ir lower quorum call:

quorum call:

no mr. dorgan: madam president, i ask con i consent the quorum cae vacated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. dorgan: madam president, at 5:30, we'll be having a cloture vote and the cloture vote deals with the underlying legislation called the travel promotion act. and as i said earlier this afternoon, if the congress can't agree on something like tourism,

what it's become of the issues of health care or energy or climate change or so many other significant controversial issues? this underlying bill is very simple. it is bipartisan. over 50 members of the senate have cosponsored this in the last congress. it actual reduces the federal budget deficit by close to half a billion dollars. and as i indicated, it -- it should bear no controversy at all. it is simply the development of a public-private partnership that will begin to market our country as most other countries are doing in order to attract destination international tourism to our country. all the other countries are doing this. if you watch the golf tournament today, the u.s. open, in the middle of the golf tournament they break to a commercial. it's the country of turkey saying, come to turky, come and visit the wonders of turkey. well, good for turkey. they're you will there trying to promote international tourism. but the same is true with france

and with india and japan, great britain, so many other countries. why are they doing that? they're doing it because it is unbelievably job creating to have international tourism come to your country. on average, an international tourist spends about $4,500 on hotels and cars and tourist attractions and food. so it's unbelievably job creating and boosting of the economy of the host country. but even more important than that, our country needs to do this and we are not because starting in 2000 -- going to 2008, we now have 600,000 fewer visitors in a year from overseas than we had eight years ago. why is that the case? it's because some people feel that we don't want them to visit our country. quite the opposite is true. and so we suggest rather than keep losing economic opportunities from international tourism, let's at least join the

discussion and get in the game by promoting tourism to our country. destination international tourism. let's at least get in the game. and so our bill creates this public-private partnership and establishes the capability to begin promoting our country. why is that important? well, obviously economic development and jobs, but even more important, at a time when there has been so much controversy about our country and actions abroad and so on, to invite people to our country and have them come here and visit this country is to have them leave with a wonderful impression about the united states of america. there just isn't any way to visit our country and leave with a bad attitude about what the united states is and what it means. this is a great place, the best -- the greatest democracy in all of history, with unbelievable freedoms to that most -- that many people in the world do not have. but it's a wonderful country,

full of natural resources and wonderful people. and to come here and visit here is to leave and believe very positive things about our country. that, it seems to me, makes a lot of sense these days. now, madam president, a colleague was on the floor just a bit ago saying, well, he couldn't vote for cloture at 5:30 because he was not allowed to offer his tarp amendment. of course, tarp has nothing to do with the underlying bill. but that's all right. the rules of the senate allow somebody to offer a tarp amendment. he says, however, that the majority, that's us, is saying we're going to obstruct your right to amend. now, this colleague must not have been around last thursday and friday when we were negotiating to try to get an agreement. we -- they offered, their side offered the first five amendments. they said -- we said show us the amendments, you can offer your first five amendments. all of them were so-called tarp amendments, the troubled asset

issue. well, tarp amendments, having nothing to do with tourism and travel, but that's fine. we said okay, you are can offer that. so how is it somebody comes to the floor of the senate now and says they're being obstructive? we said you can offer them. but then what they said, well, you've offered five tarp amendments and here are your three amendments. one of your three amendments is one by senator sanders, then we won't allow to you offer. we object to that. now, what was the sanders amendment? it was pretty simple. the sanders amendment would use existing authority to, rather, require that the commodities future trading commission use existing authority to begin trying to tackle this question of what's happening in the run-up of oil prices. the commodity futures trading commission has acted like a potted plant for a long, long time. oil prices went to $147 a barrel in mid-2008 and the cftc was

explaining to, well, that's supply and demand. that's total nonsense. total nonsense. had nothing to do with supply and demand. 2 had to do with speculators breaking -- my it had to do with speculators breaking that oil futures market. so the cftc knew nothing about it. right now the supply of oil is up and demand is down and the price is going up once again. there's something wrong. so the senator from vermont wanted to offer an amendment, so i included it on the amendments that we would offer to the republicans last thursday and friday, saying, on, you want to offer five amendments have that have nothing to do with the bill. that's fine. you can do that. here are the three amendments we propose to start with. they said no, no, no, you cannot offer the sanders amendment. well, wait a second? the minority is going to decide what the majority can offer? we've just said to the minority, you can offer your five tarp amendments having nothing to do with this bill, that's fine. so now we have somebody coming to the floor this afternoon saying he has to vote against

cloture because the majority says we're going to obstruct your right to amend? nothing could be further from the truth. in fact, the decision by the minority has put us in this position. so apparently we will have people coming to the floor with the belief that somebody obstructed their right to amend even though the amendment that they proposed was agreed to by us, that we would allow it, it was fine to be offered. even though that was the case, we'll have some people come to the floor apparently deciding to vote against cloture on this bill. because they say that somebody obstructed their right to amend. that's just totally without foundation. and so i -- it is byzantine to me that here we are in the united states senate on a piece of legislation called "the travel promotion act," which is designed to promote tourism and to create jobs and to promote this country, promote this

country's interests, widely bipartisan, it's been around for now 2 1/2 years or so, no great controversy that i know of, a bill in which we were required to file cloture and wait two days for a cloture vote just on the motion to proceed to it. once we got to the motion to proceed, we had a vote, and guess what? 90-3 -- 90-3 said, yes, let's proceed dispoivment then the minority said -- proceed to it. and then the my fortunate said oh, by the way, you can't proceed to it because then we're going to insist on the 30 hours postcloturement so you've got to wait 30 more. total, complete, thorough delay. and so it doesn't sit well with me for anybody to come here and to have say that somebody's being obstructive. the presiding officer: the majorities that expired. mr. dorgan: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that unless a member of the minority comes to claim time that i be allowed to continue. and if a member of the minority

does come to the floor, i certainly would relinquish the time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. dorgan: madam president, it doesn't wash at all for somebody to suggest somehow they have to vote against cloture because they were denied their right. over on that aisle on thursday, we had a discussion, senator reid, senator mcconnell, myself, senator martinez, and then back and forth in the cloakrooms, we offered amendments back and forth that -- just to get started on the bill. there wasn't a list that said here's the end-all. it said, let's just try get started. and all five of the amendments offered by the minority, we said, fine. have nothing to do with the bill but that's fine. you want to offer them? offer them. but don't come to the floor on monday saying that the majority's obstructing your right to offer an amendment for which we said you could offer. i mean, how do you explain in contradiction? and, again, my point, if this congress can't even agree on tourism, how's it going to agree on the -- how are we going to make progress on health care?

how are we going to make progress on comprehensive energy legislation or climate change or a range of difficult international situations? how are we going to reach some sort of understanding that we represent one interest in this country? that ought to be the public interest in the united states of america. we all work for the same people. and not everything has to be partisan. there is so much rancid partisanship. i was with the majority leader when we stood there. i understood what he was saying. he was saying to the minority, let's swift get started. you want amendments? fine. do amendments. there was nothing but agreement by our majority leader to say to the republicans, just offer some amendments. give them some amendments you want to offer and then go ahead and offer them. a senator: will the senator yield? mr. dorgan: i would be happy to yield. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: i thank my friend

from north dakota on his efforts on the important issue of tourism but for consistently standing up for consumers sick and tired of paying artificially high prices at the gas pumps. i want to take this moment, if i might, just to explain what my amendment is about. mr. dorgan: madam president, rather than yield for a question let me yield the floor and ask him to explain the amendment and then get the floor back. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. sanders: this amendment enjoys widespread supports from a very diverse coalition of organizations throughout this country who shared the common concern that the price of gas and oil is soaring and they don't understand request. but what they do know, it is hurting consumers especially in rural areas like north dakota, vermont, throughout this country, and it is hurting business groups throughout this country. these groups, among others, include the poem markets association of america, it includes public citizens, the

gasoline and automotive service dealers of america, the united egg producers, the peanut growers, friend of the earth, and new england fuel institute. all of these organizations for different reasons are worried about the impact of rapidly rising oil prices on consumers. madam president, all of us took economics 101. what they told us in economics 101 is that when supply is low and demand is high, prices go up. and when supply is broad and demand is minimal, prices go down. well, right now, unfortunately, it seems we can throw out mocks 101 right out the window because at this moment the supply of oil in the united states is as high today as it was 20 years ago and demand for oil in this country

is lower than it was a decade ago. so the question that we are wrestling with now, if supply is high and demand is low, why are oil prices soars? up until today, as a matter of fact, madam president, gasoline prices increased for 54 treaty days, the longest streak on record dating to 1996. today the national average for a gallon of gasoline is $2.69 a gallon, up more than $1 since late last year. madam president, there is mounting evidence that the run-up in oil and gas prices have little to do with the fundamentals of sly and demand and have everything -- of supply and demand and have everything to do by excessive speculation by some of the same wall street funds that received the largest taxpayer bailout in the history of the world. they're back again.

not having caused enough damage driving our country and much of the world into a deep recession, now they're back into their speculation and driving up oil prices which are having an enormously negative impact on consumers all over our country. clearly as a congress, as a senate, we have a responsibility to do everything that we can to prevent the manipulation of oil and gas prices so that they reflect the bake economic supply and demand -- the basic economic supply and demand curve, not excessive speculation. this would help americans struggling up to fill up their gas tafngs this summer but have a positive impact, by the way, in expanding the number of international travelers visiting the united states, the fundamental purpose of the travel promotion act that our amendment is part it, would like to be part of. madam president, the amendment that i am offering, would like to offer, would simply require

the commodities futures trading commission to use its emergency authority to prevent the manipulation of oil prices. now, what is so horrible about that? what has caused our republican friends to jump up and fear in say, this amendment can't be offered? let me mention to my republican friends, last july, the house of representatives passed an identical bill by a vote of 402-19. same bill. overwhelming majority of republicans in the house voted for that bill but for some reason our republican colleagues here do not want to give us the opportunity to vote for it today. i want to thank majority leader reid for -- and senator dorgan, for trying to work out a compromise with the republicans that would have enabled a vote

on this amendment. under this agreement, as senator dorgan has said, the senators would have been able to receive a vote on their top five nongermane amendments. they had five. we had one major nongermane amendment. and it's very hard for me to understand, and maybe my friendship from north dakota has some thoughts on this one, i just have a very hard time understanding what their fear is. what are they afraid of? are they afraid we would be able to take action against the excessive speculation that's countrily taking place on wall street -- that's currently tacking place on wall street. that's the only answer i can think of. the american people are hurting. we're in a recession. people is lost their jobs. people have seen a decline in their income and the american people are sick and tired of paying artificially high prices add the gas pump and people in new england are worried about what happens next winter when

they have to heat their homes with oil. so i want to just mention and conclude, interestingly enough, that just conferred, just conferred, the guardian, the british newspaper, reported that -- quote -- "staff at goldman sachs can look forward to the biggest bonus payouts in the firm's 140-year history after a spectacular first half of the year," and now i don't mean to just peck on goldman sachs. there are a number of other financial outfits that may be engaged in excessive oil speculation, as well, but gold map sacks is the leading trader of oil and gas derivatives. so here we are, goldman sachs, among others, now paying out huge bonuses after having been bailed out by the taxpayers of this country and they're back at their same old tricks engaging in excessive speculation which is what my amendment begins to

address. address. so madam president, i am amazed our republican friends would refuse to allow an amendment to come to the floor of the senate that was passed overwhelmingly in the house with very, very strong republican support in that body. and with that, madam president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. dorgan: madam president, as i have indicated previously, the underlying bill on which we're going to have a cloture vote is bipartisan with over 50 cosponsors here in the united states senate? the last congress. republicans and democrats alike have supported it. we're apparently going to have a cloture vote that some, scwumming by what one of my colleagues said earlier, some feel they have to vote against cloture to stop this bill because they feel their right to amend was obstructed despite the fact that their right to amend was explicitly agreed to so, you know, working on bad information is thought a good way with which

to vote, in my judgment. let me just make an important point. i indicated earlier, this is one of the few pieces of legislation that will be brought to the floor of the senate that actually reduces the federal budget deficit by close to $550 million. that's pretty unbelievable but the most important issue here, really, two issues. one is at a time when we are seeing 500,000, 600,000 americans a month losing their jobs, losing their homes, losing home because we are in a deep recession, at a time when we have all of this unemployment, for a piece of legislation to be brought to the floor that tries to boost employment by boosting tour im, that will spend a substantial amount of money -- $4,500 for tourists we are told, at a time especially when we are 633,000 fewer international tourists coming to america than did eight years ago. now, where is that the case?

because 9/11 intervened. the terrible attack, the tragic attack on this country on 9/11 and follow that our country obviously decided we watched to keep terrorists out of this country. it was harder to get a visa, longer lines overseas to get a visa and then the iraq war began and a lot of people were upset with our country for unilaterally actions in iraq and so on so we've going through nearly a decade, now, in which people are travel willing around the world more and more often but they're not traveling here. they're traveling to other countries -- to spaip, to france, great britain, yugoslavia -- you name it -- not yugoslavia, they would have traveled to ruing yugoslavia -- kosovo, turkey, and india and japan, all of whom advertising aggressively internationally, saying "come to our country,"

see the beauty of japan or india or australia. but our country is not involved in that competition. we should be. there is no better place than this earth. to come hour is to love this country and to understand the good character and culture that exists here. this piece of legislation will create jobs and opportunity in this country but even more important, it will create good will all across this world from people who visit here. and go home and understand and have a better understanding of what america is about. at a time when we are in a democrat recession, do we want to create jobsst i hope so. at a time when we care about what the world thinks about us, do we watch to improve our standing in the world? i hope so. so we will have a cloture vote in three or four minutes and i'm told, now, some who have cosponsored the bill, even, will probably come down and vote against cloture because they will claim they don't is the right to offer amendments. they sure do. we agreed they could offer their first five amendments last

thursday. it's just that they said that we can't offer our amendments because they object, for example, to the sappedders amendment. we said you can offer five, we'll do three. they said, that's fine but we won't allow you to offer the sanders amendment. we won't agree to that. so again, my question, if a congress, if the united states senate has come to the point with it can't agree on tour in, what hope is there for big, really big important controversial issues that we're going to confront later this year? my hope is that perhaps some will understand the good will with which the majority leader and i and others offered the minority the right to offer the amendments they chose to offer. it was the in urt that decided they didn't want to agree and it would be difficult for me to see and of those who were given the ability to offer the amendments come to the floor and vote against a bill they support because they say they weren't given an opportunity to offer amendments.

it's pretty hard to square that circle and my hope is they will understand that before they vote. it would be very nice if perhaps on this one vote it would be considered a leadership or partisan job and it wouldn't be based on misinformation but instead we decided this is about tour itch, about promoting jobs and economic opportunity and boosting the reputation of this country away the world by having people visit the united states and understanding the full breadth of what the american experience is about. madam president, i yield the floor. i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: