senator begich. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow-up -- can i just say senator begich was here earlier. i apologize, i do rush out and make a quick call. thank you, mr. chairman. let me come if i can, follow-up on a couple of things. mr. edwards i agree with you with regard to state and bankruptcy that we shouldn't go down that path. we need the talk right now. from what i understand talking to multiple people who deal in the business of muni bond, state funds, it's having an effect on the market. i know states are probably feeling that even though they won't say that the rates have been adjusted upwards but there's is nothing calculated in to what we might do or not do, so even the notion of talking about it i think is not very healthy for we need to get through. so i want to say i agree with you in that regard that we should be going down that path. i would be interested in each one ago quick comments on that, obviously mr. edwards you've already made a comment. in each one of you would quickly comment on the idea

begich: mr. president, i rise today to join my friend from oklahoma to talk about a commonsense piece of legislation. i come to the floor pretty often to talk about the deficit and today i want to talk about something very specific that we can do to address this matter. the orphan earmark act would rescind earmarks that remain 90% or more unused nine years after being appropriated. in early january, "usa today" published an article examining 20 years of earmarks that have not been spent. according to the analysis, at least 3,649 of those earmarks -- not a single dollar had gone toward its intended purpose. and many of our orphan earmarks also count against a state's share of federal highway funds that have taken billions of dollars away from the state transportation departments across this nation. during the past 20 years, orphan earmarks reduce the amount of money that states could have received in federal highway funding by almost $7.5 billion. that's $7.5 billion that states could have used to

thank you very much. >> senator begich. >> senator begich was here a year. i had to rush out and make a quick call. mr. edwards, i agree with you in regards to states in bankruptcy that we should not go down that path. from talking to multiple people in the business, muni bonds, it is having an effect on the market. states are feeling that. the rates have been adjusted upwards, but there are risks being calculated into what we might do or not to. even the notion of talking about that is not healthy for what we need to get through. i agree with you in that regard that we shouldn't be going down that path. i would be interested in your quick comments on that. obviously, mr. edwards, you already made a comment. if each one of you could just quickly comment on the idea of the state's walking down that path of declaring bankruptcy, which i think would be a huge mistake. >> senator, i can tell you that we have discussed it and we have basically -- governors are pretty united in opposition to that legislation. nobody is asking for it, nobody wants it. we agree with

begich: mr. president? mr. rockefeller: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. rockefeller: mr. president, i yield five minutes to the senator from alaska. mr. begich: thank you very much, mr. president. thank you, mr. chairman, and to the ranking member, i think the work you have done in this bill, as i said yesterday, is very exceptional on the time it's taken to goat where we are. i understand -- taken to get to where we are. i understand the amendment that's being proposed and the goal of it, and i have been one of these have supported the deficit commission that's brought forward some recommendations thousand manage this budget. i've supported multiple efforts on this floor to reduce and manage the budget in an overall scheme of how we move down to sustainability for our finances of this country. this is one bill that you have to take into account not only what is being proposed but what it does and what it will impact, and i'll just use from my state. you know, when you think about alaska, there's

begich: thank you very much. and, mr.ident, i want to talk on essential air service, but i do want to make a couple of comments after hearing my colleague talk about the budget. i want to assure him there are some moderates over here that understand the value and the managing. budget. and someone comes from alaska -- we support gun rights, oil and gas drilling, we support a lot of things that maybe the senator may not be aware of as a democrat. but the other thing is, leadership is about all of us working together. i look for the president's budget. that doesn't mean we're going to sit hey and wait for him to make decisions. we have responsibilities here, mr. president. and i know last year i sat here and voted for the session-mccaskill amendment that would have reduced some of the spending, controlled some of the spending, that we couldn't get all votes on the other side to make happen. i supported every dime that came back from the tarp repayment to go to pay off the deficit, which now we're close to 80% or better of th

senator begich and senator murkowski also did so much to help us thread the needle that would be a balanced bill. and then there was senator warner who also had a different interest, and that was to protect his constituents from congestion around washington national, and i think we were able to accommodate the needs of the people who live around national airport as well through the leadership of senator warner. so i want to say that it took a lot of negotiation to get there, and that's why really this bill took several weeks to do. so i'm very proud and pleased that we have done this. i, too, want to recognize the staffs without whom none of us could do the research and the detail work that are necessary. i will start with senator rockefeller's democratic commerce staff. ellen deneski runs the senate majority on the commerce committee and she is a joy. she and anne beggeman, who runs the republican side, are truly colleagues who can shoot straight, there are never surprise, we trust each other, we don't always agree, the answer's not always "yes," but the answer is straight. and that's what

the merkley and wyden (cantwell and merkley and begich amendments) are the only two amendments filed with a focus on the issue of beyond-perimeter flights at national. they would both alou for new flight exemptions at the airport that would favor distribution to limited incumbents or new entrants. the merkley amendment would provide eight new roundtrips for beyond-perimeter service. the wyden amendment would add 12 new roundtrips yoantdz the perimeter and four new roundtrips within the perimeter for a total of 16 new flights. while the hutchison amendment may not provide the same level of opportunity for services to their states that they desire, her amendment does provide ample room for their constituencies to obtain new service with five exemptions rather than 12 beyo beyond-perimeter. i feel we must strike a balance. we have no choice. we can't make everybody happy. senator hutchison's and my approach would sort of go down the middle. people who don't want anymore, people who want a lot more. kind of edge them together. that's all you can do in a bill of this sort, where meigss ru

of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable mark begich, a senator from the state of alaska, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following leader remarks, the senate will proceed to a period of morning business much senators permitted to allowed to speak up to 10 minutes each this morning. we made significant progress on the f.a.a. authorization bill this week and we'll make more progress next week. the finance committee's going to report out a bill on -- amendment legislation on tuesday, funding for this most important piece of legislation. we hope to complete action on this bill early in the week of the 14th. today i will continue to work with the republican leader on an agreement to vote on monday on the confirmation of several executive nominations. there will be no roll call votes during today's session of the senate. mr. president, there are three bills at the desk due for a second reading. the presiding off

begich to goo from from the 2011 request, this is actually a decrease in funding, correct? >> let's be clear. if in fact the numbers we are talking about on the hill today of the numbers that potentially could be cut -- >> no, i am just talking about what the request was. >> the department has just reece -- just released a letter that the secretary sent talking about 16%. they go to that 16%, this becomes a rather significant increase over the 2011 budget. >> as my mother used to say, i hope we'll have that problem. the reality is, right now, if the 2011 numbers, if curley what we requested 27 gets cut below the fiscal year 2010 numbers, we would have almost 20% reduction in the budget in the state department and usaid. i don't think anyone believes that is what we should be doing. we will be very much focused on what is going to happen on capitol hill, but the purpose of this discussion is to talk about the 2012 budget. there is no question we are very concerned about what could happen in 2011. >> given all the uncertainty, isn't it pointless to talk about percentage incre

amendment 64 is an amendment by myself and senator begich from alaska. it's an orphan earmark amendment where we instruct the agencies to eliminate moneys that have been sitting for nine years or longer and not expended. that's close to $500 million that we can count so far. probably $1 billion. it helps the agencies. it's money that we have already allocated that will never be spent that's unaccounted for. i believe we're going to have a voice vote on it and i'd appreciate everybody's support of that amendment. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the amendment is considered adopted. mr. coburn: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to call up amendment number 80. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: as -- mr. coburn: as amended. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. coburn, proposes amendment number 80 as modified. mr. coburn: this is an amendment -- we have an essential air service. senator mccain's amendment to eliminate essential air service, which is basically a subsidy for people who drive -- have to

senators from alaska, senator -- the senators from alaska, senator murk -- senator murkowski and senator begich. so they had concerns we had to address. the california senators certainly have wanted more access for california because that is a huge population base that will now have better access to national airport as well as dulles. so there -- i think that is the outline of the amendment that we have just adopted, and we're going to continue to work in conference. the house bill has five new entrants only, so we have 16. we have conversions. the house does not. so there will be a lot of talk and a lot of input, but my goal is to have more competition, to have strengthened air carriers for our overall u.s. air competition, and to assure that the people west of the mississippi river have access to national airport. and so i think we have made a good start here, and i want to commend all of those who have been involved in a very delicate negotiation, and i especially thank my chairman, senator rockefeller, of the commerce committee for helping us to get to this point that we could pass an f.a.a