stabenow: i see the distinguished senator from north dakota on the floor. this is senator heitkamp's first farm bill we are ready to vote on. she has been an extraordinary voice, really hit the ground running. we are really proud of her, and it's my pleasure to yield her five minutes. ms. heitkamp: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. ms. heitkamp: i would first like to thank the incredible leadership of the great senator from the state of michigan. i met her over a year ago and knew that she was a force to be reckoned with, not only because she has red hair but because she is someone who understands that to move something forward, we need to have compromise and we need to understand that this is a farm bill that represents the interests of the entire country, not just the interest of maybe the great plains states or the southern states or even our urban areas that care desperately about nutrition, but that we need to forge a bill that can pass both chambers and that can keep our country moving. the fact of the matter is, ma

floor of the senate. and with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. barrasso: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor today to talk about the advise and consent duties of the united states senate. as you know, our constitution gives the senate the responsibility to advise the president on high-level executive positions and judgeships. the senate is also asked to consent on those appointments to ensure that only those who are worthy of the public's trust hold positions of such great power. the confirmation process is a way to protect the american people from nominees who simply aren't up to the job or to the times that we're in as a country. it's also an important

, change the rules of the senate by breaking the rules of the senate. in other words, it's the intimidation, the threat that's been hanging over the senate as an institution for the last few months that needs to come to an end. and so i believe that is why the senator from tennessee and myself would like the majority leader to answer the question: do you intend to keep your word? senators shouldn't have to walk on egg shells around here afraid to exercise the rights that they have under the rules of the senate. and there's no question that all senators have a lot of power in this body. this power operates on unanimous consent. that means if any one of the 100 want to deny that, it makes it hard. that's the way the senate's been for a very long time. i want the culture of intimidation by the majority here in the senate to come to an end. and the way it can end is for the majority leader to say my word is good. and we quit having this culture of intimidation hanging over the senate for the next year and a half. mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding o

in the united states senate. with that, mr. president, and for what will likely be the final time, i yield the floor. >> mr. president -- >> mr. president? mr. president? mr. president? >> the majority leader. >> mr. president, i will be brief. i appreciate very much the remarks of senator cowan. the only thing he said that i disagree with is no one had a chance to vote on him to get here. there was one big vote that was very important. a man by the name of deval patrick. and once he made that decision, you were our senator as long -- as well as you were the senator of massachusetts. mr. president, i, of course, know deval patrick. we all saw him at the convention giving his brilliant speech. and he was swarmed with people giving him advice as to who he should select to replace senator kerry. but he called me and said don't worry about it, i'm going to select the best person from the state of massachusetts to represent senator kerry for the be interim. and he was right. and i have told governor patrick on the tele

the senate majority leader harry reid is so frustrated with senate republicans to locking presidential nominations that he has threatening to use the nucular option that would change the rules for the confirmation process there are over one hundred nominees waiting to be confirmed in the senate using the sixty vote filibuster senate republicans are stalling at several top government positions the bipartisan policy center it just released their analysis of the nominations process for financial regulator is along with launching and nominations tracker justin shard in the senior policy analyst at the center is here to discuss. thanks for joining us q. can you tell us about the analysis that the center has done with the nominations process for financial regulators and what are some of the major conclusions so we wanted to inject some new data into a debate about what the proper regulatory structure is for these agencies and obviously when dodd frank passed everybody thought there needed to be reform but what was the best way to do it so we want to do we wanted to find out how the structure

the roll. quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i'd ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i first want to say to you how wonderful it's been to serve with you in the united states senate and as you take your leave to go back to the real world in massachusetts, we all wish you well and we thank you for everything that you've done when you've been here, especially the good cheer that you brought to our caucus. so thank you very much. and in the vein of thank yous i wanted to come down after this historic day passing this historic bill to say some thank yous. i already thanked my colleagues in the gang of eight, and other senators that worked so hard on this bill, so there will be time to do that on another occasion. but sometimes people ask -- have asked me during the course of my checkered career how did you get to do this and why did they let you do this and how did somebody with no apparent skill or aptitude for public educa

the senator from new york. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. warner: mr. president, i'm disappointed that the senator from iowa didn't accept the majority leader's proposal to let us finish this bill in a more orderly process, but i -- i have watched this debate and want to add my voice to those who have come out and complimented the enormously good work, bipartisan work that the gang of eight has performed in their efforts to forge a bipartisan compromise on an issue that is of rashable importance to this country, to our economic growth, to our security and quite honestly to the character of our country. i look forward to voting in favor of this legislation. i will not recap all of the components and the path of how we got here, but suffice it to say that this -- this critically important piece of legislation fixes our broken immigration system, ensures adequate and some would say, i would even say undue border security, allows part of those 11 million undocumented individuals to earn their path to

the senator from arkansas. mr. pryor: mr. president, this is amendment 1298. it is the pryor-johanns amendment. i think the good news here is we have agreed to a voice voavment but what this does is it requires the department of homeland security, as they're doing their hiring to beef up the border, to hire veterans of our armed services. this is really a win-win all the way around. our vets have, as we know, a higher unemployment rate. but also they happen to be the best-trained, most disciplined. they have that can-do spirit. and they make great employees, as many of us know. we also know that our veterans know how to complete a mission. with that, i'd like to yield the floor to senator johanns. mr. johanns: mr. president, i thank senator pryor for bringing this amendment forward. i very proudly support it and concur. it can be voice voted. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: is there anyone who expresses opposition? the senator from arkansas. mr. pryor: inned that we're able to dispose of this amendm

-- support in the senate. like to talk about one more issue that's vitally important to our country's middle class. we just focused on some of the business issues, whether it is reducing red tape, make being sure that we bring our debt down in a reasonable way, or whether it is simply about looking at industry by industry, what we can do to make sure our market share increases in america. we also have the issue of america's workers. what i'm here today to talk about is something vitally important to our country's middle class, and that is moving forward with the president's nominations for the national labor relations board so it can get back to work protecting the rights of working americans and employers. over the course of the last few months the president has nominated a full slate of five very qualified people to serve on the nlrb. three democrats and two republicans, all of whom have sterling credentials and a track record of focusing on results and working across the aisle. the first two nominees were n

and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: mr. president, i rise today to express great concern about the announcement regarding plans to drastically reduce the u.s. nuclear deterrent by over one-third. the strategic basis for this reduction is entirely unclear. the president must provide members of congress additional information on the basis and the implications of this announcement. general chilton, then commander of u.s. strategic command, testified before the senate foreign relations committee in 2010. he said, the new start treaty gave the united states exactly what is needed to achieve its national security objectives. given the assessments of our commanders, i am highly skeptical and gravely concerned about such dramatic reductions in a world of increasing danger and proliferating threats. regardless about how one feels about these particular force levels, i believe there is broad concern about any unilateral reductions in u.s. nuclear forces. two and a half years ago, after lengthy deliberation and conten

i thank the senator. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up mccain amendment 956, and i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. ms. landrieu: i object. the presiding officer: is there objection? ms. landrieu: i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. ms. landrieu: reserving the right to object -- and i have some difficulty with the senator's amendment that he wants to discuss -- but until -- i've been trying to get a vote on amendment 1113, that one of the members from the other side is holding up on, on flood insurance. until we get things worked out, i hope the senator from arizona will appreciate the predicament we're in. i am happy for the senator to discuss his amendment. but to call up an amendment to have any kind of vote on the amendment, i would have to object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. mccain: mr. president, i appreciate the senator from louisiana allowing me to discuss my amendment. i think i'

i have led the effort in the senate. we are trying to change the immigration laws to encourage the phds on the stem side and trying to create these is for startup entrepreneurs. i am an ag state senator. it is clearly there. at the moment, they are focused on a farm bill. it is something that i think there is an open-minded to. the issue for me is i think i have to be convinced that anything we passed does not encourage more illegal behavior. i am not convinced yet. i also would say my focus in my office and me has been much more on the farm bill. we know the bill has come out of the. there are details. e are studying them. senator rubio has said there will be significant changes on the floor if this bill is to pass the senate. >> you looked at the polling numbers after 2012. if the democrats and republicans fail to reach an agreement, which party would that hurt the most? >> i have had this fear that there may be democrat strategist who decide that if we can keep immigration reform from passing, if we can change the word

: will the senator yield? mr. coats: crashing into a field in pennsylvania and killing thousands of americans. a senator: will the senator yield? the presiding officer: under the order morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations which the clerk will report. mr. coats: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent i have just two more minutes to wrap up this statement. the presiding officer: is there objection? hearing none. mr. coats: thank you, mr. president. what i've just explained is why these programs exist. they connect the dots and successfully thwarted dozens of terrorist attacks. they are some of the most effective tools available to protect our country from terrorist organizations like al qaeda. and that is why i find it so troubling and, frankly, irresponsible for the media and, frankly, others to distort the nature of these counterterrorism programs. these programs are legal, constitutional, and utilized only under the

now live to the senate floor on c-span2. who in your infinite wisdom, ordained that we might live our lives within the narrow boundaries of time and circumstances, we honor your name. today, supply our senators with the strength they need to serve you. help them to seize the opportunities to strengthen our nation bringing deliverance to captives and letting the oppressed go free. keep them from any temptation that would prevent them from glorifying you. send your spirit into their minds and illuminate their understanding with insight and discernment. we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: 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. matt the majority. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following any leader remarks, the senate will resume consideration of the immigration bill. filing deadline for

change the rules of the senate. we did that with the two rules changes earlier this year, thereby confirming again that's the way you change the rules of the senate. but the majority leader, despite of having given his word -- not once but twice -- continues to suggest that that may not be a word that's going to be kept and has continued to flirt openly with employing what is called the nuclear option. now, my party, when it was in the majority some time ago -- eight or nine years ago -- flirted with it as well but good sense prevailed and we moved backward. and we moved into a position where we are today, which is that it takes 60 votes when you have a determined minority to get an outcome. now the threat has related to nominations and nominations only, as if somehow breaking the rules of the senate to change the rules of the senate would be confined to nominations in the future. the way that would be done, of course, is the parliamentarian would say that it was a violation of the senate rules to change the rules th

the roll. quorum call: a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. madam president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you. and i also ask unanimous consent that the senator from ohio, senator brown, have the opportunity to speak following me for up to ten minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you. i ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. madam president, i come to the floor today as millions of students in high school and colleges across the country have recently graduated. i had an opportunity to attend a number of commencements across wyoming, to speak to a number of students who are graduating, and i note that president obama has also been out giving graduation speeches this year. at ohio state university, the president criticized those of us who warn that government doesn't always have the best answer. the pre

now live to the senate. we welce feller, director for the upper midwest merkos-lubavitch house in st. paul, minnesota, who will lead the senate in prayer. the guest chaplain: almighty god, i evoke your blessing today on this august body, the united states senate. in their divinely inspired wisdom, the founding fathers of our blessed country, the united states of america, established a policy of separation of church and state. however, it was never their intention to separate our country from you, sovereign ruler of all mankind. hence, both legislative bodies of our blessed country begin their daily sessions invoking your divine presence and guidance in their legislation. hence, in our pledge of allegiance we declare "one nation under god," on our currency is printed "in god we trust," and on the wall of this very senate hall in which we invoke your blessings is engraved in bold letters, "in god we trust." grant, almighty god, that the senators realize that in legislating just laws they are fulfilling one of t

i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i want to start by thanking the able senator from arizona for his statement and for his leadership, for his incredible work on this bill. and i -- and i want to start by thanking all my colleagues that have been in this so-called gang of eight, both democrats and republicans. chuck schumer and dick durbin and bob menendez on the democratic side. but today i especially want to thank the republican members of this group, led by john mccai mccain, lindsey graham, and jeff flake, marco rubio. for their extraordinary leadership. for reasons that everybody in this chamber understands, their willingness to be at the table and to stay at the table was an act of leadership unlike any other that i've seen in this chamber in the four years that i've served here. we would never be here today voting to fix our broken immigration system were it not for them. and so on behalf of the people i represent in colorado, thank y you. for me, this all started in colorado bec

the senator is recognized. mr. sessions: the congressional budget office analysis of the gang of eight immigration bill confirms in dramatic fashion our most significant concerns about the bill. indeed, i would say that the history of the movement of this bill through the senate, this is the most dramatic event yet. combaiskally, it -- basically, it says these things in explicit phrases after careful analysis. number one, it will reduce the wages of american citizens. number two, it will increase unemployment in america. number three, it will reduce g.d.p. per capita in america, the growth in our economy will be reduced by the passage of this bill. and it will -- and it concludes that illegality will not be stopped but only reduced by 25%. so we're talking about a bill that's supposed to be the toughest ever that's going to promote economic growth in america, a bill that's supposed to make us economically stronger and be a bill that ends illegality in the future. and it just doesn't do that. as i've read the bill, i

of the senate. so the minority -- and i suspect a reasonable number of the majority -- are waiting to find out whether the majority leader intends to keep his word. your word is the currency of the realm here in the senate. his word has been given. we expect it to be kept. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 744, which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 80, s. 744, are a bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes. the presiding officer: yoshed -- under the previous order, the time until 11:30 a.m. will be equally divided between the two managers or their designees. mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i have expressed my frustration and more often in the last weeks about the lack of progress on getting votes. we have been on this bil

i'd blow out of the senate. en minutes to make the train, and i sometimes missed the train. one day i'm breaking my neck to get to the train. i am sprinting. if you ever take amtrak, now ask anybody when you hit washington station, do you know joe biden? i guarantee they'll tell you no, and tell you a story about my trying to make the train. i am like those old commercials, running for the airplane, jumping over chairs. i am carrying my bag, which seemed like my staff deliberately loaded down with weights to slow me down, and i swear to god, true story, i'd get up, conductor says, hey, joe, joe. hold up. don't worry. you're okay. we're holding it for lautenberg. >> joe biden really, really knows how to do that well. thanks for being with us tonight. now it is time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." have a great n

>> i would yield to the senator from texas. rir thank the senator. i honestly respect and value the work that the so-called gang of 8 has done on this legislation as well as the contributions made by my colleague from north dakota and from tennessee. i think they have moved this bill in a constructive direction to give people more confidence that we are actually serious about dealing with border security. but i want to ask them to distinguish if they will between the provision that they i know supported both of them, in my amendment, that was tabled earlier, which makes the progress from probationry status to green card contingent upon 100% situational awareness of the border and a 90% apprehension rate, which is defined as operational control. how does your amendment differ from that? my understanding just from -- and i know it hasn't been written yet or hasn't been completed yet. but my understanding is that senator schumer and the democrats would not agree to that. i know they object to it. senator schumer has been quite clear in his telling me tha

leadership in the senate. this won't be like the house oversight committees, but she could have some difficulty. she did get herself in some difficulty back in the '08 campaign by -- she thought it was off the record session, referring to hillary clinton, the rival of barack obama, as a monster and had to quit the campaign. then she came back and left the white house on maternity leave and then came back to the nfc and left again in february. so she's -- this is very interesting to see these two powerful women, both mothers, both working actively, you know, very close to the president and having very strong points of view. it's going to be fun. >> beyond just the administration, seeing condoleezza rice in the previous administration, seeing hillary clinton as this very, very consequential secretary of state, to see samantha power, michelle floernoy, susan rice, i feel like this is sort of somebody's going to write about this some day. probably going to be you. >> it is a good subject, because, boy, they are pow

of the senate. my friend, the majority leader, has made that commitment on two occasions. he made it in january of 2011 for the next two congresses -- we're in the second congress now. at the beginning of this congress we had an extensive discussion about rules changes after which the vast majority of senate republicans supported two rules changes and two standing orders. and in return for those changes that we made, the majority leader committed once again that for this congress he would not pull the nuclear trigger, as we call it around here. use the nuclear option. in other words, turn the senate into the house. so the majority leader will be confronted with his promise, his commitment on a daily basis until we understand fully that he intends to keep his commitment to the senate and to the american people. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, leadership time is reserved. mr. leahy: i suggest the absence of a quorum and the time equally divided. the pr

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable william cowan, a senator from the commonwealth of massachusetts, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following the remarks of me and senator mcconnell the senate will be in morning business for an hour. republicans will control the first half. the majority the final half. following morning business the senate will resume consideration of the immigration bill. now, mr. president, we have in order a number of amendments that are now pending. and i would hope that the managers of this bill will work to get times set for these amendments, time agreements, and we'll work out a time to do these as quickly as we can. but we have to have an agreement to move forward on these amendments. and i would suggest i don't want and i don't think we should have to move to table any of the amendments or anything like that. i think we should be able to have

officer the senator from alabama. a senator: the senate's not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. mr. sessions: madam president, this is not a vote on the corker-hoeven amendment. it's a vote on a complete substitute of over a thousand pages that includes all aspects of the bill before us. it includes the amnesty, include the failed entry-exit visa. and if we vote for cloture tonight, we will be transferring complete control of the entire process of this immigration bill to the majority leader, harry reid. you can hear the whistle in the distance right now as the train is arriving to the station. if senator reid and corker and hoeven are able to cut off debate today, the next vote will come in about 30 hours on another substitute vote in 30 hours after that. senator reid has filled the tree. there will be no amendments allowed. mr. leahy: regular order. the presiding officer: the opponent's time has expired. mr. sessions: -- without the approval of the majority leader. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to

that's how the senate should work. their hard work and that of others have produced a bill that -- produced the bill that is before us. many senators have already spoken about what is in the bill, the billions of dollars for border security, the tough employment eligibility verification requirements, the pro-tourism policies and the path to citizenship. rather than cover that ground again, i want to talk about two problems with the bill that i hope can be fixed. first, the system designed for future immigration is unfair to women. and, second, the pathway to citizenship is unfair to immigrant taxpayers. the new merit-based point system for allocating visas to future immigrants is the first problem. simply put the point system inadvertently makes it harder for women than for men to come to this country. the new point system is based on an attractive economic idea but unfortunately one that clearly disadvantages women. the idea is if we want a stronger economy then we should give immigration preferences to people who hold

and the united states senate, voting on the landmark immigration bill. in the senate. 's a voice vote. you can hear them saying yes or no, aye or nay. i have heard a preponderance of yeses. the vote is being taken. it's moving quickly. we should have the final result maybe six to ten minutes from now. all that is needed is 51 votes in the senate to pass. that's going on on one side of the capitol. on the other side, has the treasury put democratic spin on otherwise? the chief congressional correspondent mike emmanuel. what's latest? >> the treasury's inspector general made a splash on capitol hill and wasn't here. he wrote a letter to the top democrat on the house ways and means committee, talking about the word, progressives being used in a sheet that irs screeners were using but concluded that progressive groups, liberal groups were not mistreated, writing, quote, we found no indication in these materials that progressive was a term used to refer cases for scrutiny for political campaign intervention. the chairman of the committee, dave camp, said conservative groups

>> we want to increase the number of republican senators. say that because i believe it is important for the country. this topicsted in not because i am a republican but because i believe the country needs a different direction. our goal is to make certain that we move in that direction. it would be great if we had more than 50 senators. you do that by reelecting the incumbents, the republicans that are out seem to be in excellent shape. no incumbent republican senator faces a significant challenge in being reelected. is primary responsibility to make sure that those republican senators are reelected. you work in open seats and try to make certain that republicans gain in the elections for which there is no incumbent. tore is a great opportunity defeat a number of democrat senators who are up in 2014. about the numbers and they worked in our favor. >> we will talk about some of those. >> there are a number of races where it seems that you have to have a good challenger to get those 51 seats in the senate. michigan,, iowa, minnesota, colorado.

the people of montana. he's a hardworking senator. he learned the value of hard work on a ranch outside helena, capital of the state of montana. from the time he was a boy, he was noted as being extremely smart. that's why he was able to learn -- i'm sorry. to obtain both his bachelor and law degree at one of the most prestigious universities of the world: stanford university. i've worked with him many years i've been here in the senate. i've worked with him when he was chairman of the environment and public works committee during the massive highway bill. he's been a member of the agricultural committee for many, many years. and his mark in this body, though, has been as a member of the finance committee. he's done many, many things. he was involved in the 1982 bill that was, reformed the tax code significantly, called bradley -- gephardt. but max baucus was in there working out things that he thought was important to montana and to the country. he became chairman of this very important committee. and he's been instrumental in develop

in the senate, 90% of the democratic senators agreed with 90% of the american people. the republicans did not even get 10%. the writing is on the wall. background checks will pass the united states senate, it is only a question of when. i want to be very clear, though. in order to be effective, the bill that passed the senate must include background checks and not a watered-down version of background checks. we are not going to let the forces of an extreme minority water down and damage the content of this bill. the force against this bill cannot hold out forever. we are close. there are conversations going on. they cannot stand in the way of 90% of the american people. so i say to each of you today, don't give up. we are not going to give up. the fight is right and is one that we are going to win. i will never forget the 26 deaths, but sadly, there have been thousands of others since then. the american people identify with what happened at that little elementary school in connecticut. is my pleasure to introduce --my friend. shoulder tostood shoulder with me and other

the senator from utah. mr. lee: reserving the right to object i'd like to explain briefly what the overall situation. we're not objecting to budget, we're not objecting to conference. we just want the debt limit left out. it's a separate issue what warrants its own debate. it's a simple request. no back-room deals on the debt limit. i'd like to focus on one particular argument we've heard from the other side. critics argue that conference committees are transparent and they don't involve back-room deals. if this were ever the case, today it is not. the purpose of conference committees is to reconcile differences in similar bills passed by the house and by the senate. it's not the only way but it is one way. in theory, conference committees are an open, accountable and trustworthy means of resolving bicameral differences. but in recent years, the conference process, like so much else in this town and in this chamber, has become constructed -- corrupted. today conference committees are another mechanism to exclude

legislation we seek to bring before the senate was the result of senators from both sides of the aisle who came together and made an agreement. what was initially a proposal for the so-called gang of eight became to the committee process the product of a group of 18. now let's have a product of a group of 100 representing all states in this country. amendments authored by 17 of those 18 members were adopted into the bill. 17 of the 18 members of the senate judiciary committee had amendments adopted into the bill. a bipartisan majority of more than two-thirds of the senate judiciary committee voted for the bill the senate is being called upon to consider. now, i'm honored to serve as both the chairman of the senate judiciary committee and the president pro tempore of the united states senate. as an office established in article 1, section 3 of the constitution of the united states. i have been privileged to serve the people of vermont for more than 45 years, the last 38 as their senator. but one thing i've learned many years ago was taught to me by the distinguished majority leader at t

the vice president: congratulations, senator. welcome to the united states senate. the vice president: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, i want to join the distinguished majority leader and the republican leader in welcoming my new colleague from the great state of new jersey, jeff chiesa, and his family to the united states senate. i look forward to working with him closely on the issues of importance to new jersey and to the nation. you've heard some of his exemplary milestones in his career. he is a career attorney and someone who has served in public service. certainly has the goafn's confidence, as is evidenced by the time that he spent with him at the u.s. attorney's office, in his transition the gone's transition, which he led as well as being his chief counsel and the attorney general for the state of new jersey, for which he has had some extraordinary opportunities to protect and promote the general well fair of the people of the state of new jersey. jeff's father was a chemical plant worker who died when he was eight years old. so h

let's see some legislation that can pass the senate. and we have the pieces necessary to come together and work out a compromise. some democrats in the house you want us to forget about the fact that we passed a bill and pass another bill. no. that is not make any sense. the whole student loan issue gets to the issue of affording college. the whole goal is to get more folks to go to college. you have talked about administrative bloat in the university of minnesota system. of this situation is on universities and needing to the a harder look in mirror about how much they pay their own administrators in century to the cost of higher education? >> it is a shrek the question. you are getting at the issue, the cost of going to school. do you have too much faculty every institution needs to look at its operation cost and determine how competitive they want to be. we're getting to the point where the cost in tuition and fees and books and all of those things is getting so high that you're starting to see other forms of competition pop up. i go

the roll. quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: i ask to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. manchin: mr. president, thank you. mr. president, i appreciate the power of the free enterprise system. it is one of the reasons for america's greatness, and i know from experience that private businesses do some things better than the government ever could. but over the last couple of decades, the united states has increasingly relied on private contractors to do the work that the men and women in our armed forces used to do. and they are getting exorbitant salaries to do the work, in some cases almost twice the salaries of the president of the united states. to the people of west virginia and to me, it doesn't make any sense to pay a defense contractor up to $763,000 a year. that's almost twice as much as our commander in chief and almost four times as much as our secretary of defense. and if we don't -- if we do nothing about this, this figure will automatically rise to $951,000 next year. $951,

the senate. effort to kill the bill is doomed. >> michael: i think they are going to get out of the senate. i think the effort is doomed. you have people who will vote against it who don't think what the country think. i don't blame them in a sense, that's what a house member does. if i were there, i would think i would do better than that but what is the strategy to get those votes in the house? >> well, you heard part of the rhetorical strategy today with ted cruz senator sessions and others who offered some sort of cover. this bill is too long. this bill is too complicated. there may be sneaky stuff in this, and most importantly it does not do an adequate job to secure the border. that's catnip to tea party and very conservative voters saying this is just not good enough in terms of securing the border and if many of these people from down south are going to be coming across our borders despite this bill. and i have real questions about whether this is going to pass the house. look at what they

the roll. quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i'd ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i wanted to come to the floor tonight tonight just to talk briefly about where we are on immigration reform. we're moving along this week. we've come out of several weeks of committee work on this where there were a number of republican amendments that were adopted as part of the process, a number of democratic amendments adopted as part of the process. as somebody that was in the negotiating group that led to the bill reaching the judiciary committee, i -- i actual think it wa -- i actuallythink it wash republicans and democrats and it's been an unusual bipartisan effort around here and it's the kind of effort that the american people, certainly the people of colorado, think is long, long overdue. they don't understand why we seem to be engaged in these fights that don't have anything to do with them instead of working together construc

they will not regain the senate. they will lose their next presidential election and they will lose the house. at some point. the majorities may be large enough for democrats to govern, even in the senate, under those circumstances. if that happens, republican -- some republicans will feel obliged to do business with them and you'll begin to try to set a new dynamic, which will allow new voices more problem-solving, moderate conservative voices to emerge in the party to get us back. it's either a dominant one-party democratic system to get some things done, or slowly or quickly a situation in which the republican party returns to its sanity. >> jeff is a great senator. wonderful, wonderful united states senator. good friend. so glad you're here today. some of the ideas from alexander was working with chuck schumer who made some suggestions, first on the motion to proceed. having a filibuster is ridiculous. get to the substance of the bill. so various things make sense. i think the idea of having to get up there and ta

is changing and the senate needs to catch up. so we are right now putting the finishing touches on this new amendment to the senate immigration bill that will get much tougher on the border. we hope that will bring along another potentially 10 to 12 republicans to get a very, very big vote. and the question is, if we were to get 70, 75 to 80 members of the senate voting on this, could the tea party in the house of representatives still stand in the way of this knowing that the bill could get a majority vote if john boehner just brought it up next week or the week after? this will be the true test for john boehner of whether he is really going to be the speaker of the house of representatives or whether he's just going to basically go down to the right wing of his caucus. >> i don't think i have ever heard the word 80 come out of a senator's mouth. is that a possibility in your mind? >> yeah, i don't know. i mean, maybe i should dial that back a little bit, but there's a lot of enthusiasm near the senate right now. let me be honest