mr. barrasso: thank you madam president. madam president, as i come to the floor today the senate is continuing to try to debate a bill to fund the department of homeland security. we've made no progress on this >> we have made no progress on this bill for week cloud-based solutions as solutions democrats as the democrats continue to filibuster us getting on the bill and having a discussion. the bill has passed the house of representative cloud-based solutions. the way it is supposed to work is it democrats don't like something about the bill they should amend and change it. that is how the process worked in the past and how it should work in the today. this is how it worked when we debated the keystone pipeline. we had 40 amendment this is an important piece of legislation. funding for the department of homeland is scheduled to expire on friday. both sides of the aisle should agree this is something we need to do. why are democrats being ob obstructed and why are they so eager to willingly cut off the funding? well this is

mr. barrasso: thank you madam president. madam president, as i come to the floor today the senate is continuing to try to debate a bill to fund the department of homeland security. we've made no progress on this bill for weeks as democrats continue to filibuster our efforts to actually even get on the bill, to have a meaningful discussion on the subject. the bill's already passed the house of representatives. and the way the senate is supposed to work is that if democrats don't like something about the bill, then they should offer amendments and change it. that's how the process has worked in the past. it's how the process is supposed to work today. you know, the process as it worked about a month ago when we debated the keystone x.l. pipeline. we had more than 40 different amendments debated on the floor voted on on the floor. that's more than double the number of amendments than the senate democrats allowed all last year in debate on the floor of the united states senate. well, we could be debating those and voting on thos

mr. barrasso: thank you mr. president.i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you mr. president. over the past week, i was home in wyoming traveling around our state. i had a chance to talk with students about their hopes for the future and talk with many small business owners about their efforts in trying to create jobs. now, the people of wyoming they work hard and they take seriously the western values of family and community. they're committed committed to preserving the west's role in providing natural resources that improve the lives of millions of people all across america. this commitment is shared by the senate western caucus. it's a caucus which i chair in the senate as well as it's shared the same commitment by the western congressional caucus. recently we released a joint report titled "principal stewardship of the american west ." "principalled stewardship of the american west." this new report has details about specific things tha

mr. barrasso: thank you mr. president. i'd like to join in the comments from my distinguished able, and learned colleague from south dakota. we talk what happened when the president yesterday released his bugged forbudget for the next fiscal year. i agree with my colleague from south dakota that the president's spending is absolutely astonishing. the president wants to spend $4 trillion in 2016 -- $4 trillion. that's $1 billion 4,000 times. nobody has ever seen a budget that big before. "the new york times" ran an article right after the budget came out yesterday with a headline "liberal aspirations set out as a budget." "liberal aspirations set out as a budget. "the article said president obama presented a budget on monday that is more utopian vision than pragmatic blueprint. well the american people don't want a utopian vision, they want responsible leadership. responsible leadership that understands their needs and the challenges that people face every day. so far this year all we've seen from the president is a list of

mr. smith, i think there is some misunderstanding and again i appreciate the leadership senator barrasso and senator heinrich abroad to this but this is the only permit that is needed. the lng export application is not the only federal permit to what of the federal permits are you aware of that projects like this are going to get and is set in addition to the local bishop local or state permits? >> like i said you have to run a outlet to get these things but it takes about two years before you even pre-file the site and all these kind of things. then you have to go through nepa studied by the government can take longer, can take less. you have all of the time you have to demand basically everything agency check the box and make sure everything is comply with environmental laws economic interests that is part of the nepa process. you do examine the economic impact, and then you get a final decision. >> are the deadlines associated with those permits? >> on nepa actually not. there actually is none. you can actually it falls under the six-year civil statute of limitations. you can delay th

mr. barrasso: thank you madam president. madam president, as i come to the floor today the senate is continuing to try to debate a bill to fund the department of homeland security. we've made no progress on this bill for weeks as democrats continue to filibuster our efforts to actually even get on the bill, to have a meaningful discussion on the subject. the bill's already passed the house of representatives. and the way the senate is supposed to work is that if democrats don't like something about the bill, then they should offer amendments and change it. that's how the process has worked in the past. it's how the process is supposed to work today. you know, the process as it worked about a month ago when we debated the keystone x.l. pipeline. we had more than 40 different amendments debated on the floor voted on on the floor. that's more than double the number of amendments than the senate democrats allowed all last year in debate on the floor of the united states senate. well, we could be debating those and voting on thos

mr. barrasso: thank you mr. president. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you mr. president. mr. president, last tuesday president obama met with ten people at the white house. these are people who had written him letters about the health care law. the white house said it was designed that this little publicity stunt was to remind people to sign up for insurance on healthcare.gov by the deadline date of sunday, february 15. at his meeting the other day the president said that the people there were, as he said, a pretty good representative sample of people whose lives have been impacted, as he said, in powerful ways. well, i will tell you mr. president, if president obama really wanted a representative sample he would have included some of the people his law has affected in alarming and expensive ways. what does the president have to say to those people? why didn't he invite any of them to the white house for his photo op? here's