at 5:30, confirm nation vote on the nomination of robert wilkins to serve as a judge on the d.c. circuit court. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, retired admiral barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, receive our prayers as incense of thanksgiving for your goodness to the children of humanity. lord, thank you for strengthening our

nation, protecting it from evil as you guide its citizens by the unfolding of your powerful providence. bless our senators. show them shiewtions to their problems and give them the courage to press on. protect them from the traps of evil and the snares of transgression. keep them from even desiring to do wrong, as you guide them on the path that leads to life. we pray in your wonderful name. amen. the president pro tempore:

please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. reid: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to proceed to tar calendar 266, is $1846, the flood insurance legislation. the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 266, s. 1846, a bill to delay the implementation of certain i guess pros of the biggert-waters insurance reform act of 2012 and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president, i would note the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

+srao*eud mr. president? the presiding officer: the leader. the senate in a quorum call. mr. reid: i ask that it be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: following my remarks, the senate will resume consideration of the unemployment insurance extension. filing deadline is 3:00 p.m.tained at deadline for all second-degree amendments to the reed styt substitute is 4:30 today. there have been some discussions going on. the republican leader and i have spoken, i have spoken to democratic and republican senators, as i'm sure my frienden shall th the republicar has done. we have one vote at 5:30 on robert wilkins to be a circuit court judge. we will see if we will go afford with the two additional votes on cloture tonight or put them over

until tomorrow. we are not in a position today, either the republican leader or me, to do anything other than -- if we get something worked out, it will be before we have the first vote and maybe we'll put this over for a reasonable period of time. if we can't, we'll have to have these two votes. mr. president, it's often said that actions have consequences and that's an understatement. but in the senate, inaction also has consequences. my republican colleagues have been very effective at creating gridlock in this body, at preventing the senate from doing its job. while this type of obstruction may serve republicans' political purposes, it does not serve this country's political -- purposes generally. that's for sure. it may serve republicans' political purposes, but it does not in any way lead to something

that's good for the country's purposes. on friday, i received a letter, as did the republican leader, from secretary of state john kerry. john kerry is someone who understands the senate, having served here for a a quarter of a century. after a year at the state department, more than a third of secretary kerry's leadership team remains vacant. one year -- remains vacant. four of his six under secretaries have yet to be confirmed, and 58 state department nominees are pending before the senate. just that one department. that one cabinet slot, we have 64 spots that are left floating around out there someplace, mr. president. this is unacceptable. as a time when our nation needs a robust presence abrawrksd the senate is -- abroad, the senate is stuck. the state department cannot

afford for a third of its leadership positions to be vacant. it is not tabooed for the state department. it is not good for our country, and it is not good internationally. this is what secretary kerry said, among other things, in the letter he wrote to us. i quote, "it is not an overstatement that today so many critical national security positions are still awaiting confirmation, that it is now affecting our ability to do the nonpartisan work of american foreign policy, defend the security of our nation, promote our values, protect our interests, and help our business overseas, which creates jobs for americans. simple snraited, the backlog in confirmation of state department nominees is impacting our national security and weakening america's role in the world." close quote. mr. president, the senate's inaction, its failure to carry out its duty to advise and consent has consequences. why are we not moving afford? it's because of obstruction by the republicans in the senate, under the adept leadership of

chairman menendez, the senate foreign relations committee is expected to report out at least 31 state department nominees this week. many of those nominations were made months ago, and return to the president at the end of is first session of the 113th congress. why were they returned? because obstruction of the republicans. it's incumbent upon the united states senate to promptly consider all nominees and in particular the vital nominees who will protect our national security and our role as a world leader. unfortunately, republicans have made it difficult and time-consuming to confirm any nominee, no matter how essential or ma how noncontroversial. if the senate can't confirm its constitutional duties, how can we hope to engage in a robust process? we waste so much time trying to get simple nominations done. they complain about not having amendments. this last work period, mr. president, we spent weeks

eating up time that meant nothing to anyone. the same republicans have wasted months of the senate's time last year and are now bitterly complaining that the senate does not spend enough time considering amendments. every hour republicans forced us to spend watching the clock waiting for nominees to perform procedural motions is an hour we could have spent debating and voting on amendments. now, mr. president, we cannot have extension of emergency unemployment insurance to be bogged down by a raft of political amendments. republicans are so obsessed with taking pot shots at the affordable care act and staging political stunt votes they are willing to derail a bill that will help 1.4 million out-of-work americans?

we can't allow that. it's unfair. still the complaints the minority have not fallen on deaf ears. the republicans said they would not vote for an extension unless it was fully offset. i compromised. it is fully paid for in the bill before this body. next my republican colleagues said they would not vote for this legislation unless it enacted real reforms to the unemployment insurance program. i agreed. that is in the bill before the body. now many of my republican colleagues say they'll turn their backs on americans who have been out of work for months and months unless they have an opportunity to vote on an amendment for this bill. although i'm wondering what republicans will demand next. so, reasonable amendments, reasonable number, relevant amendments? of course. we'd be happy to take a look at that. i'd be happy to do that. we have our tuesday caucuses every week.

i'll go over this in my caucus in some detail. my republican colleagues can't take yes for an answer, but if they flood this with extraneous amendments it will be clear they never wanted it in the first place. i'm willing to sit down and talk about it. i'm willing to allow votes on these amendments. however, i'm not going to allow this legislation to be bogged down, as i've indicated, by meaningless votes or derailed by another doomed crusade to strip millions of americans of the affordable care that they have now. and once republicans get the amendment votes they want, i hope they will give 1.4 million out-of-work americans the vote they want and they need. republican colleagues should remember that the final vote on this legislation, a vote for middle-class men and women who desperately want to work and desperately need our help in the meantime is the only vote that

really matters. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: my friend, the majority leader, was talking about the crush of nominations. of course the reason we have a crush of nominations is because of the decision of the majority to break the rules of the senate to change the rules of the senate last year which produced the inevitable entirely predictable consequence of sending an enormous number of nominations back down to the administration at the end of the session. so the decision of the majority to run roughshod over the majority has a lot of consequences, one of which is pretty clear already, that it didn't streamline the nomination process as it was sold to the majority to do. it only made it more difficult. on another matter, i'd like to say a word about unemployment insurance. the reason for the holdup should

be pretty obvious at this point. republicans have a lot of good ideas on how to pay for this extension. we also have a lot of proposals for getting at the root of the problem, proposals that would make it easier for folks who are struggling in this economy to actually find -- actually find stable and fulfilling work or get retrained so they can find good jobs. that's a goal i expect we could all agree on. unfortunately, up until the weekend, the majority leader wasn't terribly interested in any of these ideas. he only seemed to want to extend the program without really paying for it, without doing much of anything to help private-sector job creation and without creating opportunities for targeted training that would help folks who are currently, currently receiving unemployment assistance actually find a job. so i think this is unfortunate. there's clearly no shortage of creative, constructive proposals

out there that speak to the underlying problems, that speak to the urgent need to create more stable, good-paying jobs and which make sure we don't increase our already out of control federal debt. some of these ideas actually come from democrats. the occupant of the chair's senior senator from connecticut has an idea to create a program that subsidizes employment for low-income americans so they aren't stuck in neutral while they search for permanent work. this is an idea that actually deserves debate, deserves a vote. and as i've indicated in recent days, the majority leader should give other senators more of a say in what we do around here, including members of his own conference. so hopefully his comments a few moments ago and over the weekend are a sign that we may be able to work this out in a way that the senate can function like it used to, which is that members actually are able to offer

amendments and get votes before we move to final passage on important legislation. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 1845, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 265, s. 1845, a bill to provide for the extension of certain unemployment benefits and for other purposes. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: thank you, mr. president. senator mcconnell has made a very important call to restore the senate as a great

deliberative body that it was intended to be. i would like to continue to add my voice to that call. in fact, i'm going to expand on some observations that i made previously before the senate, i believe in the month of december last year. the united states senate is a unique body designed with a very unique purpose in mind. in the "federalist papers" 62 attributed to the father of the constitution, james madison, the unique role of the united states senate is explained this way -- quote -- "the necessity of a senate is not less indicated by the propensity of all single and numerous assemblies to yield to the impulse of sudden and violent passions and to be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate and pernicious

resolutions." end of quote. when madison talks about factious leaders and also intemperate and pernicious resolutions, he basically means what we call partisanship and the way some partisans express it, my way or the highway approach to legislating that is all too common these days. what might come as a shock to anyone who has followed the united states senate lately is the fact that the senate was specifically designed to check partisan passions and to ensure that all americans of all stripes are fairly represented through a deliberative process. clearly the senate is not fulfilling the role that the framers of the constitution intended in recent years.

to find out what went wrong, we first have to examine how the senate was supposed to function. about this propensity of legislatures to be dominant by a factious leaders acting intemperately, madison goes on to say -- quote -- "examples on this subject might be cited without number and from proceedings within the united states as well as from history in other countries." end of quote. note that in advocating for the creation of a senate to counter this negative tendency, madison references examples from proceedings within the united states. many state legislatures in the early days of our republic were unicameral with frequent elections and weak executives. this led to many instances where

a temporary majority faction would gain control and quickly pass legislation that advantaged the majority at the expense of the minority. the united states senate has been called the greatest deliberative body in the world because, just because it was specifically designed to proceed as a measured pace and to guarantee that the rights of the minority party be protected. so james madison wrote in federalist paper number 10 -- quote -- "complaints are everywhere heard from our most considered and virtuous citizens, fallly the friend of the -- equally the friend of the public and private faith and of public and personal liberty that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in conflicts of rival parties and that measures

are too often decided not according to rules of justice and the rights of the minority party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." end of quote. what's unique about the senate is that the rules and traditions for senators to work together to prevent madison's overbearing majority from steam rolling the minority party. because the rules of the senate are built around consensus as opposed to the other body, the house of representatives where the majority party dominates, here it forces senators of all parties to listen to each other and to work together. now, at least that was true most of my time in the senate. that has changed in recent years.

if anyone wonders why the tone in washington has become so heated recently, the loss of the senate as a deliberative body is certainly a big factor. there is an had i -- a story which may not be adequate but depicts how the senate was intended to function. the story goes when jefferson returned from france where he was serving during the constitutional convention, he asked george washington why the senate had been created. washington replied by asking jefferson supposedly quote,hy did you pour that tea into your saucer? end of quote. to cool it, jefferson said. washington responded, even so, we pour legislation into the

senatorial saucer to cool. in the house of representatives the rules committee sets out the terms of debate for each bill. if you want to offer an amendment in the house, you have to go hat in hand to the rules committee and get their permission. if the house leadership doesn't like your amendment, you're out of luck. by contrast, here in the senate, the senate has a tradition of allowing extensive debate and amendments by any senator without prior approval from anybody. however, that tradition has gone out the window under the current majority leadership. we have seen an unprecedented abuse of cloture motions to cut off the deliberative process also paired with a tactic called filling the tree, blocking amendments from being considered. the senate majority leader has effectively become a one-man version of the house rules

committee, dictating what amendments will be debated and which ones will never see the light of day. he has done so again on the unemployment bill currently before this senate. in fact, he's been quite unashamed about saying that he's not going to allow any amendments. this strips the ability of individual senators to effectively represent their state regardless of political party. blocking amendments also virtually guarantees that any legislation the senate votes on will be more partisan in nature, violating the very purpose of the senate, according to james madison. by empowering the majority leader at the expense of individual senators, the people of the 50 states lose their voice in the senate and party leaders get their way instead. the people of iowa sent me to the united states senate to represent them, not to simply

vote up or down on a purely partisan agenda dictated by the majority leader. everyone complains about the lack of bipartisanship these days, but there is no opportunity for individual senators to work together across the aisle when legislation is drafted on a partisan basis and amendments are blocked. bipartisanship requires giving individual senators a voice, regardless of party. that's the only way to get things done in the united states senate. in the last decade, when i was chairman of the finance committee and republicans controlled the senate, we wanted to actually get things done. in order for that to happen, we knew that we had to accommodate the minority. we had to have patience and humility and respect for that minority, attributes that don't exist on the other side anymore.

and we had some major bipartisan accomplishments from the largest tax cut in history to the medicare prescription drug program to numerous trade agreements. those kinds of major bills don't seem to happen anymore. the senate rules provide that any senator may offer an amendment, regardless of party affiliation. each senator represents hundreds of thousands. in the case of california, 36 million of americans, and each has an individual right to offer amendments for consideration. the principle here isn't about political parties having their say, but duly elected senators participating in the legislative process. again, it is part of our duty to represent the citizens of our respective states, each senator has an individual right to offer amendments. this right cannot be outsourced

to party leaders. the long-standing tradition of the senate is that members of the minority party as well as rank-and-file members of the majority party have an opportunity to offer amendments and get votes in the united states senate. the now-routine practice of filling the tree to block amendments has been a major factor in the destruction of the senate as a deliberative body. this is usually combined with filing cloture to cut off further consideration of a bill, which has occurred in truly unprecedented extent. in a deliberative body, debates and amendments are essential so cloture should be rare, and abuse of cloture strikes to the very heart of how the senate is intended to work. it is important to note that the majority leader has tried to pass off the cloture motions he

has filed, which are attempts by the majority party to silence the minority party as nothing but republican filibusters. there seems to have been a concerted attempt to confuse cloture motions with filibusters, but "the washington post" fact checker has caught the majority leader in this distortion, giving the claim of republican filibusters two pinocchios. in fact, a report by the nonpartisan congressional research service called quote cloture attempts on nominations dated historical development, end of title, written by richard s. beth contains an entire section titled -- quote -- "cloture motions do not correspond with filibusters." end of title. the abuse of cloture often combined with the blocking of

amendments prevents all senators from doing what they were sent here to do, not just members of the minority party. and you know it's even gotten worse. even where the majority leader's decided he is going to open to amendments, he has created out of whole cloth new restrictions to limit senators' rights. first he normally only opens up the amendments process if there is an agreement to limit amendments, and this is usually only a handful or so of amendments. then he has magically determined that only germane or relevant amendments can be considered. of course, nowhere do the senate rules require amendments to be germane other than postcloture. senators elected in the last few years appear to be ignorant of that fact. you will hear some of my colleagues here argue against an

amendment saying it's nongermane or nonreally vonetta, so they have fallen totally for the majority leader's creative rule making, thus giving up one of their rights as a senator with which to represent their state. i can't count how many nongermane or nonrelevant amendments hi to allow votes on when i processed bills when republicans were in charge. they were usually tough political votes, but we took them because we wanted to get things done, and that's the way the senate operates. you don't see that nowadays. the current majority of votes -- avoids tough votes at all costs. and that's why if you wonder why things don't get done around here in the senate, that's one of the reasons they don't get done. the american people sent us here to get the work done and to represent our constituents, and

that means voting, not avoiding tough votes. we sometimes hear that this is a question of majority rule versus minority obstruction. again, that ignores that each senator is elected to represent their state, not simply to be an agent of one of the political parties. there are policies that have majority support in the senate that have been denied a vote. now, understand, we have been denied amendment -- votes on amendments that even a majority of this senate supports. what happened during debate on a budget resolution proves my point. the special rules of the budget resolution limit debate, so it can't be filibustered, but allow -- it also allows for an unlimited number of amendments. a republican amendment to the senate budget committee in support of repealing the tax on

life-saving medical devices in president obama's health care law passed by an overwhelming 79-20 vote with more than half of the democrats voting with the republicans rather than their party leader. we also had a republican amendment in support of the approval of the keystone x.l. pipeline to bring oil from canada, and that passed 62-37. most like -- votes like these that split the democrats and hand a win to the republicans is exactly what the majority leader has been trying to avoid by blocking those very same amendments on legislation. and, of course, that's probably the explanation of why we didn't take up a budget resolution for more than three years prior to this year. until we put an end to the abuse of cloture and the blocking of amendments, the senate cannot function as james madison and the framers of the constitution

intended. we must bring back the senate as a deliberative body. our politics today desperately need the cooling saucer of the united states senate, as george washington described the senate to jefferson. the action by the majority leader to make it easier to consider nominations on a purely partisan basis went in the wrong direction. in the face of bipartisan opposition with no republican votes, the so-called nuclear option established a precedent, effectively overruling the rules on the books. a better move would be for the senate to establish a precedent that filling the tree and using cloture to block a full amendment process is

illegitimate. it's time to restore the senate so it can fulfill its constitutional role. senator mcconnell has made a thoughtful and well-reasoned appeal, and i hope my colleagues will listen for the sake of this institution, for the good of the country as a whole and out of respect for the framers of the constitution that set up the united states senate as a very unique deliberative body. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: last week i said on the senate floor that serving in the united states senate is becoming like being asked to join the grand ole opry and not being allowed to sing. here's what i meant by that. take last week. the democratic leader, the

distinguished majority leader, the senator from nevada, brought up unemployment compensation. how do we help unemployed americans go to work. i can't think of an issue more important to our country. all of us have ideas about how to do this. but he brought up his idea. hasn't been considered by committee. and then when he put it on the floor, he cut off amendments, he cut off -- cut off debate and cut off votes. coming up soon will be minimum wage. how to increase family incomes in america is the foremost issue facing our country. we all have ideas about that. we're elected to deal with it. we're in a long period of unemployment. we believe the economy is bad for a variety of reasons. we on this side believe it has a big, wet blanket of rules and regulations that have been increased by the obama administration. we'd like to debate that. we'd like to talk about it. we don'tie