the senator from minnesota has the floor. not senator from illinois. mr. roberts: that's a question. if he could ghief some assurance -- give me some assurance that that could be considered, but that hasn't happened with the situation we are. i'm done. mr. franken: thank you, mr. president. mr. durbin: if the senator from minnesota would yield for a kind of -- kind of a question. mr. franken: certainly. mr. durbin: i wonder if you're aware that we've been debating health care reform for 19 days and in that time there were four republican amendments to change the bill, six motions to commit the bill back to commit, stop the -- committee, stop the debate on the floor and that is the sum total of all of the effort on the republican side to date. we don't choose the amendments, the leadership chooses it on the republican side of the aisle. i ask the senator from minnesota, are you aware of it? mr. franken: i am now. i was aware of the general shape of things which is the sort of dearth of substantive amendments offered and sort of the delay, yes, then i'm aware

durbin: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of senate resolution 382, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 3 382, supporting the goals and ideals of observing the national slavery and trafficking prevention month from january 1 through february 1, 2010, to raise awareness of and opposition to modern slavery. mr. durbin:the presiding officee objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. durbin: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the resolution be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, may i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of senate resolution 383, submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 3 383, designati

i see the senator from minnesota here. they come from all over the world to go to some of the hospitals that minnesota has. the fact is those hospitals agree that we can do this more efficiently, and we can reduce the overall payments under medicare, and we've worked very hard to protect the way that we do that so it doesn't do injury. the insurers have come to the table. home health care came to the table. i read the letter earlier from the home health care services. it's from the president of the home care and hospice association of america, and the -- he says we support the provisions of your health care reform legislation as they relate to home health care. that's what we're debating here on the floor, and they do support it, and the fact is that the senator from georgia who stood up and said well, in our state we have a letter that says -- well, first of all, that's based on an earlier assumption. secondly, we have no idea what the assumptions are in the analysis that they made. thirdly, it's based primarily on the hou

the senate will be in order. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. lautenberg: madam president, may we have order, please? thank you. madam president, this -- this is a simple solution to a complicated problem. my amendment contains the dorgan amendment, the work that our friend from north dakota is significant. but what it did not have is a guarantee, as much as possible, that the product was safe, that there were no counterfeits, that there were no mixture of things that might not work -- well with other drugs. and it -- and it adds a simple requirement that imported drugs be certified as safe by the health and human services secretary. so i hope that we'll be able to pass this including the -- which will include the dorgan amendment and make sure that the products that get here, no matter what the price could be, if it's not safe, it's worthless, and we want to be sure that every product that reaches our shore is safe to take and -- and will operate at more reasonable costs. the presiding offi

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable al franken, a senator from the state of minnesota, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the leader. , majority leader. mr. reid reid: i ask unanimous consent the time until 1:00 a.m. equally divided and controlled between the leaders or their designees, that senators be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each, that the mandatory quorum be waived and the majority leader be recognized for the last ten minutes and the ten minutes prior to that, the republican leader be recognized if he chooses to speak. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: mr. president, those who are following the business of the senate may be surprised to find us a little after midnight in session. this is a decision made by the senate just a few hours ago to postpone the continuation of our session into a

the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: madam president, i thank the majority leader for designating haft of the time between now and 1:-- half of the time between now and 1:30 that i should control. and i would first like to thank all the people that are here, the staff and pages. this has been a tough session for many but tougher for many of them than some members of the senate because they have had to wait until the very last senator of either political party has finished for the day many times before they go home, and i was reflecting on that yesterday afternoon in the midst of one of the toughest historic snowstorms here in washington, d.c., that hundreds of staff people were waiting at their post, doing their jobs on a saturday in the middle of a snowstorm when virtually every business around washington was closing down. and i just want to thank them and the pages and both sides of the aisle for their patience and commitment to this great country and this great institution. why are we here on sunday? why are we

of the senators present and voting. let me go to the bill before us, because buried deep within the over 2,000 pages of this bill, we find a rather substantial change to the standing rules of the senate. it is section 3403 and it begins on page 1,000 of the reid substitute. these provisions not only amend certain rules, they waive certain rules and create entirely new rules out of whole cloth. again, i'll skip over some examples but let me read a few of these provisions that amend the senate rules which are contained in section 3403 of the reid substitute. it's section d, titled referral. the legislation introduced under this paragraph shall be referred to the presiding officers of the prospective houses, to the committee on finance in the senate, and to the committee on energy and commerce, and the committee on ways and means in the house of representatives. the bill creates out of whole cloth a new rule that this specific bill must be referred to the senate finance committee. another example under section c, titled "co

the bill. namely those by senator nelson. and then another cloture votes is out there on the substitute amendment that is the senate version of the health care bill the one put together with the house committee and the finance committee. then there is a vote on wednesday on cloture to the underlying bill, three procedural steps, 60 votes each and then we expect the final vote christmas eve at 7:00 p.m. that would be a majority vote at this point* a simple majority vote and any of this could have been -- have been shorter if they agreed to not spend as much time on any of the process. then the next call is from mississippi. go-ahead. >> caller: i am the french. i will go back to my country. my father was sick when he was 55 and my mother sick when she was 60 my parents lived to the age of 90 and 92. when they are sick and don't have insurance it makes them sicker. [inaudible] but not to have any ensure insert any insurance for the poor but for all of the people when they see babies die it is ridiculous. >>host: thank you for th

not the way the senate operates. i can remember when our friends on the other side were in the minority. specifically, i remember the now assistant majority leader saying the senate is not the house. praising the procedures in the senate. and if ever there were a measure -- if ever in the history of america there were a measure that the american people expect us to take our time on and to get it right, it's this one. this massive 2,000-page effort to restructure one-sixth of the economy and have the government take over all of american health care, where we see in all of the public opinion polls people are saying please don't pass this. they want to try to rush it, try to get it through here in a heck of a hurry, back it up against christmas. and i've said to my colleague, the majority leader, we're happy to be here. we're going to be here saturday, we're going to be here sunday. i did ask for members to have an opportunity to go to church sunday morning if they wanted to, and the majority leader indicated that would

president, the health care reform before the senate -- the health care reform before the senate. frayed to appear dim witted and unfit, it is only when the child cries out the emperor wears no clothes that's the crowd acknowledges that the emperor is naked. like the little boy crying out, those of us on this side of the aisle are pointing out that this bill is fiscally not responsible. while not addressing our current health care challenges, the so-called health care reform bill we're debating creates new programs at a time when we're not paying for the one we already have and adds $2.5 trillion to what we're already spending. i learned as a long time ago as a mayor and governor, if you can't afford what you're doing, how can you take on new responsibilities? we could be using this opportunity to fix our health care system by finally working to lower health care costs and pass those savings on to citizens who are already overburdened by an expensive health care system. yet, instead of common sense, incremental reforms that increase access to quality, affordable health care, reduce

guest: now that the bill has passed and the senate, the next step is for the house and the senate to conference and resolve differences between their two versions of the bill. host: what will be the most contentious issues between house and senate negotiators? guest: it will be many of the same issues that were contentious during the debate, the public option, potentially, abortion language, and also questions about how the bill is financed. the house and senate have different mechanisms for paying for the bill. host: a number of members and senators are releasing statements. "i am deeply disappointed the bill option." can i build a does not include this passed the house? s-tguest: the house bill includa formal public option and the senate bill did not. there were a number of liberal senators who had pushed hard for public option and majority leader harry reid, is original bill included a public option with the opportunity for states to opt out of that. in the senate, there was not enough support for that. republicans were unified against it and there were enough democrats, moderate

that's what we need now in the united states senate. we need the kind of courage that john kennedy wrote about in "profiles in courage." mr. risch: senator barrasso, there already are some courageous democrats stepping up, and i would hope that every democrat on the other side, call your governor and say governor, what do you think about this? help me out here. should i vote -- i'm in caucus and they have bought enough votes to get to the 60, but i got to tell you, i don't like the way they did it, number one, and number two, what about the rest of us? we didn't get -- we didn't get the $300 million, we didn't get the x number of million, help me out, governor. you know, they say they're going to shift $25 billion to the states that you're going to have to come up with. what do you think? do you think i ought to vote for this? or maybe, maybe if one of us steps forward and says, you know, i'm going to vote no and i want to set the reset button and i want to put people back to the table and say let's do this right. we can do this right. w

i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, my distinguished colleague from massachusetts has been talking about the urgency of now and the importance of this legislation has done so mass tperly. we have been -- masterfully. we have been debating health care for weeks. we have been debating it for months if you think about the markups that took place in the health committee as well as in the senate finance committee. we have been debating it even more if you consider the time of negotiations that took place between a group of six members of the senate, three democrats and three republicans, in search of a bipartisan effort. so, all of this talk that this is a rush to judgment is, doesn't just square itself with the facts. but there is another bill that is pending before the senate, a bill that should have passed without any difficulty. mr. president, the tactics of delay and obstruction that we have seen on this floor for the last few weeks on the part of the minority have now reached critical mass.

the senate will be in order. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided on the johanns motion to commit. mr. baucus: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: this is very simple. a vote for the johanns amendment is a vote for the status quo. that means seniors continue to pay higher premiums, higher cost sharing due to wasteful overpayment. a vote against johanns means we can extend the solvency of the medicare trust fund that helps seniors and helps benefits. a senator: the senate is not in order? mr. enzi: the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. please take your conversations out of the well and outside. mr. enzi: senator collins. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: madam president, home health care is a compassionate, cost-effective alternative to institutional care. it allows our seniors to receive care just where they want to be in their own homes. under this bill, home health care would take a di

-- >> i don't know what the deal was. >> i'm going to tell the senator the deal. >> the senatorfrom arizona has the floor. >> i don't know what the deal was, but we'll wind out what the deal was. >> if the senator would yield i would say what the deal was. >> i can't walk through the halls here without -- >> would you like me to answer the question? >> i'd like to finish my answer to you, if i may. that is, i don't know what the deal was that was cut with them, but we'll find out what the deal was that was cut with them, and i know bertha milliard was not there when the deal was cut. >> will the senator yield for one more question? i'll yield for one more. >> does the senator know that the so-called deal was that where as medpac and the administration and the house wanted to make drastic cuts to the home health care that we went to the home health care industry, worked with them, and took two of their major suggestions about fraud and abuse and also outliers and we modified so that the home health industry felt this was reasonable? does the senator know this was -- this understa

among the republican senators. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: before senator mccain begins, i'd like to, if i may, take a moment just to establish where we are today, what happened yesterday, and as a lead-in to what he's about to discuss. yesterday senator mccain offered an amendment on the floor of the senate that would do two things. it would send back to the finance committee this, the democratic health care bill, which is the 2,000-page bill right here. and it would say to them, one, take out the cuts in medicare. and, two, any savings in medicare must go to make medicare more solvent. that was the mccain amendment. that was defeated. 58 democrats said yes to the cuts in medicare. they said no to using -- they said yes to using the money that comes from these cuts to create a new entitlement program. 40 republicans said no, we don't want to do that, and two democrats joined in that as well. so yesterday we made it clear that the central core of this bill inclu

the senate will pass the bill, this is it.y of us have been doing this for a year and this is a momentous occasion great host: is this as momentous as november 7 in the house? guest: this is bigger. this has been about the struggle to get to 60, the dealmaking, finding the balance between the conservatives and liberals and the democratic caucus searching for a long time for a republican but that they were never able to get and are certainly not going to get this morning. host: vice president joe biden is arriving. he will be presiding. you can see his motorcade arriving on capitol hill. go ahead and finish as we watch him a ride. guest: they are bringing him in for this big boat and the rare case of a tie, the vice- president who will be presiding, and cast the deciding vote that would give 101 votes in the senate and he would be number 51. i don't think we are expecting any protest votes at this point from the liberal democrats. there was discussion that the liberal democrats or conservative democrats would cast a protest vot

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i herebyoint the honorable roland w. burris, a senator from the state of illinois, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, president pro tempore. mr. reid: snrp. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized ment. mr. reid: following leader remarks the senate will resume consideration of the health reform legislation. following the leader remarks the time until 12:30 will be for debate only. the majority will control the first half of the time that's allotted until 12:30. the republicans will control the next half. the remaining time will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. the senate will recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons. there are two amendments now pending. one is the nelson of nebraska amendment of the other is the mccain amendment, motion to commit. senators should expect votes after the recess in relation to the pending amendments. should i say, amendment and motion. mr. pre

the senate got it wrong. and, mr. president, i intend to offer an amendment to take out this tax and replace it with a progressive tax similar to what exists in the house. let me conclude, mr. president, by simply saying this: i understand that the leadership wants to move this bill forward as quickly as possible. i understand that. but in my view, we have got a lot of work in front of us to improve this plan, among many other things, many other things. and i know many members have different ideas. at the very least, states in this country, individual states, if they show choose, should be able to develop a single-payer plan for their states, because at the end of the day, in my view, the only way we are going to provide comprehensive, cost-effective universal care is through a single-payer. i know some people are saying well, we're dealing with health care, we're not going to be back for a long time. if this bill would pass tomorrow, trust me, we will be back in a few years because health care costs are going to conti

coburn: i thank the senator. the first comment i would have is relying on what a wall street analyst says today. they have about this much credibility in this country today. look at the economic situation we find ourselves in because of what wall street analysts have said. that's the first point i would make. the second point is the majority whip yesterday said we should not cut medicare -- we should cut medicare advantage because of the 14%. senator dodd recently went after the patients choice act because we actually make it be competitively bid without any reduction in benefits. your bill for every medicare advantage cuts 50% of the benefits out. it cuts the benefits. and so the difference is -- and i agree with the majority whip. we do need to have the savings in medicare advantage. but the way you get that is through competitively bidding it, at the same time maintaining the requirements for the benefits that are offered. there's a big difference in those two. ours ends up being pure savings to save medicare.

available under the senate rules. i presume that all senators know the senate rules already. so i've decided that letter to meet leaves the impression that senator would like to urge senators to use some of those delaying tactics stated in that memo. but i urge a more cooperative course. out of courtesy to other senators i urge my colleagues to allow us to reach unanimous consent agreements to order the the voting of future amendments in a more timely fashion. that's simply the only way that we can ensure that more colleagues would have the time and opportunity to offer and debate or amendment. i think all senators. madam president, a couple requests. first i that senator harkin could make his forum. contents that stacey sacks detail leave the senate health committee. a majority health office granted for privileges for hh 3590. >> without projection. >> i ask consent that the order of december to be modified to delete all after the work table. >> without objection. smack i now ask consent that from 2:00 to 2:45 p. divi

the only senator who did not vote was the kentucky senator. despite the holiday, negotiators will begin working by phone at next week on a compromise between the house and senate version of the health-care overhaul. >> christmas day, a look ahead at 2010 politics, including republican congressman and nbc david gregory. buzz aldrin and fellow astronauts on the legacy of apollo levin, a discussion of the role of muslims in america and the world. later, a former c.i.a. intelligence officer on u.s. strategy against al qaeda in afghanistan. starting at 8:00, remembering the lives of william f. buckley jr. and senator ted kennedy. >> this christmas holiday, we have three days of the tv on c- span2. beginning friday morning at 8:00, books on history, politics, and public affairs. you'll see sarah palin on her recent book to work and you'll hear about a biography on supreme court justice scalia. tracy kidder from the miami book festival is also included. you can get a full schedule at booktv.org. >> an event now with former congressional staffer and sc

hutchison: the reason i mentioned senator kennedy is because he was the leading liberal in the senate at the time and yet he agreed to that language. the federal employee health benefit package, the following language appears in the financial services and general government appropriations act for fiscal year 2009: section 613. no funds appropriated by this act shall be available to pay for an abortion or the administrative expenses in connection with any health plan under the federal employees health benefits program which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions. section 614. the provisions of section 613 shall not apply where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest. mrs. hutchison: isn't that the same as the language of the nelson-hatch-casey amendment? mr. hatch: you're right. let me read that language for you. in general, no funds authorized or appropriated by this act or an amendment made by this act may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the cost of any hea

from louisiana and the distinguished senator from nebraska and, of course, the distinguished senators from kansas and -- and montana -- not montana but south dakota, who are here on the floor and participating in this. i believe we have until 12:27. so i'm going to relistening wish the floor and leave it up -- relinquish the floor and leave it up to you. a senator: i want to put a fine point on something that was said by the senator from pennsylvania about the use of medicaid funds in the states. there are a number of states that do provide programs that have abortion funding, but i think there is a very clear distinction that needs to be made in medicaid funds which are matching funds, and none of those funds can be used to fund abortions. and you said that in response to his question, but i think that point needs to be made very clear because the senator from pennsylvania was implying that somehow since states had created programs that fund abortions and since medicaid is a federal-state program, that somehow those two are being mixed and that this idea that because we're -- they're

the senator from montana. mr. baucus: i'd like to ask my friend from arizona is it not true that the last statement from the c.b.o. on the degree to which this underlying legislation does or does not reduce the deficit, stated that the legislation reduced the deficit by $132 billion. that is the last statement from c.b.o. ever addressing the deficit and also stating the second decade, the deficit will be reduced between $630 billion or $1.3 trillion. isn't that true that's the last statement from c.b.o. addressing the question. in fact, concluded it decrease the deficit, is that not true? mr. kyl: madam president, i don't know the document that my friend is referring to. i think that the document dated december 23 today is -- mr. baucus: it would be one a day or two ago. is the c.b.o. letter commenting on the modification? mr. kyl: and, i don't know. but my point is this. that the document released today in order to clarify the situation, again, said the key point is that you can't do both. the government only gets

the senate will come to order. the senate will come to order. please remove conversations off the floor. mrs. hutchison: mr. president, parliamentary inquiry? are the next three votes ten-minute votes? the presiding officer: the senator from texas is correct. the next three votes are ten-minute votes. mrs. hutchison: thank you. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, there are two minutes equally divided. who yields time? the senate will come to order. under the previous order, there are two minutes equally divided. who yields time? mr. dodd: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. dodd: mr. president, i urge my colleagues to support the class act and to vote against the, i believe it is the thune amendment which would strike the class act from the bill. as you heard, i hope, this afternoon, this bill is totally voluntary. there is no requirement by employers or employees to be involved in this. this is a very creative idea of using individuals' money to co

not just in the senate. they want to make every finite decision for the 700,000 or 800,000 peoplee people who live. mr. demint: will the senator yield for a question? mr. durbin: not at this time. i will tell you this, the people who live here are tax-paying citizens of the united states. they pay their taxes, they vote for president, they send their young men and women off to war, just like every state in the union. and i think they are entitled to some of the basic rights we enjoy in each of our own states. i also want to say a word about the needle exchange program. i get nervous around needles. i don't like to run into the doctor and say, give me another shot. and most people feel the same way. so taking a n issue like this on is not a lot of town start with. why are we -- so taking on an issue like this is not a lot of fun to start with. so why are we talking about needle exchange program in the district of columbia? for one simple reason -- the aids infection rate in the district of columbia, washington

alexander: the senator from idaho is here. e both had the experience of being governors, as did the presiding officer in her state of new hampshire. but we were talking the other day -- and i hope you don't mind me repeating that. i worked with the democratic legislature the whole time i was governor, but what -- what we always did on anything important was we sat down together, we had our different positions, we fought during elections, but we we -- we worked things out, and we didn't go forward unless we found a way to agree. and that -- that meant i usually didn't get my way. i got some of my way, but i had to take into account that someone else -- in this case, the democratic legislature in tennessee -- might have a different idea. sometimes it was a better idea. and i would ask the senator from idaho, we talk a lot about bipartisanship around here, but the reason for bipartisanship is that these big bills are tough bills. we're expected to make difficult decisions. are we going to reduce the growth of medicare, are we goin

aide in the senate. i can remember president johnson, a democrat; everett dirksen, the republican leader, dealing with the housing construction in 1968. a very controversial bill. how did they deal with it? the democratic leader had the bill written in the office of the democratic leader with staffers marching in and out. people looked to washington and said the republicans and the democratic think it is important. in the end they voted for cloture and in the end they got the bill. mr. mcconnell: my friend from tennessee is entirely correct. right before we got here in 1964 and 1956, the democrats -- 1965, the democrats had an overwhelming majority. the voting rights bill of 1965 passed on an overwhelming bipartisan basis. the leader of the republicans, everett dirken was involved in that. the republicans supported it on a percentage basis -- the presiding officer: minority time has expired. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent for one more minute. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. mcconne

that the senate is not in order. >> please state your conversations off the floor. >> the senator from montana. >> we went to the extra mile i reached out to my good friend the ranking member of the finance committee and to the ranking republican member of the health committee. we sought to craft to build to appeal to the broad middle. we sought to craft a bill that could win the support of republicans and democrats alike. we met, a group of six, three democrats and republicans come amid before the 30 times we met and encouraged by the president to do so but our group met with the president several times and he encouraged us to keep pursuing negotiations hoping to get bipartisan agreement. we did not reached an agreement but the leadership on the other side of the aisle went to great lengths to stop us from doing so her even though we did not reach a formal agreement, we came very close. the principles we discuss our very much the principles upon which the finance committee bill to the bill. they are reflected in the bill before us today. i might say actually the work began much earlie

the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, the mccain motion to commit on medicare advantage would keep overpayments in the medicare advantage program, keep them, even though the medicare advisory commission recommends they be eliminated. the mccain motion to commit is a tax -- it is a tax on all seniors to maintain the overpayments to private insurance companies and require beneficiaries to pay higher part-d premiums. that's the tax. the average couple pays today $90 per year just so that insurers can reap greater profits under medicare. a $90 tax per year. the mccain amendment is a raid on the medicare trust fund. medicare advantage overpayments take 18 month months off the lif the part-a fund. there's no evidence of greater quality of care. in most cases it is the opposite. medpac told the congress this year that only some medicare advantage plans are high quality. the rest are not. medpac find that only half the beneficiaries nationwide have access to a plan that -- the presiding officer: the senators's time has

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable mark udall, a senator from the state of colorado, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the time until 1:00 a.m. will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority leader controlling the final ten minutes prior to 1:00 a.m. and the republican leader controlling the ten minutes immediately prior. mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i intend to take ten minutes of the republican time. will you please let me know when one minute remains. the presiding officer: the senator will be notified. mr. alexander: i thank you, mr. president. mr. president, there may be a number of americans who are switching over from the minnesota v. carolina football game and they may be wondering what in the world is the united states senate doing coming into session at midn

3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable roland burris, a senator from the state of illinois, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, presidet pro tempore. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, following leader remarks the senate will resume consideration of the conference report to aaccompany h.r. 8288, with the time until 9:30 a.m. equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. at 9:30 a.m. the senate will proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the conference report under an agreement last night the vote on adoption of the conference report will occur tomorrow, sunday, december 13. mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, does the clerk need to report the bill? the presiding officer: under the previous order the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order the senate will resume consideration of the conference report to accompany 3288, which the clerk will report. the clerk: conference

i want to give the senator from oklahoma an opportunity to explain it, because the simple reality is that i don't think we should be wishing misfortune on any of our senate colleagues on either side of the aisle. i don't know if this was an innocent statement or something that he now wants to clarify, but as stated, it troubles me. it troubles me because i'm afraid it reflects the situation we find ourselves in too often in the united states senate, where people are literally invoking god's name and prayer for political purposes in -- in this case to wish misfortune on one of our colleagues who wouldn't be able to make our 1:00 a.m. scheduled roll call. i don't wish misfortune on any of my colleagues. will baucus: mr. my colleague yield on the that point? mr. durbin: i would be happy to. mr. baucus: i want ask my colleague, who knows senate procedures so well, why are we having a 1:00 a.m. vote anyway? isn't it possible it could be a different time? mr. durbin: i thank the senator from montana, because he's exactly right. under the usual business of the senate, we agree that we'll do

and i would just say -- just thank the senator from ohio and i would say this is one part of the answer. but denying victims a day in court i don't think brings justice to this country or fairness, and i know that senator kennedy would be saying the same thing if he were here today. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: the senator from nevada. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. mr. ensign: mr. president -- madam president, excuse me. it's a football day. i apologize. probably had that kind of male thinking going on. madam president, there's an urban myth that people like to talk about when they're discussing health care reform. it's like one of those rumors that runs rampant on the internet. nobody knows where it started but you're sure it must be true. the story about canadian health care. you know, everyone there is covered and they have a progressive health care system that we should somehow copy. well, it's time to bust this myth and tell the american people what a government-run health care system like canada would mean for

to the floor of the u.s. senate, now, the chaplain is reciting a prayer for this sunday session as the senators begin day seven of health care debate. labors. help them also to take solace in the fact that they are ultimately accountable to you, we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c, december 6, 2009. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby piept the honorable mark begich, a senator from the state of alaska, to perform the duties of the chair. signed richard c. byrd, president pro tempore. mr. durbin: the time until 3:15 p.m. will be equally divided. the majority will control the first hour. the re

they say -- "the senate bill fails small business." the u.s. chamber of commerce expresses -- quote -- "u.s. chamber expresses disappointment with senate health bill." the national association of wholesaler distributors, the wholesaler distributors say no to the reid health bill. the small business entrepreneurship council, "small business group says reid health bill more of the same. more taxes, mandates, big spending, and nothing to help lower health insurance costs." the associated builders and contractors, great employers in this country -- "a.b.c. critical of the democratic senate health care bill." the national association of manufacturers -- "n.a.m. says congress is taking health care reform in the wrong direction." the international franchise association -- "franchise businesses oppose senate health care reform efforts." there is a better way to handle health care reform. for months i have been pushing a fiscally responsible step by step proposal that recognizes our current need for spending restraint while starting us on a path to susta

i have a comment from the senator. rich republicans not though and speaking what the american people want about insurance. there's a whole lot of poor people that need insurance desperately. you all are not in contact evidently with the poor people of this country. i worked for 39 years and seven months. i am retired. i paid in my dues. and i have insurance from my job and i have medicare and, medicare a and b. but there is people that don't even have it. i'm willing to pay whatever taxes i can under my under $55,000 a year income to supplement people from this country. >> host: senator, what about provisions in this bill and house bill would expand medicaid to more families? >> guest: the expansion of medicaid to include more people will give coverage to the people the debate is will they get health care? if they get medicaid card, we know medicaid reimburses doctors and hospitals so poorly, half of the doctors in the country don't take patients on medicaid. that continues to be a problem whether they have medicaid car

i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. bennett: mr. president, last night i held a telephone town hall meeting. as usual, with those we get over 10,000 people that end up on the telephone town hall talking to us. i said this is a meeting that's open to any subject you can talk about. overwhelmingly, they all wanted to talk about health care. and the -- i had one call of a fellow that said he liked this health care bill. he was a small businessman. he said this will help me as a small business man. why are you opposed it? i said i have been a small business man and i would like to point out that you that nfib, the organization that helps small business is opposed to it, and i went through some of the reasons. and then i told him of other small business or medium sized businessmen in utah who have said to me if this bill passes, we are out of here. we could do our manufacturing overseas. we could send our product to south america and have it made there. we have stayed in utah more out of patriotism than money, but if this bil

the senate is adjourned. we talked with a capitol hill reporter about the continuing debate on health care. >> alex wayne is with congressional quarterly, the senate is continuing deliberations on health care, how is the work going? >> well, it's agonizingly slow. they've been talking for a week about this bill and haven't voted on any amendments of substance, they voted on four amendments today, two of them failed into past but the to the past really wouldn't do anything to the bill. >> anything significant about them? >> there was one that drew some democratic support to, they stripped and a pretty important provision of the bill. part of the bill would create long-term care program, it would give people a cash benefits if they become disabled and would require you to paint a monthly premium for that benefit to. a lot of republicans have criticized his program call that the class act because they think it will become a bigger drain on the treasury and is one more entitlement we don't need so a couple democra

let me -- during the finance committee markup, the senator from florida, the senior senator from florida advocated in favor of treating certain medicare advantage enrollees in florida better than the rest of american seniors under medicare advantage. let me read from two articles written at the time of the senate finance committee's deliberation. "the new york times": "senator tries to allay fears on health overall." september 24, 2009. and i quote from the article: "mr. nelson, a democrat, has a big problem. the bill taken up this week by the committee would cut medicare payments to insurance companies that care for more than ten million older americans, including nearly one million in florida. the program known as medicare advantage is popular because it offers extra benefits including vision and dental care and even in some cases membership in health clubs or fitness centers. quote, it would be intolerable to ask senior citizens to give up substantial health benefits they are enjoying under medicare, said mr. nelson, who has been deluged with calls and complaints from constituents. qu

has done anything to curb the health care insurance industry, was the senator in the senate when senator kennedy fought for weeks and months for the patients' bill of rights? was the senator here then? was he engaged in that debate? senator kennedy and i fought for the patients' bill of rights, and the majority on that side of the aisle opposed it. so the fact is that there have been efforts on my part to curb the abuses of the health insurance industry by sponsorship of the patients' bill of rights. second of all, during the campaign, yes, i said that we could reduce and eliminate waste, fraud, and spending in the -- fraud, abuse and waste in spending, and i said it because of senator coburn's patient choice act, which could save $1 trillion from the states in medicaid savings, $400 billion over the next ten years in medicare savings. i wish that the senator from illinois would examine the patients choice act as proposed by the senator from oklahoma. maybe we would learn something. the senator from oklahoma's bill wants to preserve the best quality health care in america and not elimina

the senate returns at 9:30. atch live coverage on c-span2. >> now white house budget director peter orszag talk to reporters about the cost of the house and senate health care legislation. from the national press club, this is about one hour. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning and welcome. i am susan dentzer, editor and chief of their affairs and we are happy to be sponsoring this breakfast this morning. we inherited this breakfast from the so-called brosda health breakfast reporter's group, and named in honor of jerry brosda hill unfortunately left's earlier this year having passed away. i thought it would be appropriate, since jerry started his breakfast, largely because believe it or not once upon a time health policy was the real backwater issue and it never came up in the major news conferences in washington and jerry that thought that was a darned shame. also we found in a rare moments when health policy did serve as as a major issue at say the sperling breakfast he couldn't get in because he was jus

the pending legislation. and senator sessions specifically was asking him questions and he readily acknowledged that the legislation only applied -- didn't apply to white people. that it only applied to what he called traditionally discriminated people. so, consequently, what you have is the hrlaw applies to the wealthiest jewish people community in the country and most violent, west the african-american country. host: do you have a response? guest: first of all i'm very sorry to hear what happened to you. nothing that should happen to someone. two points quickly and i don't know the details of the case or what the police response was. first, nobody can prosecute anything as a hate crime unless you find the perspetratorperpet. why the police were not able to i don't know. that is the first issue, can they find the people they believe did it. if so, then they can consider whether it is a hate crime. the hate crime issue i'm not an attorney, my understanding is that hate crimes can be committed against white people as well

3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable mark udal, a senator from the of colorado, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, presidet pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is read served. under the previous order the senate will resoup consideration of the conference report to accompany h.r. 3288, the clerk will report. the clerk: conference report to accompany h.r. 3288, an act making for housing and urban development and so forth and for other purposes much -- purposes. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: mr. president -- if the senator from iowa will -- the presiding officer: the time until 2:00 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled between the leaders or designees. the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: parliamentary inquiry. how much time will i be recognized for now. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa will be recognized for 13 minutes. mr. harkin: mr. president, i don't intend to use it more, if others on my side are seeking it. but, mr. president, toda

she's in the senate gallery, the seating that wraps around the senate chamber there. se of you that have been in that room before. flint, michigan, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to make a couple comments. i think the bottom line is just like they were saying, $638 billion for war. in the essence of any war that ultimately takes lives. we are trying to insure people who don't have health care. and i guess the last time, republicans were in office. they had all three, the white house, senate, and congress, and they did nothing. so all these bright ideas they have now and all the objections, they had more than ample fine to rectify this disastrous situation in this country and they did nothing. the republican party is nothing but a party of gimmicks. if there was a move to criticize the way obama-believe me, republicans would get onboard. host: "the washington post" is endorsing the senate's legislation but says as the bill moves forward, in conference commosheations -- negotiations with the house, congress should keep provisions to hel

the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i yield myself such time as i might consume from this side. i listened to the distinguished majority whip, and i don't know how many times we on this side have to tell him that if they want to read republican bills, here's an opportunity to come and read them. so they do exist, and they've existed for a long time going back to some of their entries into the senate in the spring. another thing that i heard was that republicans have no ideas taking on the insurance companies. i would refer him to the coburn-burr bill that does away with the discrimination that insurance companies can't deny health insurance because of preexisting conditions. i heard him say that we're newfound supporters of medicare. well, let me suggest to him that when we learned from the complaints of his party four years ago when they were berating the fact that we wanted to take $10 billion out of medicare and how that was ruining medicare, well, we're faced now with $464 billion out of medicare, and so we

i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. nett: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to proceed as if in morning business for not to exceed ten minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennett: mr. president in, this morning's "washington post," we have once again an outstanding article by robert samuelson. this one entitled "health care nation: medical spending threatens everything else." mr. samuelson has been critical of republicans, and he is in this article. he's been critical of democrats, and he is in this article. but he makes some points that i think are worth bringing to our attention. the primary one being that we are not focusing on the right thing, which is making some kind of attempt to turn the cost curve down using the budgetary doublespeak, with respect to health care. let me quote a few comments from mr. samuelson's presentation. he says first, "the most obvious characteristic of health spending is that government can't control it." a very true statement which i will show in

the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: madam president, i ask unanimous consent i would be able to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, we live in a world that is being poisoned by greenhouse gases of our own making. if we do not act, we face irreversible, catastrophic climate change. my grandchildren face a world where there will be not enough food, water or fuel, a world that is less diverse, less beautiful, less secure. as i speak today, we are witnessing a critical moment in our fight against global warmi warming, both at home and abroad. this past monday, the environmental protection agency acted by releasing its final determination that greenhouse gases threaten the public health and welfare of the american people. this was an action required by law and ordered by the supreme court. this finding will require e.p.a. to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the clean air act. monday's endangerment finding is a critical step in our country's eff