expected, work on a bill encouraging tourism. lawmakers will break for weekly party caucus lunches at 12:30 p.m. eastern, and we plan to bring you live coverage of president obama's rose garden news conference at that time. now lives in a coverage here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer.

the chaplain: let us pray. gracious god, ruler of all nature, protect our senators from the seductive influences of power and prestige. today, deliver them from the delusion of self-importance which their position and status subtly nurture. remind them of the example of the greatest man who ever lived and said, "he that would be greatest must be servant of all." in disagreement and confrontation, help them to respect and esteem each other,

as they struggle together for the resolution of complex issues. lord, give them the humility to know that no one has a monoply on your truth and that all need oefp other to discover your guidance together. we pray in your holy name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., june 23, 2009. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable roland burris, a senator from the state of illinois, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, presidet pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: mr. majority leader. mr. reid: following leader remarks the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators to be allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each. republicans will control the first 30 minutes and the majority will control the next 30 minutes. the senate will be in recess from 12:30 to 2:15 today to allow for weekly caucus luncheons, to continue work on an agreement to continue the legislative branch appropriations bill, to be able to reach an agreement senators could expect votes in relation to that bill during today's session. mr. president, i ask unanimous

consent the "help" committee be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 1777. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 1777, an act to make technical corrections to the higher education act of 1965, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that a substitute amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and there be no intervening action or debate, any statements relating to this matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: mr. president, before we turn to legislative matters, i want to express my personal condolences to those in the entire united states senate to the people affected by yesterday's tragedy. and that was a lot of people. that tragedy took place on the

washington metro system. nine people were killed and scores were injured yesterday evening as they simply made their way home during rush hour. the accident shook this city and this body. like so many other commuters, many who work on capitol hill rely on the metro system every day. it's been reliable, it's been safe. we're terribly concerned about what took place yesterday. my heart goes out to the families who lost loved ones and those who were injured. as we learn more about what caused this terrible accident, we'll work to ensure it never happens again. mr. president, this new year began with so much hope. when we began the 111th congress, i hoped the republicans would leave their partisan games in the 110th. i hoped they would have listened when the american people reviewed their record and said no to the party of no. i wrote the following at this time this past january. i quote -- "we have no choice but to govern differently.

times demand it. if we do not govern differently, we will have taken no lessons from the bad experience of the bush years." that goes for republicans and democrats alike, mr. president. in my first address to this chamber this year, i reminded both republicans and democrats, when we retreat to partisanship, when we fail to reach for common ground, we rob ourselves of the ability to create the change the american people demand. as the health care debate approached in april, i reached out to our republican colleagues and wrote this, "rather than saying no, we must be willing to offer concrete and constructive proposals. we cannot afford more of the obstructionist tactics that have denied and delayed congress's efforts to address so many of the critical changes facing this nation." end of quote. last week i reminded the other side our hands are outstretched across the aisle. just yesterday i encouraged our

republican friends to join with us to pass an important bill that would promote foreign travel in the united states, bring jobs, reduce our deficit, strengthen our economy in the process. every place in america, there are hotel rooms, motel rooms that are not occupied as they should be. the legislation yesterday that was killed by the republicans would have had more people coming to those hotel and motel rooms. mr. president, at the beginning of this year, at the beginning of this congress, at the beginning of this debate and even up to the beginning of this week my commitment to bipartisanship and finding common ground has not changed. unfortunately a stubborn group of senate republicans has not changed either. yesterday republicans blocked a bill that had 11 republican cosponsors. i assume, mr. president, when they sponsored that bill they were in favor of the bill. that's kind of an idea people get around here.

they blocked the bill that would support a $1 trillion investment in a slow economy. they blocked a bill that would create 40,000 jobs at home over the next year. it would have cut our deficit and that would vice president helped our economy recover. perhaps, though, we shouldn't be surprised. just last week a republican senator said the following: "democrats need to know when they bring bills up we're going to extend the debate as long as we can, even if we can't win." that's what he said. given their commitment to obstruction, it's remarkable we've gotten anything done this year, let alone such a strong catalog of important accomplishments that helped us revive our economy, strengthen our national security, protect our environment, promote equality and ensure progress. if republicans are going to stand in the way of a bill that creates tens of thousands of new jobs, cuts our deficit by hundreds of millions of dollars and helps every state in the union, how are we going to do

the other important work the american people sent us here to do? if they don't want to create jobs and save our government money, what is it they want to do? as my good friend from north dakota, senator dorgan, said yesterday on the floor, if we can't agree on a piece of legislation offered by over 50 senators, republicans and democrats, dealing with promotion of tourism and creating jobs and promoting the country's economic interests pw-r asking international tourists to come to america and see what america is all pw-rbgs if we can't agree on about, if we can't agree on that, howe will we get agreements on climate change and so on? it's so disappointing." i don't know if anyone could put it better than senator dorgan did. i couldn't. reforming health is a daunting task. no one claims it's simple but everyone knows it's essential. no one claims the answer is obvious. everyone knows we must work towards one. if republicans refuse to find common ground on the easy

things, how will we do so on the hard ones. difficult to understand, mr. president, but it's clear to anyone following this debate that our republican friends are not interested in making difficult but necessary decisions to dig our economy out of this ditch and move us farther down the past to recovery and prosperity. they have said publicly and privately they're betting on obama's failure. to this point, mr. president, it's been a bad bet because obama is still today, in the press his popularity is approaching 70%. instead they claim that talking points written by pollsters, they like to repeat the tired, trite and baseless claim if we reform health care, 85% of americans -- 85% of americans wants us to reform maker. but they're saying if they approve health care, they'll be

denied and delayed in getting health care. it's absolutely uncomprehensible what their reasoning is, mr. president. and nothing could be further from the truth. first, let me state once again the facts. no matter what republicans claim, the government has no intention of choosing any part of the medical plan. we're talking about a public option, a public choice. the government has no intention of khaougs for you any part of your medical -- of choosing for you any part of your medical plan. if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. in fact, it's the name of the whole section of the "help" committee's bill. section 131 is called -- quote -- "no changes to existing coverage." end of quote. that's what the title of the bill section is. every time you hear republicans say otherwise, you know they're not interested in an honest debate. second, let me reiterate once again the reality. the only thing being delayed is

urgently needed reform that ensures all americans have access to quality, affordable health care. the only thing at risk of being denied is americans' ability to stay healthy, get healthy or care for a loved one. is being denied and denied by a party by a party that makes stalling tactics their specialty. the party of noes showing no interest in legislating, and i'm most concerned that the party of noes showing no interest in helping millions of people who have no insurance and the 20 million who are underinsured and the millions more who are paying too much for health care, that they could lose which is one accident and one illness, and the millions of people, mr. president, who are afraid they're going to lose their insurance. that's what this debate is about. it's not only about the people who have no insurance. it's about allowing people who have insurance to keep it. in the last eight years the nuer of uninsured in this

country has gone up by 10 million people. 10 million people. so i remind my republican colleagues again, this is not about winning and st. louising. this is not the time for -- this is not about winning and losing. this is not the time for ideology. this is not the place for political games. for millions of americans, those with no coverage at all, it abouts a concrete and critical crisis that children, families, small businesses feel every single day. it is about the parent who can't afford to take their kid to the doctor because insurance is too expensive. it's about the small business that has to lay off employees because it can't afford skyrocketing health care premiums. it is about small businesses who eliminate insurance because they can't afford it. it is about the three and five families who put off necessary medical care because it costs too much. american families and every one of our states are counting on us to work together in our common interests. they are not counting political

points scored by either party. senate democrats want nothing more than to work with republicans to create a bipartisan health reform bill that assures quality, affordable health for all americans. that's why the "help" committee has held 14 bipartisan round tables, 13 committee hearings and 20 meetings of committee members to discuss various proposals. each one with the goal of reaching a bipartisan agreement. hard-working americans are too often the casualities of our broken health care system. they deserve better than to be also the casualities of this kind of politics. it's not too late for republicans to join us for a serious discussion and dialogue about how to move this country forward. as i did at the beginning of this year, this congress, this debate and this week. i still have hope they will. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president, the secretary of health and human services recently said that when it comes to health care, the status quo is unacceptable. i certainly agree with that. shoe thug wulgd it can thousand r shoe thug wulgd rolling to saw -- she then went on to say that the people are content with doing nothing. on that i disagree. republicans and democrats share the belief that health care reform is definitely needed. the question is: what kind of reform should it be? some have proposed a government-run health care system that would force millions to give up private health plans they haven't liked and replace them with a government plan where care is denied, delayed and rationed. this so-called reform is not the kind of change americans want. they want health care that's more affordable and accessible, but that reserves the doctor-patient relationship and the quality of care they now

enjoy. and that's why republicans are proposing reforms to make health care less expensive and easier to obtain without destroying what's good about our current system. republicans want to reform our medical liability laws to discourage junk lawsuits and bring down the cost of care. we want to encourage wellness and prevention programs that have been successful in cutting costs. we want to encourage competition in the private insurance market so make care more affordable and accessible. and we want to address the needs of small business without creating new taxes that kill jobs. but instead of embracing these commonsense ideas that americans support, democrats in congress are trying to rush through a health care bill that will not only lead to a government-run system, but will do so by spending trillions of dollars and plunging our economy deeper and deeper into debt. recently the independent congressional budget office told us that just one -- just one

section of the bill being discussed in the "help" committee would spen spend $1.3 trillion over a decade. and senator gregg, the ranking member of the budget committee, estimates that the "help" committee bill would end up spending more than $22 trillion. more -- $2 trillion. more than $2 trillion on a bill that wouldn't solve the entire problem. the american people don't want us to spend trillions of dollars on a health care system they don't want. and, yet, that's exactly what democrats plan to do. even though they can't explain to anyone how it will be paid for. despite the staggering cost of the democratic health care plan, we're being told we need to rush it through congress for the sake of the economy. when republicans ask how democrats are going to pay for it or what impact it will have on our health care system and the economy, the only words we hear are rush and spend and rush

and spend. we heard similar warnings earlier this year when democratd their stimulus bill and voted on it less than 24 hours after all of the details were made public. if the american people learned anything from the stimulus, it's that we should be suspicious, very suspicious when we're told that we need to spend trillions of dollars without the proper time to review how the money is spent and the effect it will or won't have. democrats also said the stimulus money wouldn't be wasted and that they would keep track of every penny spent. yet already we're learning about outrageous projects like a $3.4 million turt the tunnel that is -- turtle tunnel that is 13 feet long or $40,000 being spent on the salary of someone's who job is to lobby for more stimulus money. the administration also predicted that if we pass the

stimulus, the unemployment rate would not exceed 8%. well, just last week the president said that unemployment would likely rise to 10%. so when democrats now predict that their health care bill will cut costs, americans should be very skeptical. and they have good reason to be since independent estimates show that every health care proposal the democrats have offered would only hurt the economy. americans should also be skeptical when it comes to democratic promises that people will be able to keep their current insurance. just last week the independent congressional budget office said that just one section -- one section of the "help" bill will cause 10 million people with employer-based insurance to lose the coverage they currently have. and that's even before we've seen a finished product. the bill is still missing significant sections such as a government plan that democrats want which can force millions

more to lose their current coverage. the stimulus showed that when politicians in washington say that the sky is going to fall unless congress approves trillions of dollars right away, we should be wary. yet just a few months later americans are hearing the same thing from democrats on the health care debate. rush and spend, rush and spend. americans want health care reform, but they want the right kind of health care reform. they want us to take the time and care necessary to get it right. and that's why the democrats rush-and-spend strategy is exactly the wrong approach. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, there will now be a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each with the republicans

controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: mr. president, today the "help" committee will meet to discuss another new government program that seeks and has advertised to promote prevention and wellness. while prevention and wellness is important, can lead to lower overall health care costs, we already have several programs focused on wellness and prevention. the h.h.s. appropriations request for prevention i is $700 million. in a recent omnibus appropriation bill, it wa was $22 million worth of earmarks for legislators pet projects for prevention and wellness and $310.5 million worth of earmarks under the health resources and services administration.

yet the health care bill includes $80 billion new spending on new prevention programs without acknowledging the existing programs or suggesting improvements to them. in other words, wellness and fitness has become another trough to put both feet in for earmarks and pet projects of members. we already have a $1.8 trillion in federal debt. the majority keeps on spending on new government programs and intervene in the markets and our personal lives. my question is: where will it stop? the center for disease control has devised programsed focused on weight lost and obesity, smoking and tobacco, drinking and alcohol, injure and accident -- injury and accident prevention. these programs receive hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year. but the health reform bill considered by the health

committee adds billions more for prevention. reckless spending going on is irresponsible. we should be focusing on whether the existing programs achieve their stated objectives. the federal government does nothing to measure effectiveness of prevention programs, has not a single metric for program performance. before we create a new federal entitlement program costing billions, we should first measure the effectiveness of our country programs. and i can tell you what is working. i can tell my colleagues what is working, employers all over the country are creating innovative, voluntary programs to promote healthier lifestyles and bring down cost. safeway is a great example without a government program. so instead of removing lynn drenses to more -- the "help" committee's first instinct is to

create another government entitlement program and set up roadblocks to employer innovation. i would now like to take a moment to put this in perspective. today is tuesday, june 23. and another day has passed without the senate having a complete health care reform bill to consider. we don't yet know what the majority will propose for their so-called government plan or how it will be paid for. what we do know is that a congressional budget office preliminary estimate believes that the incomplete bill will cost over $1 trillion but cover only one-third of those currently uninsured. so i'm very interested in the congressional budget office cost estimate of a complete bill. some fear that the final price tag for covering all americans could cost taxpayers as much as $3 trillion. we have a real problem here.

every day that goes by without a key element of the democrats' bill being available for consideration leads to another day where millions of americans will become uninsured. this is a disservice to our constituents and -- and an embarrassment. mr. president, the -- the president of the united states and the majority continues to allege that we will enact health care reform before we leave for the august recess. we are now approaching the july recess. we do not have an estimate or the language, much less the estimate, of two vital important parts of any health care reform legislation. what will be the role of the employer and what will be the government mandate or the government role? and, finally, how much all of this will cost the taxpayers.

so we're talking about one-fifth of the gross domestic product of this nation and we are expected in a few short weeks to enact overall health care reform with still -- with still the members on this side of the aisle not being informed as to what the plan is. much less have a serious debate. now, there -- there are meetings of the committees going on and discussion and nice things said about each other. and i always enjoy. but the fact is we haven't gotten down to the fundamental challenges of health care reform in america, and the days are growing shorter, and the time is growing short, and, mr. president, we cannot enact health care reform and fail. we cannot do that. so the sooner we get the full perspective of what the administration and the other

side's proposal is and how much it costs and what the fundamental issues are being addressed such as employer mandates and government mandates, my -- our -- are certainly not clear not only to us, but to the american people. we have to communicate to the american people how we're going to fix health care. we can't do that unless we have a complete plan to consider and present to them as well as members on this side of the aisle. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senatorthe presiding officer:e senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i would like to use the next 10

minutes to address the nomination of judge sonia sotomayor to be the next associate justice of the united states supreme court. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. cornyn: i spoke last week a little bit on this nomination and the constitutional responsibility of the senate to conduct a fair and, i believe, a dignified hearing that will be held now on july 13th, just a couple of short weeks from now. as i said then, and i'll say it again, she deserves the opportunity to explain her judicial philosophy more clearly and put her opinions and statements in more proper context. i think every nominee deserves that. but i don't think it's appropriate for anyone, this senator or any senator, to prejudge or to preconfirm judge sotomayor or any judicial nominee. this is an important process, as i said, upon dated by the same

-- mandated by the same malayssia of th-- the samemandaf the senate to provide advice and consent, a constitutional duty of ours and it should be taken in a responsible, substantive and serious way. last thursday i raised three issues that i will reiterate briefly with regard to judge sotomayor's record. i'd like to hear more from her on the scope of the second amendment to the constitution an whether americans -- and whether americans can count on her to uphold one of the fundamental liberties enshrined in the bill of rights, the right to keep and bear arms. i'd also like to hear more from judge sotomayor on the scope of the fifth amendment and whether the government can take private property from one person and give it to another person based on some elastic definition of public use. and i want to hear more from her on