the u.s. senate is about to gavel in at 2:00 eastern, 30 seconds from now. we expect procedural votes and also work on two district court nominations coming up at 5:30 eastern, vote on a leadership elections for both parties expected tomorrow including the next majority and minority leaders. tomorrow more work, child care block grant program helping low-income americans pay for child care. now to live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, our hope for the years to come, as we prepare to turn a new chapter in the

united states senate history, we pause to acknowledge that you are our light and salvation. you are the strength of our lives, enabling us to move confidently toward the future. empower our lawmakers who are coming and going, sustaining them in all of their tomorrows. bless also the many other laborers who will be leaving us, who faithfully served without fanfare. lord, reward their fidelity with heaven's commendation. as our senators seek

to respond to the voices of the american people, may they make it their top priority to listen to your whisper. may pleasing you be their greatest desire. let your kingdom come and your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. we pray in your sovereign 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.

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i now move to proceed to calendar number 467, marketplace fairness act. the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed, s. 2609, a bill to restore state sovereign rights to enforce state and local sales and use taxes, and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president, following my remarks and those of the republican leader, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 5:30 this evening. during that time, senators will be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. at 5:30, the senate will vote cloture on nominations of moss and on martin may. one is from the district of columbia. the other is from the state of georgia. mr. president, i have always believed it wise to follow will rogers' admonition. don't let yesterday use up too much of today. we have a lot of work to do and no time to linger on the past.

with just a few weeks left in this congress, the 113th, there are a number of important legislative matters before this body that must be finished. i congratulate the republican leader who will soon become the new majority leader. the senior senator from kentucky and i have known one another for a very long period of time. we have been whips together. we have been -- he was minority leader, i was minority leader, majority leader, going back and forth, so we understand these jobs. i appreciate his devotion to the state of kentucky. to our country, to the united states senate. he knows i hold him in the highest regard. i am ready, mr. president, to work with him in good faith to make this institution function again for the american people. i saw firsthand destruction wasg to our system. i have no desire to engage in that manner. i have been, as i have mentioned

before, i mention again, minority leader. i have been able to strike compromise with my republican colleagues and i'm ready to do it again. regardless of how you may interpret last week's election results, it's clear that the american people want us to join together to get things done for the middle class and all americans. we should be able to do that. after all, helping working families is not a partisan issue. just last week, we saw four very red states -- alaska, arkansas, nebraska and south dakota, vote to increase their minimum wages. clearly, mr. president, republicans outside this building don't object to giving american workers a livable wage. the minimum wage is just one example. there are other issues like student debt relief for borrowers, pay equity for women and a number of other issues that need to be addressed as well. there is absolutely no reason why we can't work together on these issues, all issues, democrats and republicans to lend americans a helping hand

that they so desperately need. although the desks in this great chamber may move around and change, our duty to help working american families never will. senate democrats are ready to work in the good faith of their republican counterparts, whether it is today, tomorrow, january, or whenever it is to help the middle class and when we do that, we help all of our citizenry. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: last week, the american people sent a strong message to washington. they voted for a new direction. they called for a change in the way we do things here in the senate. and they sent a new team to washington to carry their wishes forward. we plan to do just that. but several items remain for the

outgoing congress to consider, and that's our immediate focus. in the weeks that remain in this congress, we should work to accomplish the essential task of funding the government and preventing retroactive tax increases. we must address the expiring authority that passed this session from the department of defense to train and equip a moderate vetted syrian opposition and we must continue to enforce the efforts to address the ebola crisis. all of this will require cooperation from both sides of the aisle, from both sides of the rotunda and from both ends of pennsylvania avenue. the actions of the next few weeks could help set a positive tone for the work of the next congress. it's a tone that will depend largely on the administration's willingness to respect a message sent last tuesday. that's one of the things we discussed at the white house on friday. it was a productive meeting. there were a lot of -- a lot of

of -- that both parties can accomplish together over the next couple of years. i hope that happens. in fact, i'm optimistic. but working together requires trust. i think president obama has the duty to help build the trust we all need to move forward together, not to double down on the old ways of doing business. that's why i think moving forward with the unilateral action on immigration he has planned would be a big mistake. as was last night's announcement to essentially give china a free pass on emissions while hurting middle-class families and struggling miners here in our country. last week, the american people said they would like to see more cooperation in washington. he said he thinks all of us have responsibility and himself in particular to try and make that happen. that is the kind of tone the american people are looking for. now it's on folks here in washington to calibrate their

actions accordingly, so let's not do things to hurt the possibility of a cooperative partnership, but step back and focus on what could be accomplished together. let's listen to the american people. mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant republican leader. mr. cornyn: mr. president, what happened on november 4 was the beginning of an opportunity, an opportunity we have working together to restore faith in our democratic institutions, to restore strong growth to our economy and to restore a sense of purpose and principle to u.s. foreign policy. starting with the incoming

majority leader, my good friend, the senior senator from kentucky, republicans have been entrusted by our fellow citizens to lead this chamber next year. we understand that the american people sent a strong message on november 4 that they were enormously frustrated by what they saw as dysfunction in the state of affairs here in washington, d.c., and we understand why they are eager for new leadership and a new direction. my party, the republican party, approaches this opportunity with humility and above all a clear-eyed commitment to address the top priorities of the american people, and of course those priorities start with jobs and the economy. i know the unemployment rate has continued to tick down little by little, but it's really fairly misleading when you consider the

fact that we're stuck for the 36 h year low in the labor participation rate. the percentage of people who are actually looking for work. indeed, there are still more than seven million people looking for full-time work and working currently in part-time jobs. and we know that many people have just simply become so discouraged that they have given up and they have quit looking, and that's a tragedy. and then there is this problem. america's median household income is no higher in 2013 than it was nearly a quarter of a century ago in 1989. that's been a silent tragedy, one that has been sustained by the middle-class in america that's seen no growth in their median household thk for about a quarter century. the median income was lower last year than it was the year

president reagan left the wows. that's simply astonishing. it has prushed the middle class. addressing that should be one of our highest priorities in the new congress starting in january. since 2011, our colleagues in the united states house of representatives have been passing legislation that they feel would boost job creation and increase wages. in the 113th congress alone, they have passed dozens of jobs bills. unfortunately, as we know, those have not been taken up by the majority leader in the senate, and they have been effectively declared dead on arrival. and then we also know that this strategy of blocking amendments on pending legislation lest vulnerable incumbents be forced to cast tough votes has really

backfired because many of our colleagues in the majority have not been able to point to a legislative record of effectiveness for their own constituents because of this flawed strategy of blocking the senate from considering amendments and voting on them. it's one thing to be in the minority and have -- have the amendments or suggestions that i am offering added, but it's harder to explain to your own constituents if you're in the majority and you're being blocked out, too. so i hope we're done with that. i know the incoming majority leader, senator mcconnell, believes strongly in returning the senate to its traditions as the world's greatest deliberative body where anyone, regardless of who they are, which political party they are affiliated, can come to the senate floor and offer constructive suggestions and get a vote. that's what we do. at least that's what we used to do, and that's what we can do again. and that doesn't mean just the majority party gets votes on

their amendments. that means the minority party will get votes on your amendments. hopefully slowly but surely we can begin to rebuild not only trust and confidence within ourselves and this institution but regain the lost trust of the american people by showing that we can effectively solve problems on a bipartisan basis to the challenges they face as members of the hardworking middle class. and then there is the basic job of governing. we will pass a budget next year, something our friends across the aisle have failed to do since 2009. now, here's something that i don't think anybody will excuse or defend. how in the world can it be that when every small and large business in america has to pass a budget, when families have to have a budget so they can determine their priorities and how they can most effectively

utilize their income, that they have to pass a budget but the united states congress does not? that's frankly malpractice, in my view, and it's got to end and it will end next year. now, i know republicans and democrats will continue from have policy disagreements. nobody is suggesting that's not going to happen but this is the place where those get debated, where they get voted on and judge majorities will pass legislation and send them to president obama. and those will be largely if not almost entirely bipartisan majorities. of course, by definition. we know democrats by and large continue to support the affordable care act and republicans continue to believe that it was a mistake and should be replaced with patient-centered alternatives but we don't have to choose between complete paralysis and

actually functioning. dysfunction is not the only choice we have, and now that that's been rejected by the voters, resoundingly, we know a change is in order. the american people have demanded it and they deserve it. and and they will get it. so last week's elections won't change some of the fundamental policy differences that we have between political parties on obamacare, on what we need to do to preserve and protect social security and medicare and the like, and it won't change people's points of view on other hot-button issues but it will give us a chance to make some steady incremental progress on issues where we do agree. you know, when i came to the senate teddy kennedy, the liberal lion from massachusetts had been here about 40 years and he was working on the health, education, labor and pensions

committee with mike enzi, a conservative republican from wyoming. one day i went up to mike enzi and said how is it that you and senator kennedy with such diametrically opposing views of what the congress ought to do and how to solve these problems can work productively together? senator enzi told me it's easy. it's the 80-20 rule. he said the 80% we can't agree -- can agree on, we do. the 20% we can't, we don't. we put off for another day. strikes me as imminently -- eminently practical and a way for us to get back to work again. now, when i talk about the easy stuff that we can do, i'm referring to the bipartisan majorities that support things like the keystone x.l. pipeline authorization, increasing

natural gas supports because it changes the geopolitics of the world where people like vladimir putin can't put a boot heel on the gas supply to europe or ukraine and use that for his own purposes. and then i'm confident that we can find commonsense safeguards from an overreaching federal bureaucracy. we can agree on things like improving work force training programs and do things that make it much easier to launch new infrastructure and construction projects. we can do things like we should have done last year or this year like reforming our broken patent system to discourage abusive and costly lit nation. we actually had a bipartisan bill in the judiciary committee but it didn't come to the floor because the majority leader wouldn't bring it up because one of his constituents simply objected to it. no one should have a trump card

when it comes to good, bipartisan legislation and they won't. next year. we will vote-vote on patent reform -- vote on patent reform. there are things like mitigating some of the burdens of obamacare like restoring the 40-hour workweek and repealing the medical device tax which has strong bipartisan basis for -- bipartisan support for revealing that tax which has driven medical device manufacturers and their jobs overseas. i have constituents, for example, in dallas in that business and they say they're building their business in costa rica because of the impact of this medical device tax. and its negative impact on medical innovation and job creation here. and then i do know there's bipartisan support for abolishing the independent payment advisory board under medicare, this is 15 bureaucrats who basically get to guide decide who gets medical care and who does not with no

real appeal or recourse. in the judiciary committee that i serve on we've had very impressive bipartisan support for things like prison reform and even sentencing reform. those are important issues of substance that the united states senate ought to be discussing, debating, and voting on and trying to find ways we can work together to achieve solutions. so each of the things that i've mentioned have bipartisan support. and if we can pass these measures with strong support on both sides of the aisle, and send them to the president for his signature, it will be much easier to establish the trust and cooperation necessary to do the harder stuff. so starting with the easy stuff that we've already identified that has bipartisan support, demonstrating we can actually do that, then i think we will have the confidence in ourselves and the american people will have the confidence in us and their government to begin to tackle

some of the more challenging issues. senator mcconnell, the republican leader, mentioned this but it bears repeating, that the president is still threatening to go around congress and use an executive order to implement a new, radical change in our federal government's immigration policy and i think it's a terrible mistake. at this same luncheon the senator from kentucky mentioned, a number of us went down the line and said mr. president, please don't do this. because if you do, it will make it even harder for us to take a step-by-step approach to immigration reform that enjoys bipartisan support. it will poison the well. not to mention the fact that what the president is proposing to do is unlawful and it will also make it harder for us to do the other things that i've mentioned already that have bipartisan support. it will poison the well.

why in the world would the president want to do that at the start of a new congress in the last two years of his term in office? don't you think he would want to have some legacy that he could point to, those last two years, saying, well, i might have been dealt a tough political hand with republican majorities in the house and senate but we were actually able to be productive. i think that's why most senators have come here, to be productive. so i would urge the president as others have done in the very strongest of terms to abandon his plan for this executive northwest and -- amnesty and heed the clear message voters sent last tuesday. after a six-year experiment in unfettered liberalism and big-government policies, the american people are asking for a new direction. i'm not under any illusion all

of a sudden they've fallen in love with my side of the aisle. that's not true. but what they are willing to do is put us on probation and give us all a chance to demonstrate that we can change our course, we can listen to the american people and we can do things together that they want to see us do. my constituents, 26.5 million texans are sick and tired of watching the federal government waste their money selectively youly enforce the law and try to micromanage their lives as if the federal government knew better than they do what's good for them and their families. it's tune and they know it, but that hasn't stopped the efforts of the last six years. what my constituents want, i believe, and i believe it because they've told me this, they want leaders who will respond to their practical, day-to-day concerns. leaders who appreciate and

address -- and will address the biggest threats to the american dream. leaders who will uphold the timeless principles of our constitution. i believe there is a nascent bipartisan emerging consensus here that we can actually do this. this is not too hard for us to do. i've read some of -- what some of the pundits have said, it's going to be even worse with the republicans in charge. well, it better not be worse or there will be a heavy price to pay, and most of that will be paid by the american people who will not be well served if we simply refuse to change and if we refuse to listen and that goes for the president, that goes for republicans, and that goes for democrats. so for my part and i believe for our part on this side of the aisle, we're eager to work together to solve our country's problems, to help unleash this

great american job creating engine known as our economy and to restore the rule of law and constitutional government. as for president obama, we can only hope that he decides to work with us rather than against us and against the best intentions and desires of the american people. 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 be in a period of morning business until 5:30 p.m. with senators permitted to speak therein for ten minutes each with the time equally divided and controlled by the leaders or their designees. the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: i was hoping to catch the senator from texas. i'd like to speak for up to 10 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: thank you. i was hoping to catch the senator before he left because i wanted to ask him and i'm not sure he's going to slip back in here, but i was going to ask

him if he thought maybe -- because i agreed with him that that new -- that new approach to bipartisanship could start today. ayotte we have to -- i don't think we necessarily have to wait until january. there you are some of us that have been ready, that have worked in a bipartisan way literally for years, getting really important things done for our nation and i'm sorry that the senator from the senator slipped away, i'm sure he's got some other pressing business because i wanted to ask him and i absolutely agree with him on the priorities that he just laid out. i think he just said that the american people want us to act and act together in their interest. i think i heard him say that in the top of his list that he was particularly anxious to work on was the keystone x.l. palestine, -- pipeline, the

expedited export of natural gas. i think he said it was important for jobs in america, helping strengthen the middle class, sending a very positive signal to them that we heard them in this election, that he was troubled about the falling median household income and wanted to do something to raise it and i think i heard him say that he was concerned or that he was -- how shall i say it -- he was thinking that some of these things would really push putin back on his heels. i've been one of the ones sanctioned by president putin and there are a few others that are on that list so i'm been of that mind for a while. i think he also said and referred to ted kennedy, one of our dear friends and mentored many of us, not just democrats but republicans as well with his straightforwardness, his compassion, his capacity for

extraordinary work and his willingness to work across party lines as the senator from texas pointed out, called up the great partnership with senator kennedy and senator hatch, and talked about the 80-20, let's agree on 80%, we might not agree on everything, but let's move forward, i think were his words, on the 80% that we do agree on. so i want to come to the floor today to ask senator cornyn from texas particularly and senator mcconnell and senator reid and others if they would join me in moving forward on the keystone x.l. pipeline. this has been a project that hasslingered far too long. it is clearly supported by 60 or more members of this body. it is a piece of legislation that has been endorsed by the

new majority leader,-to-be majority leader, is a cosponsor in -- and a leading cosponsor of the legislation. there are a significant number of democrats on that legislation, and i believe with a push, a significant push in the next few hours, that we could actually get the votes we need to pass the keystone pipeline. now, in an hour or so at the request of the minority, i'm going to wait for about an hour and then i'm going to propose a unanimous consent to do exactly that. to set up two hours of debate tonight after the vote and then have a vote on the keystone pipeline tomorrow. i believe it is time to act. i believe that we should take the new majority leader at his

word and stop blocking legislation that is broadly supported by the american public and has been for quite some time. i want to say yes to majority leader -- new majority leader mitch mcconnell. the time to start is now. the public has clearly spoken. and i believe that we can move forward on several important pieces of legislation. senator reid mentioned the marketplace fairness act. that is another very important piece of legislation that i believe needs to be moved through and with a little push right now it could get done, and it would be a significant boost to business and retail that are being hurt every day by our inaction. but my comments today are going to be about the keystone

pipeline because i am chair of the energy committee for the united states senate and i'm going to do everything in my power here and at home on the campaign trail, where i'm still in a runoff, as you know, to get this project moving forward. one of the extraordinary facts about the keystone pipeline is not what it is -- and i'm going to talk about that in a minute -- and what it does, but one of the most extraordinary pieces of argument for why we should pass it is the unprecedented coalition that supports it. now, there are other bills that have a longer list of supporters. there are bills that have pages and pages of -- there are bills that have pages and pages of lists, but this particular bill has a relatively

short list of organizations but they are extremely powerful and they are extremely diverse which makes it compelling and i think it makes us -- or should make us want to stand up and respond to this coalition. i'm going to read their names because i've got some time to do this before we call -- i call for unanimous consent to pass the original hoeven-landrieu keystone bill, which is a stand-alone keystone bill as originally introduced with 45 republican cosponsors -- every member of the republican caucus is already a cosponsor of this bill. and we have on that bill about 12 democratic cosponsors, and i

am confident that we have the additional votes necessary to pass it. the american chemistry council, the american concrete pipe association, the american exploration and production council, the american highways users alliance, the american petroleum institute, the american road and transportation builders, american truckers association, associate general contractors of america, association of oil pipelines, concrete reinforcing steel institute, distribution contractors association, independent petroleum association of america, industrial minerals association of north america, institute for 21st century energy, international brotherhood of electrical workers, laborers international union of north america. and let me start there and make a point.

many bills that pass here or are attempted to pass here either have a list of all business organizations artificially all labor organizations or -- or article labor organizations or all environmental , you know, highway contractors. this bill has such an extraordinary diverse group of some of the strongest business leaders in the country and i want to underscore to my democratic colleagues that are supporting this piece of legislation, tremendous support from labor unions. because labor unions, like business leaders, want jobs. they want profits. they want success. they want more investment in business, creating good middle-class jobs. and the difference between the oil and gas industry, which i've been pleased to be a strong advocate for in many, many

different facets, is that this industry does produce the kinds of jobs that americans really want. not minimum-wage jobs, not just slightly above minimum wage but jobs that in my state -- the senator knows this because he's well aware of this -- start at $60,000, $70,000, $85,000 for a young man artificiall man or a n coming out of high school or a trade school, let alone college. these are very important jobs. that's why labor unions are represented here along with portland cement association, the plastics industry, the united states associate of journeymen and plumbers and pipe fitters industry, american concrete, the business roundtable, american supply association, american iron andteel institute, national association of manufacturers, national electric contractors association,

national roofing contractors. why would roofing contractors be supporting the keystone pipeline? there are no roofs on a pipeline. but there are thousands of roofs on workers needed to build a pipeline all along the route of this pipeline. there will be increases of populations of housing, industrial sites, retail, residential supporting over 40,000 workers to build this pipeline. the north american dye casting association, the national utility contractors. again,, yo, you know, associate businesses. the u.s. gas and association business. and finally, steel manufacturers and western alliance. now, this is an extraordinary coalition that has come together to support the hoeven-landrieu bill. the bill that i'm going to call up in a few minutes for unanimous consent to pass

because i believe what the new majority leader has said and i believe what senator cornyn has just said, the senator from texas, and i believe what the current majority leader has sa said, soon to be minority leader in the next congress, that we need to work together and that we can work together and we need to begin to do that today. not tomorrow. not in january. not in february. not in march. not around the corner. not next week. but today. that would send "the" most positive signal. and i'm not asking to have unanimous consent on 10 bills that are controversial. i'm not asking us to do the impossible. i'm not asking us to do something that just came up last week. i'm asking us to move forward on

a bill that has labor support, business support, general contractor support and the american people, most importantly. the latest polls on the keystone pipeline, not just in my state -- and i see my colleague from west virginia -- and not just in west virginia, but polls in this country from california to new york, to michigan to pennsylvania, to ohio to florida and to texas overwhelmingly democrats, republicans -- not everyone -- but overwhelming support to build the keystone pipeline because americans want jobs. and american families deserve good-paying jobs. and americans are tired, in addition, to bowing to mideast powers or to russian dictators

about what our future is going to be. americans are proud. we want to stand proud. and we believe the keystone pipeline is an important first step, it's a signal, it's a symbol that represents american energy power. it's a symbol moving past gridlock. it is a deliverable on promises that we have all made. yes, we will work together, yes, but that will start later; yes, we will work together butt will be next year. yes, we will work together but it will be in the spring. yes, we'll work together but we can't passkey stone unless we pass -- pass keystone unless we pass these 10 other things. there's always going to be tomorrow. there's always going to be 10 other things. let's act today, tomorrow. we can do this. si suepeda -- we can do this.

we can pass the keystone pipeline and answer the frustrations of the american people so they could rest next week and say, oh, my gosh, the senators of the united states of america have ears and they have brains and they have hearts and they heard what we said and we can do this. and we have a bill that is on the calendar. i have also passed a similar bill through my committee, but i'm not even asking to pass the bill i passed through my committee, which i think is slightly better than the one on the calendar. but we can all compromise here. i'm also a cosponsor of the bill, the lead sponsor of the bill that's on the senate calendar. it doesn't have to go through a committee. it basically technically alrea

already, you know, has. it is ready for a vote. and we have the 60 votes to pass it. so i'm going to recognize in just a minute the senator from west virginia -- well, i'll recognize -- i'll ask the senator a question because the -- only the chair can recognize. but i'd like to ask the senator from west virginia, does any of this make sense to him? i don't know if he was down here or i'm sure he was in his office listening to the comments of the majority leader, the soon-to-be majority leader and the good senator from texas saying now is the time to work together. i don't know if you heard that. but do you think that maybe this bill would be the bill to start moving us from gridlock to doing the job for the american people? mr. manchin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: thank you. my good friend, the senator from louisiana, has been working on this for many, many years.

i think even before i came. i've been here four years now. when i first came, i talked to senator landrieu, my friend from louisiana, and asked her about this and basically i think you explained to me at the time th that, first of all, the sovereign nation of canada, the country, was going to produce it so we had no say into the production of this product. it's going to be produced. and next of all, it's going to go somewhere because there's demand for the product in the marketplace. there's a demand for it. with all that being said, it didn't take my too long to reply to you, i think if you recall, four years ago that in west virginia, we have a little bit of common sense and we've got good people, like louisiana, and we felt if this product is going to be sold and we're buying this type of a product around the world, why wouldn't you buy from your friends versus the enemies that we have supplied resources to to be used against us? that was the one that resonates with west virginians. i know it resonates with louisianans. the other thing is, is i'm

understanding there are a thousand american companies already, a thousand american companies, senator, and west virginia, not to say what you've been able to do and help the people in louisiana, all the jobs they've gotten from this, it would be a tremendous windfall for all of us. titit's something we can count . and i can't for the life of me understand why we haven't to date been able to move this piece of legislation forward. i did hear both the minority leader, soon-to-be majority leader and the minority whip, soon to be the majority whip, talk about it's time for us to start working together. there's not a better piece of legislation to show that we heard the results of tuesday's election. we heard it. and if you heard nothing more from that -- from that roar of americans, whether they voted or didn't vote, they basically told us, do something, start doing what you're supposed to do, start governing, do something. we might not agree with ya but we'd like to see this open

dialogue, this transparency, this beautiful body, the senate, the whole world watches. but when we see us doing nothi nothing, that's not something that we're very good at or look very good at doing. and that day is gone. so i would ask my -- my senate colleagues if they would be so kind as to give us a chance to show them that we're starting anew. it's our first day back from our recess. that we're going to have a piece of legislation that's going to help us be more secure as a nation. and that's why i'm here, too. i'd like to hear -- maybe you can count on that. the security of our nation, basically, you've been here, you've been seeing what's going on, the demand we have for foreign oil, what it's done to us, the areas of the world it has taken us to, the amount of resources that we have spent in blood and treasure fighting for those resources, whether people believe it or not. this is a chance for to us secure that. so, senator, if you could talk about that. ms. landrieu: well, the senator from west virginia is so right in focusing this debate at this

moment on the subject of national security because veterans day was just celebrated by all of us yesterday, i believe -- or monday. monday. we all participated in veterans days events. and so it pains notice say this -- and so it pains me to say this, and i'm going to give you all the facts, and the senator knows this, this country exports 340 imports, 340 mineral barrels a day. iraq exports 340,000 barrels of oil per day. keystone -- that's iraq, that we've bled, left men -- not left them on the battlefield, but they've died there. and we have many soldiers here at home. canada, which is a friendly country, an ally of ours, with

the keystone pipeline would bring in 870,000 barrels to the u.s. so the american people sit here and think, okay, what is wrong with this picture? we could be taking oil from our friend, canada, creating jobs in north america, good-paying jobs -- not only building the pipeline, maintaining the pipeline ... this pipeline doesn't come to louisiana. i've fought for it like a tiger, and the pipeline doesn't even come it my state. it goes to texas. i have refini have refineries i. this pipeline connects canada and texas. so i'm sorry that the majority leader, the senator from texas, had to scam per off the floor, and i'm sure he had a meeting to

go to. but this is really about refineries in texas that are waiting for this oil and moving this oil, as the senator knows, flethrough the most safe means possible to these refineries off of the highways, off of the railroads, and supporting a relationship with canada as opposed to countries in other parts of the world that always don't share our values, and that we have to spend a lot of our defense money protecting. so this makes no sense. and that's why i think this pipeline has such overwhelming bipartisan support across the country. mr. manchin: the oil is coming down into the refineries anyway. and we've had some explosions by our rail carriers. it's coming by truck and it's coming in so many different

forms. we've been told this is the safest way to transport it. and when people talk about safe to transport -- and this is not the first pipeline we have in america. i think if you ever had the map -- and i think you have had the map out here before senator -- there's pipelines that crisscross all across america. if you take it in the harshest environment -- in arkansas the alaskan pipeline means so much to us, has been done in the harshest of environments and been done safely. i'm concerned about that. when you said about directly going to texas but you all benefit, everybody benefits. everybody benefits. and the other thing i wanted to say that we did -- yesterday i know you were in parades for veterans day. i can only imagine your schedule. it's just got to be unbelievable. but about that being said, people still want jobs. all they want is jobs and opportunity to work and certainty.

this gives americans a lot of certainty about jobs and the future economic grog of our country. ms. landrieu: absolutely. and just this morning to prepare for offering this unanimous consent, which i will do in a very short period of time, and ask for a couple of hours of debate tonight and then a vote sometime tomorrow, i spoke to the leader of the building and trades council for the united states of america, and he was very strong in his words to me about how disappointed he has been in some members here who have not stood up for the building and trades. these are men and women that work in every state. all they want to do is go to work and have jobs. he was extremely disappointed in the gridlock over this piece of legislation, and that, senator, is exactly what he said to me.

he said, senator, we're about fed up with elections and with politics, because what my members want are jobs. that's what their families want. and they are tired of fooling around with such commonsense projects that bring so much wealth to middle-class families. i note that the majority leader on our side is concerned about the flat-line of middle-class income in this country, and i know that his heart is working towards increasing incomes for all families. this is the first step, not only is the project itself going to generate huge amounts of jobs and economic activity -- and i'm going to put a this amount in the record. it is $20 billion estimated. it is almost the size -- it's slightly less than the state of

vermont's entire g.d.p. i mean, this one project is like an output of one of our states, albeit a small state. but vermont is an important state. i've never in my life seen a project with so much economic benefit. i've never seen an infrastructure project supported by a broader base, from the left to the center to the right. i've never seen labor and business come together in my life like they have on this issue. i've never seen so many senators cosponsor a bill. and yet, because of something i can't quite put my finger on, we haven't yet passed it. and i think that we can do that now, today, and that would send -- or tomorrow -- a very positive signal that we heard the voters, we do understand this cry for breaking the gridlock, moving forward together, getting the job done, and i could not think of a

better bill that symbolizes what we're trying to do in terms of jobs, economic security, energy security, and looking to the future in our country than this bill, that would build this pipeline, get these -- this oil, which is going to be produced anyway, off of the rails, off of our highways, into refineries, and, may i say, the senator from west virginia knows this -- and the senator from the north dakota, who is my, you know, right hand on this -- but with the senator from west virginia, we have additional pipelines to build, because we've got to build these east-west. the real need for the supply is the west coast and the east coast, as the senator froze. -- as the senator knows. you can produce all the oil and gas that you want or all the energy or you can produce and generate the power. but if you can't move it to the places that it needs to be, it's

as if you haven't produced it. now, i know something about this as chair of the energy committee. so after we do keystone, which we're going to do tomorrow, we've got to build some other pipelines to go east and west. this is only going to take 10% of north dakota's supply. north dakota has become the leading supplier of oil and gas in the country. let me just talk about north dakota for one minute, because i can't do it justice, like senator heitkamp can do it. but i've heard her give this speech enough to be able to repeat it. and it's worth repeating. the senator from texas just came here and lamented, oh, my gosh, what can we do to lift the middle class? the senators, all three of them, came there and asked that question. i want to give them an answer. build the keystone pipeline. because you know what's happened in north dakota? it might be a sparsely populated

state, but it is now surpassed every state in the production of oil. and you know what else they did? they took their economic number, which is 36 in income on a scale of 1 to 50 -- they were the 36th poorest state. the senator from west virginia would know, where are they today? you know where they are? -- you know where they are in four years? they have moved from 36 to 6. think about that. i just want to let that sink in for just a minute. north dakota moved their number from 36 out of 50 to 6 out of 50 in four years. now, i challenge any senator from any part of this country for any political leaning to come down to this floor in the next 24 hours and show me one piece of legislation, one tax

cut, one jobs bill that could move a state in four years or a group of states from 36 to 6. that is the power of this industry, and we are standing in its way. it is shameful. it is wrong. and it must stop today. now, if people want to hide, they're going to have a hard time. so i want everybody to hear clearly, this is not a time to hide, not a time to sit down, not a time to play games. it is a time to stand up. we already have enough votes to pass this. we have 45. every single republican, none of them are on the floor right now, but every single republican in this chamber is a cosponsor of the bill that i am going to ask

unanimous consent. so think very carefully before any one of you object, because you are all cosponsors of the bill, so just think hard on it before you do it. mr. manchin: i think you have talked on so many things that i agree with whole heart i ha who. i think on the environment, you touched on that. a lot of people believe that people that come from energy states throw caution to the wind on the environmental issues. there's no one in this body -- i don't believe on either side of the aisle -- that doesn't want the best and cleanest environment for themselves, their children appeared families and future generations. with that being said, i think this pipeline has passed every hurdle that the environmental communities, rightfully so, put out. so we should make sure that we

are protecting the environment. trying to find a balance between the environment and the economics, if you will, the economy is so vitally important. i don't know if there's any environmental impact study standing in the way that would prevent this. ms. landrieu: i agree with the senator, and i think he's absolutely correct and the senator from montana moneys this as well. the senator from montana also has an issue that i'm going to ask him to explain in just a moment. he knows it better than i do, about private property rights, because he negotiated the language in the bill. but responding to your question, the senator from virginia -- from west virginia, about the environment, that's what is so exciting about this project, so compelling for us to move forward because not only did the international study that was done, which said it is in our international interest, of course, to trade with our best and most friendly trading partner closest to us that enjoys the same high-quality

standard of life with us and even higher environmental standard, but the environmental study that came in conducted by the president's own administration. this wasn't done by a previous environmental. this is president obama's own administration, came back and said, concluded this is the safest way to move this the, and i.t. the most environment -- and i.t. the most environmentally friendly convey to move it and that is the record. not only does it have compelling economic argument, it has compelling environmental argument from that perspective. and i'd like to ask the senator if i could from montana if he would explain the very important language that is in the hoeve hoeven-landrieu bill that is cosponsored by every single republican in this chamber, about the language he negotiated on private property rights, because this is a very important

principle for many republicans but also for many democrats, particularly in louisiana where we have a lot of private property, and in west virginia you have a lot of private property, and in montana you all have some -- a lot of private but some public lands. so would the senator answer that question for us, if he would. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. tester: i would. thank you, senator landrieu and thank you, senator manchin. i have a few things to saivment but, mr. president, since this is the first time we've been on the floor since the election, i think what the american people told us, they're frustrated with the way things work in washington. enough political games. they told us that americans want lawmakers to compromise, work together and get things done. they told us that the -- the americans told us they want a stronger economy with good-paying jobs. it shouldn't take an election to get this message through, but it did. so nationwide, including my state of montana, it is fair to

say that unemployment is down. but it's also fair to say that wages aren't where they need to be. to many americans a understand too many montana quans are struggling to make ends meet. the keystone pipeline can help. now we have another tempt to block consideration of this bill written by senators landrieu and hoeven. the votes are there. we know that. and if there's one way we can create good-paying jobs right away is by improving and building this keystone pipeline. building the pipeline will tell the american public that washington is ready to turn the page. it will tell them that we heard them, their voices matter and washington is reacting appropriately. building the pipeline will strengthen our economy and infrastructure. according to the state department, building the pipeline will create 16,000 jobs, support another 26,000 more. those are jobs that will help americans provide for their families.

secondly, the pipeline will include an on rample for oil in the -- on ramp for oil in the balkan region and let more go to the marketplace. with production in the balkan continuing to boom, we need more options to get that american oil where it needs to be. the x.l. pipeline is that option. third, shipping oil by pipeline is the safest way to ship it and the safety of the american families and communities must come first. fourth, building the pipeline means for business with canada, our friend to the north, and less business with the middle east. folks who really don't like us. our country continues to be involved in conflicts in that volatile middle east but continues to do more business with our neighbors to the north as opposed to the countries that don't share our world view can help cut off the funds to those who work against us. i think the keystone pipeline is a big step toward creating that energy security. but the pipeline must be built right. i'm going to get to the

disappoint that senator landrieu talked about. it must be constructed with respect for private property rights. we cannot have foreign corporations using eminent domain to run roughshod over the feemedz of a farmer in montana or over sacred tribal lands. the respect for private property rights is in the landrieu-hoeven bill. it is not in the house bill. it is a critical component. it has to be in. otherwise we're making a huge mistake. this pipeline also must be built to the highest safety standards. there can be no corners cut. leaks and spills don't make anybody any money. they are unacceptable. so the most modern safety systems must be employed, including double pipe, if necessary. and that is a fundamental difference between the senator landrieu and hoeven bill, what they drafted over in the house, versus the good work we've done here in the senate. the house bill contains no protection for landowners.

none. zip. the house bill says good luck, landowners. you're subject to eminent domain by a foreign corporation. you have no spill prevention protections. the landrieu-hoeven bill, on the other hand, protects rural america. senator landrieu has been working on this effort for years. this bill will give the pipeline the senate's seal of approval and it will send a signal to the americans that congress is working together, creating good jobs, supporting our economy, and that we're able to make responsible decisions. but is this the big move forward? i'll continue to make sure oil shipped through this pipeline stays in america. i've heard the arguments on all sides but north america's oil should stay in north america. it will lead to cheaper energy that will be more affordable for our homes, our businesses, for our working families. that will lead to more good manufacturing jobs in this country because we'll be able to

recruit because of our energy costs, be able to recruit that manufacturing based back to our country we gave up 20 or 30 years ago. mr. president, there are a lot of reasons to improve and build the keystone pipeline. it will create good-paying manufacturing jobs. it will support our middle class. and we need to support our middle class. it will make us more energy secure and it will strengthen our transportation and infrastructure systems. but america needs a sign. it needs a reason to trust that congress and washington as a whole are levinning. ap-- are listening. i am tired of the gridlock, tired of kicking the can down the road. i didn't come here to delay and push our problems to the future. i came here to work for commonsense solutions that we can enact today and move this country forward today. the keystone x.l. pipeline is one of those solutions. passing this bill and building this pipeline is one of those very, very important things we need to do for our

infrastructure, for our energy security, for the country as a whole. i encourage my colleagues to support and help us rebuild our trust with the american people. with that, i would turn back to the good senator from west virginia, senator manchin. mr. manchin: let me just say that the senator from montana and all of us -- the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: thank you, mr. president. there are quite a few of us on this bill for a reason. it is about the opportunities with jobs we have, and it doesn't have an environmental detriment to our country. it's already been proven. with all this, what is the hangup? why can't we get this vote that we're hoping to get by tomorrow at the latest? i can only tell you that the jobs, the 1,000 american jobs that 1,000 american companies are providing, the goods it takes to build this thing, this pipeline, i've got a chance in west virginia. we're doing an awful lot of work right now because we come from

an energy state that does an awful lot of the support work for any type of energy throughout the country and around the world. the bottom line is if you're going to have a secure nation, you've got to have control of your own destiny. this gives us the control that we don't have. it gives us the ability to say we may not have to go around the world and engage in different conflicts that we see going on right now, and that's what we're talking about, the security of the nation, i think, is the most important thing that the keystone does. it helps us be more secure. with the greatest trading partner we have, canada is the best and largest trade partner for 35 states out of the 50. the number one. people go all over the world trying to develop a market here or there, but when it comes right down to it 35 states, the number-one trading partner is canada, and canada is working with us. but i know they have pressures from around the world to go somewhere else. if we have the best partner, the

best ally we've ever had and could imagine working with us to develop this product that the whole world seems to need and want, we need it in america, why not have control of it? i've heard also -- and the goes from louisiana -- and the good senator from louisiana and i talked about this, why should we do all the heavy lifting when it is going to go somewhere else? it is supply and demand. when you have supply in your backyard but you demand, but you have a need in your own country, that gives us a good hand to play. why should any of these advantages be turned to a disadvantage? the only thing i can do is hopefully we can get this vote. and i would take my good friends on the other side of the aisle, my colleagues on the republican side. this will be the best gesture we have to move the ball forward, the best gesture they can make coming off of the changes of the shift that we had in tuesday's

elections, the people are speaking. they want us to work. the senator from montana hears the same in montana. mr. president, you hear the same in new mexico. we want you to do something. we want you to work. we're not going to agree all the time with people. we just want you to just try. we had a football game we played the other day, w.v.u. we played t.c.u. we were ahead. should have won the game when in the last half of the fourth quarter, for some reason play calling wasn't as aggressive as it had. we got beat 31-30. people don't want us to sell the ball in the united states senate. they want to us do something. it's time for us to move forward. this is the first chance to show coming off of tuesday's election that we can work together. we've heard you loud and clear. we're willing to take a vote. we know our environment will be protected. we know we can find a balance between the environment and the economy. we know that we create thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs, put millions and millions of dollars into the economy. that's what we do know. there's going to be still some

people that don't support this piece of legislation, and they have all the reasons to speak about that. but give us a reason to vote for something we think will help america and help our states individually. that's what we're asking for. that's what the good senator from louisiana has been fighting for since the day i got here. and her being on the energy committee, being chairman of the energy committee has made a difference from my standpoint looking at an energy policy. the most important thing she's done, how do we keep the united states of america secure? i appreciate her efforts on this. i look forward to working with her on this. she knows i support, i endorse the bill, i'm a cosponsor and i definitely will proudly vote for this piece of legislation as soon as we can get it on the floor. ms. landrieu:? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: thank you. i see that the senator from north dakota has arrived. she wants to speak and can do this beautifully because this pipeline comes through her

state, as i said. but i do want to just respond to a few things and thank the senator from west virginia. you know, i've heard colleagues, particularly my colleague from california, say this often, and shied it in committee. she says -- she said it in committee, she said it on the floor. even though she and i are on opposite sides of this debate, we've worked together on some really important legislation for our country. and i have such respect for her leadership on the restore act, which was an amazing piece of environmental legislation for our gulf coast states. and without her leadership, it would not have happened. but i've heard her say over and over and over again, elections have consequences. and this one does, just like they all do. and one of the consequences of this election is that a clear path for keystone has been opened up, and the reporters following this legislation, which they have followed it very

careful, know exactly what i'm talking about. a pass for passage has been cleared. and in my view, that path will never ever be clearer than it is today. now, in order for the path to stay clear -- and it is crystal clear today -- politics has to be set aside. gamesmanship has to be set aside. and we must come together to do what is right for the country, for the american people, and to vote. there are strong feelings, i know, against this bill. there have been for many years. but the overwhelming majority of this body -- 60-plus members -- have indicated support for this

legislation. and the senate bill from the perspective that you just heard for private property rights, for clarity, for simplicity, is far superior to the house bill that has been passed. now, the house is very agile, very agile. they can do lots of things quickly that the senate can't do. so the house may decide to take the language of this bill, pass it, call it something else. i understand that. i don't know if that's what they'll do. but there is a clear path for victory on keystone. whoever's name is on the bill does not matter to me as long as it gets done. and i want to say that again. the name on the bill does not matter to me as long as this gets done. and it needs to get done right

now. not in january. not in february. not in march. it doesn't need to be combined with anything else. it needs to get done on its own, because it's standing alone. it will go to the president's desk stand-alone and i believe the president will have to make an important decision. i'm hoping he will sign it. but if he doesn't, that's the process. i hope that he will. and i will be urging him to do so, because his administration, his state department, his e.p.a., and his transportation department has urged him to support this piece of legislation for the strength of our economy, a signal to our allies, to strengthen america here and abroad. and i will strongly urge him to sign it. but, you know, we have a job to do in the senate. he has a job to do, and the

house has a job to do. but if everybody would stop playing games with this bill and think about what the american people said on election day and stop trying to push one philosophy or one person ahead of the other, we can get this done. now, my name's not even first on this bill. senator hoeven's name is first. it is a hoeven bill. i'm the lead sponsor because -- democratic sponsor because i'm the chair of the energy committee, and i will be until january 2. and if my voters send me back, i'll be here for six more years. that's why my name is on the bill, because i chair the committee. but if they want to take my name off, put somebody else's name on and pass it, so be it. i didn't come here to see my name in lights. i came here to create jobs for my state and for this country,

and i believe i've done an excellent job in the 18 years that i've been here, through very difficult circumstances, and will continue should the voters want me to. but today we need to talk about the keystone pipeline, and nobody can speak better about this than the senator from north dakota, because her state -- and i want to line this up before she speaks, because she was traveling and she might not have heard all of -- she just landed and might not have heard what all three leaders said when they came to the floor, is that all three of them said -- senator reid, senator cornyn, and senator mcconnell -- said their number-one goal was to break gridlock. and they wanted to start now. and their second goal was to expand middle-class job opportunities and create wealth in america. so i'm hoping the senator from the state that has created the most wealth in the shortest

period of time of any state in the union might express to the rest of us actually how that happened and why she thinks this keystone pipeline and other pipelines -- because she and i agree this is just the first of several that we're going to have to lay down to make america a super energy power. you don't become a super energy power by just wishing it. you become a super energy power by putting in the infrastructure that makes it possible. even kids in second grade understand this. you have to put up the windmills. you have to put up the solar panels. you have to put in the pipelines. you have to put in the highways. so the senator from north dakota who has a very sparsely populated state understands the issue of this infrastructure, i think, better than any senator in this body.

so i'm going to ask her if she would just respond to that and maybe elaborate on the question how did your state get so wealthy in the last few years? maybe because the rest of us -- and my state is doing well. listen, i'm not here complaining. my state is doing beautifully. our unemployment in south louisiana is 3%. so we are blessed because we are an energy state, we are proud of it, and we are creating jobs hand over fist. but there are places like detroit, there are places in ohio, there are places in pennsylvania and new york and in new mexico and in other places where people are unemployed, begging for work, willing to work and three leaders came to the floor and said it's time to break gridlock. well, here's a project that can do it. so i hope to see them sometime before close of business tonight. but would the senator expound on that? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota.

ms. heitkamp: mr. president, i stand with my great colleague and a great champion of this energy renaissance, probably the greatest champion of the energy renaissance here in the senate, senator mary landrieu of louisiana. i want to talk first about the election. i think that all of us have had some time now to reflect, and i think the clearest message that this entire body, as well as the entire united states congress, the clearest message that we received is that stop fighting, get your work done. i don't think it could have been any clearer. and so we have an opportunity today to demonstrate that we got that message. not in a partisan way, but in a bipartisan way, in a nonpartisan way, to say we heard you loud and clear. it is time to do the job that we were sent here to do, and that is to move legislation that

moves this country forward. senator landrieu has expounded on the great opportunity of this energy renaissance, not just for this country but for the entire world. and so let's start with what's happening in north dakota. we have had an explosion of oil and gas production. in fact, we have rapidly moved to the second place in this country in gas and oil production. actually, oil production. we produce oil from oil shale. what does that mean? that means nothing if you can't move the oil. it means nothing if you can't get this product to the refineries and this product to market. you can produce all the oil you want. and part of what we need to address as we look at an energy infrastructure is how we move energy products. today in america and actually in canada, how we're moving this product is by rail, and that has

created tremendous stress on our agricultural infrastructure. it has created tremendous stress on manufacturers who need to use those rails to haul their finished products. it's created tremendous stress for the railroads. are they glad for the business? you bet. and has that created and opened up new markets for the oil production in my state? you bet. but the bottom line is the best way that we know how to move oil and move this product is in a pipe, and that is essential to building out this energy infrastructure. why is it important? well, let's start first with the fact that we now are moving forwards north american energy self-sufficiency. and i don't use -- a lot of people talk about american, and that's a great goal, but if we include our friends to the north, the people that i grew up with, the people that i know, i have been up to the oil sands, i have been all over alberta, i

have been all over saskatchewan, i know this is a very friendly country that continues to have the longest contiguous border that there has never been a conflict. we celebrate that in north dakota with the peace garden, which is a lovely park which is on both sides of the border where you can easily cross because we celebrate that, and these are our friends, and if we are going to continue to build out this energy renaissance in north america, we better be prepared to move this product. okay. so we all know that some of the opposition to this has very little to do with the pipeline. it has to do with a concern about the increased availability of fossil fuels. well, i'm telling you this is still an economy that runs on fossil fuels. we have done tremendous work with fuel efficiency. we have done tremendous work with energy efficiency, but we're going to continue to use gasoline in our cars. we're going to continue to use

diesel in our heavy equipment. we're going to continue to use this product. and who do you want to buy this product from? i just ask -- and if the american people have -- if you asked any american person would you rather buy this product from venezuela or would you rather buy this product from our friends to the north, canada, i'm pretty clear and pretty sure what their answer is going to be. so let's talk a little bit about why the united states, at a time when we are seeing a global slowdown in economic progress for many of the other countries throughout the world, why is the united states seeming to go further? why are we producing and generating more wealth in our country than other places? i would tell you it's because of this energy renaissance, because we are doing something no one else is doing. we are producing our own oil and gas. we are developing the techniques that get this oil and gas out of the ground, and we are taking that as a raw material which is providing a renaissance not just in the oil area but also in

natural gas as a feed stock for many of our manufacturing processes. and so we have a real opportunity here. but all of that goes away if we don't move the product, if we don't figure out a way to make sure that our product gets to market. i'm going to talk a little bit also about what this development in our country means to the world when we are confronting great challenges in dealing with russia. we're confronting great challenges in looking at what's happening in the middle east. we're confronting all of these challenges throughout the world, and we know that we can not only deploy our efforts -- humanitarian efforts, our efforts by supporting through air strikes some of the work that's being done on the ground, but perhaps the single most important thing that we can do is help provide oil and gas to europe and to those countries

that are dependent on people or on countries that are not our friends. and so we look at what our opportunities are today, and we know those opportunities are in the energy renaissance. so how do we move this product? how do we send a signal that we're ready to take advantage both globally and domestic domestically -- take advantage of this production, take advantage of this renaissance in north america? well, we approve the keystone pipeline. you know, a lot of people talk about what the keystone pipeline means to my state. it doesn't exactly go into my state, but the governor of montana made sure when he was providing the permits that there wasn't what i call an on ramp. there is a place where we can in fact access the keystone pipeline. we anticipate about 100,000 barrels a day of north dakota crude will be able to be placed into the keystone pipeline, sent down to refineries into louisiana.

and -- and that may sound like a lot. it's about 10% -- less than 10% of our current production. but for me, the keystone is so much more than just this particular pipeline. it is a national discussion about our failing energy transportation infrastructure. that's what this is. and if we do not -- if we do not move this project forward, if we say no, what's the next thing? what's the next project that's essential? a 22-mile pipeline in massachusetts that would provide huge stability for the northeast in terms of the -- their heat production? 22 miles could -- could be a huge benefit to our friends in maine in terms of stabilizing their home heating costs this winter. but yet, we fight the pipeline. the keystone, huge advantage that we have in this country

because we're an oil and gas producer and could potentially be an oil exporter, providing that source of soft power across the world. what do we do? we turn our back on the infrastructure that moves this product. and so we have got to do everything that we can to get this approved. i want to turn just briefly to the -- the politics. you know, a lot of people come here and talk politics. i believe this is a place to talk policy, and that's what i try and do. but just for a moment, i want to talk about the respect that we should have for voters. i want to talk about elections, and elections have consequences, and one of the things that we can do to begin to restore the public faith, the public faith in our democracy and in the institution of the united states congress is do something bold to begin with, actually move

legislation that the people have been waiting for for a long time and actually respond to concerns. you know, maybe we get the votes, maybe we don't, but take a vote. take a vote. get it done. show the american public that we're willing to come to this body, debate the great issues of the time and bring things to a vote. so they actually see us doing something. they actually get results. they pay our salary. we came here to vote. we came here to work. we came here to do something for the american public. now, we don't all agree. there is no doubt about that, we don't all agree, but i will tell you this -- the thing we should all agree on is that it is essential in terms of providing certainty to the american public, confidence that the american public has in this body, that they see us on this floor not two years -- two months from now, not three months from now, not four months

from now but today, the first day that we're back in session after an election, hard-fought election with pretty dire consequences for our side of the aisle, but a hard election. it is essential that we send a message that we got the message and we take a vote. i am so proud of my colleagues now coming back when arguably when could be back in her state doing a little campaigning, but she is here fighting for what she believes in and what she has always believed in which is an energy infrastructure that makes a difference for north america, makes a difference not just for states like mine but for all consumers of energy. and i want to thank the senator from louisiana for your tremendous leadership on this, and your willingness to basically come here and say i don't care who gets the -- yeah, the credit. i don't care -- if you have my name on it or not.

let's get the keystone pipeline approved. i want to make one final point. if you have driven the route of the keystone pipeline, what you will see stockpiled so many miles is thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars of pipe waiting, six years waiting. infrastructure that needs to go today. when people say we can wait to take this vote, you're wrong. the sooner the better. the sooner that we take this vote and get it approved, the sooner we're going to see those resources deployed and we will not yet miss another construction season in the north country. so with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and express great gratitude for the opportunity to speak. ms. landrieu: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: i know that the senator from tennessee is on the floor, and if i could just say two or three minutes and then we have agreed to go back and forth, but i'd like to just kind

of conclude a little bit in this debate that we have had. first of all, i want to submit for the record -- because i'm going to remain on the floor and speak after the senator from tennessee, but i want to put into the record a list of republican cosponsors of s. 2280, the dates they became cosponsors and say again that every single member, including the senator from tennessee, is a cosponsor of the hoeven-landrieu bill that is pending on the senate calendar, s. 2280. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: i also want to put into the record the 35-plus -- very powerful organizations that range from business to labor to manufacturers that have been a strong and powerful and vocal coalition for over five years in their efforts to bring us together, they've come

together, the question is whether the members of congress can come together. these groups have come together. it's not often that you see the laborers, pipe fitters, boilermakers and building and trades all together sitting down with the chamber of commerce and the american petroleum institute but they sure managed to find common ground on a common table and america will be best served when the members of this body and the house do the same. i also want to put into the record two short statements to -- and this is directed to those that -- on the other side or are wavering or not sure, not the other side republican but the other side of this issue -- are wavering. i want to put into the record that the environmental review process has been conducted over five and a half years. the review process has been thorough, five studies have been conducted as required by law, are complete. i want to repeat that.

the five -- five environmental studies that are required by law have been conducted, they are completed, and this goes into the record. in addition -- the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: in addition, the only other requirement was from the state department, and i want to put this into the record, but the bottom line is the -- the last study from the state department finds there will be no significant impact on the environment from the keystone x.l. project. i want to put that into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: i want to conclude with this -- the path today is crystal clear. today it is crystal clear. there is no guarantee next week or next month or when the republicans take the majority

that the path will be as clear as it is today. let us not miss this opportunity. let's get our work done on the keystone x.l. pipeline, an important project for this country, send a message, send a message that we've heard the voters and show that trust begins today with us on their behalf. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: thank you and i thank the senator from louisiana. tomorrow at 2:15 or shortly after we'll be vote on the like develop block grant of 2013. i want to take a few minutes and explain why it's important and to whom it's important and why it's time to end debate on the child care development block grant and voter or down. when i talk about why it's important, i think of a young

woman-off other mentioned on the floor of the senate from mississippi to attended la mane college. --ley mane college. we was able to qualify for a voucher from the state of tennessee through this with these federal dollars, there are about 21,000 families like her, and she was able to get $500 or $600 a month knot to provide daycare for her child while she got a business degree from lemoine-owen college. the good news is now she is an assistant manager at wal-mart, got a degree, has two children and is able to pay for her own child care without help from the federal government. this is exactly the kind of legislating we should be doing at the federal level. questions come up, what's the appropriate role for the federal government on an issue like child care? the answer this bill gives and it's a bipartisan bill with

strong support on both sides of the aisle, is that we should enable this young mother and 21,000 other families in tennessee to take a voucher with federal dollars, maybe $500 or $600 a month, choose their own child care center for that child, and while going to school or working, put themselves on their own two feet. it's been an enormously successful program. it's worked for over 20 years. it was inaugurated in the administration of george h.w. bush at the time there was a democratic congress. so it's a bipartisan result. and it follows the example the other successful federal programs by enabling american families to help themselves. we follow the same model when we deal with federal grants and loans for colleges. last year the presiding officer will remember we had an agreement in this body on huge changes to the state of the

union program -- student loan program. president obama became involved in it, secretary arne duncan, a bipartisan group on both sides of the aisle, the republican house of representatives came long and we basically created new rules for the $100 billion of loans that the federal government gives to -- or makes to students every year so they can continue their education. we put a market-based pricing system on it, it was revenue neutral to the taxpayers, and it had the effect in that year of lowering the interest rates on student loans to undergraduates by about one half of -- cutting it nearly in half. we followed that model ever since the g.i. bill for veterans was passed in 1944. taking the federal dollars available, creating scholarships or vouchers for students, they then choose among the veterans in that case could choose among notre dame,

university of new mexico, university of tennessee, yes shiva, wherever they wanted to go to an acred college and that's worked very well. maybe the most successful piece of social legislation ever passed. and the child care development block grant is good example of that as well. it's a perfect example of the government working as an enabler instead of a mandator. it spends $5.3 billion on child care for children under the age of 13 with plenty of flexibility. while it has bipartisan support from a republican point of view we like especially the grants to -- block grants to states, what's flexiblity and the choices for parents. that's worked very well. it's a model i hope we continue. that's the importance of the bill to everyday families in tennessee and across this country. the other question is, is it time to end debate on the bill? that's what we're voting about. we call it cloture which is a mistifying word but all we're saying we've talked about it

enough and at least 60 of us believe it's time to end the debate and vote yes or no. have we all had our say. let's ask that question. senator harkin, senator mikulski, senator burr have worked on this for several years as well as several others of us. it was approved one year ago by the senate health, education and labor and pensions committee on a bipartisan basis. then in march of this year, 2014, the bill was debated and discussed over a two-day period. now, we've had a lot of discussion in the senate about whether we get to offer amendments. that concerns come from the senator who is presiding today, also from me and the senator from oklahoma who is here. we're here to have our stay say. it's not easy to tom to the united states senate, it's not easy to stay here and once we're here we'd like to have our say whether it's the clean or

the -- killeen or the -- the keystone pipeline. we had a model process for amendments. the child care well. block grant having gone through committees in the senate, gone through committees in the house came to the senate floor in march, on march 12, and it was brought to the floor by unanimous consent, there there o motion for cloture at the beginning, no filling of the tree, we said anyone who has got an amendment that has nothing something to do with the child care block grant bring it on in. 50 senators offered -- senators offered 50 different amendments. then we considered andth agreed to 18 of those amendments on the senator floor, four by recorded vote, four by voice vote. senators enzi and coburn and leaned and two more nor landrieu and one for lee and bennet and scott, thune, bennet,

warren, vitter, sanders, portman, all had amendments to this bill, they were allowed to offer them, speak on them and they were either voted on or accepted. then it was passed by the senate. then it wept to the house of representatives -- then to the house of representatives who considered it more and they've sent it back to us. the only changes they made were done in consideration with the ranking members of the senate committee that dealt with it. here we've got about as good a process as we're ever going to have in the senate. through the committees, not out of the back door somewhere, all in the light of day, no cloture votes forced, no filling of the tree, amendments offered by anyone who wanted to and then we went on till today. so i think part of the reason for this is because all of us value early childhood education. the other part is because we've had a good process. so i think it's only fair to say it's time to stop talking and vote on the child care

development block grant tomorrow at 2:15. i ask our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for it and i'd like to conclude with just one personal word. all of us, i think, support the idea of early childhood education. i'm an early learner, my mother had one of the two early schools -- preschool education programs in our county in tennessee when i grew up. it was it was in a converted garage, she had 24 three-year-olds and 25 five-year-olds in the afternoon. my children couldn't imagine a single mother dealing with that many children all at one time but she did and had no place to put me except no nose schools so i was in kindergarten for five years, i may be the only united states senator who can say that. i had drummed in me from the earliest days the importance of early childhood education by both my mother and father. many of us have had that same experience. we had different ways of trying

to get to that goal but this legislation, the child care development block grant provides $5.3 billion to families across the country, mainly mothers, who are going to school so they can get a job or who are working, so they can do like the young woman in memphis i talked about, stand on their own two feet, pay their own child care bills, but this helps them get started. so it's an important bill. i congratulate senators harkin and burr and mikulski, especially, for their hard work on this, i'm forgetting some senator -- isakson i think -- well, particularly those three. harkin, mikulski and burr. and i urge my colleagues tomorrow afternoon to vote yes on ending debate on cloture for the child care development block grant. i yield the floor, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: mr. president,

i've been on the floor now for a couple of hours urging our colleagues to take heed of the clear -- one of the clear messages from this election. people all over the country spoke and spoke clearly and loudly to say let's get to work, let's work together, let's stop the gridlock and let's find common ground to move our country forward. so two hours ago i came to the floor to speak about one of the most important pieces of legislation, the keystone pipeline. as chair of the energy committee in the senate i've had the great privilege of working in a bipartisan manner with many members of -- all the members, in fact, of the republican caucus on this bill, led by senator hoeven. i'm the lead sponsor on the democratic side, with a large group of my colleagues trying to

convince this body to have a vote and a strong 60-vote margin which is required for passage on the killeen pipeline. -- keystone pipeline. the senator from west virginia and north dakota came cowan to speak and the senator from montana joined me and i want to announce we've just gotten a great word from the the house of representatives. evidently they heard us speaking and they have introduced our bill in the house. and the information that we've gotten is they plan to pass it tomorrow. let me just say hallelujah. i'll say it again. hallelujah. because their bill would never have passed this body, and this bill would not have any chance of getting the president's signature. because it's keystone plus, or it was. but now if the house has introduced the exact same bill as the hoeven-landrieu bill, we

have now even a clearer path to victory. i started two hours ago saying i could see the path. i'm not sure everybody else could. but it's clear to me now that people are starting to see it. and i could not be happier. so i don't have the actual number of the house bill, i was just told they've introduced the identical bill, including the private property language, which is absolutely essential to secure the 60 votes required. that's why i drafted it in the bill. that's why senator hoeven insisted it be in the bill and that's why we have it in the bill. and i thank the house for keeping that language which is important for its ultimate passage. so it looks like -- it looks like to me just in the last two hours that lots of people are paying attention and this is wonderful.

because this is an important step and it should be i think our first step. and let me also say i believe i am also a cosponsor of senator alexander's bill. no senator has worked harder in either party -- and that's saying a lot, because senator murray works hard on this subject along with senator barbara mikulski. but senator alexander has been a former secretary of education, has been ceaseless and tireless in his efforts on behalf of early childhood education. he and i worked together when president bush was president to pass accountability for the first time in our nation's history. i believe and hope i am a cosponsor of his bill and will look forward to helping him move that piece of legislation at least forward for a vote. there might be a few things in there that other members disagree with and that's what our process is, but that is a critical issue for education and job creation as well. we've got ski tone pipeline at

one -- we've got keystone pipeline at one end, which is, you know, as concrete and steel as you can get, and then we've got the soft but so important issues of economic development which begins with early childhood education. and i'm proud to be an advocate of both and a strong advocate, and i want to thank him for his leadership. and i would urge at least my members, who i believe are very supportive of this, as well as the republican members, to give cloture on his bill. and i yield the floor. mr. inhofe: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: mr. president, i read with a lot of interest the trip to china that was made b by -- by president obama and meeting with president shix, over what they characterized as an agreement on greenhouse gas

emissions. i didn't hear any kind of agreement from anything that was said by the president of china. and they have been talking about this as historic breakthrough. un, that's exactly what -- you know, that's exactly what they said in 2009 back when copenhagen was the center stage for the big annual party so that people are aware of what goes on, once a year the united nations throws a big party trying to get countries to agree to reduce their greenhouse gases by certain amounts to come in. it's kind of interesting, one of the first ones i went to, i saw a good friend of mine from benin in north africa, and i said, you guys aren't getting sucked into that, i know that for sure, in terms of a reduction in greenhouse gases. what would happen in north africa if did you that? and he said, of course not. and the same thing is true in

copenhagen. before mentioning that, just look at what they called a major hick i can breakthrough between the united states and china where the president -- historic break through between the united states and china where the president pledged to reduce emissions in the united states between 26% and 28% by 2020. now, what did china agree to? now, first of all, even if they did agree to reducing emissions, we wouldn't believe them because they never stand up for -- or they don't end up doing what they say they're going to do in these agreements. but what he says he's going to do is stop increasing co2 emissions by 2030. in other words, no for the next- between now and 2030, they're going to continue to increase their levels of co2 emissions, which, you know, i agree that they're going to do that. now, next year, that's a year from december, there's going to

be another big party and that's going to be in paris. that's going to be the one where the president says he and president xi from china have an agreement. of course that's going to be kind of like it was in copenhagen back in 2009. in 2009, i remember that so well. at that time i was and still am on the environment and public works committee. we had a wonderful lady who is the -- president obama's appointee to be the director of the e.p.a. and at that time in copenhagen, they had already had congresswoman pelosi, senator boxer, president obama, then-senator john kerry, all of them over there promising the 191 countries over there in copenhagen that we were going to pass some kind of cap and trade. so after all that was over, i went a quick round-trip to

copenhagen. i always remember, i was on the ground after all that travel f for -- for three hours, but i think it was probably the most enjoyable three hours i ever had because i was able to be over there as a one-man truth squad and to say to the people of -- of -- that were attending that great meeting there that the united states was not going to pass any kind of cap and trade bill. in fact, they wouldn't have -- the very most votes they could have in the united states senate at that time -- and the senate is changing, as we all know, as we're speaking now -- at that time was 30 votes. and obviously it took a lot more than that to do it. so i went over there as the one-man truth squad to say that they were not telling you the truth and -- and there's no way in the world we're going to be passinpassing it. and the same thing is true this time. i'll tell you what this reminds me of. the meeting that took place over in china a couple days ago with our president there reminded me of the meeting that took place in -- where was it in south america?

rio de janeiro. yeah, inry daij are inry daij f. this would have been in 1998, during the clinton white house, and they went over there and agreed and signed the kyoto treaty. now, they signed the treaty knowing for a fact it was not going to be ratified by the senate. we know it takes a supermajority to ratify it in the senate. we had at that time a resolution that was passed. it was called the byrd-hagel resolution. and the byrd-hagel resolution said that we will not ratify any agreement like kyoto or anything like that, that didn't do two things. that -- that either was harmful to the economy or didn't treat all countries the same. in other words, half to treat the reductions in china the same as they would be in the united states. of course, the kyoto treaty didn't do that. and they knew at the time it was not going to be ratified. in fact, they didn't -- they weren't even going to submit it for ratification to this body.

and so that's exactly what did happen. now, let's look at what's happening in china right now. china is doing pretty well. between 2005-2011, china added roughly two 600-megawatt coal-fired power plants a week. that's two power plants a week. in the seven years -- in seven years, china added more coal capacity to its fleet than existed in the entire united states. now, this is not going to be slowing down in the years to come. by his own admission, it's going to be increasing in the next -- between now and 2030. they are expected -- china's expected to bring a new coal-fired power plant on-line every 10 days to give its hungry economy some -- some electricity that it demands. so china's now the largest consumer and importer of coal in the world. it's kind of interesting. we're going through this shale revolution in this country.

wonderful things are happening here. all of a sudden we find out if we did not have the resistance coming from the white house, we could be totally independent of any other nation for our production of energy. and -- and china, on the other hand, doesn't have the shale, doesn't have the oil, doesn't have the gas. and they don't have the coal but they can import the coal and that's exactly what they're doing. so they'll continue to do that. now, stop and think. you know, if -- if you don't like the arguments, just use logic. why would china ever agree unilaterally to reduce its emissions when that's the only way that they can produce electricity? right now -- and i have talked to them before, i've talked to people from china who kind of smile. they laugh at us and say, wait a minute, you say that you're going to believe us that we're going to reduce our emissions? we applaud the united states. we want the united states to reduce its emissions because if they do that, as the manufacturing base has to leave the united states looking for

energy, they come to china. so it's to their advantage to continue with their increases in emissions. and that's exactly what is going to happen. let me just finish. we're going to be talking about this a lot. i plan to be chairing the environment and public works committee. i chaired that several years ago when republicans were a majority. republicans are now a majority again. so we're going to look at these things logically and we're going to conduct ourselves in a way that's not going to give the united states of america, the te largest single tax increase in history. you know, a lot of us way back in the beginning in 2001, in that time frame, they thought there was actually some truth to the global warming thing and a lot of people are trying to resurrect that now. however, at that time, it's -- people who didn't believe it, they didn't know what the cost of this was going to be. shortly after that, it was the m.i.t., the charles rivers associate, and the -- there are

three -- the wharton school, they came out with an approximation as to what it would cost in the way of a tax increase for the american people if we were to adopt the global warming provisions that they want us to adopt and it was between $300 billion and $400 billion a year. and then if you follow that with a statement not from me and not from anyone else on the floor of this senate but from the -- lisa jackson, who was the -- the director of the e.p.a., appointed by president obama. i asked her the question on the record, let's say that we go ahead and pass one of these resolutions -- the resolutions have been offered since 2002. the first one was offered by mccain and lieberman. the last one by my good friend, senator markey, who was then in the house. i said, if we were to pass any of these and the largest increase in history, would this have the affect of reducing greenhouse gases? her answer -- this is lisa jackson, director of the e.p.a. -- no, it wouldn't, because this isn't where the problem is. the problem is in china.

it's in india. it's in mexico. and that would merely -- that would not affect the overall world emissions of co2. so for those who really believe that there's going to be something that is -- that comes before in the form of a treaty, as our president has said would happen in paris 13 months from now, just keep in mind this is something that isn't going to happen. the same as it wasn't going to happen in copenhagen. the american people are not ready. they've already studied this issue. they know the science is not there and they -- what they want to do is to avoid any kind of a negative effect on our economy and that's exactly what i think will happen. i see my good friend is up and i will yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you. i thank the gentleman from oklahoma, the senior senator. after the elections, on the days after the elections this year, i heard a number of my colleagues, many from my state in the house of representatives, a number in

the senate with great exuberance talk about repealing the affordable care act. they call it obamacare. others call it the affordable care act. i'm not sure where they were over the last month or so. i remember hearing pope francis i exhort his parish priest to go out and smell like the flock, he said. abraham lincoln used to talk about, i need to get out of the white house and get my public opinion baths. and i cite pope francis and president lincoln because i think if my colleagues had been out talking to real people -- not going to fund-raisers, not going to meet with rich people only at country clubs, not going to political rallies but talked to real people, they would have seen what the affordable care act's done. and just for a moment if i could, mr. president, i want to do a couple of numbers but then, more importantly, i want to share some stories.

more than 500,000 people in ohio and i think new mexico proportionally is no different, the presiding officer's state, more than 500,000 people in ohio have health insurance today that did not have it 14 months -- did not have it one year ago. 500,000 people. an additional 97,000 young ohioans, people that are just a bit older than the pages sitting here, people 18 or 20 or 25, are on their parents' health plan. 97,000 ohioans. thousands of ohioans have been protected from -- as patients as people who are insured, protected from -- when they get sick and their coverage is expensive, they used to be dropped by insurance companies because they were too costly. now they're protected, they have those consumer protections. they can't be -- be dropped from coverage. one million ohio seniors now have gotten, with no co-pay and no deductible, one million ohio seniors now have -- have gotten free preventive care, no

co-pays, no deductibles, osteoporosis screenings, for physicals forks preventive care that their doctors order. one million ohio seniors at no cost. and to tell a quick story, i was at a -- every thursday anybody from ohio can come to a coffee we have in our office, thursday mornings at 8:30 when the senate's in session, and a family came by. they were pretty conservative. i assume they probably were not necessarily voters for me. it didn't really matter. we're talking about a bunch of issues. and then the mother of said -- said to me, she said, thank you for the affordable care act. and i said, yeah. and she said, see my son over there? he's 15 years old. >> and i said, yeah. and she said -- he was across the room. when he was seven, she said, he was diagnosed with diabetes. and she said, i've counted sin since -- since he was diagnosed 34 times -- i counted, she repeated -- 34 times i was turned down for insurance, my family was turned down for insurance.