mr. harkin: madam president? the presiding officer: senator. mr. harkin: madam president, i ask further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. harkin: madam president, on january 29 in 2009, president obama signed the lily ledbetter fair pay act. the critical law, legislation signed into law by president obama after his first election, reversed the outrageous supreme court decision in ledbetter and made clear a worker like ledbetter who had not earned a raise for years still had recourse to challenge her wage discrimination. today we celebrate the enactment of this important law, but at the same time we must recognize it was only a first step. we need to do much more to ensure all workers in our society are paid fairly for their work and are not shortchanged because of their gender, race or other personal characteristic. that is why four years after enactment of the lilly ledbetter fair pay act, i am proud to introduce once again the fair pay act, a bill i have introduced in eve

mr. harkin: mr. president, first i ask that proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. harkin: secondly, i ask unanimous consent that stephanie lynn and justin clayton, law clerks, be granted floor privileges for the duration of today's session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. harkin: i ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be extended until 5:30 p.m. today and that all provisions of the previous order remain in effect. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. harkin: mr. president, i come to the floor today to give a -- give some remarks that i give about every two years, i guess, when the senate reconvenes for a new congress, and now this is a new congress. and so once again i come here to point out that we need to make some changes in the way we operate. i have been in this body for 28 years. i'm currently eighth in seniority. as soon as senator kerry becomes secretary of state, i will be seventh in seni

mr. harkin: mr. president, in the last few decades, real middle-class families in america -- i say real middle-class, making $30,000, $440,000, not $400,000 a year, have steen season their jobs being more insecure, their wages stagnate, in fact, their income adjusted for inflation is less than it was in the late 1990's. their savings and pensions have shrunk or disappeared, the cost of education has soared, at the same time the wealthiest americans and large corporations grow ever richer and pay less and less in taxes. for example, take dividends. prior to 2003, dividends were always taxed as ordinary income. but now they're taxed at a less rate, at the capital gains rate. income of hedge fund managers are taxed at a lower rate than middle-class families, so-called carry interest rule. the share of our nation's wealth going to corporate profits has been rising, as the share going to wages and salaries is declining. this has led bit by bit, tax code change by tax code change, pension cuts by pension c

mr. reid: the senator from iowa, senator harkin. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa is recognized. mr. hatch: mr. president, i have long felt that rule 22 does not define the u.s. senate. the u.s. national is defeithed in the senate and it does not mention rule 22 or filibusters. secondly, i do not believe that the dead hand of the past should control any senate now or in the future. third, i believe that the filibuster should be used to slow things down, to make sure that the minority has the right to offer amendments and to have them debated and voted on. it does not mean that the right that the minority -- that the minority has the right to win, but they have the right to debate and slow things down. the filibuster should not be used as a method to put things in the trash can. as george washington supposedly said to jefferson, it was to cool things down. i can understand that. but the filibuster has been used and will still be used even in the future so that the minority can stop the majority. i have long felt that the m

mr. harkin: madam president, i couldn't help but listen to the words of my friend from alabama regardinghe debt and the deficit. and then to be reminded that we did balance the budget, not too long ago. in fact, in 1993, we passed a -- a tax bill here in the senate and in the house, it was signed into law by president clinton, which set us on a course to reduce the deficit. in fact, by the year 1999 and 2000, we balanced the budget. we had a surplus. can you imagine that, madam president? we had a surplus for three years in a row. the congressional budget office and o.m.b. said if we had continued on the pathway that we were on, we would have fully paid often the national debt by 2010. so when i hear my friends on the republican side talk about reducing the deficit and the debt, we did that. when the democrats were in charge of the senate and the house and we had the presidency. i would also point out that not one republican on that side of the aisle voted for that bill in 1993. i can remember standing here and debating with my friend from texas at that time on this bill, and there were

mr. harkin saying they didn't care for it. so i think we're all over the map, and i think the best thing to do is read the bill this afternoon and take it up later on today. heather: congressman mick mulvaney, we appreciate you taking the time with us, and we'll let you get back to your work. >> thanks again, heather. rick: in other news today, we're following some brand new developments concerning the health of secretary of state hillary clinton. doctors say they're confident she'll make a full recovery from a blood clot between her brain and her skull. the condition brought on by a concussion that she suffered during a fainting spell at her home back in early december. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge is live in washington. when did these health problems start for the secretary? >> reporter: well, rick, for nearly a month secretary clinton has been dealing with health problems which began, according to her staff, after being overseas. on fred, december 7th, mrs. clinton has a stomach virus. the following t

mr. udall: and now madam chair, on behalf of senator harkin, i have a resolution which i send to at the desk and ask for its consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report by title. the clerk: s. res. 5, amending the standing rules of the senate to provide for cloture to be invoked with less than a three-fifths majority after additional debate. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: reserving the right to object for the reason i just stated to give the majority and minority leader and other senators a chance to find ways waste to find the senate function more fairly and more efficiently, i object. the presiding officer: objection so heard. mr. udall: madam president -- the presiding officer: the resolution will go over under the rule. the senator from new mexico. mr. udall: madam president, i would also just reiterate again, senator alexander, a number of senators, including senator merkley and myself, are all working trying to make sure that this is a better place and that it functions better, and we look forward to having the next couple of weeks to

mr. president, i rise today to talk about our efforts to change the senate rules. as we began the 113th congress on january 3, senators merkley, harkin and i introduced a resolution to reform the standing rules of the senate. 13 of my colleagues have signed on to cosponsor our resolution. as we introduced -- when we introduced the resolution, we agreed with the majority leader that it would be best to have the debate about reforming our rules after the inauguration. i appreciate his willingness to work with us on this important issue. and although we postponed the debate, we preserve the right of a simple majority of this right to amend the rules in accordance with article 1, section 5, of the constitution. senate resolution 4, our proposal to reform the rules, is simple. it is limited and it is fair. again, we are not ending the filibuster. we preserve the rights of the minority. here's what we are proposing. an end to the widespread abuse of silent filibusters. instead, senators would be required to go to the floor and actually tell the american people why they oppose a bill or a nominee in order to maintain a filibuster. debate on