind this letter which says nothing will get done unless exactly your priorities are the first ones? >> with9.6% unemployment in this country, businesses need certainty. individuals need certainty. and the best way to give that certainty, so they can out and start hiring again -- the job-creating sector is to say we're not raising taxes on anyone during these economic times and it's not just me. we have a growing chorus of democrats who agree with that. five before the elections and now the

and senator levin. we often come to these press conferences and our colleagues speak and we agree with some things, perhaps not all things. in this case i want to categorically say i very much agree with the statements made both by senator kerry and senator levin. i think from the perspective of foreign relations and the perspective of armed services, this treaty must be ratified. i want to add to that that the intelligence community has carefully reviewed the june 2010 national intelligence estimate, or as we would say the in ie on the intelligence community's ability to monitor this new treaty. we held a hearing on the nie and related issues, and then sent 70 questions for the record and receive detailed responses from the intelligence community. the committee undertook its own independent review of the nie. committee staff participated in more than a dozen meetings and briefings on a range of issues concerning the treaty. focusing on intelligence monitoring and collection aspects. so i'd like to focu

i'm working with other senators right now, senator schumer from new york. a whole bunch of other people i'm working with right now, to see if we can come up with something that will get the senate to function more effectively in the future. we'll have something to do on that on the first day we come back on january 5th. >> you've suggested it can be done with 51 votes on the first day. we're going to be watching on the first day to see what the harkin secret move might turn out to be. thank you very much. >> we can do it, lawrence. thank you very much. >> thank you. >>> still ahead, meghan mccain is on the record supporting the repeal of don't ask don't tell. she's also been pretty claire about what she thinks of sarah palin. has that video of palin killing a caribou changed her mind? meghan mccain is in the spotlight. >>> why do some republicans think doing their job is an attack on christmas? pathetic. you call this a holiday party? we need to help. these people are under-indulgers, not enjoying the holidays! together we can end under-indulgence. and if y

senator thune and senator inhofe have good amendments. i'm looking forward to supporting both of them when we return from our executive session this afternoon. i urge my colleagues to do the same. i would be happy to yield for a question. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: the senator from arizona made some good points, i think, about the importance of the triad in maintaining our -- our nuclear capability deterrence. i'm interested in knowing if the senator is aware that even if you assume the numbers that are in the 1251 report that would take the number of bombers down to 60 -- and it's up to 60, but the treaty calls for 700 delivery vehicles, which if you took that out of the bombers would take you down to 40. that we have even taking it to 60 would cut in half the number of nuclear bombers, and is the senator also aware that bombers are the best vehicle to enforce extended deterrents. the icbms, the missiles that we have, our adversaries sometimes can't see those. a bomber is visible. a bomber can be sen

unanimous consent that senator hatch have 15 minutes, senator thune, 10 minutes; senator kyl, 10 minutes; and senator graham, 10 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: would my colleague yield for a question? mr. grassley: will i yield for a question? mr. schumer: yeah. mr. grassley: because you new yorkers think you can make us midwesterns look bad. but i'll be glad to yield. mr. schumer: not you. i thank my colleague. and through the chair, i'd simply like to ask my colleague this. i understand we have a different point of view here. we both care about deficit reduction. could he please explain to me why it is okay to take $300 billion of tax cuts for those at the highest income levels, above a million, and not pay for it and yet we have to pay for unemployment insurance extensi extension? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i thought i made that point very clear, because the taxpayers are smarter than we in congress are. they know that they give another dollar to us to spend and it's a license to spend $1.15. so it just increases the na

it goes back to the senate. a handful of senators seem to dictate the will of government at least in the legislative branch. what the president accomplished are some good things for the american people. again, we are not happy for what this has done for the wealthiest 3%. nobody in our party begrudges people for making a buck. this is not class warfare. we didn't create this problem. the wealthy have gotten off in the last decade. two wars unpaid for, the extension of medicare unpaid for. we need to bring responsibility back to this country. >> congressman joseph crowley, we here are also about looking forward. thank you for taking a stand on that. >>> when we come back, my panel joins me again for the wrap up with the tax cut vote. we'll be right back. it's the only complete multivitamin with ginkgo to support memory and concentration. plus vitamin d to help maintain healthy blood pressure. [ bat cracks ] that's a hit. one a day men's. etfs? exchange traded funds? don't just give me ten or twenty to choose from

senate. we did not meet to pile on pil charges against judge porteous by dividing any of these articles into a natural pieces. pro something prosecutor might refer to as to as loading up an indictment. th there erweere other charges weed as well. consider as well. which the evidence of which was suc h introduced at trial such as as sta miniseries false statements onforms. mandatory judicial discourageroduce reforms but offensive to introduce as evidence of wn willingness to perjure himselfthing relant and interest, something veryents t the relevant to both his statements of the senate and in they bankruptcy proceeding.inow the house has great discretion in how it to act soon article in the impeachment and the senate impeachment trial committee ingain this case ruled againstame precisely the same motion the council makes only two months char ago finding that the schemes charged were very straightforward. v we also consider whioether the charge of a violation of a specific criminal statute that

senator dodd spoke earlier on the senate floor about his time in the senate. we will also hear from senator dodd's colleagues. mr. blumenthal will be sworn in. in january. >> -- the speech you gave whenit you first arrived there after remarks you may have. i can't recall what my speech was even about 36 years ago in reprentative the house of representatives,hat except i do recall very vividly there was no one else in the chamber when i gave it. it was an empty hall, early oner colleague, johnny debt. for those old enough to remember johnnie from pennsylvania was rr sitting in the chair.pennsyania he wore dark glasses forever, even all during the day, and hee said there patiently and listened to me as i gave my hand shaking speech in the house ofkn representatives.e house midway through the speech hemidu walked up to me as those who who envision the chamber of the house speaking frommb the well d walked up to me and said quietly so that was my speech in the senate and i am deeply honored s number of you have comepe outumf today so i am not speaking to a naim an

so i would yield the floor to senator corker. mr. corker: thank you, senator. i appreciate that very much, mr. president. i appreciate the courtesy. i wanted to follow up -- i think senator kerry was down here earlier today talking a little bit about proceeding. i know we have people in the cloakroom wondering how we go forward with the amendment process. so i just thought, if i could enter into a conversation with him through this, this, unlike most procedures, where you have a 60-vote cloture, you're -- your ability or your strength on the issue itself rises because it actually takes 67 votes or two-thirds of those voting to actually ratify a treaty. so it is not like when a cloture vote goes by here and you go from a 60-vote cloture from 51. in this case you're actually strengthened because it takes more votes after cloture to actually pass this piece of legislation. and i just wanted to, if i could, to verify with senator kerry the process of actually offering amendments, not just on the treaty, because i know we're still on the treaty, but also on the reso

the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell, senator thune, the senator from texas, all of leadership have earmarks in there. but they say they found religion and ready to oppose it. i can't imagine the bill can pass 60-vote hurdle. >> charles? >> the poison in here for republicans is the billion dollars relatively small amount that would be used to implement obamacare. it takes out of the the hands the legitimate incoming congress issue of how to deal with obamacare and illegitimate voted out congress who would oppose $1 billion, and that means that the republicans would no long ver the way of -- no longer have the way of stopping obamacare removing the funding. because if it passes now, then next year the republicans will be required to take it out. have the house support that. and senate and override a veto, that's why there is strong opposition apart from earmarks. on issue of the shutdown, nots blithe as steve is on this. of course, i wouldn't mind if it shut down for a week or two or save the money. it's revisiting of what happened with gingrich and chin clin. clinton was way do

i can remember the senate the day -- the days of senator byrd, our late senator byrd, and senator baker, with whom i first came to the senate as a staff member. they basically had an agreement that worked like this, senator baker was majority leader for four years, senator byrd majority leader four years, but they led their parties for eight years. and when they did, senator baker would say to the committees, don't bring me a bill to the floor unless it's got the chairman and the minority leader agreeing to it. and they would say, let's offer amendments. there might be 300 amendments. after a while they would offer a motion to agree to have no more amendments. usually they would get that. and they would by discussion narrow that down to a number and people would get their amendments. you might have to be late here one night or be here friday or saturday. senators would say, well, i wonder how important this amendment is. but the american people were heard on the floor of the senate. so it's my great hope that in the new congress where there will be a relatively even number of senators,

senate. the purpose of insulating one-half of our national legislature from the volatile shifts in public mood has been degraded. and while i strongly favor reforming our campaign finance system, revitalizing and rehabilitating our journalistic traditions and restoring citizen faith in government and politics, i know that wishes won't make it so. now, i've heard some people suggest that the senate as we know it simply cannot function in such a highly charged political environment, that we should change senate rules to make it more efficient, more responsive to the public mood, more like the house of representatives, where the majority can essentially bend the minority to its will. i appreciate the frustrations that many have with the slow pace of the legislative process and i certainly share some of my colleagues' anger with the repetitive use and abuse of the filibuster. thus, i can understand the temptation to change the rules that make the senate so unique and simultaneously so terribly fr

and the senate. these were the facts the house considered in unanimously approving four articles of impeachment. the house determined that the corrupt conduct by judge porteous fell into four discreet schemes. one involving his corrupt relationship with amato and creely. another pertaining to the marcottes. a third reflecting his false filings and bankruptcy. and the final concerning his deception of the senate and the f.b.i. notwithstanding historic precedent of giving the house broad discretion in drafting articles of impeachment and the plain logic of this division, judge porteous complains that the articles contain allegations that, in counsel words, are improperly aggregated. the senate has never ordered an article passed by the house to be divided up according to the accused's desires or required multiple votes on an article -- a proposal prohibited by the senate's own rules. unlike his motions to dismiss articles i and ii, this motion was heard and decided by the senate impeachment trial commi

so i would yield the floor to senator corker. mr. corker: thank you, senator. i appreciate that very much, mr. president. i appreciate the courtesy. i wanted to follow up -- i think senator kerry was down here earlier today talking a little bit about proceeding. i know we have people in the cloakroom wondering how we go forward with the amendment process. so i just thought, if i could enter into a conversation with him through this, this, unlike most procedures, whe you have a 60-vote cloture, you're -- your ability or your strength on the issue itself rises because it actually takes 67 votes or two-thirds of those voting to actually ratify a treaty. so it is not like when a cloture vote goes by here and you go from a 60-vote cloture from 51. in this case you're actually strengthened because it takes more votes after cloture to actually pass this piece of legislation. and i just wanted to, if i could, to verify with senator kerry the process of actually offering amendments, not just on the treaty, because i know we're still on e treaty, but also on the resoluti

the senator from florida. the senate will be in order. mr. lemieux: madam president, this amendment says simply one thing, that within one year's time of the ratification of this treaty, the united states and russia would sit down and negotiate a tactical nuclear weapons treaty. why do i bring this forward? because we know, and we heard a lot about it today in our closed session, that there is a tremendous disparity between the number of tactical nuclear weapons that our country has at 300 and the russians have at 3,000. 10-1. if this treaty is ratified, the russians will have 4,500 nuclear weapons, we will have 1,800. this is not a poison pill. you will hear that. it's not. it does not change a material term of this agreement. it just says, within a year's time, we will sit down and enter into these negotiations. and we need to put it in the treaty because that's the only way that we can make sure that it will happen. if we send this treaty with this amendment back to the russian duma and they don't approve it, what does that say? it says th

in the senate. it's also expected to increase 100,000 jobs nationwide. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. udall: mr. president, this is disappointing. it's a shame we can't move this important legislation forward. we should be helping our economy. we're embroiled here in obstruction. i will continue to fight for this. i hope other senators who are here today will join me in helping me unleash the power of our credit unions to get americans back to work. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: i believe the regular order now is my amendment number 4833. at this time i would like to yield just for a moment for an announcement from the senator from colorado -- i'm sorry, from montana, senator tester. mr. tester: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. tester: i want to thank the senator from oklahoma very much, very much appreciate kicking it over to me. i ask unanimous consent to be a

two will be by senator kyl and one by senator wicker. i believe senator wicker is prepared to call up his amendment at this point. i think we're going to proceed -- i would ask unanimous consent that on each amendment there be a half-hour equally divided -- no, hold it. okay. mr. president, we'll hold off on the unanimous consent agreement, but senator wicker, i believe, will start the debate on his amendment. thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi is recognized. mr. wicker: i ask consent to call up amendment number 4895 by wicker and kyl. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from mississippi, mr. wicker, proposes amendment numbered 4895. at the end -- mr. wicker: i ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wicker: and thank you, mr. president. i rise this evening to offer another amendment to the resolution of ratification. this amendment rises out of concerns over

new senators thinking that the senate is the a law-making body. those are the ones who have been most shocked into action by the fact it's no longer true that the senate is a law-making body. if the senate doesn't run on majority rules, if it takes a supermajority to do everything, it is no longer a functioning legislature. how can that be fixed? if the old hens in washington were worked up about it, it wouldn't that hard to fix. you can change the rules of the senate with a single majority vote if you do it on the first day that congress is in session. it's not that big a deal if the powers that be wanted to make it happen. the people who do want to make it happen are not the powers that be. they're the junior senators. they don't generally get to call the shots. instead of trying to pull this off by persuading the big shots, that the big shots want to do this, because maybe the big shots can't be persuaded, the junior senators are organizing trying to get the public behind the idea that the senate rules should change and should change on january

democrats will be defending 21 senate seats. republicans only have ten to defend and the citizens of the u.s. supreme court ruling will mean republicans will be able to be pouring money into the election cycle and purchase a bunch of senate seats. that's how it works. i mean money works, doesn't it? if the republicans get control of the congress and then the only choice to stop their radical agenda is the filibuster so in my opinion weakening it is dangerous. senator jeff merkley of oregon is in favor of the filibuster reform and he joins us tonight. senator, this filibuster has been around since 1857, why change it now? >> well, actually, ed, we're not planning to gut it, we're planning to make it do what we all think it does, that is if 41 folks say debate should condition, then the debate should condition but you shouldn't be able to object, go home to dinner, take a vacation and never appear on the floor and explain to the american bhiem understand for so if you say to be continued you need to be ready to have continuous deb

treaty finally on the floor of the senate but not without one republican senator threatening to read every last word in that treaty and another senator, the leading opponent senator kyl saying it's disrespectful to the christmas holiday to bring it up. what do you say to he and the others dragging their feet. >> get out of the way. there's too much at stake for america's national security. and don't tell me about christmas. i understand christmas. i have been a senator for a long time. i've been there many years where we go right up to christmas. there's ten days between now and christmas. i hope i don't get in the way of your christmas shopping, but this is the nation's business. this is a national security at stake. act. act. >> press secretary robert gibbs also fired back against those republicans saying this is a new low in putting political stunts ahead of our national security. this treaty is supported by president h.w. bush. every living republican secretary of state, our nate owe allies and the military, it is the height of hypocrisy to complain that there is not enough time

i think the senator understands that. i'm convinced the senator knows that. he's too smart about this stuff and he knows too much about it not to understand that if the russians think all of a sudden we've done something that alters that balance, i believe he thinks they're going to react to that somehow. he has nodded in assent, he does believe that. and so all this nonbinding component says is recognizing the existence of the relationship, it doesn't say that they're going to get out, it doesn't say at what point it changes things. what's more, the record could not be more clear here from our unbelievably competent personnel working on this. and when you look at the comments of -- let me just go back to them right now. i know that the senator from arizona has respect for lieutenant general patrick o'reilly. he is a retired united states air force lieutenant general, and it's his job to defend america against a missile attack. now, here's what he said. he says, "relative to the recently expired start treaty, the new start treaty actually reduces constraints

senator. since that time i've been honored to work with you and others on all of the priorities facing our country and many more. public service has been a blessing and a labor of love for me and little in life could be more fulfilling. but i look forward to the next chapter of my life. i'm neither shy nor retiring, there are ways to serve. elective office is only one of them. i plan to continue to fight for missouri national priorities from a different vantage point. through 40 years in public life, i've met many wonderful people. i visited every area of the county, of the state, every term i served in office. the people i met in office and the people i worked with have made the job so rewarding i decided to stay longer. the people of missouri have been my most trusted and valuable advisers, i thank them for giving me support. in addition to my colleagues and friends there are too many to thank but let me give you the first one first, my patient family, my wife linda, the light and love of my

senator mcconnell chose senator kyl to represent the republicans in the senate. i chose the chairman of the finance committee, senator baucus, to represent democrats in the senate. so they're moving forward on that to see if there is something that can be worked out. my republican colleagues knew this as they drafted this letter. therefore, they also know that the true effect of this letter is to prevent the senate from acting on many important issues that have bipartisan support. with this letter, they have simply put in writing the political strategy that the republicans pursued this entire congress, namely, obstruct, delay; obstruct, delay action on critical matters and then blame the democrats for not addressing the needs of the american people. very cynical, but very obvious, very transparent. so i, mr. president, -- we must move forward on matters of importance. we have numerous judges that need to be taken care of, and i'm trying to work something out with the republican leader on those. so i hope that everyone understands there are issues that we need to

the presiding officer: senators, please, the senate will be in order. the senate will be in order. mr. baucus: mr. president, the senate is still not in order, especially right down here in this part of the well. the presiding officer: would the senators please remove their conversations to the cloakroom. please remove your conversations to the cloakroom. senators ... mr. mcconnell: i thank the chair. with unemployment over 9% for more than -- more scekive months than at any time since world war 2, the voters are looking for a different approach here in washington. two years of out-of-control spending and big-government policies have led to record deficits and debt, chronic unemployment and deep your honor certainty about our nation's fiscal future, meaningful show votes and antibusiness rhetoric won't do anything to make the situation better. this saturday's session is a total waste of the american people's time. one of the votes wheeled today was opposed by every single republican and many democrats. and the other vote we held was a poll-tested plan opposed by every single republ

the senate and the house, these are tests of wills. and we need all the help we can get from the president. is the help there? yes. does it come to the extent that i would like to see it in the way that i would like to see it? no, it has not come in that form which i think is essential to come down in the right way. and what i believe to be the best way in terms, for instance, of the tax bill. >> there's a couple minutes left. >> we talked about the dysfunction of the senate quite a bit. and start raises that question also, doesn't it, because here you have a situation where on don't ask don't tell repeal you had a super majority that favored it but somehow couldn't get clear. on start, you've got the foreign policy establishment of the republican party that supports testimony this. so why is it that you can't get republican support for something like that? >> because a significant number of republicans decided that they would filibuster anything that did not fit their order of business. it's very -- i've never seen a letter like this.

senator kerry and senator levin. you know we often come to these press conferences and our colleagues speak and we agree with some things and perhaps not all things. in this case i want to categorically say i very much agree with the statements made both by senator kerry and senator levin. i think from the perspective of foreign relations and the respective of armed services, this treaty must be ratified. i want to add to that the intelligence committee has carefully reviewed the june 2010 national intelligence estimate or as we would say, the m.i.t., on the intelligence community's ability to monitor this new treaty. we held a hearing on the nie and related issues and then sent 70 questions for the record and received detailed responses from the intelligence community. the committee undertook its own independent review of the nie. committee staff participated in more than a dozen meetings and briefings on a range of issues concerning the treaty. focusing on intelligence monitoring and collection aspects. so i would

that there is some stall that works in the senate. do you think that the president will do that in short order? >> yes, he will drop had his defense. the argument have been, you're the defense. you have this obligation. i think that's generally right. we don't want the presidents picking and choosing what they defend in court. this will have lost its legitimacy. it won't a case people can argue overturning the will of the public. but i am confident and i give the president credit. joe lieberman and harry reid and great leadership from steny hoyer and nancy pelosi. i am overwhelming confident we will get rid of this. >> representative barney frachk, thanks for your time. >>> everything is going fine in afghanistan. the withdrawal starting next july might be a withdrawal that doesn't start until 2014. other than that, it's an excellent report the president revealed today. >>> on this date in 1961 was born a visionary who had everything but time. dead two months after his 32nd birthday. his work defined by his conclusion. that the work i

by senator shaheen. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: and i want to respond to the comments of my friend from texas, who was very passionate in her remarks, by saying that it interested me that she raised the name of president ronald reagan because his major -- a lot of major players in his administration support this treaty. george schultz, for one. james baker, second. and the director of national intelligence, who's responsible for verification, supports this treaty. and lieutenant general patrick o'reilly, head of u.s. missile defense agency, says that -- that the new start treaty actually reduces constraints on the development of missile defense. and so i -- i think that her comments were very articulate but they're not correct, because, again, i would place into the record the many leaders from former republican administrations who are pressing us hard to get this treaty done. as a matter of fact, we've had no boots on the ground, nobody to verify what the russians are doing for

murray: the senator is correct. i'm merely asking that the -- the presiding officer: the time will be equally divided between now and 3:00 and the senators may speak on either subject. mr. mccain: i thank the chair. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, then i come to the floor this afternoon to speak and join in the effort to repeal don't ask, don't tell. mr. president, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senators will please take your conversations off the floor. thank youthe senator from washis recognized. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, this policy has failed in its intended goals. it's done a tremendous disservice to the men and women who want nothing more than to defend our country and it's time for this policy to go. i want to begin this afternoon by talking about a true hero from my home state of washington named margaret wick. she joined the air force in 1987 and served honorably for 18 years as a flight nurse, rising to the rank of major. she was des

senator. in my book the highest accolade is that russ feingold is a good and decent person with a passion for fairness, social justice and honest an open government. for me it has been an honor to be his friend and colleague for 18 years. our friendship will continue as will russ feingold's fight for progressive causes that he believes very strongly in. our departed friend paul wellstone use to say -- quote -- "the future belongs to those with passion." well, by that definition, russ feingold has a wonderful future ahead of him. i join with the entire senate family in wishing him the very best in the years ahead. mr. president, in these closing days of the 111th congress, the senate will say farewell to one of the most seasoned and accomplished members on both sides of the aisle, senator robert bennett of utah. certainly no one in this body doubts senator bennett's staunch conservative values and principles, especially on fiscal and regulatory issues. he has been a consensus builder, willing t

senate i'm sure the u.s. senate will be very keen that it gets ratified here early last when the bloodier talk about how we've got this farther to go thus far if and when it is finally fully ratified now here in moscow when are we going to see some concrete evidence of the treaty and those cuts taking place. ok ivan soon enough the u.s. can negotiate or astarte said they might start the verification process this spring you understand that only when both countries have their treaty ratified it will come into a fact now that the senate gave its approval it's russia's turn and they're really not many obstacles left as my colleague in moscow said russian lawmakers generally made it clear that they have no objections to the treaty what will follow we all know they would start dismantling the bombs and traveling to each other to see that the other side is complying with their obligations under the treaty both countries have some very significant reductions underway they will cut their nuclear arsenals by a third do

senator bennet for two minutes, senator gillibrand for two minutes and senator schumer for two minutes. mr. bennet: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: i rise in strong support for the "dream" act. i have a lost sympathy for the arguments the senator from arizona made about what is going on in arizona, what's going on in the rocky mountain west where i come from, which reminds me of the need that we have in this country to -- and in this congress to finally face up to the facts and pass comprehensive immigration reform. but that's not what we're talking about today. what we're talking about today is the dream act, a narrow bill that deals with about 65,000 people a year that are here through no fault of their own and have no other country of their own but want to make a contribution to our country. as scholars, as taxpayers, as part of our military. the people that have worked hard, that have played by the rules, and they want to do nothing other than make a contribution to the united states of america. much as my grandparents and my mother want

senate. i will warn them, this is probably not my last speech because i intend to be heavily involved in the debate over whether or not we pass a continuing resolution or a -- an omnibus bill. but i have a history with the senate and it began when i was a teenager. as a summer intern, i remember sitting in the gallery and watching bob taft prowl across the back of the senate watching to make sure things were going according to his desire. he had been the majority leader. he had stepped down from that position because of the cancer that he had perfected, but he was -- he had contracted, but he was still paying attention to this body where he served with such distinction. and lyndon johnson was sprawled out with his lanky frame in the democratic leader's desk and i was watching from the gallery and thinking what an extraordinary place this was. ten years later, i came back as a staffer and i served here, was sitting in my cubicle in the dirksen building when word came that john f. kennedy had b