to -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. sanders: not just from too big to fail but economic concentration of ownership. mr. president, with that, i would thank my friend from connecticut and yield back the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the the clerk:. the clerk: we the undersigned senators hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 349, s*plt 3217, the restoring american financial stability act of 2010. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call is waived. wet is: is it the sense of the senate -- the question is is it the sense of the senate that debate on s. 3217, restoring american financial stability actor of 2010 shall be brought to a close?

the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

quoru vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are 57, the nays are 41. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn, not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to. the majority leader. mr. reid: enter a motion to enter a vote on which the motion was not invoked on the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: the motion is entered. the senator from alaska. mr. begich: thank you very much, madam president. i wasn't intending to vote on the floor because i was hopeful tonight we would have a simple vote that would move us to a debate on a bill that i think

people have been waiting for for a long, long time, and that's getting reform to our banking institutions and financial institutions. i will say that for those that are watching and listening, you know, it's -- i'm new here. i've now been here a little over a year and trying to understand the process. but one thing i've learned is this great motion called the motion to proceed. a lot of people watch and see us vote. they think, the bill has gone down. this motion was a a very simple motion. it alloyed toss move to the bill -- it allowed us to move to the bill so we could debate. what i've heard over the last several weeks and literally the last 48 hours, this desire for people to add amendments and talk about it and do all the things we want to do and that's have full debate on the floor, but because of this simple motion that the senate requires -- which i think is kind of a foolish motion -- that's my own personal opinion, this hope -- we're not even allowed mao to debate this bill and offer -- not even allowed now to debate this bill and offer amendments

to this financial reform legislation. so i'm disappointed, disappointed for us as body that we can't move forward. second, i think my constituents in alaska are disappointed that we don't have an opportunity to debate this issue and throw amendments on the floor to refine a good piece of legislation, to move us forward to getting reform in our financial institutions, especially these megabanks. over the last year and a half since i've been here, almost a year and a half, all i've heard about is how bad this economy was a year ago or so and what caused it, with the financial institutions just kind of crashing in because the rules or lack of rules they ompte -- they operated under. the goal of the senate is to make sure the public sees some transparency to these megabanks. yet for whatever reason our friends on the other side are not willing to even move this forward. i also learned today, just reading some of the material that we get every single minute

around this place, that they've been working on a bill for months. i don't know where they've been working on this bill because i sure the health care haven't seen it. i do know they've been having a lot of meeting up in wall street. maybe that's where they're writing the bill. but i haven't seen this bill. you know, for two, three, four months, whatever the timetable they claim that they've been working on some legislation -- that's what i've read today -- but the public hasn't seen t the moron people haven't seen it and we actually had a chance tonight to vote to allow us to see it and have a debate. they wouldn't allow that. so i'm disappointed. i'm disappointed that we don't have that opportunity. i'm disappointed for the american people, that we will not move forward on banking and financial reform, which is desperately needed. it is what crashed this economy, a lack of rules and the carelessness of so many with hard-earned dollars from working people across this country, that they had put into banks,

anticipated that they would be put aside and protected and not put into some high-risk have en thyrse that later on banks did and other megabanks did and caused this economy to be in the notion it is today. you know, i will say this: in alaska, we have some great institutions. our credit unions, our community banks did a great job. they weren't investing in risky ventures. they weren't investing in risky financial instruments with hard-earned dollars that people put into those banks as investors or people deposited in those banks, the credit unions, the small community banks did a great job. this is our opportunity to not continue the status quo. it is clear to meet other side, they're interested in status quo, where billionaires became billionaires again by betting against the recovery of the economy. which is amazing to me, they bet against the american people. they hoped they would be foreclosed on. that's the rules the other side wants to continue.

maybe i'm living in another world. i'm betting on american people. i'm beth on alaskans, that we want to move forward, not status quo where this economy almost crashed and burned. at the same time, we want to make sure that banks in the future can't be coming to the taxpayers and aske ask us for a bailout. that's outrageous that the taxpayers got left behind in this process. so, again, madam president, i'm disappointed. it is amazing, like i said, they're drafting some bill somewhere in some dark room -- i don't know if it is in the capitol or up in wall street. you know, somewhat mages to me that people are complain -- somewhat amazing to me that people are complaining that they're drafting legislation in some back room, which they're not doing. their hypocrisy is unbelievable. i wasn't planning to come down and speak. i was voting like the rest us thinking we were going to move

forward and here we're. no bill to offer amendments, no bill to strengthen our financial organizations. same old business as usual, status quo, the rich get rich,the people who are working hard every single day suffer, lose their 401(k)'s or education retirement accounts they set aside for their kids or thought they put them in a bank that was supposed to be sciewrks ended up who knows where, except in a few people's pockets that worked on wall street. i would hope my colleagues on the other side would just allow us the opportunity to offer amendments to a financial reform legislation that will once and for all hold these financial institutions accountable for the actions they caused to this country, that almost put us on the verge of bankruptcy. madam president, thank you for the opportunity to, i guess, vent would be my view right now, an aggravation of what's going on. but again it is our job to hold these financial institutions

accountable for what they did to the taxpayers of this country, and i hope that our colleagues on the other side will see the light of day and join us to offer a debate. thank you, madam president. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. merkley: madam president, thank you for letting me speak tonight, and i am pleased to be here with my colleague from eafnlg i also wasn't planning to come to the floor to talk about this tonight, but -- because i thought the vote was going to passments i thought this was -- this is called a motion to proceed, and around here that is senatefeck for a motion to not get -- that is senatespeak for a motion to not get anything done. it is particularly aggravating because i was back in colorado this weekend, as i am every weekend, traveling the state and had the chance to see the tv friments. from time to time. you couldn't so aturn on a tv station without seeing some politician talking about the importance of getting this work

done. democrats and republicans. people take the time out of other weekend to say to the american people we're working hard to try to correct the problems that led us into the worst recession since the great depression. then we all get back to town on monday and we don't get anything done. we take a vote not on the bill but a vote that would just allow us to debate the bill to amend the bill, to get republican amendments and democrat amendments, to improve the legislation. and we're told we can't do that. we can have the debate on the airwaves, wok we can have the debate all weekend long on television in front of the american people. but when we come back here in theory to do the people's birks somehow we can't debate it any longer. and this is the reason why so many people across the country think washington is completely out of touch. there are people saying, well, the recovery has started. everything is okay again. and i'm glad to see -- i'm glad to see there are some signs of

improvement in our economy. but for the families in colorado, there's still a lot of struggle going on. there's stale lot of people worried about losing their houses. worried about losing their jobs or how to pay for their kids' higher education. the last period of economic growths in our country's history, madam president, before we were witched into the worst recession since the great depression was the first time in this nation's history ever -- ever -- that our economy grew -- our gross domestic product grew -- but middle-class income fell in the united states. in colorado it fell by $800 while the cost of health insurance went up by 97%. the cost of higher education went up by 50%. our families are recovering not just from one recession but effectively from two recessions, and you a think the least we could do -- and you'd think the

least we could disco would be to put some commonsense regulations in place that had they been in place before the last crisis we wouldn't have had the crisis to begin with. you know, our last period of economic growth of this country was based on debt. too much debt at every level of the economy. the consumers shall -- too much debt washington has got too much debt of the and some bank holding companies in new york that historically had 12 to 14 times debt to equity decided during that period of time to go to 28 and 30 times. by any standard, an incredibly risky strategy. and to make matters worse, the way they levered themselves up was with derivatives that no regulator was looking at, bondholders didn't even understand. and the commonsense reforms that

are in place in this bill because of the work on the agriculture committee would have cured that problem. and ultimately, what we're trying to do is put ourselves in the position of never having to say that some financial institution is too big to fail or that the taxpayers have to hold a gun to their head and clean up somebody else's greedy mistake to make sure that there's transparency in a marketplace so we know what securities are being traded. i've spent half my life in the private sector and a lot of it in the capital markets. this isn't an antibusiness piece of legislation. in fact, quite the contrary. there are a lot of businesses out there that have been harmed terribly by judgments that were made, that were not made because they were prudent business decisions, but they were made to make a fast buck. and so here we are on monday night, after the weekend of

people -- talking head television programs, and we can't get the american people's business done. again, this is not a vote up or down on the bill. this is just a vote so that we can have a debate on the floor of the united states senate, so that we have the opportunity to amend and improve the bill. i'm sure the bill's not perfect. in fact, i know it's not perfect. it's got room for improvement. i see my colleague from the senate banking committee is here, from the great commonwealth of virginia. so, madam president, i'm going to yield to him. i yield the floor. mr. warner: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: madam president, first of all, let me thank my colleague, the senator from colorado, who is a member of the banking committee, who's been part of trying to get this bill right over the last 14, 15 months. he, like i, have spent a career in the private sector. i think both can read a balance

sheet. we both understand that it's the capital markets that drive the american economy. i think we both agree that we want to keep america the capital of the capital formation for the whole world. we don't want this to migrate to london or shanghai or elsewhere around the world. but we also know that 18 months after we came to the precipice of a financial meltdown ought to be enough time to put rules of the road into place so that we can give the market what it craves most, which is predictability. now, i'm not going to go on at length. i mean, i had the opportunity earlier when the chairman of the banking committee was here. i think, unfortunately, i probably spoke for about 40 minutes going through how we got to this point and all the things that take place in this bill to

put these new rules of the road in place. i would only make two or three quick points. one, in my 15 months, at least, here as a new guy, i've never seen a bill that's had more bipartisan input than this piece of legislation. i had a great ally in senator cork partner tennessee when we worked on too big to fail. i worked with senator corker on technical amendments to make this better. but this was a bipartisan piece of legislation. two, i actually think there's a great deal of agreement on both sides of the aisle about our policy goals. not really talking about the role of government or who should get covered or not covered the way it was in health care. we all agree, no more taxpayer bailouts. we all agree more transparency. we all agree there ought to be some sense of fairness in our financial system, and the consumers ought to know the financial products they're using

and buying or mortgages they're making have got some basic underlying protections to them. i've yet to hear any of my colleagues on the other side disagree with those basic premises. i think we're still working towards what i hope would be, as opposed to some of the disappointments that would come out of this chamber, something the american people would be proud of when we find common ground. now, i've got to acknowledge i'm not a very good political pros fossty kay tor -- prognisticator. i think it's close to 80% we'll get a bipartisan bill. i'm not sure anyone lynnening tonight under -- anyone listening tonight understands procedurally why our colleagues who share the same goals, those of us working on bipartisan teams who have got amendments that will help strengthen the bill that, we shouldn't be spending tonight talking about

those amendments, offering those amendments, offering those improvements, having those who disagree debating back when this was a bipartisan product to date, will be a bipartisan end solution, i believe. the american people demand 18 months after the fact that we put these new financial rules of the road in place. unlike many of my colleagues, get to go home to virginia in my home state. if i run into a virginian explaining why we're not on the bill, i don't know what to tell them. the senator from colorado spent the weekend crisscrossing colorado. he's asking folks to rehire him. i share your kind of head scratching on why aren't we here talking about something that there's really not major policy differences. there's common agreement we need to have reform. and a lot of the reform parts there's agreement on. and where there's not agreement, there's more bipartisan

consensus on the form of the amendments. i'd love to hear the senator from colorado's response to that. mr. bennet: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you. i appreciate my colleague from virginia -- as as you were talking, i was thinking about, you know, my work in the deal world, as you have had that experience. you were in a position where everybody wanted to get it done, and there was general agreement that you were 80% or 90% of the way there. the way to get it done was not to not continue discussing. it wasn't to say i'm going to pick up and fly back to denver or fly back to virginia until cooler heads prevail. it was to stay in the room and get it done. i think particularly when this isn't about a private-sector transaction. this is about the american people's business, the people that have hired everybody here

to do this job, that it just seems like a shame that we shouldn't be out here tonight in a bipartisan way figuring out how to cross the t's and dot the i's and put a framework in place that would have prevented the catastrophe that our families are now continuing to live through. sometimes that's one of the things people forget, is that there are parts of the economy that have recovered faster than others. there are parts of the economy where people are getting hired or paid and other parts where people are still struggling along. the people i saw this weekend were a lot of people that were struggling along. they're not engaging in class warfare as some people say. what they're interested in is making sure we create a set of conditions where the game isn't rigged and where they have some predictability in their lives as business people and working families in our states. like you, i'm new, so maybe we

don't know exactly the way this place works. but i hope somewhere in this building there are people that are coming together to figure out how we can create the conditions where we could at least get a vote to have the conversation about how to get to that last 10% of this bill. mr. warner: just one final comment, madam president. i know the presiding officer is a new member as well. this is one of those moments when there's been a year and a half of bipartisan work that's gone in, when there seems to be a commonality of interest in what the goals of financial reform are. i don't know about the presiding officer, i don't know about my good friend, the senator from colorado, but i never got the memo that said our job wasn't actually to get stuff done. and, you know, there were

legitimate major policy differences in the health care discussions. but in this discussion, there are things that need to be worked out. but the goals, we've all agreed on. the bipartisan working groups have been at it for more than a year. i told my colleagues from the other side of the aisle, i don't know if maybe there was some -- the procedural shepb unanimous begans -- shenanigans kind of back and forth. but i hope my colleagues from the other side of the aisle -- i see my colleague who's got great expertise in the financial sector. the senator from north carolina just coming in. some of the newer folks, whatever the reason why our colleagues on the other side didn't want to get to a real discussion of the bill, let's -- you know, i hope they can come back later tonight or first thing tomorrow and we can move to this bill, talk about it, put forward those amendments. i know i'm going to have some

bipartisan amendments to make the bill stronger. i know some of my other colleagues will as well. and at the end of the day get the people's business done. because as my friend from colorado has said, the dow may be back north of 11000, but that doesn't mean much if you don't have a job. one of the ways we can guarantee the financial markets are going to continue to have the capital to make the loans, to make the investments to create that next wave of jobs is to make sure we've got financial rules of the road in place. i thank the chair and yield back my time.

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mrs. hagan: thank you. madam president, i too am disappointened that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have decided against even debating wall street reform legislation here in the u.s. senate. it's been almost two years since our financial system stood on the brink of absolute catastrophe. the meltdown on wall street has wreaked havoc on main street across america. millions of americans lost their homes, their jobs, their retirement savings. taxpayers were asked to fund a massive bailout of wall street. and here we are a full two years later trying to debate a bill that will establish new rules of the road, create a more stable financial system and ensure that the american taxpayer will not be asked to bail out wall street banks again. i'm sorry to say that my

colleagues today voted to stand up for wall street instead of standing up for all the people on main street who lost their jobs and their entire life savings. they voted against the seniors who saw their 401(k)s instantly eaten away by the reckless games wall street was playing with their hard-earned money. in my state, this recession, the worst since the great depression, has meant that currently 500,000 north carolinians are out of work. many families, both the husbands and wives are out of jobs, and they are worrying how they're going to put food on the table for their families. democrats have been working in good faith for many months on a bill to hold wall street accountable for gambling with the money of north carolinians and people across this country. i know that chairman dodd has been working with republicans on the banking committee for the last year and a half. the time has come to have this

debate on the floor of the senate. wall street reform means ending taxpayer-funded bailouts. it also means establishing new standards for the complicated financial products that contributed to this economic downturn. the purpose of this bill is to ensure recent financial meltdown never happens again and that we protect seniors who lost retirement savings and protect small business owners who got caught up in the credit freeze and the countless americans who lost their jobs. it means protection for consumers from irresponsible banking practices and greater certainty for bankers. banks need to be able to understand what the ground rules will be so that they can focus on the business of banking. north carolina is a leader in the banking industry, and both our states banks and its banking customers will benefit from

responsible financial reforms. the proposed legislation also creates an office of financial literacy that will develop initiatives intended to educate and empower consumers to make informed financial decisions. our students today need the tools to understand the financial products and how to manage debt, including mortgages, student loans and credit cards. i hope that my colleagues will listen to the american people on this issue. it's imperative that we pass commonsense wall street reform so that american taxpayers will never again have to shoulder the cost of a financial crisis. madam president, i yield my time. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: madam president, i am disappointed, but not

surprised, that our republican colleagues have chosen not to go forward in terms of financial reform. we should be very, very clear when we do financial wall street reform, we are taking on not only the powerful people in the united states of america, but some of the most powerful people in the world. people of endless resources. madam president, when congress deregulated wall street against my vote, wall street over -- and their allies over a 10-year period fietd for dereg -- fighted for deregulation so they could be in a position to do anything that they wanted to do, which has brought us the terrible recession that we're currently in. last year alone in 2009, the financial interests spen spent $300 million in lobbying

and financial contributions in order to fight finance and wall street reform. so i'm not surprised that at this point our republican friends have not chosen to go forward. i hope they change their mind and i hope that they know back home that the american people are profoundly disgusted at the behavior of wall street and they want to make sure that we never again be placed in a position of having to bail out people who for their greed and recklessness have brought suffering to tens and tens and millions of americans much madam president, as we proceed, and i believe we will proceed to wall street reform, it is also important that we not just pass something for the sake of a press release, but that we do something really substantive. and there are a lot of issues out there. i know senator dodd has brought

forth a bill with 1,600 pages in it. there are dozens and dozens and dozens of important issues. i want to touch on simply three that i believe are essential if we are going to be serious -- underline serious -- about wall street reform. and issue number one. i receive calls every week from vermonters, and i suspect you do from people in new hampshire, who are disgusted by having to pay 25%, 35% interest rates on their credit cards. madam president, in my view usury is immoral. and if you look at christianity or judaism orris lamb or any -- or islam, or any of the major religions, they make the point that charging interest rates to

desperate people is immoral. we have to put an end to usury. we have to put a cap on rates that financial institutions charge when they use credit cards. the amendment that i will be bringing before the floor is similar to what has existed for several decades now for credit unions. credit unions today are doing just fine, but they cannot charge more than 15% interest rates accept under exceptional circumstances. if it's good for credit unions, it is good, in my view, for wall street and large financial institutions. second of all, madam president, i think there is great skepticism about the role of the fed and the lack of transparency that exist in the federal reserve. about a year ago chairman bernanke came before the budget committee on which i serve, and

i asked him a pretty simple question. i asked him, mr. chairman, you have lent out trillions -- underline trillions of dollars -- in zero or near zero interest loans to the largest financial institutions in america. could you please tell me and the american people who received those trillions of dollars in loans? i don't think that that was a terribly unfair question to ask. an mr. bernanke said, no, i'm not going to tell you. gave me his reasons why i disagree the american people have right to know who received those loans. the american people have a right to know whether some of those large financial institutions took those zero interest loans and went out and bought government bonds, t-bonds at 3% and, if true, is a huge scam. we need transparency in the fed and i'm going to bring an

amendment to the floor to do that. and the third point that i want to make, madam president, is -- and -- is in i believe november of 2009, i introduced legislation, three pages, very simple legislation, which calls for breaking up large financial institutions. and as this bill proceeds, our colleagues, senator brown and senator kaufman, are going to be introducing a bill along those lines which basically says that if an institution is so large that its collapse will bring systemic damage to the entire economy, we've got to start breaking those tiewtion using t. -- institutions up. if a financial institution is too big to fail, in my view, it is too big to exist. the issue here, madam president, is not just the liability -- the potential liability for the

taxpayers of this country if a large financial institution collapses and we have to bail them out. it is also an economic issue. are we comfortable, madam president, when according to simon johnson, the former chief economist of the i.m.f. he says -- quote -- "as a result of the crisis and various government rescue efforts, the largest six banks in our economy now have total assets in excess of 63% of g.d.p. this is a significant increase from even 2006." now i find it quite interesting that the senator -- the senior senator from new hampshire was on the floor a little while ago attacking me because in the budget committee i brought up a resolution which lost 12-10 to begin to break up these large financial institutions. i get a little bit tired of our

conservative friends who says, oh, the gov can't do anything. we hate big government. but apparently they don't hate large financial institutions, six of whom have assets equivalent to over 60% of the g.d.p. of this country. now teddy roosevelt, a good republican over 100 years ago, started breaking up large financial institutions -- large corporations. what we are talking about now is a handful of corporations, of financial institutions, that play a very negative role in creating a -- a stranglehold and a lack of competition in our entire economy. and i intend to be strongly supporting the amendment brought forth by senator brown and senator kaufman. i think it's moving exactly in right direction. so, madam president, i am disappointed, but not surprised,

that the republicans have not chosen to go forward on wall street reform. i hope they will reconsider that. and when we do go forward, i hope we listen to the american people. we take serious action and we start the process of standing up to some of the most powerful people not only in this country, but in the world. and, with that, madam president, i would yield the floor. mr. brown: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. i appreciate the words from the senator from vermont in his support of the brown-kaufman amendment and his working on making -- on real wall street reform. two years ago, as we know, we're on the verge of another great depression. wall street georgeed itself on greed and junk debt, markets pan ibicked and -- panicked and chaos threatened wall street. at the request of the bush

administration, weeg acted swiftly and bipartisanly to pull us back from the brink of collapse much we saved the banks temporarily as we should have. but wall street with the lack of regulation an deregulation and appointments of the bush administration to people far too friendly to wall street had done its damage. wall street's greed led to seven million people losing their job, go to sandusky or zanesville and see what it did to manufacturing. wall street's excess and rampant speculation caused six million home foreclosures. go to neighborhoods on the west side of cleveland or go to neighborhoods in north columbus and see the damage that that wall street excess and rampant speculation caused to homes and to families in my state. here we are two years later, wall street's continuing to risk main street jobs, main street

pensions, main street homes on get-rich-quick schemes. here we are two years later in reach of legislation designed to put an end to the recklessness on wall street and senate republicans, and sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, are delaying and to kill any such reforms. we can't afford to allow this delay longer. senator dodd put out a working draft of legislation following november. there was a big hue and cry over that draft. many said it was too big on wall street. senator dodd continued to talk to those on the banking committee. he put together bipartisan working groups including senators corker and warner, senators gregg and reid, senators dodd and shelby, and senators crapo and schumer. a republican and democrat on each negotiating team. so, madam president, we've been working on this since start of the financial crisis. it has been four months since

senator dodd put the legislation out for the public's review. we are requesting a simple up or down vote to start the debate and the senate caucus said no. they're filibustering, delaying. i think they're trying to destroy this bill. all we're trying to do is not pass legislation. we know we're not ready to do that yet. all we're trying to do is move the bill forward so any senator whether or not it's one of my -- whether it's a republican colleague or democratic colleague can offer an amendment. there are good amendments that can make a strong bill even stronger. there's an amendment going to be offered by senator corker, he and i talked about this on -- on our sunday morning show this week, just yesterday, on calling back executive compensation that seems to make sense. there's an amendment that senator kaufman and i have been working on to put size limits on banks and end the day of banks too big to fail. if banks are too big to fail,

those banks are simply too big. i would add that 15 years ago the assets of the six largest banks in this country -- the combined assets of the six largest banks in america 15 years ago were 17% of the g.d.p. the combined assets of the six largest banks in america today are 63% of g.d.p. there are other amendments that can finally hold wall street accountable for their own mistakes offered by republicans and some democrats. we just want to move forward so those amendments can be offered. it's unfortunate when the senate republican leadership and it really -- i know there are republicans that want to work with us. when the senate leadership pulse their -- pulls their colleagues from doing right thing. we saw the same tactic with health insurance debate, delay and delay only to find obstruction at the end. we know if they can delay and delay as officials in the american bank associations have said, that that's the best way to kill this legislation and to get their way if they can delay this for months and months and

months. we saw the same delaying tactics with essential programs like unemployment insurance and cobra. this is not a time, madam president to play games with financial well-being of hard-working americans, of hard-working middle-class ohioans. i wish republican senators could vote to do the right thing instead of following the calculus that the republican leader want. it is not the will of the american people wanted. today a "washington post"-abc poll said that 85% of americans -- financial institutions conduct their business. it's certainly not following the people -- of experiences of people in ohio and across the country who have lost jobs and lost much of their wealth because of wall street greed and excess. it's not following the experience of small business owners across the nation. i talked to small business owners in dayton, springfield,

zanesville and cambridge who can't get credit. they can't understand with the money that wall street has been -- has been rewarded with, if you will, or that were bailed out with that they simply -- that they still can't get the kind of credit that they need to make their business a success. this legislation would make financial institutions, not american taxpayers, pay for their mistakes. we can't predict the next economic disaster, but if we protect consumers and investors, we can likely prevent it. wall street reform could provide the strongest consumer protections for ohioans, no more of the trips and the traps of the mortgage market and elsewhere that led to the near collapse of our economy. wall street banks wrecked our economy, got a taxpayer-funded bailout and are profiting again while working americans continue to suffer. we can't sit by any longer and continue to do nothing. madam president, we need to move now. no more meltdowns, no more bailouts, no more cutting back room deals to prevent reform,

but to get there, we need to move this bill forward. we need our republican colleagues to say yes. not vote for the bill, but just say yes to move the bill forward so we can actually have a debate on the bill. bring this bill out in the public light so the american people know who is fighting on their side. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the majority leader. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: a quorum is not present. mr. reid: madam president, i

ask -- the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to instruct the sergeant at arms to request the presence of absent senators and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there is a sufficient second. the clerk will call the rl. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote, the ayes are 50, the nays are 31. the motion is agreed to. a quorum is present.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. lautenberg: mr. president, arehe status of the business before the senate right now? the presiding officer: motion is proceed. to s. 3217. mr. menendez: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, we hear our republican colleagues -- and i want to talk about the vote that we had just a few minutes ago, a vote that was a victory for wall street but not a victory for the american taxpayer. we hear our republican colleagues proclaim they're for wall street reform, that they are on the reform bandwagon. but then they seem to pull the

american -- mr. president, the senate not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. please carry your conversations outside. mr. menendez: so they say they're on the reform bandwagon and yet when there is a chance to move forward simply to debate the process, they pull the emergency brake. the apropose our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have -- the approach our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have taken to wall street reform symbolizes america's worst fears about how the powerful omple op. they held a closed-door strategy session with wall street executives that from public reports -- published reports included solicitations for their campaign committee. then they marched into this chamber with a script, a wall street playbook written by the

nation's most significant republican political consult tant, and rather than debating what was in the bill, they went to the wall street playbook. they waved the flag, they proclaimed their patriotic intention to protect americans from those who took us to the brink of economic disaster, but then they played the fear card, the fear card, and they talked about bailouts and told americans that they would pay. and when americans realized that our wall street reform is actually -- what it actually was is what in essence has to be done to end taxpayer bailouts, that opponents were just playing fast and loose with the facts to protect the big banks instead of taxpayers, our colleagues on the other side claimed to embrace wall street reform in front of the cameras while behind the

scenes, behind closed doors, they continued to strategize with wall street about how to kill this legislation. mr. president, i'm sure that families in my state who are hurting and across the country who are hurting who lost their jobs, their health care, some have lost their homes because of the reckless excesses of wall street trougheers driven at profits at any cost, the value of their property has plummeted. their 401(k)'s have been des nate mated. their hope for a -- has been decimated. their hope for a retirement is largely gone at this point. and so american taxpayers want accountability, not trickery. they want all of us in this chamber to stand up for them and mean it, not stand up for wall street and try to find a clever way to make it look like they are for main street.

we need only to look at the actions of those on the other side over the past two weeks to see the real story. they huddled with wall street. they strategize about how to protect wall street, but they make it sound like they are protecting main street. it's game of mirrors, appear to stand for reform but do wall street's bidding. they hire political consultants to tell them which words to use, and it comes up with the american people don't like taxpayer bailouts, so all you have to do -- all you have to say about this real effort for reform is that it's a taxpayer bailout and they'll hate it. and they'll hate it. the only problem is that the facts don't fit their rhetoric. the law that we would have gone to debate, the bill that we would have gone to debate, i

should say, in fact ends taxpayer bailouts by reining in the excesses of wall street and that's exactly why wall street is working so hard with the other side to defeat it. they play the fear card, as they always have, and then they try to distance themselves from that consultant but not before they march in lock step to the microphones and tell americans, this is a bailout bill. it'll cost taxpayers billions and lead to more and bigger billouts, that it's another government intrusion into their lives. you know, mr. president, fear is a powerful force. and in the short term, in the short term, sometimes fear is far more powerful than truth. but in the long term, it simply isn't true. maybe that's why truth has been the first casualty of every argument we've heard from the other side. whether on the recovery act on

putting people to work and making health care more affordable, on extending unemployment insurance for those who are struggling, and now on reining in those who brought us to the edge of economic ruin after eight years of lax regulatory policies that let wall street run wild. now that the fear card doesn't seem to be working, suddenly our friends standed in front of the microphones and claim to be in favor of reform, and yet at the end of this all, they could have cast a vote to let us begin to work together on the process but they continue to confer with wall street and tell their members, once again, as they have on every major piece of reform legislation that has come before this chamber, to stand in lock step and vote "no." to vote against even starting the debate. mr. president, i say to my colleagues today, blindly following your consultant didn't

work out so well, and neither will blindly following an obstructionist strategy work out very well either. the american people have figured out the trick. you can't talk like a gladiator and put on a show for the taxpayers and then be a mouthfees for wall street -- a mouthpiece for wall street. doing nothing and calling it "leadership" is not an answer. saying "no" once again an keeping the status quo is not an option. saying "no" to sensible wall street reform is a sure-fire way to wind up right back in the same mess we just got out of recently. saying "no" is the surest recipe -- that's the surest recipe, saying "no" is the surest recipe for more taxpayer bailouts. the bottom line is we're as democrats are here to say "yes" to commonsense reform so that

wall street excesses will never take us to the brink of economic ruin again. "yes" to a free market, but there is a difference between a free market and a free-for-all market and what we've had is a free-for-all market. our republican colleagues seem to want the free-for-all system to remain exactly as it is. the same lack of rules, same lack of oversight, the same megaprofits for the large wall street banks, and i ask at whose expense? at what cost to american families? at what risk to the very foundation of our economic system? if our colleagues are serious about ending taxpayer bailouts, then they should favor making banks pay for their reckless behavior. instead, they come to the floor one after another in an attempt to gut it. what they oppose, what they are once again saying "no" to is asking the wall street firms to pay to ensure against their own

failure. mr. president, we should also remember today -- and this vote as we look back at eight years of an administration that nodded and winked and turned a blind eye to wall street's schemes, that history has a way of repeating itself. let's not forget that the reckless behavior of the big banks and other wall street speculators that sent the economy into a near-depression last year has an historic precedent, as do the muscular safeguards and regulations that we must implement this year to protect consumers so it never happens again. and that precedent was the great depression. it came after a period of republican presidents -- hardi harding, coolidge, hoover -- who sided with freewheeling companies over commonsense regulations. and we had no choice but to clean up the mess with a period of sustained, robust regulations

implemented by another democratic administration at that time. and once again the time has come, after the economic damage has been done, to put in place a series of robust reforms and safeguards so it never happens again. and once again, just as they did after the great depression, our republican colleagues are saying "no," leave things as they are. no feed for wall street reforms. -- no need for wall street reforms. let the market take care of itself. they want to say "no" to the lessons of history. we need to say "yes" to commonsense reforms, "yes" to sensible oversight and regulations, "yes" to protecting the jobs, homes, and retirement savings of families who have been playing by the rules, "yes" to protecting them from more reckless financial gambling and creative derivative schemes, "yes" to guaranteeing taxpayers will never be on the hook the next time risky corporate decisions force a

too-big-to-fail company into bankruptcy. can't have a system where big wall street firms and banks take big gambles knowing they are keep the gains if they win ands but we as a country will pay the -- but we as a country will pay the cost if they lose. that's playing russian roulette with our economy. with that happens, the victims are hard-working families who did everything right. they played by the rules. wall street didn't and they expect us to make it right. they worked as hard as they could at every job they had and earned all their lives to buy a home and raise their families, send their kids to college and maybe, just maybe, put something away for a decent, safe, comfortable retirement. now, mr. president, they sit at the kitchen table at night asking hard-wrerchling questions: can we afford the mortgage this snonts can we keep our health

insurance? how do we pay our credit card bills? will we keep our jobs? will we lose our home? can we ever retire? these are the families who needed a "yes" vote a little while ago. they need our protection. they didn't deserve what happened to them. now we have a chance to make things right so it will never happen again. the senate needs to take up wall street reform, and the comois is simple: do we stand up for a banking system that is fair, transparent, and honest? or do we stand for a banking system that takes advantage of consumers, one in which speculation runs wild and puts the entire economy at constant risk? do we stand on the side of working families who played by the rules? or do we stand on the side of a wall street and big banks, not the community banks because they're not the ones who got us in this, but those large institutions who have gotten far

too comfortable writing their own rules? in my view, the choice is clear. it's time for the senate to step up to the plate on behalf of working families. it is time for reform. it's time to end too big to fail. it's time to rein in the bulls. it's time to protect hard-working taxpayers. it's time to simply move forward and take up the debate. and i hope the majority leader will bring us to another vote so that we can in fact get to that moment in which we can move forward and have the debate and have the amendments and ultimately know who stands for the taxpayer and who stands for wall street. i hope there will be enough votes here to make sure that this institution of the people, by the people and for the people is going to put them first. mr. president, with that, i

yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i rise today to express my disappointment that we were unable to reach an agreement today to begin debate on reforming wall street. as my colleague from new jersey, senator menendez, so eloquently put it, this is not the time to say no. this is the time to move forward and get something done. someone referred to the senate the other day as dysfunction junction. it was a nice little rhyme, and i can tell you it is incidents like what we saw tonight where our friends on the other side of the aisle just won't even simply allow debate to start that leads us to that sad name. well, we are ready to move away from the station, mr. president. there are those of us who have been out talking to our constituents who know that the train has to leave the junction. the train has to move ahead. and we need to move ahead with this wall street reform. last week i came to the floor

with some of my colleagues to discuss another delay, the delay of nominations. these are nominees that have been voted out of their committees sometimes with unanimous support out of the committees. they're waiting months for a full vote on the senate floor. as we noted when we discussed that, during this time in the bush administration five nominees were outstanding. now during this time in the obama administration, over 100 nominees are outstanding. so if anyone doesn't believe us about this delay and what's going on here, look at those numbers and look at what's happening with this reform. it's ironic that we're talking about putting rules in place to prevent wall street from gaming the system, mr. president, when we've got plenty of senators who are gaming the system right here. but there's a problem with that. the american people aren't the game of chance. they don't want the dice rolled over their futures. they don't want the dice rolled over their family homes. they want us to get this done. look at what's happened with this filibuster. again what we've seen today,

stopping us from going to debate. in the entire 19th century, including the struggle and the debate about slavery, fewer than two dozen filibusters were mounted. between 1933 and the coming of the war, it was attempted only twice. under eisenhower and j.f.k., the pattern continued. in eight years of the eisenhower administration only two filibusters were mounted. under kennedy, there were four. but now we see this tactic being employed over and over again. this year alone, since january, we've had over 50 filibusters. now, i can tell you, mr. president, that i believe in the end we're going to get this done. i believe in the end we will have republican votes for this bill, because i know there are some colleagues on that side of the aisle that want to get this bill done, that have been working to get it done. but the reasons i heard raised today for holding up debate just do not ring true. first off, advancing the idea that this bill isn't already a

bipartisan product would be a slight to all those who have worked on it. i see senator dodd over there who worked for months and months and months to craft a bipartisan bill. the bill that we have before us is the product of countless hours of negotiation between members on both sides of the aisle and incorporates many of the agreements that were reached. and if anyone thinks that there is a more important issue to have before the senate, that there issome reason we shouldn't be debating this, i don't think they have been talking to the people back home because the people understand that when wall street got a cold and they bounced back and they're doing well, main street got pneumonia. smallsmall businesses today arel starved for credit. the small banks, which as senator menendez pointed out, had nothing to do with starting this crisis, they are also suffering. that is what is happening in this country today. nearly three years after the financial system began to melt down, america continues to suffer effects of the worst

economic crisis since the great depression. millions of americans lost their jobs, homes and retirements and savings. although some key indicators are beginning to move in the right direction, i can tell you from being home this last weekend, many families are still struggling and economic damage is slow to reverse itself on main street. meanwhile on wall street, the largest firms handed out record bonuses totaling nearly $146 billion, an 18% increase from 2008. what do we have at home? u.s. per capita income declined 2.6%, boiled down to its essentials, the financial crisis was about risks that everyone thought they could manage but that instead got wildly out of control. three years later, and i think it's hard for people to believe this and hard to believe that we can't even go past a debate tonight, that we weren't even allowed to actually put the bill on the floor. three years later wall street is still operating by the same old rules. and that is why it's so important that we begin debate.

now there may be some of my colleagues that think that all wall street needs is fixing a few potholes. well, that's been tried before and it certainly didn't work. i think what we really need is some stop signs at some intersections and some very good traffic cops. there's a lot more to the modern financial system, as we all learned, than meets the eye. we need transparency and accountability that's in that bill. we need an early warning system for too big to fail. that's in the bill. we need derivatives reform. and i'm not talking here about the good work that businesses do to weather an economic storm when they hedge their bets within their businesses. i'm talking about the wildly out of control over-the- counter derivative trail when the whole financial institutions were trading things they didn't even understand and creating the big mess we're in. reform legislation must include, and this legislation includes it, provisions to look out for the best interest of consumers by educating them about their

financial choices, ensuring they have access to less risky products and protecting them from abusive sale practice including from nonbank lenders. we look back at what happened the last three years, mr. president, it's like wall street was driving down the street in their per radarry and government was following behind in a model-t ford that. has to stop. when you look at the history this have country when we have been confronted by major challenges we always rose to those challenges. when hitler was running across europe, our country didn't just say no. we rose to the challenge and the greatest generation won that war. when the russians were going to put a man on the moon, we didn't say go ahead, we're not going to get involved, we rose to that challenge to put a man on the moon. a senator: mr. president, a cloture motion at the desk. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i have a cloture motion. 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 debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 349, s. 3217, the restoring america financial stability act of 2010, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. reid: i ask the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i express my appreciation to the senator from minnesota for allowing my interruption. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota retains the floor. ms. klobuchar: thank you very much. as i was saying, mr. president, this country has done well not by saying no. it's been saying yes, by moving ahead and getting things done. we can't let this continue. we have to put these rules in place. our colleagues on the aisle, some of them are in good faith negotiating. others are not. the american people will not allow this gamesmanship to continue. the game is over. let's debate. let's get some amendments. there's changes we can make to the bill, changes that i support. but the only thing we're really

going to get this done by getting this bill on the floor to allow for debate. the american people deserve nothing less. thank you, mr. president, and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. kaufman: mr. president, i've been around this place, i came here first in 1973 working for then-senator biden. one of the rules we have around here is the american people really don't care about procedure. it's one of those things they just don't care about procedure. it's all too complicated. i don't blame them. half the time i don't know what the procedure is. so the procedure doesn't work. but you know what? during those 37-some years, every once in a while something comes along where procedure matters. now, our friends on the other side of the aisle have had a field day for the 15 months i've been here on procedure. they count on the fact that nobody in america cares about procedure. so what they've done is time and

again filibustered motions to proceed. that's hard to explain to someone out in america. what is a filibuster and a motion to proceed? that's just hard to figure out. you can get away with that. you can have a filibuster and a motion to proceed. then you have a filibuster on the bill, then you have cloture. all these words mean nothing to most americans. i tell what you really does -- and i'm for a filibuster. i think it's important to maintain the rights of political minorities. and that's the way to do it. and i say to my colleagues that are here that want to change the filibuster rules, spend a year in the minority, two years in the minority and thendom me and tell -- and then come to me and tell me you want to change the filibuster rule. i think people don't realize that want to change the filibuster rule is when one side or the other gets out too far, then the american people notice what comes on and they come and they'll fix it. and i'm convinced that's what's going to happen here today. i think the american people figured out what it is my friends on the other side of the aisle didn't and they are my

friends -- on the other side of the aisle, and they are my friends. we just have a different point of view. everywhere i go in this country, people are concerned about what happened. everywhere. they're concerned because they have so many friends and relations who lost their jobs. other friends and relations who lost their houses. and they say what are you going to do about it? what are you in washington going to do about it? are you totally -- don't you get it? don't you understand what's happening here? you're not going to do anything about this? and i watched senator dodd work for hours and days and months and, frankly, years to try to put together a bill so that we can vote on a bill that would be a bipartisan bill. i've been here again hanging out at this place for 37 years. i've never seen an effort that was -- that worked any hard tore try to get a bipartisan bill. go back and look at him. frankly, i got a little

frustrated, mr. chairman -- mr. president, because, you know, it took so long. but he did the right thing because i think he knew at some point if in fact we didn't get an agreement, we'd be here tonight and be faced with charges that this is a partisan bill. let me tell you, this is not a partisan bill. as you know, mr. chairman, as you in the chair know, and i, we have differences with this bill. you and senator levin have an amendment you want to offer, that i'm a cosponsor to change the bill. i have an amendment with senator brown, senator brown from ohio to make changes in the bill. senator cantwell and senator mccain have a bill that i'm a cosponsor. there are three amendments already that i'm in favor of that are amendments. i've heard chairman dodd say time and again, this is not the perfect bill. this is a bipartisan bill. we put a lot of effort into it. he's welcomed the opportunity for people to come forward and offer amendments. now, i don't get it how you can

say that you don't agree with the bill but you're not going to let anything happen on it. and on an issue like this. an issue that's so important to the american people. so important that we get it right. it's time. committees are great. i support the committee system. i think it's wonderful. i think negotiations are great. i think the bipartisan negotiations going on -- and i know they're going on because i've seen them on the floor. 10 or 12 members of the banking committee who are working. chairman dodd in the beginning set this thing up. he delegated down so that senator warner and senator corker were working on one thing. he and a republican, democrat were working on each of these things. they're still working. they're working as we talk now. it's time for that to stop. it is time for us to get out in the open and be a united states senate. it's time for us to debate these issues in the open. it is time for the republican party to decide they really want

to do something about wall street reform. i hope they're listening. in my opinion, we should stay here and discuss it until we're ready to go. we're going to disagree. one of the big things i'm in favor of is returning to tkpwhr-g. guess what -- glass-steagall. when we voted in 1999, senator dorgan voted for it, voted against it and senator shelby voted against it. these are not democrat and republican issues in my opinion. i don't see this as being a partisan fight. i think this looks like a fight to get political advantage. that's what this looks like to me. and i'm very hesitant to bring that forward. it looks to me like they don't want to vote. period. and i know that's not true for members on the other side. i know they want to talk about these issues. so, anyway, i just want to say tonight to the american people it's time to contact your senator and say "let's bring

financial regulatory reform to the floor. let's debate the issues on it. let's get the amendments. and let's make it -- pass it so that millions of americans who lost their jobs, who lost their homes know that we in the senate have done everything we can to make sure this never happens again." thank you, mr. president. mrs. shaheen: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: mr. president, i'm here tonight to join my colleagues. because, like them, i am deeply disappointed that 41 senators tonight voted to stop us from even beginning to doe bait on -- to debate on legislation to rein in the reckless an risky wall street conduct that brought this economy to its knees. rather than make this case out in the open on the floor of the senate to the changes they want to the wall street reform bill,

these 41 senators who voted to block debate are, instead, saying they want changes worked out behind closed doors. they're actually saying they will prethe vent -- they will prevent debate and hold this wall street reform bill until they are accomodated behind closed doors. now, i bet a lot of senators -- we heard senator kaufman say there are amendments he wants to the bill. there are amendments that i would like to see in the bill. for example, i think we need to strengthen the provisions in the bill to prevent financial institutions that are supposed to be helping american companies finance their growth plans, that are supposed to be helping families save for their retirement, that are supposed to be helping families save for their kids college education. to prevent those institutions

from making risky side bets for their own profit. but rather than block the senate from taking up the wall street reform until i get what i want, i intend to cosponsor the amendment that the presiding officer and senator levin are sponsoring and then debate that issue openly on the floor of the senate. our amendment prohibits federally insured banks from engaging in proprietary trading and it will impose strict capital charges on large nonbank financial tiewtionz to limit their -- tiewtionz to -- institutions to limit their proprietary trading. we learned about the proprietary trading that goldman sachs was doing. betting their own money that mortgage-backed securities would fail while getting their clients to invest in those same mortgage-backed securities. now, mr. president, i'm sure

there are a lot of people who think like i do. that a system that allows that kind of conflict doesn't make sense. and we need to change it. so i think we need to get this bill on the floor so we can debate this issue and so many others that we need to address to change the practices on wall street. mr. president, we need to enact a strong wall street reform bill as soon as possible. and while we delay, the big banks on wall street have returned the same types of reckless and risky gambles that brought our economy to the brink of a complete financial meltdown. you know, my grandmother used to say that while the cat's away, the mice will play. today i think my grandmother would say, while wall street reform is delayed, middle-class families are being played.

so let's be clear. a vote against opening debate on holding wall street accountable is a vote to protect wall street. we're still suffering the consequences of unregulated wall street greed. millions of hard-working americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own and they still can't find work. and too many small businesses still can't get credit. we need to do everything we can to ensure that the recent financial crisis never happens again. that taxpayers never again have to bail out wall street bankers for their bad bets. i would hope that all those senators who tonight voted to block us from taking up wall street reform will reconsider that vote and that they'll come to the floor of the senate and let us do the work of the people

of this country. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. burris: thank you, mr. president. for years at big corporations like goldman sachs wall street bankers packaged bat mortgages together and sold them to investors. they knew that these investment vehicles would inevitably fail, so they turned around and bet against them. they betted against the american people, mr. president. that's what they did when they put these packages together. they sought to make a profit off the misfortunes of their own customers. tonight we stand at the brink of a real debate on this topic. but our republican colleagues will not even agree to let us move forward. we have to debate on whether or

not we're going to debate. main street suffered through the most challenging economic situations in a generation. it has been made clear tonight who the republicans stand with. they stand with wall street because, mr. president, we're debating to debate. after the breathtaking scope of the economic crisis america's only now coming to terms with how we can simply refuse to move forward. refuse to debate this critical legislation. we are debating to debate. unbelievable. we've got to debate to debate. without meaningful reform, wall street continues to pose a systemic threat to the american financial system. i know a little bit about the financial system, mr. president. i'm probably the only one here

who's a banker. i spent my early years in the biggest bank in the state of illinois selling money for a living. i know a little bit about banking. i know what glass-steagall would do at the time. it would prevent us from getting into the insurance business and the banking business an banks were still able to grow and the banks were able to build into the entities. to assist businesses to grow and provide capital and make sure they would be successful and repay their loans. as a matter of fact, mr. president, i financed some of the most difficult businesses in the state of illinois. we had a government guaranteed loan section, startup businesses. i loaned a million dollars, mr. president, to a church -- the first black-owned church hospital in america. i financed that in 1969 with a million dollar loan. guess what? the hospital paid every penny of that money back to our bank plus

we made interest on it. it wasn't a giveaway. it wasn't any type of charity. it was a business transaction to help the community, and that's what banks ought to be doing. that's why we need to pass strong financial reform to prevent bad behavior on wall street from sinking ordinary folk on main street. i know a little bit about main street because that's where i financed those businesses. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the reform legislation introduced by senator dodd. the distinguished senator that put his life into this business trying to make sure that we have some type of financial security for the people -- so they're not ripping off folk and getting all rich off of the -- off of the work of the other people. this bill would have prevented

goldman sachs and other companies from getting into this mess in the first place. and it can help ensure that we will never end up in this position again. i hope so but we don't know what will come up. i urged senator warner on the floor today -- senator warner was saying he might not know what will happen and probably won't. but i hope that we -- when we get the legislation debated, that we're debating to debate that it will never happen again. but first we have to debate the bill on the floor. i'd like to ask my colleagues on the right to simply talk and debate about the ideas on this bill. i mean, i worked glass-steagall. i'm cosponsor of the amendment on the glass-steagall act to come back. this legislation will create a consumer protection bureau to shield ordinary americans from unfair, deceptive and abusive business practices. as former attorney general, i know what it is mis -- defending

those consumers tremendously during my years as attorney general of the state of illinois. the bill would establish an oversight counsel task to keep a close eye on emergency risks so we would not be taken by surprise again. it will end, mr. president, too big to fail. protect taxpayers from unnecessary risk and eliminate the need for future bailouts. this bill would also increase transparency, accountability for banks, hedge funds, and the derivative markets. so big companies like goldman sachs won't able to get away with fraud anymore. these basic reforms will establish clear rules for the road for the financial business, financial service industry so that we can keep the market free and fair without risk another economic collapse. but if we fail to take action, if we do not pass this reform legislation, if we even fail to

move forward on this simple procedural motion to debate to debate, then we will be right back where we started, no safeguards against this kind of dings acception an abuse in the -- deception and abuse in the future. mr. president, i ask my friends to join me into moving on to senator dodd's bill. let's move on to it and get on with the business of debating the bill and not debating to debate. i ask my friends on both sides of the aisle to stand with me on the side of the american people. so let's move to debate this financial reform legislation without delay. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. whitehouse: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. we are now, just for those who are tuning in, in a swaying in which the -- in a situation in

which the republicans who filibustered about 100 times in this session are now filibustering not a piece of legislation, they're filibustering a the ordinary proceed -- the ordinary procedural motion on the senate floor to move to that piece of legislation. there will be a -- probably be a whole second filibuster when we actually get to the wall street reform bill. but for now what they're filibustering is just moving to proceed under the senate rules to take up the bill and begin the debate. in on strucking us from even -- in obstructing us from even debating the wall street reform bill, the republican minority has once again shown the american people whose business it is that they serve. make no mistake about it, wall street bankers are the clerk wilare chortlingabout this tonie

republican success in once again obstructing reform. each day that the republicans delay us, high-powered investment banks make more money on highly leveraged gambles. each day that the republicans delay us, mortgage brokers, unregulated by the consumer protection agency push people into poor quality mortgages with confusing terms. each day that the republicans delay us, c.e.o.'s continue to get rainy day bonuses unchecked by proper corporate governance and oversight. each day these republicans delay us, credit card companies trick and trap american consumers with exorbitant rates an fees and no commonsenses. each day that the republican minority delays us, wall street wins and main street loses. the ties between the republican party and wall street c.e.o.'s are pretty well documented.

news outlets, for instance, reported earlier this month that the leaders of the senate minority sat down with two dozen top wall street executives to discuss wall street's concerns with these proposed reforms. nobody's talking about what was said, what deals were made, what winks and handshakes were exchanged. the meetings were behind closed doors. but the very people who brought about the housing bubble and the financial meltdown and profited handsomely through both have been strati guising with the -- strategizing with the republicans on how to prevent us from cleaning up the industry. they have good reason to do so by continuing to operate too big to fail firms, they executives make good money in the good times and get taxpayer bailouts in the bad times. the american people hav