December 13, 2005
Speeches on Any Topic • U.S. Bahrain Trade • No Votes
Feingold (Wisconsion) busted out with this Five-Point speech outlining his plan for dealing with the problems he sees plaguing our strategy for winning the global war on terror. He got me pumped up because he was forceful and actually had some concrete ideas for going after al Qaeda and evntually getting out of Iraq. I wondered if the U.S. won't leave Iraq because that might be the best way the U.S. thinks it can get Zarqawi. Whoa, Zarqawi is number one on the most wanted list, if that list is based on which terrorist attracts the most U.S. defense dollars.
The Patriot Act was the issue of the day, however. Specter came on and had a little bit of an unoffical colloquy with Feingold. Specter (Pennsylvania) spoke for awhile about changes that the conference report has made substantial changes to the Act as it exists now. Then he asked Feingold a question. But Specter said Feingold with all due respect did not answer his question. Then Specter talked awhile longer to the changes of the conference bill, the controversial aspects including § 215. That seems to be the point of most contention. Then Feingold came back on and said I did answer your question, Mr. Chairman. And says how And Specter says, You don't know what I did in the conference because you weren't a conferee, and I'll have you know I didn't get everything I asked for, we have a bicameral legislation, how he didn't have everything I liked. Basically, it's not going to be perfect. Feingold tries to get back in and Specter says I have the floor. Feingold again tried to get Specter to yield but Specter would not yield. Specter gives Feingold time. Feingold says you did an awesome job in the conference committee and I know you tried, the problem is not you, I'm not saying it is. But he still objects to the conference report. He dislikes the sunset provisions. Feingold notes that he was the only senator to vote against the first Act because it was deeply flawed. The chairman has been tremendous but he's very disappointed with what the senate got back from the committee. Then he yielded the floor. Specter says he likes the part where Feingold says he was brilliant and a tremendous chairman but he's got to debate the senator from Wisconsion on the other points.
Specter then started to talk about judicial review. We have moved close to probable cause on a search warrant, or an arrest warrant. Reasonable grounds to be believe that what is sought in an investigation is for an international terrorist organization.
Feingold came back on to say that Specter told him what Specter did in the conferences. Feingold is saying that under the act the investigation does not have to be linked to terrorism, § 215 he cites again, and again. On that ground alone Feingold is against the conference report, it seems. Feingold says, this isn't about if we had our druthers, it's about the gov't going and looking at your library records regardless of whether it's related to terrorism. Specter comes back on, says in the grand scheme the bill is acceptable. He says, yes the investigation does have to be related to a terrorism inquiry. I wouldn't support a bill that infringed on civil liberties, wouldn't do it. Also, a conclusive presumption in the national security letters. The NSL was not established by the patriot act, and have been in existence for decades. And says they've got some nice compromises on NSLs in the conference report. Recipient of NSL the right to contract an attorney, go to court, get the NSL quashed if it is unreasonable, oppressive,.... The provision on this in the CR he says is more protective than that in the Senate version. Specter offers Feingold chance to respond, if that's alright with the president. No objection.
Feingold has to get going but he wants to add something quickly before he leaves. Feingold says the NSL provisions are not sunsetted and need to be. Specter says the Sen from WI needs to get a briefing and not get his info from the Washington post. Specter say please don't leave the floor. Feingold says I got to. Specer says, well just briefly here, the Washington Post is just plain wrong. He then reads from the conference report, how they got 30 days, and how there are 85 senate provisions in the CR vs. 15 house provisions. He opposes wiretaps, too, he says. He was DA in southern Pennsylvania and didn't like them then either. He wants Feingold to look at how random selection is foiled by the language about wiretaps. Random selection? The general sunset compromise he says is 4 years. Apparently Bush and the White House were in agreement with 4 years on the sunset. So the House lost out, when it was asking for seven years.
Feingold wants to respond, but maybe later? Specter offers plaudits on the debate, which he says is too rare in this body. Feingold says, yeah, this funny, the senator from PA is valiant but he's worried that Specter voted for all of the positions Feingold is voting for (the senate version). And wonders why Specter is not more concerned, that 30 days notification on the sneak and peek is troublesome. The senate bill was seven days. The house wanted 180. So, your place could be searched and you wouldn't know for 30 days is what the CR has. Feingold likes how the senate sunsets have been inocorporated but says, the sunsets should be only the first protection we offer to the people, that sunsetting a bad provision is not even a Pyrrhic victory.
Specter says Feingold has just made my argument better than I have. He says 30 days on a surreptition or secret search (as opposed to what, a public search?) is a major concession from 180 days. The House gave up 150 days, the Senate only 23. See, the Senate did win that negotiation. He talks about scintillas and peppercorns. Feingold has not left yet. he tries to get back in, but Specter won't let him, something about SPecter will yet, I'll say Byrd pull this, I'm not gonna yield until I know I still have the right to the floor. Ok, he gets the right and yields. Feingold is pissed off about the 30 days. The U.S. Govt' comes into your house without any notice (which is not allowed by the Fourth Amdt., he says) Why can't a judge renew this every seven days. It is not a minor difference of 7 or 30 days. Specter says Feingold's problem is really with even one day of delayed notice searching. Specter says you've gott have delayed notification because otherwise the person you're investigating will know you are on to him. So these delays allow us to stay on the job and not blow our case. [One might wonder...what are they waiting for?...if you know it's your guy, pounce.) So then he says how the senate is not in order, vaguely I suppose I can hear people talking in the background: Feingold? The Senate comes to order after one more plaint. Now more Senators are coming to the floor!
Specter moved on to WTO issues. He focused on current U.S. law protecting farmers, and how the WTO is opposed to that law. He does not want the U.S. to give up that law in obeisance to the WTO. He yields to the Senator from Mexico. Byrd is now sitting president. 'The Senator is recogniiized.'
It's Jeff Bingaman (New Mexico). He is speaking about funding for children's programs, benefits that could potentially be lost if the House budget package goes through. Medicaid benefits for children, for example.
Then Max Baucus (Montana) also came on to talk about Medicaid beneficiaries, and the House Bill. Baucus wants the Senat to object to these proposed cuts. Says these cuts will hurt children, pregnant women, people with disabilities, the poorest and neediest among us. Baucus wrapped up by discussing the "Libby" provisions of the Asbestos Bill. These provisions somehow favor or benefit the town of Libby, MT where people appear to have been sickened from years of mining vermiculite asbestos. The fibers of the asbestos mined in Libby, he says, are unlike other asbestos fibers. They are barbed and cause havoc and cancer in the lungs. He said that although EPA had listed Libby as a Superfund site and got it put on the National Priorities List, that only 10% of the cleanup had been completed. So his provisions must fund that clean-up. It is also possible that his provisions see to favorable treament of Libby residents in court. The defendant in this instance is W.R. Grace & Co., the mine operator/owner.
Quorum call. C-SPAN says a quorum call is used in the senate, most often, to temporarily delay floor proceedings.
Later this week in the Senate: Federal Spending • PATRIOT Act Extension • Budget Cuts
It is 15:11 est
It is 15:15 est
Senator Grassley (Iowa) has come on talking about the U.S-Bahrain free trade agreement. USBFTA? He believes that this trade agreement is a win for our economy. Bahrain proposes to eliminate 100% of the duties it currently charges to U.S. products, except for 2% of U.S. agriculture products. Trade in every service sector, unless excluded. Says Bahrain is a service provider center in the Middle East. As the region develops, there will be increased opportunity for U.S. exports. Says workers at Iowa Lenox (heating products) will benefit from this agreement. Also, Meentemeyer corporation will benefit from this agreement, out of Cedar Rapids. Talking about our Free Trade agreement with Oman, which is based on the Bahrain agreement. By the year 2013, the U.S., President Bush included, wants a Middle East Free Trade Agreement by 2013. A broader effort wants Israel cut in on these free trade agreements. Also, Jordan and Morocco. Senate has before it a bill implementing the U.S.-Bahrain free trade agreement.
Grassley then has remarks for Conf. Comm. on Byrd Amendment instructions. The Byrd Amendment is designed to prevent dumping. Then he goes through list of various senators who say they will oppose the reconciliation bill if such and such a provision remains in it: Medicaid, payment limits, MLCC program (Milk Program), etc. Everyone is for balanced budgets until their pet issue stands in the way. We need to ask ourself if we're really trying to trim this budget. Byrd Amdt. described as Pork. Cutting it would allow more money to go to federal govt. One recipient of the program used the money to pay off a home mortgage, he says. The provision was originally slipped into a bill a few years ago. What we're talking about is getting rid of a subsidy program that benefits the few at the expense of the many. Calls it corporate welfare. WTO says U.S. trading partners can retailiate against U.S. because of this Byrd Amendment. Consumers are hurt, as are U.S. exporters of: wine, cigarettes, forkload trucks, steel products, copy machines, etc. Soon India, South Korea could exercise their rights to retaliate. The situation needs to end. The GAO report points out other ridiculous aspects of program: no accountability. Claims submitted for disbursements under the program might not be justified. Our gross domestic product (GDP) last year was 11 plus trillion. [15:34 est] House has already nixed Byrd Amendment.
Next up, Baucus speaking about USBFTA. How it's going to open up foreign markets to U.S. products. Robust service sector provisions in agreement. Recognition of intellectual property rights. A seed to grow prosperity over instability. He applauds the work of trade negotiators. Says U.S. ambassor Belushi (?) was very close to negotiations. [15:39 est]
Baucus then moved to an entirely other matter. Talking about an emperor that ruled Byzantine empire. Sending emissary up Adriatic Sea, to Venice. Guy ended up teaching Greek at some college in Florence. Chrysallarus. Noone had translated Greek in Italy for 700 years. Led to a flame of learning reconnecting Europe to...thought. The Modern Age, the scientific revolution, began. Western Europe gained its dominance of world economy during Renaissance. This is about the year 1000, a.d. Now talking about Cordova, Spain. He is paying homage to the Italian Renaissance and noting something about Arab caliphates. So he calls for a new American Renaissance. Smart people in China and India are learning to do what we are, and they will be able to do it more cheaply. The theme of his speech is competitiveness, something he has talked about many times this year on the floor of the senate. American gov't cannot stand idly by.
Six step agenda.
(1) Improve education. Need educated workforce.
[But I tuned out.]
Byron Dorgan (North Dakota) came on at about 1600 est and started talking about how deep the U.S. trade deficit is. He had a chart entitled, "Out of Control Trade Deficits." Talk about how stuff is made in countries, cheaply, and sold at one of the big-box stores, like Wal-Mart. Talks about how a woman last year set out to buy her children only gifts made in the U.S. They wanted some electronics and she couldn't find anything from U.S. We sold China $3b in good last year, but purchased $23b of goods from China. Supposedly China has a huge market but our stuff isn't being sold there. This free trade isn't free at all. This trade is unsustainable. We're losing American jobs because employees here cost too much money. Our trade deficit is financed by debt we sell to foreign countries. Buyers are telling suppliers to start making the supplies, e.g. auto parts, in China. In China the cost per hour would be 30 cents whereas here it was $20 or $30 an hour. Who's gonna buy these good made abroad if the people in the U.S. don't have any jobs. How about bilateral automobile trade? With Korea, for instance. Only 3,900 U.S. autos sold in Korea. Dodge Dakota became popular in Korea but Korea quashed the popularity. Accusations that China stole production blueprints from GM. There is a Chinese company called Chery, that is going to sell a car called the QQ or something and this car is very much similar to the car that would be made from the stolen blueprints. Dorgan asks for a few more minutes. Pennsylvania House Furniture he cites. La-Z-Boy bought it and tried to move it to China. PA governor tried to save it but La-Z-Boy moved it. Now the PA wood is sent to China to be assembled and then sent back. Pennies on the hour for child workers and no pollution controls and no unions in China. That's not fair trade, that's not helping our country. Who ultimately is going to buy those products? My point is that this doesn't work. Why are we talking about the free trade agreement with Bahrain? It's a small moment to talk about doing a FTA with them. Why aren't we focusing our attention on the huge deficits? And these international corporations have the mail sent to the Bahamas. A building in the Cayman Islands is official residence for 12,748 corporations. What's the purpose of having a residence in the Cayman Islands? Simple. You don't have to pay taxes in this country. You can have all the opporunities of the American but you don't have to hire American workers or pay American taxes. There are some great corporations in this country but the corporate culture has gone off the track. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we were talking about the full-blown trade crisis? We are selling this country piece by piece. You finance a trade deficit by putting currency in the hands of people in other countries, so that they can buy our bonds, real estate, etc. Calling the trade policy jingoistic. Dorgan yields the floor. [16:19 est]
Sen Mark Dayton (Minnesota) paid his respects to one-time MN senator, Eugene McCarthy.
[16:11 est]
Majority leader Bill Frist (Tennessee) came on and said that the Senate should vote to reject the House amendment to the budget bill/deficit reduction bill. Then he brought the Bahrain bill before the Senate and got it passed by voice vote. He understood that there were three bills at the desk due for a second reading. All three are tax bills, one concerning the Gulf Opportunity Zone. He got these three bills placed on the calendar. He moved on to specifying the agenda for tomorrow, the 14th.
The deficit reduction bill will be voted on by the Senate over the next couple days. There are several proposals to instruct the Senate conferees concerning conference negotiations on this deficit reduction bill. He came back and covered passage of the U.S.-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. He says the Senate might possibly have to meet on Saturday because there are a lot of bills that the Senate has to address.
He moved on to talk about Iraqi elections, a subject he covered in his morning business speech. He says it looks like a record number will be voting in Iraq. He and other senators talked with the U.S. ambassador to Iraq as well as Gen. Casey by conference call this morning. Some advances have been made. There are up to 97 Iraqi battalions in the fight, as opposed to five at the beginning of this year. 31 operational brigade headquarters, almost double the number of trained & equipped Iraqi security forces (214,000). Plus, more tips being provided by the Iraqi people. September, 4, 705 tips to Iraqi and U.S. forces. Information is flowing freely. One resulted in bust of Improvised Explosive Device (IED) factory. New gov't will be in place by April 2006. If there is no other business, he asks the senate to be adjourned.
It is adjourned until tomorrow morning.
[18:22 est]
Live coverage when Senate resumes, C-SPAN2
Feingold (Wisconsion) busted out with this Five-Point speech outlining his plan for dealing with the problems he sees plaguing our strategy for winning the global war on terror. He got me pumped up because he was forceful and actually had some concrete ideas for going after al Qaeda and evntually getting out of Iraq. I wondered if the U.S. won't leave Iraq because that might be the best way the U.S. thinks it can get Zarqawi. Whoa, Zarqawi is number one on the most wanted list, if that list is based on which terrorist attracts the most U.S. defense dollars.
The Patriot Act was the issue of the day, however. Specter came on and had a little bit of an unoffical colloquy with Feingold. Specter (Pennsylvania) spoke for awhile about changes that the conference report has made substantial changes to the Act as it exists now. Then he asked Feingold a question. But Specter said Feingold with all due respect did not answer his question. Then Specter talked awhile longer to the changes of the conference bill, the controversial aspects including § 215. That seems to be the point of most contention. Then Feingold came back on and said I did answer your question, Mr. Chairman. And says how And Specter says, You don't know what I did in the conference because you weren't a conferee, and I'll have you know I didn't get everything I asked for, we have a bicameral legislation, how he didn't have everything I liked. Basically, it's not going to be perfect. Feingold tries to get back in and Specter says I have the floor. Feingold again tried to get Specter to yield but Specter would not yield. Specter gives Feingold time. Feingold says you did an awesome job in the conference committee and I know you tried, the problem is not you, I'm not saying it is. But he still objects to the conference report. He dislikes the sunset provisions. Feingold notes that he was the only senator to vote against the first Act because it was deeply flawed. The chairman has been tremendous but he's very disappointed with what the senate got back from the committee. Then he yielded the floor. Specter says he likes the part where Feingold says he was brilliant and a tremendous chairman but he's got to debate the senator from Wisconsion on the other points.
Specter then started to talk about judicial review. We have moved close to probable cause on a search warrant, or an arrest warrant. Reasonable grounds to be believe that what is sought in an investigation is for an international terrorist organization.
Feingold came back on to say that Specter told him what Specter did in the conferences. Feingold is saying that under the act the investigation does not have to be linked to terrorism, § 215 he cites again, and again. On that ground alone Feingold is against the conference report, it seems. Feingold says, this isn't about if we had our druthers, it's about the gov't going and looking at your library records regardless of whether it's related to terrorism. Specter comes back on, says in the grand scheme the bill is acceptable. He says, yes the investigation does have to be related to a terrorism inquiry. I wouldn't support a bill that infringed on civil liberties, wouldn't do it. Also, a conclusive presumption in the national security letters. The NSL was not established by the patriot act, and have been in existence for decades. And says they've got some nice compromises on NSLs in the conference report. Recipient of NSL the right to contract an attorney, go to court, get the NSL quashed if it is unreasonable, oppressive,.... The provision on this in the CR he says is more protective than that in the Senate version. Specter offers Feingold chance to respond, if that's alright with the president. No objection.
Feingold has to get going but he wants to add something quickly before he leaves. Feingold says the NSL provisions are not sunsetted and need to be. Specter says the Sen from WI needs to get a briefing and not get his info from the Washington post. Specter say please don't leave the floor. Feingold says I got to. Specer says, well just briefly here, the Washington Post is just plain wrong. He then reads from the conference report, how they got 30 days, and how there are 85 senate provisions in the CR vs. 15 house provisions. He opposes wiretaps, too, he says. He was DA in southern Pennsylvania and didn't like them then either. He wants Feingold to look at how random selection is foiled by the language about wiretaps. Random selection? The general sunset compromise he says is 4 years. Apparently Bush and the White House were in agreement with 4 years on the sunset. So the House lost out, when it was asking for seven years.
Feingold wants to respond, but maybe later? Specter offers plaudits on the debate, which he says is too rare in this body. Feingold says, yeah, this funny, the senator from PA is valiant but he's worried that Specter voted for all of the positions Feingold is voting for (the senate version). And wonders why Specter is not more concerned, that 30 days notification on the sneak and peek is troublesome. The senate bill was seven days. The house wanted 180. So, your place could be searched and you wouldn't know for 30 days is what the CR has. Feingold likes how the senate sunsets have been inocorporated but says, the sunsets should be only the first protection we offer to the people, that sunsetting a bad provision is not even a Pyrrhic victory.
Specter says Feingold has just made my argument better than I have. He says 30 days on a surreptition or secret search (as opposed to what, a public search?) is a major concession from 180 days. The House gave up 150 days, the Senate only 23. See, the Senate did win that negotiation. He talks about scintillas and peppercorns. Feingold has not left yet. he tries to get back in, but Specter won't let him, something about SPecter will yet, I'll say Byrd pull this, I'm not gonna yield until I know I still have the right to the floor. Ok, he gets the right and yields. Feingold is pissed off about the 30 days. The U.S. Govt' comes into your house without any notice (which is not allowed by the Fourth Amdt., he says) Why can't a judge renew this every seven days. It is not a minor difference of 7 or 30 days. Specter says Feingold's problem is really with even one day of delayed notice searching. Specter says you've gott have delayed notification because otherwise the person you're investigating will know you are on to him. So these delays allow us to stay on the job and not blow our case. [One might wonder...what are they waiting for?...if you know it's your guy, pounce.) So then he says how the senate is not in order, vaguely I suppose I can hear people talking in the background: Feingold? The Senate comes to order after one more plaint. Now more Senators are coming to the floor!
Specter moved on to WTO issues. He focused on current U.S. law protecting farmers, and how the WTO is opposed to that law. He does not want the U.S. to give up that law in obeisance to the WTO. He yields to the Senator from Mexico. Byrd is now sitting president. 'The Senator is recogniiized.'
It's Jeff Bingaman (New Mexico). He is speaking about funding for children's programs, benefits that could potentially be lost if the House budget package goes through. Medicaid benefits for children, for example.
Then Max Baucus (Montana) also came on to talk about Medicaid beneficiaries, and the House Bill. Baucus wants the Senat to object to these proposed cuts. Says these cuts will hurt children, pregnant women, people with disabilities, the poorest and neediest among us. Baucus wrapped up by discussing the "Libby" provisions of the Asbestos Bill. These provisions somehow favor or benefit the town of Libby, MT where people appear to have been sickened from years of mining vermiculite asbestos. The fibers of the asbestos mined in Libby, he says, are unlike other asbestos fibers. They are barbed and cause havoc and cancer in the lungs. He said that although EPA had listed Libby as a Superfund site and got it put on the National Priorities List, that only 10% of the cleanup had been completed. So his provisions must fund that clean-up. It is also possible that his provisions see to favorable treament of Libby residents in court. The defendant in this instance is W.R. Grace & Co., the mine operator/owner.
Quorum call. C-SPAN says a quorum call is used in the senate, most often, to temporarily delay floor proceedings.
Later this week in the Senate: Federal Spending • PATRIOT Act Extension • Budget Cuts
It is 15:11 est
It is 15:15 est
Senator Grassley (Iowa) has come on talking about the U.S-Bahrain free trade agreement. USBFTA? He believes that this trade agreement is a win for our economy. Bahrain proposes to eliminate 100% of the duties it currently charges to U.S. products, except for 2% of U.S. agriculture products. Trade in every service sector, unless excluded. Says Bahrain is a service provider center in the Middle East. As the region develops, there will be increased opportunity for U.S. exports. Says workers at Iowa Lenox (heating products) will benefit from this agreement. Also, Meentemeyer corporation will benefit from this agreement, out of Cedar Rapids. Talking about our Free Trade agreement with Oman, which is based on the Bahrain agreement. By the year 2013, the U.S., President Bush included, wants a Middle East Free Trade Agreement by 2013. A broader effort wants Israel cut in on these free trade agreements. Also, Jordan and Morocco. Senate has before it a bill implementing the U.S.-Bahrain free trade agreement.
Grassley then has remarks for Conf. Comm. on Byrd Amendment instructions. The Byrd Amendment is designed to prevent dumping. Then he goes through list of various senators who say they will oppose the reconciliation bill if such and such a provision remains in it: Medicaid, payment limits, MLCC program (Milk Program), etc. Everyone is for balanced budgets until their pet issue stands in the way. We need to ask ourself if we're really trying to trim this budget. Byrd Amdt. described as Pork. Cutting it would allow more money to go to federal govt. One recipient of the program used the money to pay off a home mortgage, he says. The provision was originally slipped into a bill a few years ago. What we're talking about is getting rid of a subsidy program that benefits the few at the expense of the many. Calls it corporate welfare. WTO says U.S. trading partners can retailiate against U.S. because of this Byrd Amendment. Consumers are hurt, as are U.S. exporters of: wine, cigarettes, forkload trucks, steel products, copy machines, etc. Soon India, South Korea could exercise their rights to retaliate. The situation needs to end. The GAO report points out other ridiculous aspects of program: no accountability. Claims submitted for disbursements under the program might not be justified. Our gross domestic product (GDP) last year was 11 plus trillion. [15:34 est] House has already nixed Byrd Amendment.
Next up, Baucus speaking about USBFTA. How it's going to open up foreign markets to U.S. products. Robust service sector provisions in agreement. Recognition of intellectual property rights. A seed to grow prosperity over instability. He applauds the work of trade negotiators. Says U.S. ambassor Belushi (?) was very close to negotiations. [15:39 est]
Baucus then moved to an entirely other matter. Talking about an emperor that ruled Byzantine empire. Sending emissary up Adriatic Sea, to Venice. Guy ended up teaching Greek at some college in Florence. Chrysallarus. Noone had translated Greek in Italy for 700 years. Led to a flame of learning reconnecting Europe to...thought. The Modern Age, the scientific revolution, began. Western Europe gained its dominance of world economy during Renaissance. This is about the year 1000, a.d. Now talking about Cordova, Spain. He is paying homage to the Italian Renaissance and noting something about Arab caliphates. So he calls for a new American Renaissance. Smart people in China and India are learning to do what we are, and they will be able to do it more cheaply. The theme of his speech is competitiveness, something he has talked about many times this year on the floor of the senate. American gov't cannot stand idly by.
Six step agenda.
(1) Improve education. Need educated workforce.
[But I tuned out.]
Byron Dorgan (North Dakota) came on at about 1600 est and started talking about how deep the U.S. trade deficit is. He had a chart entitled, "Out of Control Trade Deficits." Talk about how stuff is made in countries, cheaply, and sold at one of the big-box stores, like Wal-Mart. Talks about how a woman last year set out to buy her children only gifts made in the U.S. They wanted some electronics and she couldn't find anything from U.S. We sold China $3b in good last year, but purchased $23b of goods from China. Supposedly China has a huge market but our stuff isn't being sold there. This free trade isn't free at all. This trade is unsustainable. We're losing American jobs because employees here cost too much money. Our trade deficit is financed by debt we sell to foreign countries. Buyers are telling suppliers to start making the supplies, e.g. auto parts, in China. In China the cost per hour would be 30 cents whereas here it was $20 or $30 an hour. Who's gonna buy these good made abroad if the people in the U.S. don't have any jobs. How about bilateral automobile trade? With Korea, for instance. Only 3,900 U.S. autos sold in Korea. Dodge Dakota became popular in Korea but Korea quashed the popularity. Accusations that China stole production blueprints from GM. There is a Chinese company called Chery, that is going to sell a car called the QQ or something and this car is very much similar to the car that would be made from the stolen blueprints. Dorgan asks for a few more minutes. Pennsylvania House Furniture he cites. La-Z-Boy bought it and tried to move it to China. PA governor tried to save it but La-Z-Boy moved it. Now the PA wood is sent to China to be assembled and then sent back. Pennies on the hour for child workers and no pollution controls and no unions in China. That's not fair trade, that's not helping our country. Who ultimately is going to buy those products? My point is that this doesn't work. Why are we talking about the free trade agreement with Bahrain? It's a small moment to talk about doing a FTA with them. Why aren't we focusing our attention on the huge deficits? And these international corporations have the mail sent to the Bahamas. A building in the Cayman Islands is official residence for 12,748 corporations. What's the purpose of having a residence in the Cayman Islands? Simple. You don't have to pay taxes in this country. You can have all the opporunities of the American but you don't have to hire American workers or pay American taxes. There are some great corporations in this country but the corporate culture has gone off the track. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we were talking about the full-blown trade crisis? We are selling this country piece by piece. You finance a trade deficit by putting currency in the hands of people in other countries, so that they can buy our bonds, real estate, etc. Calling the trade policy jingoistic. Dorgan yields the floor. [16:19 est]
Sen Mark Dayton (Minnesota) paid his respects to one-time MN senator, Eugene McCarthy.
[16:11 est]
Majority leader Bill Frist (Tennessee) came on and said that the Senate should vote to reject the House amendment to the budget bill/deficit reduction bill. Then he brought the Bahrain bill before the Senate and got it passed by voice vote. He understood that there were three bills at the desk due for a second reading. All three are tax bills, one concerning the Gulf Opportunity Zone. He got these three bills placed on the calendar. He moved on to specifying the agenda for tomorrow, the 14th.
The deficit reduction bill will be voted on by the Senate over the next couple days. There are several proposals to instruct the Senate conferees concerning conference negotiations on this deficit reduction bill. He came back and covered passage of the U.S.-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. He says the Senate might possibly have to meet on Saturday because there are a lot of bills that the Senate has to address.
He moved on to talk about Iraqi elections, a subject he covered in his morning business speech. He says it looks like a record number will be voting in Iraq. He and other senators talked with the U.S. ambassador to Iraq as well as Gen. Casey by conference call this morning. Some advances have been made. There are up to 97 Iraqi battalions in the fight, as opposed to five at the beginning of this year. 31 operational brigade headquarters, almost double the number of trained & equipped Iraqi security forces (214,000). Plus, more tips being provided by the Iraqi people. September, 4, 705 tips to Iraqi and U.S. forces. Information is flowing freely. One resulted in bust of Improvised Explosive Device (IED) factory. New gov't will be in place by April 2006. If there is no other business, he asks the senate to be adjourned.
It is adjourned until tomorrow morning.
[18:22 est]
Live coverage when Senate resumes, C-SPAN2
posted by J Rand at 12:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home