add to del.icio.us			digg this		print		email

Floor Statement: Democratic Inaction on FISA, Judicial Nominations, the Columbia Free Trade Agreement and Gas Prices

Democratic Inaction on FISA, Judicial Nominations, the Columbia Free Trade Agreement and Gas Prices - Wednesday, May 21, 2008 View video | Can't view the video?

Mr. President, this week we reached a milestone in Congress because on Monday it was the 500th day since our friends on the other side of the aisle took control of both the Senate and the House following the 2006 election. In those 500 days, we have seen Congressional approval rating, according to Rasmussen surveys drop to 13% of the respondants of those who believe that Congress is performing in a good or excellent fashion. I believe that one reason why we've seen this drop in Congress's public approval rating is because we have failed to address some of the biggest concerns that confront the American people. Four of them are depicted here on this chart.

One -- the first number I have mentioned here is the 96 days that Congress, specifically, the House of Representatives, has failed to act to modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, of course, is the law that allows our intelligence community to listen to the telephone conversations between foreign terrorists and to learn of attacks being planned so as to not only to detect them, but also to deter them and to defeat our enemies. Why Congress would fail to act to reauthorize this important piece of legislation for 96 days, I think can only cause us to scratch our heads and wonder what could possibly justify that effective blinding of our intelligence community to new threats and the kinds of threats that could make us safer if detected and defeated, could make us safer here at home as well as our troops that serve in harm's way in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

At the same time we've been waiting 547 days for Congress to take up and pass the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. This is important to our nation and it's important to my state. Last year alone Texas sold $2.3 billion worth of goods and produce to Colombia, a large nation in South America. And because of tariffs that are currently imposed on those goods that are sold from Texas to Colombia or from the United States to Colombia, it actually discriminates against my small businessman and woman, against the manufacturer, against the producer of farm goods, whereas Columbian goods coming into the United States because of another agreement have no similar tariff or financial discrimination. If we would just take up, if the Speaker of the House would restore the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, we'd restore a level playing field, would create more jobs in the United States because we would be creating more things here in America to sell in Colombia. And, free trade is something that, amazingly, this Congress seems more and more afraid of when in fact I think it's one of the ways out of our current economic doldrums. If we continue to create new markets for our goods and services across the world, that creates jobs here at home. And if there's anything like a stimulus package Congress could pass, free trade agreements like the Columbia Free Trade Agreement is one of them.

But it's more than important than that because Colombia, of course, is one of our very best allies in Latin America, sitting right next door to Hugo Chavez's Venezuela - someone who is not our friend and someone who has declared himself our enemy. And I have to think that raul Castro, Fidel Castro over in Cuba and Hugo Chavez over in Venezuela are just sort of chuckling to themselves, seeing how America is treating one of our very best allies in Latin America. And, in fact, it is, of course President Uuribe in Colombia who has been heroic against the narco-terrorists knows as the FARC who we recently found out were not only in cahoots with Hugo Chavez and Venezuela, but planning a lot of no good, buying arms, buying military goods from Russia and other places right in our back yard in Latin America. Why would we stiff-arm President uribe in Colombia when it is in our self-interest to sell Colombia goods and services and at the same time stiff-arm one of very best allies in Latin America, frankly, is beyond me.

The next number is 692 days. This is how long some judicial nominees nominated by President Bush have been waiting for a hearing. And, of course, we know that the Majority Leader pledged to confirm at least three circuit court nominees before the Memorial Day Break. Well, we only have two more days left to go and obviously we're not going to meet that pledged goal. So 692 days with nominees waiting for a vote with no real end in sight. And it's clear what's happening. It's an attempt to drag this out until the election is upon us and the Majority Leader can say, well, we can't get anymore judges confirmed because we're going to have to wait for the Presidential election to see who will fill those vacancies. But to wait 692 days without giving the nominees the courtesy of a hearing or an up or down vote is inexcusable. There is no reason for it.

The last number on this chart is 758 days. That's the period of time since Nancy Pelosi, now the Speaker of the House, pledged to come up with a commonsense plan to reduce the price of gasoline. Well, 758 days later the price of gasoline is going through the roof with no end in sight. The price of oil, which makes up 70% of the cost of gasoline, the price of oil, is going through the roof with no end in sight. And while we have on this side of the aisle offered what I believe to be a very constructive plan to produce more American energy, that was rebuffed by the Majority and I am left to wonder if the Majority refuses to take advantage of America's natural resources and reduce our dependency on imported oil from our enemies at the price of $3.75 a gallon, I wonder if they would reconsider when the price hits $4.75 a gallon or $5.75. At what price do we get to the point where a moratorium that banned the exploration for oil and gas on the outer continental shelf, now that it is $127 a barrel, when will we decide it is in our economic interest to depend more on what God gave us here in America, our natural resources here at home which can be developed in a way that is good for environment and in a way that is responsible.

But it is irresponsible to simply ignore reality or to imagine that we here in Congress can suspend the economic laws of supply and demand. As we've seen oil consumption worldwide go to about 85 million barrels a day, we know that countries like China and India, growing economies, are using more and more of that oil, so we're competing for a fixed supply of oil and the law of supply and demand says, of course, if you have a fixed supply but increasing demand, the price is going to continue to go up. But somehow Congress feels like we can ignore that or we can defy that. We can no more defy the laws of supply and demand than we can defy the law of gravity. I think that the American people understand that and I think that they're bewildered as I am why Congress continues to defy this basic law of economics.

Mr. President, the bill that's on the floor today is a very important piece of legislation which I think bears further witness to why Congress is held in such low regard by the American people. It's because this bill, which was designed to be an emergency supplemental appropriation to help fund our troops in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq, has become a political football. And a lot of unrelated projects have been added to this bill which has caused the President to threaten to veto it, which the Majority understands will simply slow down the process of getting these necessary funds -- getting this necessary equipment that these funds would pay for, to our troops in harm's way.

25 day from now Deputy Secretary Gordon England said that absent additional Congressional action the Army will run out of military personnel funds by mid June and operation and maintenance funds by early July. 25 days unless Congress acts, the military will run out of military personnel funds, that means money used to pay the military their paycheck each month. They will run out of operation an maintenance funds by early July. I believe it's absolutely inexcusable as we approach Memorial Day, the men and women of our military are left to wonder whether we will meet our obligation to make sure that there's enough money available to pay their paycheck so that their family can be provided for after June. While we all have talked about supporting our troops, and that's very important, how much more basic a way is there to support our troops than to make sure that they're paid the money that they're entitled to on a timely basis and not left to wonder whether Congress will meet that simple obligation.

Talk is one thing, actions would send a different message all together is another. It's indisputable that these men and women in our United States military have made tremendous sacrifices for all of us. They've given not only their precious time. Some have even given their lives to protect our way of life. Many of them have spent months, if not years, away from their family, missed birthdays. Missed births -- all in fulfillment of this noble duty to help keep the oppressed free and to protect our national security. Now they're left, of course, to scratch their heads and wonder what is going on again in Washington and whether politics is interfering with Congress's willingness to simply do its duty while they discharge their duty abroad.

This critical funding not only includes vital pay and allowance, but also the tools that our troops need to ensure that they have safe passage through neighborhoods they patrol in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm referring, in part, to the Commander's Emergency Response Program or the CERP program. When I was in Baghdad and other places in Iraq in January, the commanding officers there said this is some of the most useful funds that we have made available to them. Secretary Gates has called it the single effective program to address local population's needs. These CERP funds will come to a standstill unless Congress acts on a timely basis without loading down this bill with a lot of pet projects and pork - they will come to a standstill. Why would we want to hamstring our commanders in the field in working with local populations to try to win their hearts and minds.

As Secretary Gates pointed out the CERP program is the key to get potential insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan off the streets and into jobs. Colleagues on both sides of the aisle have long acknowledged the importance the importance of cCERP funding. However, despite this acknowledgement, Congress has provided less than one-third of what has been requested and now providing those funds at all is left in some doubt. According to the Department of Defense, unless we provide the remaining $1.2 billion in CERP funds, the program will grind to a halt. What more important thing could we be doing in Iraq than winning the hearts and minds of former insurgents and get them employed so they lay down their guns and bombs and engage in not only the political process, but the economic revitalization of that war-torn country. We all agree that Iraqis need to take more responsibility for rebuilding their own country and that's what these CERP funds are designed to ensure. Why in the world would we slow them down or fail to see that they're delivered?

Beyond CERP funds and troop paychecks, the lack of funding begins to also impact other areas. We will see a furlough of civilian employees of the Department of Defense if Congress does not act promptly. Unfortunately this includes staff members at facilities like child development centers which many of our troops depend on for day care for their young ones. It will affect military installations across America and around the world. It's sad to note that this isn't the first time that Congress has put our troops in this position. Once again while our troops are waiting for critical funding, needed not only for their own well-being, but for the completion of their mission, some of my colleagues will try to use this supplemental funding bill to advance pet projects or to resurrect a tired agenda.

There will be another attempt to force another vote on a precipitous withdrawal of our troops in Iraq. That is on a timetable handed down here in Washington rather than conditions on the ground which will lead to the decrease of the likelihood of stability and ultimate success. Despite the countless debates we've had on this issue and despite the clear and undisputable evidence of military and political progress in Iraq, my colleagues will, again, refuse to pass a clean supplemental bill to support our troops. This will do nothing -- this debate, which we know the outcome, this debate will do nothing but delay those funds going to our troops.

It's becoming increasingly evidence that American troops and our Iraqi allies are making great progress in areas that were formerly labeled as hopeless. In "New York Times" today there is a story on front page about how Sadr City, which was basically a no-man's zone has now been stablized by Iraqi troops themselves. Violence is down. Communities are fighting back against extremism. And life is slowly returning to normal and the refugees who previously fled that country are returning home. What better could we hope for than to see these sort of developments. And, of course, this is thanks in large part to the sacrifices of our military and our military families. And we also need to acknowledge the great strides being made by the Iraqi government. By reasonable estimates the Iraqis have now met 12 of the 18 benchmarks that Congress set for them and they've begun to fight against extremism and senseless violence regard to affiliation or sectarian identification.

The recent initiative that Prime Minister Maliki undertook in Basra is a good example of taking the initiative. Of doing what we had hoped for, that is taking the training that America and our coalition partners have provided and using that training to fight for themselves. And the more Iraqis stand up and fight for themselves, the more American and coalition troops can stand down and ultimately come home. Mr. President, I think it's important to point out to the American people that what was supposed to be an emergency supplemental appropriation bill is not limited to just war-related measures. And this is designed to slow down this important piece of legislation. We know that not only are other pet projects and unrelated spending measures included, there are $10 million in measures that perhaps might be justified in some other context, but we need to have this bill passed cleanly so we can get the money to the troops and we can debate the merits of these various other programs at a later time. We should not use this bill for controversial policy measures.

Our troops, as well as the American people, deserve more open debate about complex issues. And here are four of them that we need to act on. But we should not use this bill to try to get things passed without either adequate debate or adequate scrutiny, or things that could not be passed in the light of day be passed on this vehicle, this must-pass vehicle. The men and women who have made tremendous sacrifices to serve our country deserve more than to have to be asked to carry on their backs the political agendas of a few of their elected representatives. Despite the looming shortfalls for military paychecks, the United States Senate does not seem all that concerned. Despite warnings by the Deputy Secretary of Defense that Congress must act before the Memorial Day recess is, the Majority Leader recently told people that it was no big deal if Congress did not.

I respectfully beg to differ. Failing to supply a paycheck to our brave soldiers is an incredibly big deal. Playing politics at a time when our soldiers are being left to wonder whether they will be able to pay for their food bill, their gasoline bill or their health care or other items while Congress engages in this sort of gamesmanship is just simply inexcusable. So, Mr. President, I think we could improve Congressional approval ratings above the 13% who think that we're doing a good or excellent job if we would simply act on this list of items which has been waiting, some of which have been waiting for as many as 758 days without a response from the United States Congress. And if we simply quit using something like an emergency funding bill for our troops in harm's way in order to pass other unrelated pet projects or to try to impose our political agendas, I think if we acted responsibly in a bipartisan way to try to solve some of these problems, that the American people would respond favorably. That would be good for them. That would be good for the country. And that would be good for the United States Senate and the United States Congress generally.