together and we can take back america and we do not have to deal with this terrorism and the and threatens right now. -- being a threat to end right now. -- threatened right now. bill fell. the action turns to the senate. on sunday morning, there will be a cloture vote on whether the senate is going to move forward on the harry reid legislation or not. they will need 60 senators to move forward with debate on that. earlier today, 43 senate republicans sent a letter to harry reid expressing their opposition to this measure. some of the opposition turns to the white house.

you heard in a briefing that mitch mcconnell had been in contact with the president. mcconnell says that if the president decides to meet -- reach an agreement with gop leaders, most democrats will follow. we are in those discussions now. if we hear any more about live coverage of briefings, c-span will have that for you today. you can follow the senate on c-span also. in just a bit, we will show you all the today's debate on the breed proposal on the house floor -- the harry reid proposal on the house floor. we want to show you the speeches from this weekend, the speech speeches from-

president obama and senator jon kyl of arizona. >> the plan would force us to relive this crisis in a few short months. it would hold washington captain to politics once again. that is not acceptable. any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan. it must have the support of both parties that were sent here to represent the american people. not just one faction of one party. there are multiple ways to resolve this problem. congress must find common ground on a plan that can get support from both parties in the house and the senate. it has got to be a plan i can sign by tuesday.

the parties are not that far apart. we have agreement on how much needs to be cut to reduce our deficit. we have agreed on how to tackle entitlement reform. there are plenty of ways out of this mess. there is little time. we need to reach a compromise by tuesday so that our country will have the ability to pay its bills on time. bills like contract we have signed with thousands of american businesses. if we don't, we could use our -- lose our country's aaa credit rating. not because we do not have the money to pay our bills, but because we did not have a political system to match it. those who oppose tax increases on anybody -- and lower credit -- credit rating could be a tax increase on everybody. that would be inexcusable and entirely self-inflicted by

washington. the part -- the power to solve this is in our hands. all is needed is a simple vote that democrats and republicans have taken four decades. it was done 18 times under president reagan, seven times under george w. bush. it must be done again now. it is not a voted that allows congress to spend more money. raising the debt ceiling is the country the ability to pay the bills congress has already racked up. it lets businesses and our economy breathe a sigh of relief. on monday night, i asked you to make your voice heard on this debate. the response was overwhelming. when the e-mails we received was from a mall -- from a woman who wants to send this message to washington -- i work hard at a full-time job and give my parents any money i can so they can afford their

medications. i pay my bills. by all appearances, i am a responsible person. all the i am asking is that you be responsible. i have my house in order. i am asking you to get yours the same way. here in washington, we need to get our house in order. democrat in congress and some senate republicans have been listening and have been willing to make compromises to solve this crisis. not all of them. they need to demonstrate the same kind of irresponsibility the american people show every day. the time for putting party first is over. the time for compromise on behalf of the american people is now. thank you. >> good morning. i am the senate republican whip jon kyl of arizona. most people know that washington is engaged in a difficult debate about the nation's debt ceiling, the limit to the amount of money

be government and borrow. it is now at $14 chilean. august and the president do not reach an agreement to raise it by tuesday, -- it is now at 14 trillion dollars. if congress and the president do not reach an agreement to raise it by tuesday, spending would have to shrink by 40% quickly. markets would likely respond, dropping in value and hurting the retirement savings of millions of americans. republicans have tried to work with democrats to avoid this result and put the country on a better path. we need them to work with us. we started with the understanding that the reason the debt ceiling is a problem is because of runaway washington spending. republicans have been united in

the belief that raising the debt ceiling without making significant spending reductions would be irresponsible. the debt crisis rolling across europe -- we know it is only a matter of time before people start questioning whether america can sustain its huge and growing debt. if we do not do something about our spending problem now, the scenes we have seen playing out across europe could happen in america. if we do not change the way washington operates, we will not get control of our government and our future. in short, we hope the need to increase the debt ceiling could be an opportunity to make some hard decisions to reduce government spending. unfortunately, after weeks of negotiation, it became clear that democrat in washington did not view this crisis as an opportunity to rein in spending. they saw it as an opportunity to impose huge tax increases on

american families and small businesses. president obama is too committed to the european style of big government that his policies have set in motion. the democrats in washington think the answer is not to cut spending, but to raise taxes and keep on spending. democrats claim they would only target the privileged few. behind the scenes, they argued for much broader tax increases. the simple fact is, in order to afford the kind of government this president wants, taxes would have to be increased dramatically and for middle income americans, not just on the wealthy. job killing tax increases are the wrong medicine for our struggling economy. back in 2009, president obama admitted you do not raise taxes in the middle of a recession. this advice is just as true today. at the moment, more than 40 million americans are looking for work and cannot find it. according to economists, a

healthy economy is one in which unemployment is around 5%. the unemployment rate today is 9.2%. we got more bad news yesterday. our economy grew at an annual rate of 1.3% in the second quarter. forced -- first quarter growth was 4/10%. raising taxes will only add to the ongoing economic uncertainty. republicans believe we must all of our crisis. we believe we can solve its it democrat work with us. no one will get everything they want. we cannot solve all our problems at once. we can reach an agreement that will increase the debt ceiling, impose accountability, and began reducing the size of our federal government. that may not be what some in washington really wants. it is what americans and the

american economy really need. >> the weekly addresses recorded well before today's house action. the house failed to pass the harry reid proposal on increasing cuts in spending and raising the debt ceiling. it fell by eight vote of 173- 276. 11 democrats joined republicans in voted against that. the senate continues in discussions on the harry reid proposal. you can follow that live on our companion network, c-span 2. a key vote coming on sunday. the house failed to move forward on the harry reid bill. we will show you all of the debate on that bill. it is about one hour, 10 minutes. the speaker pro teore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from california rise seek recognition? mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2693, to cut spending, maintain existing commitments and for other purposes, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2693, a bill to cut spending, maintain existing commitments and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? >> parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the gentleman has the right to be heard. the gentleman from massachusetts will state his inquiry. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, is it true that a bill considered under suspension of the rules denies the minority party the right to offer any amendments or even a motion to recommit? the speaker pro tempore: a motion to suspend is not liable to amendment on the floor.

mr. mcgovern: further parliamentary inquiry, meerks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry. mr. mcgovern: is it true that it requires a 2/3 supermajority vote in order for a bill to vote? the speaker pro teore: under rule 15, a motion to suspend it will have 2/3, a quorum being present. mr. mcgovern: further parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquiry. >>he house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: is it also true, mr. speaker, that a bill considered under suspension of the rules does not pass if it receives a simple majority vote but not 2/3 of the vote? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. mr. mcgovern: and further parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquiry. mr. mcgovern: does this mean that speaker boehner's bill to raise the debt limit and to destroy medicare would have failed if it would have been considered under suspension of e rules yesterday? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has nostated a

quirequoir. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. dreier, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you, mr. speake i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this measure and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker prtempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dreier: mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i think this is the first time that i've offered a reid proposal in the house of representatives. and one might ask why it is that we are here doing this, and it's very apparent to me why it is that we're here doing this. and that is we want to ensure that next tuesday see an increase in the debt ceiling so the social security checks go out, we have -- we bring about spending reductions and maintain the credit rating of the united states of america

and do everything that i believe that both republicans and democrats alike want to have take place. as you know, mr. speer, we have passed from this house two measures within the last two weeks. the cut, cap and balance measure and just last night the boehner proposal which as we all know stem from a bipartisan meeting that he had exactly one week ago this afternoon in his meeting with senator reid right down the hall. and unfortunately mr. reid no longer supports the proposal that we passed last night, and senator reid has said on several occasions that his plan is the only plan that can pass both houses of congress. now, five minutes ago senator mcconnell once again asked senator reid to bring up this plan that senator reid said was the only one that could pass both houses of congress and senator reid said no.

thursday night i introduced this measure of senator reid's and was asked in the rules committee yesterday by mr. mcgovern whether or not we would bring it up and i said we didn't plan to. but the fact is senator mcconnell, having made the request now at least twice in the other body to have it brought up, asked us to raise this measure here and that's exactly what we are doing. now, if we look at where it is that we're headed, we all want to have a bipartisan compromise that will ensure that on tuesday we see that increase in the debt ceiling take place and do these other things. that's what the speaker of the house and the democratic leader of the united states senate, along with leader mcconell, leader pelosi discussed a week ago today. and as speaker boehner said from the well last night, tis was an

agreement which was supported by senator reid. but things have changed, things have changed, we know that. but there is one thing that has not changed. and that is we have to act as quickly possible. we need to come up with a compromise and you know what? since senator reid happens to believe that his measure is the only one that can pass both houses of congress, we are going to let him know when we defeat it here in the house of representatives that it is not the plan that can gain broad support in the house and the senate. and so for that reason, mr. speaker, we are bringing this up , we, i believe, should have an opportunity for every member of this house to go on record on this issue and i'moing to urge my colleagues to vote no on this proposal so that we can come together with an important

bipartisan compromise to achieve the goal that we all say that we share and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, this process has become a joke. it is a disgrace. it's an insult to the american people. i would say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, now is the time to act like grownups. this is the time to put our country before your political party. this is the time to put ou country before the tea party. this is the time to do what's right. today you are bringing up the latest version of the reid plan. under not only a closed rule but under the st restrictive process we have in the house. usually reserved for noncontroversial bills. this is a $2.5 trillion bill being brought up under the same process that you bring up bills naming post offices. 20 minutes of debate, no

amendments allowed, we're not even allowed to offer a motion to recommit to where you need a 2/3 supermajority. under this process your own bill would have failed. that's right. if your bill were brought up under this procedure, your bill would have lost last night. mr. speaker, the only bill we should consider on the house floor is one that has been agreed to byhe house and senate leaders and the president of the united stes. so why are we doing this today? let's be honest, you're doing it to score some cheap political points. i would like to remind the speaker of the house that he's the speaker of not just the republican party but that he's the speaker of the whole house. now is a time to bring us together, nottary us apart -- not tear us apart. maybe the reid bill is the one that can unite us because it achieves tremendous savings without decimating medicare, medicaid and social serity. but, mr. speaker, to bring it up under this process is cical and it demeans the house of representatives. i would say to the republican leadership, enough political

stunts. our country is facing a terrible economic crisis. a crisis that you created and one that you can avoid. t we've run out of time. now is the time for leadership, not bad political theater. now is the time to be to behave like legislators. please rise to the occasion. the reid bl is not the bill i would have written. it's not the truly balanced approach that i would have hoped for. there are no revenues in this bill. but i think it's the best approach that is on the table right now. and i'm willing to compromise. so i will vote yes on this bill. i'm willing to put my country first. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. members are advised to address their comments to the chair. not to other members.

the gentleman from california, mr. dreier. mr. dreier: at this time i'm happy to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished former chairman of the committee on appropriations, my friend from calornia, mr. lewis. the speaker pro tempor the gentleman from california, mr. lewis, is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. lewis: mr. speaker, if it were not for the remarks of my colleague from california as well as his colleague from the rules committee, i wouldn't be making these remarks. i'll begin with a quote. the facts that we are here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. increasing america's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. leadership means that the buck stops here. instead washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership, americans deserve better, unquote.

senator barack obama, march of 2006. by 2009 senator obama had become president obama. in two years since he became president, federal spending has increased by over 5ds00 billion a year -- $500 billion a year. in the past two years he has added nearly $4 trillion to our national debt. now president obama is in favor of increasing the national debt limit. when, oh, when will the real barack obama stand up? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the geleman from california yields back his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the democratic whip, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes.

mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, my colleagues, our neighbors, our friends sent us he to be responsibland to come to the aid of our country at a time of crisis. our country is at such a time now. our people confront uncertainty and fear and they're looking to us, looking to us for the courage to compromise and act to prevent default and to prevent gridlock and irresponsibility. yesterday we learned that investors inmerican stocks lost more than $400 billion when just a few days ago speaker

boehner said he could not compromise with president obama. now we're standing -- notwithstanding the remarks of my friend from california, the chairman of the rules committee, who talks about a bipartisan compromise, i tell my friend, you have not moved a single centimeter towards compromise with our side of the aisle. not a single centimeter. and what do we see in the united states senate, my friends? we see a majority leader of the united states senate who has the president with him, so, yes, you control 1/3 and you control over 40%, so you can stop things from happening in the senate, but the people aren't looking to us for what we can stop. they're looking to us for what we can do. for what we can do to make our country healed at this point in

time. so what has senator reidone with this bill that you introduced, guaranteed to fail? this is the second time you've put a bill on the floor to extend the debt limit guaranteed to fail. it is a pattern, frankly, i is a -- i say to you, my friends, and it's a pattern that the american public ought not to count on. what senator reid has done is he's taken the view of the speaker boehner and leader cantor and said, we need a long-term solution. and then he has compromised notwithstanding the fact that all of us on this side believe that the wealthiest among us should help take us out of this crisis and not rely on the most vulnerable among us. and so there is no revenue in senator reid's bill, notwithstanding the overwhelming numbers of us on this side o

the aisle believe that's good policy. and i know that some of you on your side of the aisle belie that as well. senator reid has set up a ocess so that we can continue to look at what we know we need to look at, bringing our deficit and debt down for which we are all responsible, my friends. i thank the gentleman. so we confront this moment of responsibility. i believe my side of the aisle will overwhelmingly say yes, not because they like this bill but because they believe it is a compromise that can work. because it takes so much of the demands that you have made on your side of the aisle, but if you came to congress expecting perfection, if you came to ongress expecting only that you do it your way and no other way, you will be disappointed. as all of us are disappointed

because it cannot happen that way. our founding fatrs brought us from many places with many perspectives to try to heal our country and provide fothe general welfare. let us avoid default. let us set ourselves on a path of compromise. my friends on the republican side of the aisle, we're going to vote for the most part for this bill. we do not believe it's perfect. but we believe it's possible. america expects us to do that. the summer soldiers and sunshine patriots will retreat at this time of crisis. do not do that. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. dreier: i yield my friend an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. and the gentleman from

california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i will say that i was prepared to engage in a colloquy with my good friend from maryland and explain to him that if senator reid believes that this is a great compromise why will he not respond to senat mcconnell's repeated requests to bring it up in the united states senate? and with that, mr. speaker, with that, mr. speaker, i'm happy to yield one minute to our presidential candidate, our good friend from still water, minnesota, mrs. bachmann. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. the house will be in order. mrs. bachmann: thank you, mr. speaker. throughout this debate over guaranteeing insane never-before-seen in the history of this country levels of spending, president obama has coolly stood on the sidelines, his arms crossed, very simply castigating republicans for not giving him a $2.4 trillion blank

check. meanwhile the only plan that the president has put forward is his february budget which in itself contained yet one more $1.5 trillion deficit. the president has no plan. only the republicans have offered plans. now is the time for the president to show leadership and the only leadership that he's showing is one that's saying,ities ,ities ,ities -- saying, tisk, tisk, tisk. we call on the president of the united states to finally engage in the process. and i yield back. te speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota, mrs. bachmann, yields back. the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let me just remind the gentlelady that no one on the democratic side ever walked out of a meeting. at this point i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. levi the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute.

mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. levin: i've been here almost 29 years. this is a disgraceful momen. this country wants compromise. what you're doing with ts bill is to undermine the chances of compromise. that what you're doing. you're trying to throw a monkey wrench in the reid bill befoe it can even leave the station. that's what you're doing. you're trying to make sure that the senate cannot work its will. why isn't this bill being brought up? because senator reid wants to sit down with senate republicans and work out a compromisand you're bringing up this bill to make sure that this will never happen, this is a disgraceful moment, mr. dreier, it is a disgraceful moment. . dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. levin: no. mr. dreier: madam speaker, may i yield time to my friend?

may i yield time to my friend from michigan? am i allowed to yield time to my friend? mr. levin: mr. dreier, you have always spoken and the -- mr. dreier: i am the author of this measure the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has not been recognized. mr. levin: i want you to yield to me. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. levin: mr. dreier, it's clear what you're doing here. mr. reid wants to sit down and work with mr. mcconnell. what you're trying to do is make sure that a signal is sent to the senate, don't bother, we're going to -- mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. levin: yes. mr. dreier: i say the action we are about to do here today is see the process that senator mcconnell and senator reid work together. why? mr. levin: i take back my time. mr. dreier, that is pernicious

nonsense. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to address their comments to the chair, not otherwise. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i didn't hear you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: i said members are reminded to address their comments to the chair and not to others. mr. dreier: i will not only address you, madam chair, i won't point my finger at you as i address you. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. mr. dreier: let me say, madam speaker, that senator mcconnell has just minut ago asked senator reid to bring the reid proposal to the floor of the united states senate and a decision has been made by senator reid not to bring the measure up. on at least three occasions senator mcconnell has asked since senator reid has said that his proposal is the only one that can pass both houses of congress, senator mcconnell has asked us to show what we all know and had a is there is not going to be a majority of

support in the -- all know and there is not going to be a majority of support. we look forward to the discussions that will take place between speaker boehner, senator reid, leader mcconnell, leader pelosi. and with that, madam speaker, i'd like to yield 30 seconds to a hardworkg new member of congress from indiana, mr. young. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. young: thank you, madam speaker. we need to cut spending now. we need to control spending in the future. but the american people understand that our foremost constitutional duty here in congress is to make sure that america is safe. former secretary gates said that further cuts to our military wilmean there are certain things our military won't be able to do and places they won't be able to go. this proposal, the reid-obama plan, proposeso cut spending by $859 billion or 10 years compared to the president's fiscal year 2011 budget. yet, the president and senator

reid has told us which places we won't be going and which missions we won'ting doing. it's irresponsible. i can't support this proposal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, a member of the committee of the ways and means, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. doggett: this republican ploy is too clever by hat. at the very same time republican senators are filibustering against bringing up this proposal in the senate. the house republicans are insisting on bringing up here so they can vote it down. while it is imperfect and imbalanced, this reid proposal protects educational opportunities for college stents, it protects retirement security through medicare and social security, and it provides more important resources for public services than the reactionary house republican budget. with house republicans still at fault for refusing to seek any

type of middle ground, the reid bill is the least worse alternative to avoid default. as desperate as they were last night, to cobble together a handful of votes to pass a partisan boehner bill, they are even more desperate to defeat this reasonable middle ground because they insist it must have 2/3 votes in this body. let us join democrats in unity to approve this proposal. the speaker pro tempore: the ntleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 10 seconds to remind my friend from texas that the measure we voted on last night stemmed from the bipartisan agreement that was put together one week ago this afternoon right down the hall. and with that i'm happy to yield one minute to my good friend from jefferson, louisiana, mr. scalise. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for one minute. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman r yielding. if you look at the reid bill it doesn't even start to address the problem. with all of the budget gimmicks and shell games, people would

recognize if you have an honest conversation it doesn't even start to tackle the spending problem. now, hardworking american families back home know the problem in america is not we got corporate jet owners and millionaires and billionaires, the problem is that washington spends too much money. you don't solve that problem b sending more money up to washington to spend even more. and so when the president talks about a balanced approach, what he really means is more job-killing tax hikes. families back home know what we really need is a balanced budget amendment to put accountability back in place in washington, to control this rampant out-of-control spending in washington and to finally attack the real problem and that's washington spending. i oppose the bill, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman elds back. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, m andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: madam speaker, this agreement offers the calm, reasonable cpromise the

country wants. most americans don't want to let the debt ceiling expire. this bill solves that problem. most americans say, you know what, you probably could cut about 5% in most government programs. not everybody believes that, but that's what this bill does. most americans say there ought to be some other way to look at difficult entitlement programs and other issues that the bill sets up a process to do that. what the bill does is recogniz the difference bween the two parties and puts that difference aside. the majority party wants to make rical changes in medicare and social security we do not. we believe that the wealthiest americans should pay their fair share to solve this problem. the majority party does not. the bill leaves that disagreement aside, focuses on the areas of agreent. you kn, american troops on ptrol are not asking under what conditions they should do their duty this afternoon. they're understanding their duty andhey're doing it, and so should we. pass this bill.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield 130ekds to my good friend from colorado, a hardworking new member of the class of 87 people that came in here to change this place, mr. tipton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. tipton: thank you. when we hear our colleague from texas this is the least worst alternative and that's our best choice? i think the american peoe demand and deserve better. it's time we put people before politics and partisanship aside so that we can have progress for the american people. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts re? mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield to the gentleman from texas, ms. jackson lee, for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: for what time? mr. mcgovern: i yield for

unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for unanimous consent. ms. jackson lee: i stand here united for america voting yes on this bill to save medicare, medicaid and social security. as an american i ask unanimous consent to put my statement into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, a member of the financial services committee, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: thank you very much. thank you very much, mr. chairman. ladies and gentlemen of the house of representatives, this is not a nation of tea party people. it is not a nation of democrats or republicans. it is a nation of all of us, and what the reid plan presents, it represents the tea party, the republicans and the democrats and the president of the united states. this is what the american people eect us to do. that is what has made this country great. at critical times we've come together and we have compromised. we're protecting medicare. we're protecting social security.

we're protecting medicaid as the people of this country want. and yet, as the republicans and tea party wants, there are no tax increases in this. as the president of the united states has asked us, there will be a second act in the year 2013. ladies and gentlemen of this house, the time is present. it is time for us to do the american thing. stand up for the american people and let us compromise in the best interest of all of us so this nation will not go into default. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 second. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: the house is not in order, madam speaker. well, it is now. madam speaker, i think it's very important to note that yesterday and today we are continuing to hear that under the boehner proposal that cuts in medicare and social security would take place when in fact

both the boehner and reid proposals have virtually identical, identical plans to put into place -- the speaker pro tempore:he gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: joint select committee that would in fact report back to this institution. thank you very much for helping to obtain order, friends. and madam speaker,'m happy to yield one minute to my very good friend from houston, a member of the appropriations committee, mr. culbrson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. culberson: thank you. madam speaker, it's important for everyone to know the reason the house is considering this bill today is to put up another guardrail, to show what the house cannot do. it's important in any compromise to understand what can and cannot be done. the house will not pass this new constitutional conservative majority of the house will not pass the reid bill because of its devastating cut to our u.s. military. the house is going to find a way to compromise with the senate, but it is not going to include massive cuts in the military. it's -- as we've estabshed, not going to include tax increases. it looks like it's going to

include some sort of select committee that will make recommendations to the congress. we're going to find a way to make sure that america does not hit the brick wallf running out of the ability to borrow. but this is one of the most important debates, one of the most important votes we will have in our brief time here in congress is to make sure we're protecting our kids and grandchildren from a crushing unaffordable level of debt. so we're working hard to find what the limits are, -- limits are of what the house and senate will do. we're not going to cut the military as the reid bill would. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlen is recognized for 15 second. combovegove make no mistake about it. from day one this majority has put the military on the chopping block and the reid would disamate medicare as we know it and -- the boehner bill would disamate medicare and the military as we know. i yield to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz,

for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam speaker. i would point out at to my good friend from texas, madam speaker, as a constitutional conservative he should recognize that the constitution itself was a series of compromises. and our nation and our economy is being pushed closer and closetory defat. hardliners on the right, extremists by any othename, have refused to compromise. we are putting in jeopardy the payment of social security obligations, paying the members of our military, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff yesterday couldn't even answer in the affirmative that he was confident that tseayments could be made if we default. we're putting in jeopardy the full faith and credit of our nation. yesterday, seniors in my district called my office in tears wondering whether we would default and what those consequences would mean for them. these are real people who live on social security to survive. we have many strongly held views on both sides of the aisle. i don't like everything in the

reid proposal before us. but compromise is critical. i recognize that i can't have everything 100my way. democrats have been at the compromise table for months. with an empty chair on the other side of the aisle. it is time on the other side of the table, it's time for republicans to warm that seat across from us. mr. dreier claims that republicans have brought the reid proposal to the floor to show that it doesn't represent a bill that can pass the house. yet, the process is a sham. the bill has been brought up undea rule that requires a 2/3 vote of this house for passage which they know cannot happen. what areepublicans afraid of? they're afraid if their propose might just show how much support there is for this proposal. where are the cooler heads in the republican caucus? where are they? they appear to not exist. your caucus seems to be held hostage by extremists and have driven the moderates from the room and from the discussion. allowing extremists to take

over is doing harm to our country. president obama, house and senate democrats have said that we are willing to support cuts. even to programs we would no -- can i have another 15 seconds, please? mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentlelady 15 seconds. ms. wasserman schultz: we said we would support cuts even to programs we would normally fight to preserve. republicans have doubled down in a groundhog day move that has pushed dead on arrival proposals by bringing us closer to the brink of chaos. at the end of the day the stewardship of our economy is in jeopardy. thank you. i yield back the balance of my me. the spear pro tempore: the gentleman -- the gentleman from california is recognized. . mr. dreier: i'm happy to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from from washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington is recognized for one minute.

miss harrah beutler: the reason we came here, this caucus is here, the freshmen are here because the american people said enough. they said you are spending too much of our money. that's what this conversation is about today. the president stood on the -- across the row tuppeda a couple ars ago and said it's a failure of leadership to raise the debt ceiling. guess what? i came here never expecting to raise the debt ceiling. but i'm no compromised. i have twice voted to raise the debt ceiling to cover spending from failed stimulus, from a health care bill that ends medicare as we know it. i have voted -- twice. twice for solutions. and you know what? that's compromise for me. i came -- when i ran for this, this seat, i told the people that i serve, you know what? i'm not extreme, i am mad. i'm mad that washington, d.c., thinks you are their piggy bank.

that's what this debate is about. we end it today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself0 seconds, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 10 seconds. mr. mcgovern: to remind the gentlelady that she has voted time and time a time again to decimate medicare, medicaid, and social security. we are not going to stand by and let them do that. at this point i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of the budget committee. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman ll suspend. the house will be in order. mr. mcgovn: at this point, madam speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman fromaryland, the distinguished ranking member of the budget committee, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mrvan hollen: thank you, madam speaker. i think the american people just heard a new definition of compromise. paying your bills is a compromise. the american family can't wake up one morning and say, boy, it's a compromise and pay for

what i already incurred. it's a compromise to pay my mortgage. that's a new one for the american people. and it's part of a reckless pattern that we have seen emerging here. furs our republican colleagues walked out of the biden talks. then twice they walked outf the talks of the president of the united states. then when the republican leade in the senate put forward a proposal, they ridiculed it. thursday night in this very house they said no to the proposal by the republican speaker of this house until he amended it. the same speaker who said we need to have an adult moment. here's the concluding paragraph of today's "wall street journal." republicans are not looking like adults to whom we can entrust the government. the american people are looking for that adult moment. if you're not willing to compromise on critical things for the country, you are not fit to govern. and that is why senator reid put forward a compromise proposal. he doesn't like his own

proposal. he would be the first to tell you that. you know what it did? it met the criteria our republican colleagues put forward. $2.4 trillion cuts. even if you take outhe war savings, more guaranteed cuts according to c.b.o. than the boehner proposal the other night. it also incorporates mcconnell's proposal. here's what it doesn't do. it doesn't end the medicare guarantee. it doesn't cut social security. and it doesn't protect tax breaks for special interests corporations. now, look, what we are seeing here is people who are holding the american economy hostage. you have to stop playing kamikaze pilot with the future of the american people. in order to extract 100% of demands for budgets your way. compromise is necessary. and at is what senator reid put forward. a compromise proposal. let's show we can govern together. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield myself five seconds to again say to my colleagues the measure we voted on last night stemmed from a bipartisan compromise t together in this very capital one week ago today. with that, madam speaker, i'm happy to yield 30 seconds--actually one minute to my good friend from ohio, mr. jordan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. jordan: i thank the gentleman for yielding. let's cut to the numbers and what this bill does. we got a $14 trillion debt. this is going to raise the debt ceiling $2.4 trillion. achieving savings of $18 billion in the first. think of it the american people see things. you got a kid who maxed out the credit card at $14,000. the kid goes to the bank and the bank says ok here's what we are going to do. we are going to give you $2,400 on the credit card, but you have to promise us over the next year you're going to spend $18 less than you planned on spending. that's what this bill does.

this bill doesn't eve come close to startin to solve the problem. that's why we are against it. that's why it should be defeated. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the house will be in order. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself five seconds. the speaker pro tempore:he gentman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: my colleague from california keeps on saying that the boehner bill was bipartisan. i remind him not one single democrat voted for that bill because democrats do not want to decimate social security. mr. dreier: would the gentleman yield? mr. mcgovern: at this time i'd like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fattah. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. fattah: i assume that something that the american people are gullible, but this is not a coincidence or happenchance. we got a republican majority that took us from trillions in surplus to trillions in deficit. added a $7 trillion prescription drug plan. unfunded wars.

and then refused any additional revenue. and choking off our country's ability to pay its debt. now they want to walk us towards default. there is a special place in the shadows of the history books for a group of people who in order to gain power were willing to sacrifice americans' leadership in this war. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from califnia. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i'd like to yield any of my colleagu on the other side of the aisle who will tell me where in the boehner bill it says that we want to cut medicare, social security, or any of the other items that they continue to attack? may i -- i'm happy to yield to anyone who can point to me where in the boehner bill it says that. i'm happy to yield to anyone. obvisly -- i'm hay to yield to my friend. mr. mcgovern: balanced budget amendment you have, the ryan budget. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. mr. dreier: madam speaker, with

that i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to my good friend from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 30 seconds. >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, the president of the united states, barack obama, has said to the congress that we need to put america first and get thisone. mr. coffman: i agree with that. i agree that we need to put america first and take politics -- put politics aside. last weeke a bipartisan proposal emerged. which speaker boehner and majority leader reid, senator reid coming to an agreement. but the president of the united states got a hold of senator reid and said, absolutely not. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. coffman: thank you, madam speaker.

the reason why he pulled the agreement was because it didn't have enough moy to get him through the election of 2012, november of 2012. the president's caaign considerations is not putting america first. we need to put america first -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. coffman: vote down -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. . van hollen: the chairman of the rules committee wanted to yield -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is not is recognized. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. dreier: we have a lot of members who would like to be heard. i extended time. thepear pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: may i inquire of the time remaining on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has four minutes remaining. the gentleman from californi has 6 1/4 minutes remaining.

mr. mcgovern: we'll reserve our time. maybe t gentleman from california might want to yield to mr. van hollen. we reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i did ask a few minutes ago and expended time by asking anyone to yield. i mean -- we have a lot of members here who want to be heard from. mr. mcgovern has time if he would like to yield. i yield 15 seconds to my friend and maybmr. mcgovern will yield him 15 seconds and then we can hear what mr. van hollen has to hear. i yield the gentleman 15 seconds, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: if you look at the boehner proposal it says we got to cut $1.8 trillion. the speaker of the house has already said that you can't have any revenue as part of that. you can't close one corporate loophole. in fact he said that the majority would override any proposal. so the only other way to get it math mathically is to start slashing medicare. and to start going after social security. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

mr. dreier: madam speaker, my point has been made very eloquently by the gentleman. i very much appreciate it. the speaker pro tempore: who seeks recognition? mr. dreier: i thank my friend for his contribution. madam speaker, at this point i'm happy to yield one minute to my good friend from drexel hill, pennsylvania, mr. meehan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsvania is recognized for one minute. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. chairman. as we used to say in the courtroom, the facts are, there are no facts. the truth of the matter is the only people who are cutting $500 billion from medicare are the democrats in their proposal. but that's not -- the gentleman wi not yield. i'll make my point and be happy to be off. the issue here is really one of

compromise. i come here as a freshman. somebdy that's looking at this for the first time. anwe came in and worked on a bill, the boehner proposal. the frustration from me was knowing going in that evening that i had already been made aware that this leadership, the leadership of the party on the other side, had ripped their members so not a single member was ready on the other side to sit and talk to anyone on this aisle. the whip was there. you will not vote. you will not talk. we were not able. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the house wi be in order. the house will be inrder. those in the backf the chamber will take their conversations off the floor.

the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: is recognized for 10 second. mr. van hollen: just to be very clear. what we did was eliminated the overpayments to some of the medicare advantage plans and, and -- madam speaker -- madam speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the house is not in order. the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam speaker. we used much of those savings to close the prescription drug doughn hole. in your budget you took the hole $500 billion, but you reopened the drug doughnut hole at the same time you are eliminating the medicare guarantee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, let me yield myself five seconds to

say i thank the gentleman for once again pointing to the fact there is nothing in the boehner proposal that there's anything that cuts social security or medicare. madam speaker, with that i'm happy to yield 15 seconds to a new member from zealand, michigan, mr. hi tsenga -- high sanga. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 second. mr. huizenga: we heard from a colleague from florida on the other side of the aisle talking about the constitution and intend of it. ladies and gentlemen, this is about controlling our spending and accountability with the american people. and it might not be i this bill. it might not be in the other bills. eventually we have to realize we need to institutional brakes on our snding because we cannot control our spending in this institution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has exped. the geleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: if this is about protecting social security, medicare, and medicaid, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman

one minute. >> as a come to the floor, this side of the aisle is committed to reaching a solution and not just a deal to this problem. we are committed to reaching out across the aisle and across the other side of the house to reach a compromise. we have already compromised on the level of cuts going even further. we have already compromised on the level of the caps, raising the caps to make it even easier in that regard as well.

we have also already compromised from where we started with regard to a balanced budget amendment holding true to the idea that we should as all americans also agree eventually pass a change to the constitution and require a balanced budget amendment to this bill. at the end of the day, although we will compromise on cuts and we will compromise on caps and we will compromise on moving forward on a balanced budget amendment, let it be clear as god as my witness, we will not compromise on our principals, our principals of defending the constitution and defending the americans and making sure that our posterity does not have this excessive debt on it. i'll yield back. >> the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new york. >> the gentleman from new york is recognized for 30 seconds. >> here we are on the brink of economic disaster and we're wasting time with symbolic

political theater as it's worse. we want to protect medicare on the democratic side. why don't you try working with democrats. the american people want us to meet in the middle. they don't want this nonsense. the debate now focuses only on spending cuts without closing tax loopholes. that still isn't enough for some. no wonder the "wall street journal" said the republicans don't like who the voters can entrast the government. they want to compromise in the middle. the president needs to pull the 14th amendment. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from newburgh, indiana. >> the gentleman from indiana is recognized for 30 seconds. >> madam speaker, here we are on the verge of a financial meltdown and my friends on the other side of the aisle are worried about politics. they're here today worried about protecting the president from having to do his job,

lead. the republicans in the house are leading. we passed two bills that would end this crisis and the senate hasn't, they haven't put them down, they haven't voted on them. they have tabled them. we're here to lead. we need leadership and we're providing it. thank you. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> madam speaker, our side is prepared to close. we'll reserve our time. >> we have several more speakers on our side. >> the gentleman from california is recognized. >> at this time i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from ashton, wizard. >> the gentleman from wizard is recognized for 30 seconds. >> thank you, madam chair. the american people are sick of these kind of conversations. my friends across the aisle voted to rob $500 billion out of medicare for obamacare.

they instituted the i-pad board that is going to ration care for our seniors. we brought a proposal to this house that was going to root out all loopholes and nooks and crannies where businesses can hide their money and they all voted no! the american people >> will the gentleman yield? >> they need new solutions. this harry reid bill is full of >> your time has expired. >> the gentleman's time is has expired. >> they don't get the job done. i yield back. >> who claims time? which doesn't get the job done. the speaker pro tempore: who claims time? the house will be in order. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you very much, madam speaker. at this time i'm happy to yield

30 second to the gentleman from mississippi mr. pa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. palazzo: the american people expect us to lead during times of crisis. house republicans have led. house republicans have provided plans and solutions to america's debt crisis. house republicans have used their voice as representatives of their district to end the deficit crisis and to balance a budget. we've done our job. it's time a the senate does theirs. leader reid and president obama is what stands in the way of helping this debt crisis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. palazz vote no on the reid plan. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman reserve? mr. mcgovern: i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record an artle that appeared in "the wall street journal" today entitled "the debt limit hobbits."

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, is the gentleman prepared to close? i'm sorry. mr. mcgovern: yes. our leader is prepared to close for us. the speaker pro tempore: then i'll close on our side. i reser the balance of my time -- mr. dreier: then i'll close on our side. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 seconds before i yield the remaining minute to -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. mcgovern: i implore rational republicans to passing the reid bill. i appeal to your sense of responsibility, to your sense of duty to your country, have the courage of your convictions to do what's right. don't be paralyzed by the threats of the tea party or other extreme groups. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: medicare,

medicaid and social security, and i yield the balance of our time, one minute, to the gentlewoman from california, the democratic leader and the defender of medicare, medicaid and social security, nancy pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for the time remaining. pelosi -- ms. pelosi: thank you very much, madam speaker. i recognize the great leadership of mr. van hollen as our ranking member on the budget committee and he and mr. clyburn representing the values of the american people athe negotiating table for this. i rise in support of the reid legislation. i urge my colleagues to support it because it protects social security, medicaid and medicare , because it is fair. but i want to use my time in the following way -- i listened

very carefully and very attentively to our speaker yesterday wh he spoke and he used the term, "the bill is not perfect but we did our level best." our level best. one might infer from that that this process is on the level. how can it be on the level if we're bringing a $2.5 trillion bill to the floor under suspension the same way we might bring the naming of a post office? $2.5 trillion, 20 minutes on each side. members have said on both sides of the aisle this is a very important debate. well, if it is why is it brought under suspension which requires a 2/3 vote guaranteeing that it will not prevail, not on the level? the word level, of course, enters into, is this on a level playing field? is it level for senior citizens

while it gives big tax breaks for oil? is it level so we can give tax breaks to corporations sending jobs overseas? is it on the level for us to make children -- young people and their families pay more for their college education so we can give tax breaks to the high end? is it on the level to bring a boehner bill to the floor that makes all those cuts, undermines social secuty, eliminates medicare and it doesn't charge one red cent to people who have benefited so much from the greatness of our country? is it our best? is it our best to drag this out for all this time to keep in sess spence as to whether we would -- suspense as to whether we would honor our constitional responsibility to pay our debts? the constitution says the

national debt has to be recognized. it has to be recognized. and recognize we did. president after president, 3 times in -- 32 times in recent memory, including when president bush was president, at that time, even though many of us did not agree with the war in iraq, did not agree the tax cuts for the wealthiest people in our country to the tunes of hundreds of billions of dollars, not agree to the giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry, we didn't agree with that policy. that's how we got into debt. turning around from the surplus direction we were going in with president clinton whose last four budgets were in balance or in surplus. we didn't agree how president bush took us into debt, but we never, never stood in the way of honoring the full faith and credit of the united states. why, then, why, then -- why,

then would we this one time with this president decide that we would put up barriers so extreme, changing the constitution in order to lift the debt limit? it's a mathematical requirement. of course we must all reduce the deficit. but is it our best to say we're going to use the debate to reduce the deficit, toestroy the public's faith? look at the appropriations bills that are brought before us. destroying the public's faith of clean air, clean water, food safety, the education of our children, the health and financial security of our seniors through medicare and medicaid, that's what they are doing. th is -- we have come to

those conclusions, we have to do it, we know how to do it. but if they want to take it to the next step of destroying the public sector, we cannot go to that place when it affects the air our children breathe, the water ey drink, the food the eat, the education they receive, the safety of the neighborhoods in which they live. the speaker also said that the bill was n perfect. . no bill is perfect. i disagree in one respect. i think this bill is perfect in its absurdity. his bill was perfectly absurd. perfectly absurd. perfectly absurd again to say to a president after 32 times lifting the debt ceiling we are going to change the game for you, mr. president. it's perfectly absurd for them to say that the bill they brought to the floor -- the boehner bill they brought to the

floor was an agreement of the four leaders of the house and senate, decrat and republican. either you don't know what you're talking about or or -- i will not yield to you. very, very important that we all take a deep breath. we have important work to do. important decision to make. senator reid has given us a directiono go. no cuts in benefits for medicare and medicaid and social security beneficiaries. i wish that we had revenues in there so that those who had been fitted from the greatness the last 50 years of bipartisan progress for the american people would be able to make their contribution, but not one read -- red cent of revenue while we are saying kids should pay more

for their student loans. so it's time to end this theater of the absurd. it's time for us to get real. it's time for us to get real and listen tothe wisdom of the american people. they have said to us that they support an overwhelming -- in overwhelming numbers a bipartisan balanced approach. in overwhelming numbers that we should all pay our fair share. and they all agree that we should get this over with soe can get back to work putting the american people back to work by creating jobs. the speaker chose when he didn't have the votes instead of to reach out in a bipartisan way to see how we could work together, he chose to go to the dark side.

let's bring -- let me repeat. and i repeat, he chose to go to the dark side. by putting forth a bill that he himself told his members would sink it in the senate and i add lead to default. lead to default. we cannot default. we are the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world. we are the united states of america. so let's go from the dark side to the bright side of the american people. vote yes on the reid bill. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members will take their seats. members in the back of the chamber will remove their conversations. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for the balance of the time. mr. dreier: i believe in civil discourse and i want to say that on several occasions in the past 45 minutes members of my staff have urged me to have the words

taken down that have been offered by members on the other side of the aisle. and i chose not to, i chose not to, madam speaker, -- the speaker pro tempore: the house is not in order the house is not in order. the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: madam speaker, in the name of civility i chose not to because we have a very serious issue that needs to be addressed. and it's before us and we need to make sure that in the next several hours we effectively address it. now, since 1962, since 1962 on 75 different occasions we have seen the united states congress

increase the debt ceiling. now, we keep hearing about the urgency that exists today. i'll tell you what's urgent. if we don't change the course that we have been on the last four years with an 82% increase in nondefense disctionary spending, we are not going to have resources for any of the things that my colleagues have talked about. what we need to do and the message that has been sent is that for the first time ever we are going to change business as usual. now, i'm going to say something i probably shouldn't at the very end here. there are some good things in senator reid's proposal. there are some good things in senator reid's proposal. i believe that the idea of establishing a joint selet committee of our colleagues who will come together and make recommendations and force an up or down vote in both houses of congress is a positive thing.

but i will say this. i don't believe, i don't believe that continuing down the road towards increasing debt ceiling without -- with the kinds of checks that are necessary is the right thing for us to do. last night's agreement that we voted on here was in fact, it stemmed from the bipartisan talks that took place right down this hall. and i will say to my colleagues, madam speaker, vote no on the

the senate is in and it may be a tougher hill to climb for senator reid after republican senators yesterday early -- submitted a letter announcing their opposition to the harry reid proposal. he needs 60 senators to move his boat -- his bill forward. the cloture vote could be completed completed on sunday the meeting at the white house wrap up about half of an hour ago. debate, today's house they said that they opposed the senate debt and deficit bill. committee members spoke to reporters for about half of an hour.

>> good afternoon. we have a house subcommittee chairman with us, and the chairman of the veterans affairs committee. last night, for the second time, the house of representatives passed a responsible planned to rest responsible deficit and possible debt default. senator reid dismissed this pragmatic way forward. let me put this plainly. senator reid's plan would give full freedom to continue his

domestic spending spree while doing nothing to address the out of control deficit. it makes in significant reforms to the real driver of our debt, entitlement programs. hacking away at the dwindling resources needed by our armed forces to keep america safe. the senate has attempted to pay for massive increases in domestic spending on the shoulders of our troops. severing the funding of the military by half of a trillion dollars. that policy has failed. the debt has exploded while the military funding has withered. men and women in uniform have spent too much to be shortchanged by this president and his allies. we owe them our liberty, but this administration treats them like just another number on the

chalkboard. the impact on our fellow troops has been nothing short of disappointing. the army and marines are stretched dangerously thin. separated from their families. using hardware that has been chewed up by one decade of fighting. today the planes average over 30 years of age. forcing constant maintenance just to keep them in the air. these brave warriors have been willfully neglected for too long. in the stand that admiral mullen is in afghanistan, visiting the troops. the question they are asking, will they be paid if this default happens? let me put this plainly.

if senator reid's plan passes as they pay down their domestic spending spree with the blood and sweat of our troops, the military will break. we have allowed ourselves to be distracted from the massive entitlement programs that are actually bankrupting the country. that stops here. the budget passed last night shrinks the government and, most importantly, holt's three years of neglect to our armed forces. thank you. now i would like to ask the gentleman from arizona -- i mean virginia, i do not know how that

happened, the chairman of our readiness subcommittee. >> i think that this is an important issue. over the last several weeks we have heard a lot about the word compromise. i think that the american people realize that overlaid on that are two other words. we need to make sure that we are having common sense on whatever compromise that we have. we do not understand why it is the democratic administration constantly believes we need to compromise our national strategic assets. when carter gave away the panama canal, we said it did not make sense. when this administration started talking about reducing the municipal defense systems in europe, we said it did not make much sense. and we watched as we basically

gave the station a way to the russians and the chinese, we said it did not make a lot of sense. but when we are looking at $859 billion, if we let that go through, quietly in the night, we will watch and preside over the dismantling of the greatest military the world has ever known. not just our words. we had a hearing this week with the vice-cheeks and each one of them came up and said have devastating cuts of this magnitude would be. the marine corps specifically said they could not meet the needs of the combatant commanders to day, but if they had to make these cuts, they would come out of personnel and they would have to have a new strategy for defending the united states of america. the army, general correctly, he said it would end up coming out of the force structure and have

to reduce the structures that we have and we could not sustain those kinds of cuts. if you move on to the air force, general agreed love had an interesting fact in terms of where they are moving. something true and shocking. he said that when the chinese say they will have 300 j20 in five years, you had better believe it. we are already taking a very old fleet and cutting it dramatically. looking at the navy, admiral breyer testified about how difficult it would be to sustain cuts of this magnitude. the navy already has a shortfall in the maintenance.

we have gone from 8% to 22% of failures on the in served's. when you look at the ship building plan that the pentagon has presented to us, they indicated they needed a floor of 1300 ships. the bipartisan panel said that we needed 436 ships. pick the number, the current plan. it will not get us to 313. it could drop us down to 270. depending on cost structure, as low as 276. for the first time in our lifetime, the chinese have more in our navy than we do. that is why we have to take a stand and make sure that we do not allow them to have them. >> i would like you to hear from the gentleman from florida. the man that commanded troops in

more, in the field. where is alan? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, everyone, for being here. three weeks ago i had the opportunity to visit our men and women in the field. when i spoke to the combat infantry brigade, we had recently heard back from operations in afghanistan. i heard things that sent a chill down my spine. commanders told me that we had to budget: the paper in the barracks. it reminded me of times at fort bragg when i had to do the exact same thing. of the times when we had to identify the vehicle, howitzer, or piece of equipment to make sure that we kept other pieces of equipment equipped because we did not have the spare parts necessary. of a time when we did not have the artillery or ammunition to

properly train. of a time when friends of mine in the armored unit said that they had to park their tanks and use golf carts to do tank tactics. it reminded me of when we deployed in 2003 and we did not have mine to thead to land driver. thank god that when he was shot in the chest, he was saved by the body armor. i will not turn my back on the men and women who are my friends. one of them is my nephew. i will not turn my back and allow them to go through the kinds of things we had to do just so that we could have midnight basketball programs from this administration. in our constitution that says that one of the

responsibilities of the federal government is to provide the common defense. perhaps the president should have thought about this before he committed us to an operation in libya, where we are wasting precious american taxpayer dollars. the reid bill is unacceptable to me. i will not allow the military that my father served in, that my mother brought -- older brothers served in, i will not see be destroyed. i will not support the harry reid bill because of the incredible, unconscionable cuts that brings forward to the budget. you are looking at a person that, before he was sworn in, there were places where they could cut the budget. it was just the same as i found three wasteful department of defense spending programs that we got eliminated.

that is what we need to do, instead of having these across the board major cuts. not without the right kind of proper training and equipment. thank you very much. >> we also have with us the chairman of the subcommittee on defense appropriations. mr. bill young, from florida. bill, tell us what the program will do to our military. >> you have done that very well. i apologize for being late. my comments will be very, very brief. the general and i worked together since before we became chairman in this congress. we are determined to provide on the national defense. but we will make savings where we can. this year, in cooperation with

the chairman, the defense appropriations subcommittee reduced hr1, last year's defense appropriations bill, by $18 billion. the bill that we just passed in the house for fiscal 12 was reduced by $18 billion. we are working to save what we can, and we made very sure not to make reductions that would affect the readiness or anyone serving in our military. a commitment that we have and a commitment that we will keep. part of it will be voting against the proposal. one final comment. our investment in our nation's defense and the men and women that wear the uniform and provide the nation's defense, it should not be some magic

political number pulled from a hat. not just decided based on whether or not we can get the votes. it should be decided on what is the threat. what is it that the united states of america is going to have to do to maintain our security and provide the equipment that alan was talking about, to make sure that when that soldier needs some equipment, it is available. that is my equipment -- commitment. i will tell you, it is a real pleasure, for the tremendous spirit of cooperation that exists between the committee's and the outstanding members of both committees. thank you very much. good to see you all this morning. >> any questions?

>> has the harry reid proposal being considered specifically as it links to the military? >> we have a chart that shows -- can you see it? you all have copies, right? maybe you can just follow along with me. on the top line, that is the budget submitted to us one year ago, february, from the president. the numbers in those columns are what would be spent in defense over the next 10 years. if you follow down to the fourth line, you see the rise and budget that was passed earlier. as has been stated by chairman young, we have made cuts to

these debts. if you look at the rye and budget over the next 10 years, we have cut $315 billion over the next 10 years from the fence. if you go down to the next line of the appropriations bill, this is what we did. all of these, to compare apples to apples, our cost of living increases spread in place. cutting $439 billion, we are saying that that is it. we gave at the office. looking at the harry reid budget, it cuts 859 billion, another $400 billion over and above the cuts that the defense people are trying to live with

right now. the budget that was passed yesterday, it would freeze our spending at -- what is the level that was passed last year? in the next year. so, what we are looking at, until we have a balanced budget, we can only control two years in the cycle. >> if i understand cut, cat, and balance, the senate version cut spending into five or six different pots. as a percentage of gdp, they wanted it as specific as different areas. mr. young said that it should be based on a political number, based on the need. without having the across the

board cut the two are having -- that you are suggesting here. >> when we actually get into defense budgets that become law, the appropriations bill, we understand what the environment is going to be. we are passing our bills. the senate is not. and then we will negotiate. we have a bottom line that we will not go below on defense. yes, sir? >> you may have just answered this, but is there any combination of cuts that you see coming from senate democrats as a result -- a result of these negotiations? >> there does not seem to be much negotiating. our speaker, from the first of this year, from the first time

he met with the president, we told him that we would help him. he wanted us to extend the debt limit. the speaker told him at that time that we will do that, but only if we have corresponding cuts in spending. he has been trying all year to negotiate. when he gets up to the line, they move the line. it has been very difficult. i understand that we are down to crunch time. there will have to be something negotiated before monday. >> in the senate, representing the republicans in negotiations, sending your bill over four proposal, what is your message in terms of where you are willing to compromise and where you are not?

>> our realm of the defense committee, uprising and appropriations, we will not cut below this line of the $439 billion. where we got here, it is secretary gates from a couple of years ago, talking about not going below 01% increase in the future over inflation. i think that he saw this train coming down the track and was trying to be proactive. he asked them to cut $100 billion and they would be able to use that for things that were more important. when it came to us to explain this to us, he said we found another $78 billion. taking out that percentage of over-inflation that he had been talking about a few months

earlier, saying that we will cut the marines by $47,000 this year, but that we cannot go any more because it will come half -- will have to come out of force. we have men and women that have been deployed 5, 6, 7, 8. i spoke to a marine a couple of weeks ago who was headed for his ninth appointment. just wearing the army people, the marines, the service people, wearing them out. we said, that is it. the president gave a speech and we said we had to cut another $700 billion. >> the chairman has asked me to look at this from the readiness subcommittee point of view. the senate wants to argue and compromise over numbers. but we are looking at changing the system. if you look at the national

defense of this country, there are four questions that have to be answered, asked and answered. the first one is simply this, what is the true risk assessment? the threat to the united states of america? it is crucial that we ask that question and ask it accurately. the second the needs to be answered is what are the resources that our commanders need to fill the mission necessary to defend the united states of america from those threats. the third question, how can we get those resources in the most efficient means possible? what can we afford to spend? what is the risk that we assume if we do not spend that money? the crucial issue is the only thing that the administration has been asking is part of question no. 4.

what do they think that we can afford to spend and what can we afford to spend? what risk is assumed? what all of us have said it is this, we will not go there. we will make sure that we are asking all four of these questions. with those, we cannot compromise asking those questions. we cannot change the risk that the country faces. >> yes? >> you are saying that 439 is your bottom line, do not go below it. but even though the generous proposal goes below $439 billion? am i reading that right? >> no. when chairman leon gets those negotiations on the cr in the

senate, he will fight to keep that line, i am sure. >> he just had an operation and in the hospital they drop them. >> in the senate, you all know that, normally on defense issues the senate is investing less than the senate is proposed -- proposing to do. set by the chairman of the appropriations committee, as determined by the budget resolution itself. i do not think that there will be a budget resolution in the senate. do not count on us being them, having a budget at all this year. we are not exactly sure where we

go. we have sent our bill to the house and the senate. we are now waiting for their action and to go to conference. we will stay within our 300 tob allocations. that top number has got to be secure. there is no question about that. we are not going to go beyond where we think we can do it safely. major cuts from this year, related by scrutinizing all lost every contract to find out if there was some slippage, to find out if there was any chant -- cancellation in the contract. we were able to work out a number of arrangements where contracts that were canceled would be costs to the contractor

and we found we were able to work with the contractor to get them and let the determination costs complete the program. some of these have been extremely successful. there are a lot of ways to come up with these dollars, but it is getting more difficult all the time. slush funds, we have pretty much taken all of them. it is an agonizing job and members of congress should be happy with this committee because we do not play politics. there is no politics in the work that we do. it is strictly what is good for the country and what is good for the men and women who provide this nation's defense. >> the wars in afghanistan and

iraq, i am wondering if, in the context of the debate and sustaining the military force, if he does that support some kind of revenue raised that would target those costs specifically. we hear a lot about shared sacrifice. >> you can always send in more to the treasury, if you like. i would encourage you to do that. but, we will not support a tax increase. the problem is not that we need more taxes. we have had run away spending. if we cut the whole defense budget, the whole rest of all of our things that we actually get a chance to vote on, we would

still be running a deficit. the real problem is the courage to invest the entitlement programs. getting this economy going, getting people back to work. 14 million people that are out of work. if we had half of them back to work, it would make a huge difference in the deficit and the budget. thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> senate democratic leader harry reid accuse republicans of filibustering his plan to raise the debt ceiling. mitch mcconnell says the republicans are ready to hold the vote. senator reid wants a simple majority. here is their exchange of the senate floor. leaders in the house of representatives have wasted this week pursuing a right-wing proposal they knew from the start couldn't pass the senate. from the very beginning, speaker boehner's band-aid approach was fatally flawed. it would have put us back on this incredible position that we are in today debating over whether t debt limit should be increased. something that was increased i don't know really howany times but about 15 or 20 times during the presidency of ronald reagan. i have a little whier to my left that said 18 times, so 19- 20 wasn'too bad.

the band-aid approach that the speaker came up with was totally flawed. it would put us back in this incredible position of fighting to increase the debt limit, something that was done 18 times during ronald reagan's administration. we would be fighting the clock for financial collapse. we would start that again within just a few weeks. the speaker's legislation was a concession to tea party extremists, yet it barely passed the house yesterday with only republic votes and it failed on a bipartisan basis last night in the senate. there was an interesting article in "the new york times" yesterday, headline "the centrist copout." the facts of the crisis over the debt ceiling aren't complicated. republicans have in effect taken america hostage, threatening to underfine the economy and disrupt the essential business of government unless they get policy concessions they would never have been able to get through legislation. that's the way it is,

mr. president. it couldn't be said more clearly. but knowing all along this radical legislation which was neither balanced noripartisan could not and could not pass in our chamber, democrats have been working on a true compromise in the senate. we have solicited ideas from our republican friends and colleagues. let it never be said that democrats in the senate were afraid to compromise. we welcome compromise. as recently as yesterday, i asked my friend, the senate minority leader, to help make this senate compromise more palatable, but we have heard very little from the republicans. i am satisfied that the conversations i have had with a couple republicans this morning bears true. i spoke with the chairman of the budget committee just a short time ago. one of the proposals propounded by a republican, my friend,

senator conrad, is working on it to see if he can work it out so it is lanage that is something that we can all live with. senator conrad is an expert with budget matters, and i thought it was important that he take a look at that. i would have hoped, though, that someone would come to us, come to the table, the bargaining table on behalf of the republican caucus with ideas to improve a proposal already cut from the republin cloth. mr. president, democrats are still willing to sit down and negotiate. my door is still open. i say again i appreciate that several of my republican colleagues have reached out to me, even in the last few hours, hoping to reach a compromise. senate democrats welcome their input and look forward to working with them on a path forward. my friend, the republican leader, must generate some more action on behalf o his republicans. the two parties must work together to forge an agreement that preserves this nation's economy. we will need input of reasonable

republicans, including my frie, the republican leader, to get this done. but, mr. president, unbelievably, another filibuster stands in our path. the republican filibuster has become routine. from the smallest measure to the greatest matter of national importance, they stall and delay and use every procedural trick in the book to keep this body from doing its job. but a filibuster at this late hour and when so much is at risk is irresponsible. it puts our economy at risk. the majority vote was good enough for the speaker's proposal in the house yesterday, but republicans believe it isn't good enough for the senate today, and i have heard from my friends on the house side to show how they are gaming the system over there, mr. president. they are going to have a vote on my proposal. on suspension for those of us that served in the house, this is for naming courthouses and

little -- measures that are of little importance, but yet this importance matters. this matter dealing with the debt limit of this country wl take a two-thirds vote to pass there. so they have gamed this system from the very beginning, and as i said, mr. president, earlier from the "new yo times" article, the facts of this crisis over the debt ceiling aren't complicated. republicans have in effect taken america hostage, threatening to undermine the economy and disrupt the essential business of government unless they get policy concessions they would never have been able to enact through legislation. so they're going through the -- as i understand on the house side an effort to vote on our legislation, setting up a two-thirds standard to get this done, recognizing, of course, mr. president, that i will outline here in a minute that a filibuster at this late hour here in the senate and when so much is at risk is really

irresponsible, and to say it puts our economy at risk is an understatement, and that is for sure. the majority vote, i repeat, was good enough for the speaker's proposal in the house,ut republicans believe it is good enough for the senate today. rather than filibuster, i ask my republican colleagues to work with democrats to make our proposal better. we have offered a reasonable, rational way for republicans to help us avert default, but let me tell you about the legislation issue, how we believe how reasonable our legislation is. this legislation was written by democrats with both parties' principles in mind. it would avert default while cutting $2.5 trillion from the deficit over a decade. it includes no revenues concession to house republicans and senate republicans. it establishes a joint congressional committee to find additional savings this year and guarantees the committee's recommendations will see an up-or-down vote on the senate

floor, and it takes into consideration that that -- that committee must take into consideration proposals like the gang of six, and literally every single spending cut that has been voted on orndorsed by republicans in both houses. that is the gist of the legislation. $2.5 trillion, extending the debt ceiling until march of 2013. a pretty fair deal. mr. president, we have made some changes to this proposition. we hope it becomes more amenable to republicans. we have improved the program integrity language to allow for more savings by combating government waste and fraud. we have removed a measure that would raise revenue by selling the spectrum, some $15 billion which will be done. should do it now, which would have -- but it caused what is called a blue slip problem which says if you haveny revenue measure, according to our constitution, they have 0 originate in the house. so to present the so-called blue slip problem, i just elimite

it from this bill. it was $15 billion of of $2.5 trillion. we also added a process conceived by my friend, senator mcconnell, to allow two additional votes over the next year and a half, two motions of disapproval before the president can raise the debt ceiling. this proposal also protects social security, medicare and medicaid benefits, but as you can see, this amendment was designed to appeal to our republican colleagues as well as to our democrat colleagues. we're willing to listen to ideas. i have said this several times, from republicasenators to make this proposal better, but, mr. president, to say the time is short is an understatement. we can amend the underlying legislation that is here before us in the so-called message of the house. we still have time to do that. we have time to do that. we could do i tonight and we could still meet the deadline on tuesday, but we need to do it soon. that's why at 1:10 in the afternoon this saturday, i hope i have more republicans contacting me to see if they can

work out something to workith us. already the economy has gone fr bad to worse. stocks continued a week-long slide yesterday. i know my republican colleagues love this country, every single one of them. i believe they want to do what's best for our economy, every single one of them, but, mr. president, i have to say -- and he say for the third time -- the facts of the crisis over the debt ceiling aren't complicated at all. republicans have in effect taken america hostage, threatening to undermine the economy and disrupt the essential business of government unless they get policy concessions they would never have been able to enact through legislation. that's why together we must avert a default that would jeopardize veterans' benefits, senior citizens' benefits, social security payments and checks for troops, even troops the front line. it would also effectively raise taxes on every american family -- vermont, illinois,

kentucky, idaho, nevada, all over this country, oregon, all the senators on the floor, even wyoming who doesn't pay much in the way of taxes. we could do that, mr. president. it would effectively raise taxes on every american family, and businesses would also suffer this. increasing the cost of everything from groceries to the mortgage. and so i urge my republican friends to join me to move forward with the only compromise plan that's left. in fact, the only option left at all to save this country from default. mr. mcconnl: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, there nobody in the senate i respect and admire more than my counterpart, the democratic leader, but we have been subjected last night and again just a few momts ago, i would say to my colleagues from wyoming and idaho, to some orwellian discussion about what is a filibuster.

now, most americans when asked the question what is a filibuster would believe that it was delaying something, delaying something. so we have the astonishing development here that my good friend, the majority leader, is delaying a vote on something he wants to pass. we were prepared to have this vote last night. we were prepared to have this vote -- we are prepared to have this vote momentarily. we are prepared to have this vote at any point. i want to disabuse my friend of the notion that somehow it's going to pass. he hasn't seen it yet but we just delivered a letter to his office with 43 of my colleagues who say they are not going to vote for it. the house of representatives is going to speak at 2:30 onhis issue. they are not going to vote for it. andith regard to the 60-vote threshold, let me quote my good friend, the majority leader. on march 5 of 2007 -- quote --

"in the senate it has always been the ce you need 60 vos." january 30 of the same year, "60 votes are required for just about everything." look, we know on controversial matters in the united states senate, it has for quite some time required 60 votes. so i would say again to my friend, it's pretty hard to make a credible case that denying a vote on your own proposal is anything other than a filibuster, and we know that august 2 is tuesday. the american people are frustrated with us. they want us to come together and make, reach an agreement. the measure my good friend is offering is not acceptable to the senate, is not acceptable to the house, will not pass. i think the american people would appreciate it if we go on and get that out of the way and get serious about talking. and with regard to talking, let

me say who ought to be in the talks. the majority leader and myself and the speaker and the minority leader of the house spent most of last weekend talking to each other. in fact, we've been called down to the white house for a meeting around 11:00 on that saturday, and i suggested to the president he give us a chance to go up to the hill and see what we can work out together. and we came close enough together to where my good friend, the majority leader, while i undstand he's, he believes that he didn't fully endorse it but at least went down there to advocate what we thought we could agree to on that sunday afternoon. and the president said no. and so i became convinced that even though my friend the majority leader and i would love to work this out, we can't do it by ourselves. has to have the only native american america who can -- it

has to have the only native american america who can sign something into law. so my suggest to my good friend, the majority leader, is let's have the voten his proposal. it isn't going to ps. and let's get to talking to the administration again in the hopes that we can come together behind something that can pass both the senate and the house and be signed into law before tuesday. now, you know, i don't blame anybody for being confused about what's beenoing on in congress this weeks, but i'd like to take a moment to explain whas going on right now. last night the democrats who control the senate proposed a bill that would lead to the largest debt ceiling increase in the history of the united states and which completely ignores the roots of this crisis. this bill has one goal, to get the president through his next election without having to have another national debate about the consequences of his

policies. the president wants to make sure this kind of debate doesn't happen again even as he gets democrats in congress to give him permission to add trillions more to the debt. that's what the reid bill does. it isn't going anywhere, as i just described. it will not pass the senate, it is not pass the house. it is simply a nonstarter. senate republicans refuse to go along with this transparently political and deeply irresponsible ploy to give the president cover to make our debt crisis even worse than it already is. and 43 of us, as i indicated earlier, have signed a pledge to the majority leader pledging we will not vote for your amendment which if enacted will result in the single-largest de ceiling increase in the history of the united states. moreover, as i indicated earlier, we will soon know with certainty that this bill can't pass the house of representatives as they will be

voting on it shortly. so since there is no possibility that this bill will be enacted into law, i would say again to my friend that he hd the vote on his proposal here and now. we're ready, at any point, to go on and have that vote and not waste another minute of the nation's time on this reckless piece of legislation that we know won't pass. earlier this week the majority leader told the speaker of the house he was wasting the nation's time by proceeding with a bill that senate democrats had pledgeed to block, a bill that the majority leader himself helped put together but which he decided to oppose, as i indicated, after the president said he didn't like it. so the question now is this: why would my friend, the majority leader, waste the nation's time by refusing to vote on his own bill? on his own bill, which we also know will fail. why wouldn't he take his own advice and get it over with?

well, the answer seems to be obvious. the democrats are running out the clock. they want to delay the hard work of negotiation until the august 2 deadline they have been warning us about all summer. the democrats' entire strategy this particular week since last sunday has been to run out the clock so the nation focuses more on the august 2 deadline than on their own failure to do something about the underlying problem. republicans have now passed two pieces of legislation that would put us on a path to fiscal sanity. not one, but two have passed the house of repsentatives. democrats have spent the last few weeks figuring out how to avoid that particular bill. democrats have spent their time talking about the tea party instd of talking about a solution. they've done absolutely nothing but stand in the way of a meaningful solution to this crisis and criticize republicans for having the audacity to suggest that we might try to

balance the books. so now we're reduced to this. they won't even allow a vote on their own bill. they're delaying the inevitable so they can avoid doing anything responsible. and it's simply indefensible. so once again i would ask my good friend, the majority leader, let us vote on his legislation. let's get this irresponsible billhat we know will fail up for a vote so we c get down to the real work of negotiating a solution to the crisis with, as indicated earlier, the only person in america who can sign something into law. the president of the united states. the lesson from last weekend is that anything the two parties agree to here doesn't mean a thing if the president decides he doesn't like it. democrats will abandon their own agreements -- a i don't blame

them. i've been leader of the party in the senate when we had a republican president. it's a tough spot. you're not a free agent. we don't have time to go through that again. we've got a couple of days here to work this out, and we can't do it without the president. republicans have proposed solution after solution to this crisis. it's time for our friends on t other side, including the president of the united states, to figure out how we're going to come together and solve this problem. i yield the floor. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the jority leader. mr. reid: i believe that my stinguished repubcan friend must be a little bit confused because he's usually totally logical. but here he tells the american people this morning, he's called the white house last week and said, "mr. president, let us do the deal." and now he's telling the president he wants the president

to do the deal. somewhat iogical. i want to make sure that everyone here in the senate understands clearly that when negotiations took place last sunday during a meeting that took place between leader pelosi, me, the speaker and senatorcconnell, and we tried very hard to work something out. but everyone suld understand when we left that meeting, we did not have anything worked out. we had nothing worked oufplt it- out. they were focusing on a six-month extension trying to come up with a trigger for the joint committee which we have never been able to accomplish. it's okay that they keep talking about an agreement that the president overruled. you can't overrule an agreement that you don't have. mr. mcconnell: would my friend yield? mr. reid: be happy to yield. mr. mcconnell: if that's the case, it proves my point. we cannot do, we cannot reach an agreement without the president. we tried that. i'll concede the point, my

friend says he didn't actually agree to that. i'll take his word for it. but it makes me point that there's simply no way under our constitutional system for my friend and i to work this out. we've got to have the president at the table. i think the approach we tried last weekend i think we both agree did not lead to an agreement. mr. reid: mr. president, the president of the united states, in the presence of senator mcconnell, senator durbin, senator kyl, and the house leaders said to all of us, no president in history has spent as much time as i have in a complying basis meeting wh leaders trying to come up with some effort on this budget problem we're having today. the president has spent hours of his time, days of his time, weeks of his time working on this. as we know, he believed that he had, as as i understand it, two tentative agreements with t

speaker. the speaker backed out of both of those. the president, i haven't spoken to him this morning but i talked to him several times yesterday, he's willing to work with anybody that will give him a proposal. and that's my point today, mr. president, as i've said earlier. the letters coming, terrific, saying -- i haven't received it yet but i'm sure it's coming that the republicans say they will vote for my piece of legislation -- they won't vote for my piece of legislation. what will they vote for? do they have any ideas? let me know. we have gone so far as even to accept the republican bill that we got from the house as a shell. no one has to worried about it being my bill. if we work something out, it will be the boehner bill if that makes everybody happy. mr. mcconnell: i thin the answer is a bill the president agrees to sign. that is what we were trying to achieve last weekend. we don't have time to ping-pong

things across the hill anymore. i think you and i are basically in agreement here with two days left the only thing congress has time to deal with and should deal with is something the president of the united states says he is willing to sign. i'm not critical of the president for not spending time on this. he's spent an enormous amount of time on this, we just haven't gotten a result yet. mr. reid: mr. president, we're he dealing with reality, not a world of fantasy. we're dealing with reality, and the reality is the deficit is fast approaching where we have to raise it or default on our debt. we have a matter before this body that would increase the debt ceiling until march of 2013. it would reduce the debt by $2.4 trillion on basically issues that the republicans have voted on. they talk about i don't think we need to do the overseas contingency fund because the wars that were started, and

they're still going on, by president bush cost a lot of money, lots of money, trillions dollars. the congressional budget office and the office of management and budget said those wars are winding down. as a result we save $1 trillion. they scored it. that's a reduction in our debt. i also think, mr. president, that if the republicans have so way they want to approve my legislation, please -- if they don't want to call me, call the president of the united states. but we have to work forward. mine is the only proposal we have. if mine passes, and we're going to continue to push this because it should pass because it's the only thing we have lt. my friend says let us vote. we say the same thing. let us vote. butn in the world on some things as important as this, why can't we have an up-or-down vote like they have in the house?

and to further underline my point, my friend, the assistant democratic leader, the whip, served in the house longer than i did. they are taking up in the house today, as i understand it, something we call a consent calendar. they are taking up extending the debt ceiling on that calendar? i think that's unheard of. we're willing to vote. we're willing to vote right now. 60 votes. 60 votes we're not willing to take because this is a filibuster. this should not be filibustered. and so, mr. president, we are not going to agree to the six-month proposal because, as i indicated in my prepared remarks, that would mean that we would be back in this mess in a matter of weeks. we want to be fully engaged. i repeat to the people that supposedly sent me this letter, what do you want? what do i say to my caucus

because my republican colleagues haven't come up with any alternative? it would be easy to do. you can amend my legislation. in theeantime, that won't happen. we're going to proceed forward and do the very best we can to overcome this filibuster. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i'll just wrap up my commends by pointing out again comments from my good friend the majority leader about the nature of the senate. he said in the senate it's always been the case you need 60 votes. always been the case y need 60 votes. we all know that. it's a very -- it's widely kno in the country now as well. and most people believe a filibuster means you're trying to delay something. and i want to make clear to