has helped to lead this in the recovery act and then again as we ended a filibuster, a month-long filibuster in october, brought that to an end in november to extend unemployment insurance, and we find ourselves again, because of the unemployment situation, even though we see it a little bit -- getting a little bit better, we have a long way to go. we're moving in the right direction but a long way to go, and this bill would extend for two months unemployment insurance that's critical for families. it would also extend help with health insurance as we're debating the larger health reform bill to create a way for families to be able to afford insurance and for us to bring down costs over the long run for businesses and for families. this bill in front of us that's being filibustered by the republicans would extend help for health care, for health

insurance, for cobra payments, and a program put in place. it made a lot of sense that if you lose your job, you could pay on your own to continue the coverage. but it is incredibly expensive. and so recognizing that and recognizing how tough it is when you lose your job and you're in a situation, it's either savings or unemployment insurance or both, and you're trying to just keep the mortgage payment and care for the kids and food on the table and electric bills and all of the other things, and thefn to add a several hundred or several thousand dollar payment for cobra on top of that just hasn't been realistic for families. so we have placed a 65% subsidy to help families get through tough time for health insurance. we also have assistance for food for families right now. again, who have never had to ask

for help before in their lives but now have a situation where they can't put adequate food on the table for their children. so this bill is very important. and what we have in front of us, unfortunately, is another filibuster, another objection, like we have seen all year, to stopping us from moving forward to fund our military, to support our troops with a pay raise, to help military families, and then to do a number of other things that are critical to do in the short run until we get into the new year and are able to focus more broadly on these things. and, as the presiding officer knows, this is not the first time this has happened. we have had from the party of "no" 98 different objections this year. this is a record, world record, i think. 98 different times that we have

seen them objectin objecting thh filibuster, objections, stalling tax deduction particulars to moving forward on things that ought to be bipartisan. these are not democratic issues when somebody has lost their job or when a small business needs to have -- needs health insurance that they can afford or when a family finds themselves in a situation where they need to be able to have help to continue their health insurance or put food on the table. this is not a democratic ideaer a republican idea. this is american, that we have democrats, republicans, independents, people who don't have a party, people who are not active politically, people who are, people who vote, people who don't vote. they're losing their jobs. they expect us to get it. they expect us to have a sense of urgency around here. the troops that are serving us right now in tougher times than

we will ever face, they're not saying, it matters whether you're democratic or republican, as to whether or not we found -o whether or not we fund the troops and give them a pay raise and help their families. they are a just saying, come on. come together, solve problems, get things done. but yet over and over again we find ourselves tonight, we're gobbing stopping the filibuster at 1:00 in the morning on a bill to fund the department of defense, often a bil on a gill d help families get over the holiday season, help people with their heating bills and keep food on the table. to dramatictize this even more, it is stunning to think about the fact that out of 40 weeks we have been in session this year, 40 weeks, 36 of those weeks we

have had filibusters or stalling takstallingtactics, objections o amendments, or objections to bills being put on the floor. that means only four weeks out of the entire year we've been in a situation where the republicans have not been saying "no." have not been stalling on things that are incredibly important. now, even with all of this, by any objective measure, there is a been more accomplished this year than in any other time since the great depression. the pob for our families is that we need to be accomplishing moshings and faster because people -- we need to be accomplishing more, and faster because people have a tremendous sense of urgency about what is happening in their lives right now. and so we need to be acting. think of what we could have gotten done and what we have -- all of the things that have gotten done and have been addressed, think about what we could have gotten done if we

didn't have 36 weeks of filibusters we had to deal with and objections we had to deal with. i hope, as we go into this new year, that there will be a sense that it's time to get things together here and work for the common good and put people back to work and tackle their health care costs and make sure people can atoured to have health insurance. let me just close, madam president, by sharing a story from annette from lake or on, michigan. she says, after a successful 21-year journalism career, i was laid off in may when my newspaper closed. i'll turn 60 in october and am a 12-year survivor of breast cancer. my husband, who is 62, is on my health insurance. thankfully the federal government is helping us pay for our cobra. which would be more than $800 a month otherwise. we're not pleading poverty, but

it's easy to see the dilemma of many americans in our shoes. risk going without health insurance, you risk bankruptcy if somebody getds sick. pay the current price, and you watch your life savings which were supposed to support new your old age dwindle down. she says, "don't listen to those screaming to maintain the status quo t doesn't work for too many americans." we have story after story after story where people are facing an early retirement, not by choice, dipping into retirement savings to try to keep their health care going. young people, old people who need us to act now, madam president, and i'm you urging colleagues -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. stabenow: -- act now. thank you. mr. sessions: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: its a he very

distressing that senator stabenow couldn't finish her remarks and that other senators like senator whitehouse and levin and lieberman have been shorted of time. why? because for some reason the majority leader feels like that we shouldn't go past 5:30 tonight. well, that is defense bill, and it is important, and we need to be talking about the good things that are in it and the things that have been added to it that are not so good. and i don't think working a few extra hours is going to hurt anybody, and i think about, as we -- as i hear colleagues complain that they can't work a weekend, they can't work up to christmas, they can't work at night, well, what about our men and women who serve in iraq and afghanistan seven days a week, 12 hours a day, christmas and whholidays they're there away fm their families. so i don't have any sympathy for any member of the united states

senate that feels like this is too hard a work for them. and i do not appreciate the fact that we are shut off in debate tonight to be able to talk about this issue that's before us. i see no reason for that to have to occur. and i object to the health care bill. the american people object to the health care bill. 61% say "no." so we're supposed to now just agree and go along with the majority, and if we don't, we're some sort of obstructionists? i don't think so. i believe i'm representing my constituency. i believe i'm representing the best interests of the united states of america. and i do not believe this health care bill is part of that. and with regard to the armed

services bill -- and i'm a member of the armed services committee; been a member for 12 years, have been to iraq six times, afghanistan six times, i believe that it's glait we can give our soldiers a pay -- i believe that it's great that we can give our soldiers a pay raise and support them in those kinds of things and a lot of other things in the bill that are good. some cut too much. but there are a lot of things in the bill that is good, and i would like to vote for it. but this defense bill has $18 billion in unrelated spending it'ds attached to it -- items attached to it, unrelated to defense, increase the cobra, food stamps and loan subsidies for businesses. so two things strike me about that. these new expenditures are not paid for. they are not within the budget. they are above the budget.

and what does that mean? well, the budget itself has us in deficit. so if it's not within the budget, if not paid for within the budget, every penny of this $18 billion goes straight to the debt of the united states of america. and we need to stop this. so why did they put this kind of spending on the defense bill? because they want to come down here and say anybody that's not willing to go along with this scheme to pad $18 billion straight to the debt of the united states of america, anybody that objects doesn't love our soldiers. and that's wrong. and people are getding tired of that. and this is how the debt of this country is surge out of control. this congress is irresponsible in our spending. we have increased the debt the likes of which this nation has never seen, and we're spending like it's going out of style. i would just point out one

matter here on the interest that we pay on the debt. last year the deficit, the annual one-year deficit was $450 billion, perhaps the largest ever. this year, as of september 30, the deficit for this past fiscal year ending september 30, 12 months prior to september 30, $1,400 billion. 1.4 trillion. this puts us on the map according to the congressional budget office to double the entire debt of america in five years and triple it in 10. unbelievable. and it's this kind of gimmick by attaching unpaid for, nonbudgeted items to the defense

bill to try to force it through so we can't do anything about it, and they snicker, i'm sure, in their self-confident way that we got 'em. if they object to the bill, we we'll say they don't love our soldiers. they don't support america's defense. i'm getting tired of it. i think the american people are getting tied of it. i saw a poll where the most popular party in america said is a tea party. more than republicans and democrats. somebody says, well, $18 billion, sessions, that's not too much money. but it's done on bill after bill a. this is not the only bill that has these kinds of gimmicks in it. and let me show you ... i figured this out one day. i just put together a chart here a little bit hastily. baseline increases: a destructive pattern.

we are -- when we increase funding in these bills above the budgeted amount, increasing the debt, people like to think, well, it's just $18 billion. that's not much. but look how that works when you do it over a period of years. tow next year -- so next year you just go over $18 billion. it adds another $18 billion to the national debt. well, that's not so much. it is a lot. the state of alabama's general fund budget is $2 billion. don't tell me $18 billion in one bill on top of this athis defense bill is not a lot of money. it is a huge amount of money. but it doesn't just work that way. so this $18 billion tends to go into the baseline and so next year when they talk about increasing the budget and they pad it by another $18 billion rchtio,it's not just $18 billioe next year. it is $18 billion on top of what woos pumped into the baseline the year before and at that toaments out to $36 billion.

and the next year it is $36 billion plus $18 billion more and the next year it is $54 billion plus $18 billion more, $73 billion. the next year it is $72 plus $18. the next year $90 plus $18. the next year 108 plus $18. the next year $126 plus 18. this one of 13 accounts in defense. we have 13 different budget bills. and how much is that? $900 billion in additional deficit just because of our inability, our unwillingness to stay by the numbers that we voted on as our budget limit. now, the budget itself, as presented by the president and passed by the democratic majority, that budget itself puts us on a road to having $1.4 trillion in deficit last year, and it looks like this year we're going to have a $1.5 trillion deficit. but if you just this one little

gimmick, if it's replicated each year, can add a trillion dollars or more to the debt of america. so that's why we're concerned about it. and, by the way, when we talk about the scheme that puts us on a road, according to the congressional budget office, to tripling the debt of america i in -- by 2019, that does not include health care. health care isn't even passed. this only includes stuff that's in law now. so how much more would those figures be if the debt goes up? and i would just point one more thing about the overall financial status of this country is the interest we pay on that debt.

this charted i've had up here before. last year, this country paid $799 billion on the debt that we had in this nation -- $170 billion on the debt that we had in this nation in one year. $170 billion. as i said, not counting the state education budget, all the other matters of our state, which is 4.5 million people, it's almost 1/50th of the nation's population, an average size state. our general fund's $2 billion. so that's how much we paid in interest. but according to the congressional budget office, those numbers increase by -- until 2019 as a result of surging debt to $799 billion. added to our debt. in interest we pay on that debt, just in one year. that's more than the whole defense budget. that's more than the whole u.s. budget was not too many years

ago. discretionary budget. that's a huge amount of money. it's going to crowd oin crowd oy for schools, highways, education. we cannot continue. the president has said this is an unsustainable course. every economist you talk to would say it's an unsustainable course. but how do we get there? we get there by taking a defense bill and tacking on $18 billion worth of unfunded spending, pure -- every penny of that to the debt. and -- the presiding officer: time has expired. mr. sessions: i thank the chair and would urge my colleagues t to -- let's send this bill back and reform it so we have a clean defense bill and take these unpaid matters off and make sure they're paid for. i thank the chair and would yield the floor.

mr. sessions sessions: madam pri suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the equal of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: first of all, mr. president, i apologize to everyone for -- i indicated to both the majority and minority we would be here at 5:30, but i had some things that came up and i just simply couldn't be here.

mr. president, i move to proceed to calendar number 175, h.r. 590, and i have a cloture motion that is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the motion to proceed to calendar 175, h.r. 3590, the legislative vehicle for the patient protection and affordability care act, signed by 17 senators as follows -- reid of nevada, dodd, udall of colorado, leahy, akaka, durbin, brown, shaheen, kerry, reed of rhode island, harkin, whitehouse, gillibrand, merkley, lieberman, boxer, and stabenow. mr. reid: i now withdraw that motion. the presiding officer: motion is withdrawn. mr. reid: i now move to recess until 10:01 a.m. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, parliamentary inquiry. the presiding officer: the republican leader.

mr. mcconnell: before we proceed to the vote, i'd just like to make a parliamentary inquiry. i believe it is the case that a simple motion to recess or adjourn is not amendable. is that correct? the presiding officer: the republican leader is correct. mr. mcconnell: further inquiry, i also believe that a motion to recess or adjourning to a time certain is amendable with time changes. the presiding officer: the republican leader is correct. mr. mcconnell: i'll not offer an amendment to change the time to convene until later tomorrow, but just so everybody will know with regard to their own personal schedules, you know, this vote could occur at any time tomorrow t wouldn't have to be at 1:00 a.m. the majority leader has the discretion to do that. we're, of course, prepared to

talk around the clock and happy to have the vote at 1:00. but i just want everybody to understand that it's my understanding that the majority leader does have the ability to set the vote later than 1:00 a.m. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. reid rye i ask for the yeas and nays on my motion. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seekers hearing none, the yeas are 59, the nays are 38. the motion is agreed to. we stand adjourned -- recessed until 10 hours.

madam president, we're going to finish this health care bill finish this health care bill madam president, we are going to finish this health care bill before we leave here for the holidays. for nearly an entire year we have reached out to the other side of her reign republicans a sit at the table, tried to negotiate in good faith, nearly a whole. now we're closer than ever to fix a badly broken system and doing more to ensure that every american can afford to live a healthy life than this country's done in decades. the republicans made the point through obstruction manuals, missions they believe in stalling is good for electoral politics, gambits like the only saw yesterday that is forcing it will hours long reading the

amendment and then complaining when the amendment they didn't like was withdrawn. it made their point to the american people. it made it perfectly clear that the have no interest in operating were legislating but the families and businesses are suffering, hurting and dying every single day, have no time for these kinds of games. that's why we're going to finish health care with the other side corporates are not. health care is the of a critical issue the body of cases, not the only critical issue this country has. right now have to complete a bill that supports fighting men and women of this country whether it there and iraq, afghanistan, korea, japan, all those many bases where tens of thousands of people are stationed. it's as simple as that. here are some of the good things in the bill that is now before the senate.

the message or the report from the house. more than $100 billion operations, maintenance and military requirements for the worse of iraq and afghanistan. part of the money will support preparation to continue withdraw from iraq. more than $23 billion with equipment used by our service members and iraq and afghanistan to do their jobs and stay safe. more than $150 billion to train our troops, prepare them for battle. more than $30 billion in health care of versus members, their families and children. and also gives our brave and valiant troops in perret's, 3.4% this year. this is not a partisan issue. yesterday this bill passed the house 395 -- 34. more than 90 percent of democrats voted for this bill,

more than 9 percent of republicans voted with this in the house of representatives. that is because they know that our of fighting men and women and the brave americans have a world away, a lot of them, wage to worse on our behalf. it's immaterial whether the leaders to give them all the resources they need to succeeded are progressives or conservatives. surely our troops were on the plant after deployment after deployment spend more time counting the days until they see their loved ones again and are counting the applicable coal scores by the side -- they don't care most the time, madam president. they just do their job. the house approved and as much yesterday. the senate should do the same today. we have seen this bill yesterday at 2:00 p.m.. are really going to wait until tomorrow to pass it? this simply is not right.

how let's get our troops with a need to succeed in doing now. then let's get back to giving all americans what they need to stay healthy. these two bills, these two pieces of legislation are about life and death. our responsibility is to bring to waste time playing political games. >> madam president. >> republican leader. >> madam president, senators on both sides acknowledged that the health care and bill we are considering is among the most vivid in pieces of legislation any of us will ever consider. i think i would argue them as significant piece of legislation and certainly in my time here. so it stands to reason that we devote significant time and

attention to it. indeed, some would argue that we should spend more time and attention on this bill than most if not every previous bill we have considered. the majority obviously disagrees. y? because of this bill has become a political nightmare. a liberal political nightmare for them. as evidence by more and more public opinion polls including "the wall street journal" this morning. they know americans are overwhelmingly opposed to it so they want to get it over with as quickly as possible. americans are already average of the track that democratic leaders took the eyes of the ball, russia and the process on a partisan line that makes the situation even worse. americans were told that the purpose of reform was to reduce the cost of health care. instead democratic leaders produced a two-point private trillion dollar, 2007 a four

page monstrosity that vastly expands government, raises taxes, raise premiums and rex medicare. and they want to rush this bill through by christmas? they want to rush this bill through by christmas -- it does all this destructive things. one of the must admit begins far reaching pieces of legislation in u.s. history and they want to rush it. and here's the most average is part: at the end of this rush they want to vote on a bill that no one outside the majority leader's conference room has seen yet to. no one has seen it. that's right, the final bill we vote on it isn't even the one we've had on the floor. it's the deal democratic leaders have been tries to work out in private. that's what they intend to bring to the floor and force a vote on it before christmas. so this entire process, madam president, is essentially a sure ray.

but let's compare the process so far with previous legislation for a little perspective of. early as this weekend -- four days from now -- on this $2.5 trillion mistake. no american who hasn't been invited into the majority leader's conference room knows what will be in the bill. the bill has been pending business of the senate since last november, less than four weeks ago, but we've actually only started the amendment process two weeks ago. just two weeks ago on the amendment process. we've had 21 amendments and motions, less than two a day. so let's look at how the senate so let's look at how the senate less than two i. so let's look how the senate has dealt with the previous

legislation arguably of lesser consequence than this one. no child left behind in 2001, 21 session days or seven weeks, 44 wall call votes, 157 amendments offered. the 9/11 commission homeland security act in 2002, 19 session days over seven weeks, 20 roll call vote, 30 amendments offered. the energy bill in 2002, 21 session days over eight weeks, 36 roll call votes, 158 amendments offered. now madame president, this isn't an energy bill. this is an attempt by the majority to take over one sixth of the u.s. economy. to vastly expand the regional role for government into the health care decisions of every single american.

and they want it to be done after one substantive amendment. one large substantive amendment. this is absolutely inexcusable. i think senator snowe put it best on tuesday. this is what she had to say tuesday of this week. given the enormity and complexity, senator snowe said, i will see anything magical about the christmas deadline if this bill isn't going to become law until 2014. and i think senator snowe's comments are a lack of bipartisanship and the outside of the debate are also on point. here's what senator snowe said in november of this year, late november. quote, i am truly disappointed we are commencing our historic debate on one of the most significant and pressing domestic issues of our time with a process that has forced all our ability for a broader

agreement on some of the most crucial elements of health care reform. the bottom line is the most consequential health care legislation in the history of our country and the reordering of $33 trillion of health care spending over over the coming decade shouldn't be determined by one vote margin strategy. surely, surely we can and must do better. while senator snowe is entirely correct. the only conceivable justification for rushing this bill is the overwhelming, overwhelming opposition of the american people. democrats know that the longer americans see this bill, the less they like it. here's the latest from pew. it came out just yesterday. a majority, 58% of those that i've heard a lot about the bill opposed it by only 32% favored.

there is no justification for this blind rush to accept a political one. and that's not good enough for the american people. and that's not justification for forcing the senate to vote on a bill that none of us have seen. americans already oppose the bill. the process is just as bad. it's completely reckless and completely irresponsible. madam president, i yield the floor. >> i ask unanimous consent that the senator from tennessee lead in a colloquy including the senator from oklahoma, defender for my domain and myself in the senator from kentucky. >> without objection. >> well, i think the senator from arizona. as i was listening to the republican leader i wonder if the senator noticed the governor of california's comments on monday.

governor schwarzenegger said on good morning america that he supports the idea of health care, but quote the last thing we need is another $3 billion in spending when we are to have a 20 billion-dollar deficit. he was referring to one of the unintended consequences of this bill which are big state cost for medicaid being shifted to those states unfunded mandate. so here's governor schwarzenegger's advice following up the comments of the leader. so i would say, be very careful to the federal government. this is in the governor of california. before you go to bed with all this, lest we think it says governor schwarzenegger. there's no rush for one second to the next. let's take another week or two to come up with the right package. >> i think the senator from tennessee who also understands this issue as well or better than anyone having been a governor and recognizing the problems that the governor faces. and can i step back a second and

governor schwarzenegger is a very astute observer of the political scene in california. may i point out to my colleagues this morning's u.s. news report. democrats