mr. lieberman: mr. president.esiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 2038, which the clerk will report. mr. lieberman: mr. president. the clerk: a bill to prohibit members of congress and employees of congress from using nonpublic information derived from their official positions for personal benefit, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 2:00 p.m. is equally divided. the senior senator from connecticut is recognized. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. you can see i'm eager to get going on the bill. i thank the majority leader, and i want to thank senator collins, senator brown, senator gillibrand, a lot of others who work to get us to -- worked to get us to this point where we can do two things. most important to us who worked on the stock act is that we're now -- have reached this afternoon -- in reach this afternoon of adopting a clear statement that members of congress and our staffs are c

mr. lieberman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. lieberman: mr. president, i rise to oppose the amendment. this amendment would take congress from where we have always been and are going to be better after this bill passes in pursuit of disclosure and transparency, sunshine as the best guarantee of integrity. this will be the first time that i'm aware of that in the legislative branch we would require divestment of personal holdings. for that reason, i oppose the amendment. i think -- remember the underlying bill we have increased the public's access to information about our holdings and our transactions. and ultimately, that knowledge ought to be enough to guarantee the public or to energize the public to make sure that we are following the highest ethical norms. divestment, in my opinion, is a step too far. ms. collins: i ask for the yeas and nays, mr. president. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change the

mr. lieberman: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. lieberman: madam president, i want to thank my friend from alabama for coming to the floor, submitting his amendment. i agree that there should be parity between the legislative and executive branch branches wherever it's appropriate. i'm very happy to work with him on this. but i -- i must say that yesterday we made some progress on a somewhat similar amendment with senator paul to appropriately scope the amendment on requiring executive branch officials to report on their financial traction -- transactions to senate-confirmed positions. i don't know whether that's the resolution here or not, but i think we should work on it. i do want to state for the record that the executive branch is not free of conflict of interest regulations. in fact, in some sense, you might say that they have -- they have tougher restrictions. even securities and exchange commission employees have to get permission before they can make stock transactions and then have to file disclosures, not within 30 days o

mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. mr. president, i have a motion to make but i just wanted, for the information of our colleagues, say that productive work is going on to try to reach a final list of amendments to the stock act and to have an agreement as to which will come up for a vote and to have that, obviously, be a bipartisan agreement. so we're making progress and i hope we can continue to do that. at this time, i would ask unanimous consent that the senate recess from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. so that all senators can attend a classified briefing. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair, and i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: mr. barrasso: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you,

mr. lieberman and he believes they are still on that path to the acquisition of nuclear weapon.feeling the pain of many of these sanctions so that is some good news. >> greta: thank you very much. you have a big party to go to tonight? >> my mother's 100th birthday tonight. >> greta: we wish her happy birthday. >> big question surrounded do major donors to president obama's campaign. and controversy over a superbowl ad and rush limbaugh is jumping in. what does rush limbaugh think about it? you'll hear from rush coming up. often the real problem is swelling, not mucus. advil congestion relief reduces swelling due to nasal inflammation. so i can breathe. advil congestion relief. ♪ what started as a whisper every day, millions of people choose to do the right thing. there's an insurance company that does that, too. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? today is gonna be an important day for us. you ready? we wanna be our brother's keeper. what's number two we wanna do? bring it up to 90 decatherms. how bout ya, joe? let's go ahead and bring it online. atten

mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator lieberman. senator enhoff. >> i think this is one of the better hearings we've had, the straightforward sfonss. i appreciate that very much. your comment about language, i'm going to get that for the record and use it later on. >> i just wrote it down. >> all right. that was a good one, general. i think we have pretty much decided on this 20% getting back to iran now it that it's something that's either achieved or being achieved as we talk. general burgess, you said we have the scientific, technical and industrial capabilities to produce a weapon, but we didn't talk about when. when is the big issue? i remember what secretary panetta said just the other day about -- we've repeated that several times, several questioners have. i think that's consistent. that's consistent back in the debate where we had a difference of opinion as to whether we should continue with the ground based interceptor in poland. at that time the unclassified date was 2015. so this is pretty consistent. one thing i don't u

lieberman. >> aye. >> mr. chairman, on the vote of those present, the ayes are 9. the nays are 0. on the vote by proxy, the ayes are 3, the nays are 4. on this vote, the ayes are 12, the nays are 4 and the amendment is agreed to. >> thank you. i thank the clerk. senator carper mentioned the word lunch break earlier, so it stuck with me. we want to try to move an amendment or two more before we break. let's see if we can keep it going. senator moran, do you have any other amendments? >> i have no other amendments, mr. chairman. thank you. >> okay. so now i just think about who is here. senator levin i believe has passed. we'll go to senator akaka for another amendment at this time. >> thank you very much. >> senator akaka? which one would you like to call up at this time?ff akaka 5. >> akaka number 5. >> this amendment on medicare. >> okay. >> i would like to come back to workers compensation at another time, but not now. so i would like to turn to health care. >> okay. >> and my amendment is to strike the provisions requiring postal retirees to enroll in medicare parts a and b. if

mr. lieberman: mr. president, i came to the floor along with senator collins to introduce the cybersecurity act of 2012. but i must thank my friend, my colleagues, dear friends and colleagues from arizona for an extra bonus in hearing their really rhapsodic and moving tribute to their state on its centennial of real love and loyalty. having spent some time in arizona, i can say every word they said is a word of truth. i congratulate them and wish them and all the people of arizona a joyous centennial celebration. mr. president, i did come to the floor to introduce the cybersecurity act of 2012. i'm here with senator collins. i want to thank her for all the work that we've done together and what has been a wonderfully bipartisan, nonpartisan relationship to deal with a very serious national problem. i'm very honored that we are joined in introducing this bill by the chairs of two -- the two committees that have been most involved in the questions of cybersecurity: the chairman of the commerce committee,

. >> senator lieberman? >> no. >> mr. chairman on the vote of those present, the ayes are five, the nays are 12. and the amendment is not agreed to. >> okay. senator akaka. you're next. >> thank you, very much, mr. chairman. i want to offer akaka amendment number one, to strike title three regarding governmentwide workers compensation or feca reform. let me tell you why i'm offering this. feca reform should not be done in postal reform. most of the employees affected by this are not postal employees. and the savings expected from these changes would have very little effect on the postal service's deficit. feca has not been reformed in close to 40 years. we need to take a closer look at comprehensive reforms to make shush we get it right and we -- to make sure we get it right and we can include adequate measures to reduce waste. there are complex issues related to the appropriate benefit levels that deserve more analysis before we cut benefits. at a hearing i held in july, witnesses raised serious concerns with reducing fe

. >> senator lieberman? >> no. >> mr. chairman, on the vote of those present, the ayes are five, the nays are eight. on the vote by proxy, the yays are zero, the nays are three. on this vote the ayes are five, the nays are 11. and the amendment is not agreed to. >> i thank the clerk. thank you, senator akaka. of those here, let me indicate that next we'll go to senator johnson and then senator mccaskill. then senator paul, then senator tester, then senator moran and then senator begich. all of whom have amendments pending. senator johnson? >> thank you. i'd like to offer johnson amendment number one and only. i would -- like my colleague from kansas, new to this process, and as i studied the issue, there's pretty -- pretty eye popping charge here that the gao study laid out the deficits of the 30esal service and it's $250 billion and it is a quasi private quasi governmental agency here, but the fact of the matter is if we experience those types of deficits we'll be on the hook for it. or the taxpayers will be on the hook

. >> senator lieberman? >> no. >> mr. chairman, on the vote of those present, the ayes are two, the nays are six. >> can i ask the clerk to go back to the senators we passed. >> senator landrieu. >> yes by proxy. >> senator mccaskill. >> no by proxy. >> and senator brown has just appeared so rather than his voting by proxy -- >> senator brown? okay. mr. chairman, on the vote of those present the ayes are two, the nays are seven. on the vote by proxy the ayes are four, the nays are four. on this vote, the ayes are six, the nays are ten and the amendment is notgr >> all right. i thank the clerk. thank you senator paul. senator pryor? >> i think that senator landrieu wanted to be noted that she based her vote on the napoleonic code. listen, this amendment should be noncontroversial. i think we haven't passed an amendment yet so maybe this will be the first one. >> we passed one. >> we passed one? >> noncontroversial. >> there we go. i would like to, at the appropriate time, ask that senator mccaskill and senator landrieu be

mr. chairman. >> senator lieberman. >> thank you mr. psychiatry, mr. dempsey, thank you for your service in your testimony. as i look at the budget that has been submitted and i heard your testimony today it seems to me that in this budget the u.s. military and our national security are being asked to pay the price for the fiscal irresponsibility of the government over the last decade. the bottom line is one that you are mandated to submit by the budget control act that congress adopted and the president signed last summer but i must say as one member of the committee, one member of the senate as i look at what he would have to do is to meet the bottom line of the requirements for the budget control act and the risk to the national security. without proportionate changes in the threats that we face around the world this budget for the coming to the coming fiscal world would represent the reduction in spending believe what was planned in the five-year defense plan for the coming year, 9% reduction for a five years. and as we've discussed it would requir

mr. chairman. >> senator lieberman. >> thank you mr. psychiatry, mr. dempsey, thank you for your service in your testimony. as i look at the budget that has been submitted and i heard your testimony today it seems to me that in this budget the u.s. military and our national security are being asked to pay the price for the fiscal irresponsibility of the government over the last decade. the bottom line is one that you are mandated to submit by the budget control act that congress adopted and the president signed last summer but i must say as one member of the committee, one member of the senate as i look at what he would have to do is to meet the bottom line of the requirements for the budget control act and the risk to the national security. without proportionate changes in the threats that we face around the world this budget for the coming to the coming fiscal world would represent the reduction in spending believe what was planned in the five-year defense plan for the coming year, 9% reduction for a five years. and as we've discussed it would requir

mr. chairman. >> the comments and questions from senator joe lieberman, a member of the senate armed services committee, leon panetta, defense secretary, and general martin dempsey testifying on capitol hill in the first of three days of congressional hearings for pentagon leaders, discussing the pentagon budget. leon panetta saying both military and civilian leaders within the pentagon remain unified behind a revised strategy that essentially shifts the focus from the long wars to future challenges in asia, the mideast, also concerns about cyberspace. the budget for the fiscal year, by the way, begins on october the 1st. news from capitol hill about rand paul, republican from kentucky, is delaying a senate debate over a two-year transportation bill to make a statement on egypt. after unsuccessfully trying to block a judicial nominee, paul refused to offer consent to quickly move ahead on the senate's $109 billion transportation bill which the president offered his support for last week. the move expected to delay consideration on the plan until later this week according to politico, the reason, senato

mr. chairman. madam secretary, nice to see you again. i'd like to say to senator lieberman and senator collins, i appreciate your work on this. this is critically important, also incredibly complex. is it appropriate for know ask you a question, mr. chairman? i'm new here. i don't walk to break protocol. >> i may have to check with counsel. go ahead. >> i share coaches senator mccain and because this is so important, not a good way to start the process so certainly in light of his objection and those of the ranking members, are we going to consider doing a -- not taking this to the floor directly? is that going to be reconsidered on that basis? >> i don't believe. so i suppose the people want to raise the question, but i think there's been a long process here. those have been reported out of this committee, out of commerce, intelligence, foreign relations had some stuff all done -- not all done on a bipartisan basis but most of them were. senator reid got acknowledge stated about this problem last year, and began to convene the chairs and then held a joint meeting which in

mr. chairman. madam secretary, nice to see you again. i'd like to say to senator lieberman and senator collins, i appreciate your work on this. this is critically important, also incredibly complex. is it appropriate for know ask you a question, mr. chairman? i'm new here. i don't walk to break protocol. >> i may have to check with counsel. go ahead. >> i share coaches senator mccain and because this is so important, not a good way to start the process so certainly in light of his objection and those of the ranking members, are we going to consider doing a -- not taking this to the floor directly? is that going to be reconsidered on that basis? >> i don't believe. so i suppose the people want to raise the question, but i think there's been a long process here. those have been reported out of this committee, out of commerce, intelligence, foreign relations had some stuff all done -- not all done on a bipartisan basis but most of them were. senator reid got acknowledge stated about this problem last year, and began to convene the chairs and then held a joint meeting which in

mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator mccain. senator lieberman. >> good morning. thank you for your service in your testimony. as i look at the budget that has been submitted, i hear your testimony today and it seems to me that in this budget, the u.s. military and our national security are being asked to pay the price for the fiscal responsibility of our government over the last decade. the budget you have submitted to us is one that you were mandated to submit by the budget control act that congress adopted and the president signed last summer. but i must say, as one member of this committee, one member of the u.s. senate, that as i look at what you have had to do rtto meet the bottom line requirements of the budget control act, it is, in my opinion -- it represents an unacceptable risk to our national security, without a proportionate changes in the threats that we face around the world. this budget, for the coming fiscal year, would represent an 8% reduction in spending be neat what was planned in the five- year defense plan for the coming year, and 9% reducti

lieberman. senator inhofe. >> thank you mr. chairman. i really think this is a better hearing than we would have with the straightforward responses and i appreciate that very much and your comment about language i'm going to get that from the record and use it later on. >> i just wrote wrote adelle. >> that was a good one, general. i think we pretty much have decided on this 20% getting back to iran now that's it's something that is being achieved as we talk. general burgess said we have the scientific, technical and industrial capabilities for producing a weapon that we didn't really talk about when. when is the big issue? i remember what secretary panetta said just the other day about and we repeated that several times some of the questioners have and i think that is consistent. back in the debate where we have difference of opinion as to whether not we should continue with the ground-based interceptor in poland. at that time the unclassified date was actually 2015 so this is pretty consistent. one thing i don't understand, and i think

lieberman. senator hofe. >> thank you mr. chairman. i really think this is a better hearing than we would have with the straightforward responses and i appreciate that very much and your comment about language i'm going to get that from the record and use it later on. >> i just wrote wrote adelle. >> that was a good one, general. i think we pretty much have decided on this 20% getting back to iran now that's it's something that is being achieved as we talk. general burgess said whave the scientific, technical and industrialcapabilities for producing a weapon that we didn't really talk about when. when is the big issue? i remember whatsecretary panetta said just the other day about and we repeated that several times some of the questioners have and i think that is consistent. back in the debate where we have difference of opinion as to whether not we should continue with the ground-based interceptor in poland. at that time the unclassified date was actually 2015 so this is pretty consistent. one thing i don't understand, ani think there

mr. chairman, we welcome your testimony now. >> thank you, chairman lieberman, ranking member collins. you are quite right. senator reid once this on the floor as soon as possible. the thing that scares me is that we have had so many hearings, and they are solid rock-solid, but we still have to find a floor time for it. this is not going to be an easy time to do that. the pressure is on this congress both of the house and senate, to come through on this. i think our government needs a civilian agency to coordinate our civilian cybersecurity efforts. that agency should be the department of homeland security. under the super leadership of janet napolitano. our bill represents expertise and hard work, as both of you have said. that is as it should be. we have eagerly saw, as you mentioned, and received a constructive criticisms and input from a whole lot of places. i remember giving a speech two years ago to a business group presenting ideas that olympia snowe and i had. they were surprised to hear the summit would listen to them, listen to their complaints, and there were a lot of them.

mr. chairman, we welcome your testimony now. >> thank you, chairman lieberman and ranking member collins.ght about that. i think senator reid wants this on the floor as soon as possible. and frankly, the thing that scares me more than anything is the fact that we have had so many hearings, and yet that was he's to get to the agreements that we've all come to, and they're solid now, rock solid. but we still have to find the floor time for it. this is not going to be an easy time to do that. so the pressure's on this congress, on both the house and the senate, to come through on this in the face of all of this danger. it's huge and not yet guaranteed. i think our government needs a lead civilian agency to coordinate our civilian cybersecurity efforts, and that agency should, of course, be the department of homeland security under the superb leadership of janet napolitano. i want to emphasize that our bill represents expertise and hard work as both of you have said, three senate committees, and that's as it should be. we have eagerly sought, as you mentioned, senator lieberman, and have rece

mr. president, i understand that s. 2105, introduced earlier today by senator lieberman, is at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: s. 205, a bill to en-- 2105, a bill tone hans security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the united states. mr. brown: mr. president, i ask for the -- i ask for the second reading and object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the bill will be read the second time on the next legislative day. mr. brown: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the resolution of the senate of january 24, 1901, the traditional reading of washington's farewell address take place on monday, february 27, 2012, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the republican leader. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: and one of the great traditions in -- in this body. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record a

mr. chairman. madam secretary nice to see you again. first of all senator lieberman and senator collins i appreciate your work on this. this is critically important and also incredibly complex. i am new here. i don't want to be breaking protocol. >> go ahead. >> i share some of the concerns of senator mccain and because this is so important, certainly not a good way to start up the process so in light of his objection and those of the ranking members are we going to consider doing, not taking this to the floor directly or is that going to be reconsidered on that basis? >> i don't believe so. i suppose if people want to raise the question but i think, there has been a long process here. bills have been reported out of this committee out of commerce, intelligence, foreign relations, not all done on a bipartisan basis but most of them wear. senator reid got really agitated about this problem last year in convening the chairs and then held a joint meeting, which in these times is very unusual. bipartisan meeting senator reid and senator mcconnell and they chairs ranking

mr. chairman. madam secretary, nice as you can pick first of all i would like to say to senator lieberman and senator collins, i appreciate your work on this. this is i think critically important. it's also incredibly complex. it's appropriate for me ask you a question, mr. chairman. i'm new here but i do want to be breaking protocol. that i may have to consult my council. go ahead. >> i share some of the concerns of senator mccain, and because this is so important, certainly not a good way to start the process. certainly in light of his objection and those of ranking those, are we going to consider doing, not taking this to the floor directly? will that be reconsidered? >> i don't believe so. i suppose if people want to raise the question, but i think -- there's been a long process here. bills have been reported on this committee, out of commerce, intelligence, foreign relations have had some stuff, all done, not all done on a bipartisan basis but most of them were. senator reid get really agitated about this problem last year, began to convene the chairs and then held a joint meeting, which in thes

i might add that senator lieberman also served as attorney general of his state and knows whereof he speaks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: thank you, madam speaker. we know that -- i yield myself 30 seconds. i'd just like to compliment the distinguished gentleman from california who was an attorney general himself and is very sharp on these matters. could you make available to us these 16 draft errors of the senate? i would be delighted to get them from you. mr. lungren: if the gentleman would send somebody over here you can make a copy of it right now. mr. conyers: thank you very much. i am pleased now to yield to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of oversight and government reform, elijah cummings, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. cummings: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman for yielding. i want to thank ms. slaughter and mr. walz for your tremendous work. i stand here and urge our members to support this bill, but certainly i have my concerns. the house republicans stripped out of a bipartisan

i might add that senator lieberman also served as attorney general of his state and knows whereof he speaks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mrconyers: thank you, madam speaker. we know that -- i yield myself 30 seconds. i'd just ke to compliment the distinguished gentleman from california who was an attorney general himself and is very sharp on these matters. could you make available to us these 16 draft errors of the senate? i would be delighted to get them from you. mr. lungren: i the gentleman would send somebody over here you can make a copy of it right now. mr. conyers: thank you very much. i am pleased now to yield to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of oversight and government reform, elijah cummings, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized forwo minutes. mr. cummings: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman for yielding. i want to thank ms. slaughter and mr. walz for your tremendous work. i stand here and urge our members to support this bill, but certainly i have my concerns. the house republicans stripped out of a bipartisan bill t

i might add that senator lieberman also served as attorney general of his state and knows whereof he speaks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mrconyers: thank you, madam speaker. we know that -- i yield myself 30 seconds. i'd just like to compliment the distinguished gentleman from california who was an attorney general himself and is very sharp on these matters. could you make available to us these 16 draft errors of the senate? i would be delighted to get them from you. mr. lungren: if the gentleman would send somebody over here you can make a copy of it right now. mr. conyers: thank you very much. i am pleased now to yield to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of oversight and government reform, ijah cummings, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. cummings: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman for yielding. i want to thank ms. slaughter and mr. walz for your tremendous work. i stand here and urge our members to support this bill, but certainly i have my concerns. the house republicans stripped out of a bipartisan bil

lieberman. last, but certainly not least, we will hear from tom, the house intelligence committee side in terms of chairman rogers on the house side as well as we will hear from mr. long reince proposal -- proposal on loss of security. the floor is yours. >> thank you very much. i appreciate the kind words, kind remarks. i have actually been focused on a topic that has become topical in the last year or so. i had the privilege to serve as a director of the national security agency just after the cold war in the early 1990's. my worry when i checked on board their was thinking about wonderful agencies, great contributions. not all of the contributions in the cold war, but that before world war ii. we were breaking and reading not see germany codes in wartime and reading them before the german field commanders. that is a tremendous advantage. if you think about the historical context, agency is a great contribution. how are you relevant going forward? what i was struck by was most of what had been in successful in exploiting the nation's history is wireless communications. i talked to a few young engineers and they presented me with some facts of the future. one o

lieberman-collin's bill. we'll hear from chairman roger's on the house side as well as from kevin to hear from mr. lund gren's bill on the homeland security committee. a lot to get out there. we want to have a robust conversation. admiral, the floor is yours. >> thank you. i appreciate the kind words and remarks. i've actually been focused on a topic that's become topical in the last year or so for about 20 years. i was asked of me or privilege to serve as national security agency just after the cold war in the 1990s, and my worry, when i checked on board there, was thinking about a wonderful agency, great contributions, the contributions of the cold war, but back before world war ii as an example. we were breaking and reading nazi germany codes in wartime, and reading them before the german field commanders, and that's a tremendous, tremendous advantage. .. >> the volume, the global communications flow would be inside fiber optic pipes and today we're testing a terra bite a second and think before that volume in the way i sort of imagine it as a nontechnical person if the path between washington

mr. lieberman: mr. president, i don't see -- oh, he is here. no the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i rise today in support of this amendment. this amendment would strike the underlying bill and would replace it with an affirmation that we are not exempt from insider trading and that each senator would sign a statement each year affirming that they did not participate in insider trading. i think this is the way to go. i think the american people want to be sure that we are not exempt and i think this is a good way to do it without creating a bureaucracies and a nightmare that may well have unintended consequences. mr. lieberman: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. lieberman: i respectfully oppose the amendment. as the senator from kentucky with his characteristic directness said, would strike the entire bill and the affirmation by members that they have not violated insider trading laws is in my opinion not enough, and -- and in the opinion of

mr. lieberman: mr. president? mr. reid: i'm sorry. i withdraw that. mr. lieberman: mr. president, while the majority leader is here, i just want to thank him for the work that he and his staff have continued to do to enable us to get to a vote on this bill, which most everybody in the -- in the senate supports to make it clear that members of congress and our staffs are covered by anti-insider trading laws. senator gillibrand, senator collins, senator brown, we've all been working to -- to bring this to an end and give members on both sides the opportunity to introduce amendments. senator reid has been showing great forbearance in not moving to file a cloture petition. and in some sense, this is a test of whether we can all apply to ourselves a rule of reasonness -- of reasonableness so that there can be a pretty open amendment process but one that does not stop the senator from getting something accomplished. so i share the leader's optimi optimism. there's only one -- one obstacle now to having an agreement. hopefully we can begin voting tomorrow afternoon and get it