Allen Race Might Be Getting Hotter

The Washington Post had the following to say:

Allen Flap May Give A Boost To Webb
Reenergized Va. Democrats Gain Support

By Tim Craig and Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, August 19, 2006; Page A01

RICHMOND -- The nationwide fallout from controversial remarks Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) made last week has given Democrats new hope in a race many thought would be difficult to win in the historically conservative state.

Before Allen insulted a native Fairfax County man of Indian descent, many Democratic officials were privately doubtful that James Webb could mount an aggressive challenge to the former governor and possible 2008 presidential candidate.

But Allen's remarks to S.R. Sidarth, 20 -- which included saying "welcome to America" -- are generating new support for the Webb campaign and energizing Democratic activists.

"Before this week, I thought it would be a very tough race for Jim Webb," said Martin Tillett, a self-described Democrat who is vice president of the Spring Bank Community Association in Fairfax County. He had already opposed Allen for his conservative positions. "This week has just added fuel on the fire as far as I am concerned," he said.

Even Northern Virginia Republicans who support Allen say they are a bit worried.

Rob Jackson, 55, a lawyer from McLean, said he still plans to vote for Allen, despite what he called "a stupid remark that a senator shouldn't have said." Jackson added that the Senate race is probably closer now. "It certainly hurt George Allen," he said. "It was a dumb thing to do."

Political analysts also said they sense a more competitive race.

"If the race wasn't on Democrats' radar screen before, it is now," said Charlie Cook, editor of the Cook Political Report.

A week of national headlines -- none good for Allen -- has the potential to change the Virginia campaign from a Democratic long shot to one that could help decide which party controls the U.S. Senate next year, political analysts said. But only if Webb, who has struggled in his first run for office, can translate the temporary boost into lasting momentum.

Democratic activists across the state have complained for weeks that Webb hasn't been visible enough, was slow in hiring staff and had limited knowledge about many issues. In a debate last month, Allen forced Webb to admit he did not know about the future shipping terminal at Craney Island in Portsmouth.

Webb, an Iraq war opponent who is a former Marine and was secretary of the Navy during the Reagan administration, still faces a relentless campaigner who last month had 10 times as much to spend on his reelection bid.

Republicans say he can't win, regardless of Allen's recent remarks. Read more at the Post.

August Recess

The Senate is on break until Tuesday, September 5 when it will convene at 11:00 a.m. to resume consideration of H.R.5631, the Department of Defense FY 2007 Appropriations bill.

August 3, 2006: Pensions Bill Passes; Family Prosperity Act Falls; Defense Bill Postponed

Recap: The Senate did not finish the FY 2007 Defense Spending Bill.  Stevens wanted to finish it but there was too much pressure to get to the estate tax bill and the pensions bill before August Recess.  Going into the early morning, the Senate recorded votes on the estate tax/min wage/extenders bill, a.k.a. The Trifecta, a.k.a. The Family Prosperity Act, and the Pensions bill.  The Trifecta did not survive a cloture vote, receiving only 57 yeas.  The Pensions Bill passed overwhelmingly, 93-5.  As it turned out, this was the last meeting of the Senate before commencement of the August Recess.  The Senate Returns on September 5.  Stevens and Frist and Inouye agreed that the Senate would finish the Defense Bill first thing upon returning from Recess.  Here's how it went down...

The Senate returned to work this morning at 9:45 edt.  Sen. Ted Stevens (AK) has the floor.  He is the Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.  He says, The Senate has a long day before it.  The Senate will see a considerable number of votes today, he says.    Accompanying him on the floor is Sen. Daniel Inouye (HI), the Subcommitte Ranking Member.

We've got to finish this bill today, Stevens says.  And I will apply Rule 16 to any amendment that isn't germane, he says.

[9:05]

Sen. Tom Coburn (OK) has asked that the Kennedy Amendment be set aside so that he can offer one.  No objections.  His amendment sets a spending limit on the amount of money the Dept. of Defense spends on conferences.  Sen. Coburn says that $66m was spent on defense conferences, including numerous conferences in Florida, Hawaii, etc.  Couldn't we do some of this by video conference, wonders Coburn.  

Stevens seems unwilling to support this amendment.  It is too broad, he says.  We have to go places to meet with representatives from other countries, from NATO, he says.  The limit is not reasonable, says Stevens: We're the last superpower of the world, we've got troops in 120 countries, the cost of travel is going up all the time.  I offered to conference with the House to set a reasonable limit but Sen. Coburn would not accept a reasonable limit.  Stevens asks that a vote to table the amendment be taken.  The vote to table Coburn's amendment on conferences is set aside for the time being, apparently because the Senators are not yet ready to vote this morning.  

Sen. Coburn now brings up another amendment.  This concerns making public the justifications that each department submits to Senate subcommittees when making budget requests.  Sunshine is the best thing we've got, he says.

Sen. Stevens makes a point of order on this amendment.  Sen. Coburn says he's talked to the Parliamentarian and that there's a defense of germaneness.  Sen. Stevens makes a point of order.  Sen. Murkowski sitting in the chair says the defense of germaneness is valid.  Germane means more than relevant but having a precise relationship to the subject of the bill, says CSPAN2.  It looks like this amendment will go to a vote by the Senate, but that vote will be delayed until other amendments are voted on.  

Sen. Norm Coleman (MN) wants seven minutes.  Stevens doesn't really want any interruptions but he isn't going to object now.  He will object later, he says.  He wants the Coburn amendments cleared out by 11:00.  (Not going to happen.)  Coburn's got TWO MORE amendments.

Sen. Coleman is speaking about the minimum wage increase.  The big issue remains the Tip Credit—i.e., counting tips toward the minimum wage.  He says the Tip Credit provision in this bill only applies to future increases in the minimum wage, not to the current provisions.  What he's got is the Dept. of Labor saying that It is going to construe the Tip Credit Provision as not having any effect on how Tips are counted toward the minimum wage in the seven non-Tip Credit States.  In other words, the seven states that prohibit employers from counting tips toward the minimum wage floor WILL NOT BE AFFECTED by this bill.  The only effect will come if/when those states raise their respectiv minimum wage  in the future.  

Take California, a non-Tip Credit State.  Let's say the minimum wage there is $6.00.  As such, a waitress there must be paid at least $6.00/hr NOT INCLUDING tips.  If she makes another $6.00/hr in tips, big deal, the employer cannot rely on that to reduce the employee's wage below $6.00/hr.  This bill will allow that employer to count tips toward the minimum wage ONLY if a state takes action to raise its minimum wage after passage of this bill.  

Now, let's look at a state that allows employers to use the Tip Credit provision.  Let's say the min wage is $6.00/hr.  If an employer can establish that an employee receives $6.00/hr in tips, under this bill he does not have to offer that employee the $6.00/hr salary.  He can offer something less.  I am not clear on whether he can offer $0 in salary or whether there is still some floor the employer must meet.  Perhaps this varies by state.  

In any event, the non-Tip Credit states do not want their employers to count tips toward salary and it appears that the Dept. of Labor, through its avowed application of the bill, will side with the non-Tip Credit states.

[10:44]

OK, back to Coburn and Stevens.  They are debating a third Coburn Amendment and Coburn has just agreed to limit the effect of his language "To this Act" which induces Stevens to drop his opposition to it.

Now, the Fourth Coburn Amendment: requiring an analysis of the total cost of earmarks on Defense Appropriations and an analysis of how those earmarks will help the Dept. of Defense.  He believes earmarks are siphoning away funds from other key national security priorities...  (I faded out for a bit)

[11:04]

The Senate is now voting on whether to table, i.e. kill, the Coburn amendment that puts a $70m cap on spending for Defense Dept. conferences.

[...]
[13:24]
The Senate has been in a quorum call for awhile.
[16:51]

The Senate is voting on another of the Coburn Amendments, this one requiring an analysis to ensure that defense budget funds are actually being used for projects assisting U.S. defense and troops.  This Amendment passes 98 to 1.

[16:54]

Sen. Stevens brings up a manager's package, i.e. a lot of amendments including modifications.  These have been approved on both sides and he asks for them to be considered and adopted en bloc.  No objection.

[16:56]

Sen. Gordon Smith (OR) is speaking on the Tip Credit.  He refers to the bill as a minimum wage/death tax compromise.  He wants to explain the Tip Credit.  He says that no one's wage will go down.  If a state's current minimum is higher than the federal minimum, the state minimum holds fast against passage of the bill.  In Oregon, he says, the min. is $7.50/hr. and it will remain $7.50 under passage of the bill.  He has a letter from the U.S. Dept. of Labor which he says explains what the Tip credit will mean.  The Dept. of Labor would protect those employees in the seven no-tip credit states, the letter says; it would not read the act as requiring tips to count toward the minimum wage.  In these seven states, the Tip Credit would kick in only if the state raised its minimum wage in the future.  For example, if a non-tip credit state in two years raised its minimum wage one dollar, employers could count that employee's tips toward that one dollar.  No worker's minimum wage will go down as a result of this bill, he says.

Sen. Sessions is bringing up an amendment, co-sponsored by Sens. Chuck Hagel (NE) and Ben Nelson (NE).  This amendment will restore funding for "non-nuclear global strike capabilities"...a "prompt strike weapon"...he wants it to be feasible to use sub-launched ballistic missiles with non-nuclear warheads to provide the president with strike capabilities in urgent situations.  This Trident missile can strike anywhere on the globe, launched from a submarine, within thirty minutes, without including a nuclear explosion.  The Amendment earmarks $77m for its development.  The thing is, Sessions says, we have missiles that we can launch from subs on a moment's notice—but the missiles that are most capable of reaching distant targets in a matter of minutes are nuclear.

The Sessions Amendment has its opposition.  Sen. Jack Reed (RI) voiced concern that our enemies might not know whether the missile we'd just launched from our submarine was nuclear or not nuclear.

Sen. Inouye also opposes it.  He says, These Trident submarines carry 24 tubes.  Right now, those are all nuclear tubes (missiles).  How would Russia or North Korea take it if they saw a missile flying in its direction.  His concerns seems to be that we'd have missiles flying over numerous countries if, e.g., one of these subs fired a non-nuclear missile at Osama bin Laden.

Nor does Sen. Stevens support this amendment.  He says some analysis needs to be done first — a review of political and international factors.  Money is tight and he wants to fund only those efforts that have been fully analyzed.  He also cites the possibility that launching a non-nuclear missile still could be overly provocative.  It could lead to risky strikes, he says.

At [17:54], the Senate moves into a quorum call.  Mr. Akaka...

At [18:24] the Senate is voting on the Sessions Amendment.  It doesn't seem to have much support.  The voting is mixed, with bipartisan support and opposition.  Not too many folks are voting for it.  Prior voted for it but then changed his vote.  It looks like military Repubs support it but even then, it doesn't have Stevens's support, so...Cornyn, Graham, DeMint, that's about it.

Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid (NV) just got a little hot under the collar, seeming to say that Stevens was trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes by shutting down the ability to offer amendments.  Stevens had called for a third reading of the bill, which would end the period for offering amendments.  Stevens says all you have to do is object to the third reading, if you want to stay and debate then let's stay and debate.

Reid says, I wanna get along with everybody.  That gets laughs.  Reid says, I wanna finish this bill, I wanna finish the pension bill, I wanna do the extenders.  

Now there's talk about finishing this Defense bill when they come back from Recess.  Some of my senators are leaving, Reid says.  They don't need to be here to vote on cloture. I'm sorry the defense bill wasn't brought up sooner, he says.  If the distinguished senator wants to stay here all night, that's fine.  We have a list of finite amendments...these two good managers...we'll finish the bill, it'll take no more than two days when we get back here...we're not trying to do anything other than just move along.  

Now Sen. Frist, the Majority Leader.  Everyone knows what business we've got to get done, and what we're seeing here is we've got a lot to get done in a short amount of time.  He is trying to set things out.  Defense appropriations, trifecta bill tomorrow morning, then we have to deal with pensions.  I think we've made good progress.  We have some pending amendments.  He suggests working hard for the next four or five hours, going to the trifecta bill tonight, voting on it, then voting on the pensions bill tonight, getting it all done, three hours, four hours.  He wants a response from the Dem. Leader.

We have a number of amendments pending, says Reid.  People feel strongly about them.  We're not gonna finish the Defense bill tonight.  I know people wanna get work done, we've been willing to move this bill for a long time.  We have about 50 amendments on our side, he says.  With all due respect, I know your job's harder than mine, but we can't finish the defense bill tonight, it just won't happen.  No one has to file cloture.  We'll finish the bill in two days when we get back here.  Maybe we need the break, to find out where we need to go when we get back, because things are moving very rapidly.  

They are talking: they come back on Tuesday, they can finish it that Wednesday.  We need to have a tight agreement on how we'd finish this bill, says Frist.  Stevens wants to talk.  He doesn't want to be disrespectful of anybody.  I think I consider everyone on this floor my friend.  He says, the Men and Women Overseas, they're not taking August off.  Me and Inouye could finish this bill tonight if we had cooperation, he says.  I am gonna be super-critical if this bill doesn't get to the President in time.  

Frist says, if the Chairman and Ranking Member think this bill can be done tonight, we should think about getting this bill done tonight.  It's gonna be hard, but if we march through the amendments, that's what we should do.

Now Reid.  Where was my friend from AK when we were spending all the time on gay marriage and other things?  We don't run this Senate.  It's not our fault that the defense appropriations bill isn't moving forward.  There's too much to do, he says.  If we don't do this pensions bill, there's two airlines that're gonna dump their pensions.  We've got a lot of other things to do besides the Defense Bill.  We won't finish these amendments even if we stay here all night.

Frist says, Let's turn the floor back over to the managers, Reid and I will confer, we'll still vote on the Family Prosperity Act at 9:30 tomorrow morning.  

Sen. Kyl asks for the order and calls up a vote on his amendment.

Right now, the SENATE IS IN CHAOS!!

Amendment passes by voice vote.  Stevens has a package to put through.

[20:29]

It looks as though Frist has moved the schedule up.  There is going to be a vote on the trifecta a.k.a. the Family Prosperity Act a.k.a. the estate tax/minimum wage/tax extenders bill TONIGHT.  The Defense Bill seems to have been set aside until after the August Recess.  The vote on the trifecta will be a cloture vote after 15 minutes for each side.  If the cloture vote is not agreed to, the Senate will move along to consider the Pensions Bill.

Sen. Reid moved that the Extenders be extracted from the trifecta and voted on separately.  Frist objected to that and therefore shot it down.

[20:53]

Sen. Chuck Grassley (IA) spoke for 15 minutes in favor of the trifecta.  Now Durbin is saying it's appropriately called a trifecta because it's a high-stakes gamble and because there are more losers than winners.

Sen. Durbin spoke for the minority for 10 minutes.  Then Sen. Conrad (ND) spoke for the minority for 10 minutes.

Sen. Reid now has the floor.  He says, The Majority Leader has dubbed this trifecta bill the "Family Prosperity Act."  It should be called the Prosperous Family Act, he says.  Sen. Reid says that the Leadership has been missing in action on every major issue facing the country.  He also calls it the "Defecta" instead of the Trifecta.

Sen. Patty Murray (WA) spoke briefly about the tip provision.  She had a letter from the Washington State Bureau of Labor citing its initial interpretation of the bill.  To wit, tipped employees would see a decrease in income under the Trifecta measure because the min wage tip provisions in the trifecta appear to nullify Washington state's provisions prohibiting employers from counting tipped employees' tips from counting toward their hourly wages.  

The question is, When we have a letter from the Federal Bureau of Labor citing its interpretation of the bill, Do We Care what someone in the Washington State Bureau of Labor says?  That's unclear....

Now Sen. Rick Santorum (PA) is speaking.  Now he's done.  Now Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.  She says, How can Reid call this a do-nothing Congress?  We've got a bill combining several measures that this body has worked on for years, and we're ready to pass it.  She says, It's not just the wealthiest Americans that are liable to the current estate tax provisions.  The Democrats are making excuses, she says.

Sen. Jon Kyl now.  He takes up the letter from the State of Washington official.  Kyl cites again to the Federal Dept. of Labor official, again interpreting the bill as not affecting the current wages of tipped employees in the seven states.

Now Sen. McConnell (KY).  He says, What we're hearing from the other side is "Block and Blame."  Each of the three components of the trifecta is supported by a bipartisan majority.

The Motion to Proceed vote is coming up, it will be at 21:40.  Frist is now summing it up.  

Now they are voting.  Majority needs 60 votes to bring debate on the bill to a close.  The notable votes:

—Yays: Nelson (FL), Byrd, Lincoln, Nelson (NE)

—Nays: Voinovich, Chafee

The motion was not agreed to.  There were only 57 votes to end debate.

[23:14]

The Pensions Bill passed 93-5.  The Senate is now wrapping up.  A few Senators including Dodd and Frist have taken some time to speak about austism.  They might have just passed a bill on austism, by voice vote.

I gotta admit, I crashed.  The Senate was still working, passed midnight eastern.  They seemed to be passing some resolutions by unanimous consent...

August 2, 2006: Amendments on FY 2007 Defense Spending

Recap: Today in the Senate, the Senate convened at 9:30 a.m. e.d.t. and resumed consideration of H.R.5631, the Department of Defense FY2006 Appropriations bill.  This bill styles itself as, "Making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes."  Also in the minds of Senators were two other measures which the Senate majority hopes to pass before Friday, a.k.a. commencement of the Summer Recess.  These are: first, a bill including BOTH an estate tax reduction for the years of 2012 to 2021 AND an increase of the minimum wage by $2.10; second, a pensions bill.  The Democrats are opposed to the estate tax/min wage bill but in favor of the pensions bill.  Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (TN) has indicated that the Senate will not get to the pensions bill until it decides the fate of the estate tax/min wage bill.  Frist stated at the close of today's business that a cloture vote on the estate tax bill is scheduled for some time Friday morning.

The Senate has not yet voted on the entire Defense Bill.  The Senate voted today on several amendments to the Defense Spending Bill today.  They passed a Sessions amendment enhancing border security; passed a Dodd amendment updating military machinery; tabled a Durbin amendment to fund brain trauma research at the U. of Chicago; and passed without vote a package of other amendments with the blessing of Subcommittee Chairman Stevens and Ranking Member Inouye.  


Here's how today's action went down in real time...

[10:28 edt]
The quote of the morning comes from Sen. Kit Bond (MO) who said, "There's nothing like an orange jumpsuit on a deliberate leaker to help discourage others from going down that path."  He was talking about leaks he views as burdening the country's ability to fight the War on Terror.

[10:30]

Sen. Jeff Sessions (AL) dittos Sen. Bond.  We need to be more serious about protecting classified information in this government, he says.  It sounds like the Senators are adding amendments to the Defense Spending Bill.  Sen. Sessions has added an amendment.  This Amendment, No. 4775, will provide $1,829,100,000 for the Army National Guard for the construction of 370 miles of triple-layered fencing, and 461 miles of vehicle barriers along the southwest border.

OK, the Defense spending bill is $467b, compared to this year's $439b.  The President requested $463b.  This includes $50b for Iraq & Afghanistan.

[11:00]

Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ) is talking about the Sessions amendment—it directs funding to the National Guard so that they can erect fencing along certain sections of the border with Mexico.  He is talking about coyotes, cartels, and gangs using weapons along the border, using weapons and vehicles to fortify their presence on the border and insure that they can bring their contraband across the border.  The Sessions amendment funding also goes toward sensors, lights, cameras...a mechanism that will support vehicular border patrols.  Kyl says that these border enhancements are part of a Dept. of Homeland Security recommendation; they are authorized by prior legislation but not funded adequately.  This Sessions amendment would provide adequate funding.

[11:14]

Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid (NV) is offering an amendment to the Defense Spending Bill that attaches the "Tax Extenders" currently included on the estate tax/min wage bill (which the Democrats do not want to pass as is).  So Reid is saying, We want to pass these extenders but we want to vote for them without also voting in favor of the estate tax reduction.  The "extenders" are tax provisions that will expire if they are not extended.  These include: tax credit for research and development, deduction for college tuition (up to $4k), capital gains rates for timber, etc.  These provisions affect everyone, he says.  The estate tax reductions will benefit 8,100 people, he says.  Reid's amendment also includes a deduction for state and local sales tax; a deduction for teachers who spend money on classroom supplies.  But Senator Frist says no, says Reid.  People say the House isn't in session, he says.  The House is still in session, he says.  They can't adjourn unless we give them permission (it's true, read the Constitution!)  Budget-busting tax breaks for the wealthiest of the wealthy in our country, he says.

Now, Assistant Minority Leader Richard Durbin (IL) cuts in.  Why does he do this?  He is taking away from Reid by entering these colloquies with him.  Compared to Reid, Durbin is sandpaper.

Sen. Ted Stevens (AK) makes a point of order that the Reid Amendment violates Senate Rule 16.  The point of order is sustained and the amendment falls!  [This happened because the amendment is not germane; it cannot be attached to the Defense Spending Bill without getting 60 votes, which would not happen.]

Now, Sen. Debbie Stabenow (MI) says that what has just happened is a shame.  She echoes Sen. Mikulski's appraisal of the pensions bill: it is being held up in an effort of political maneuvering.  The estate tax provisions don't even extend until 2010! she says.  And we're holding up the pensions bill to take care of estate tax provisions now?

[14:43]

The Sessions Amendment, funding the erection of a wall along some parts of the border and otherwise funding programs to beef up border security passed easily, by the vote of 94 to 3.  Only Feingold, Hagel, and Jeffords voted against it.

Now, Sen. Durbin has proposed an amendment to grant $2m to the University of Chicago to continue or extend research into Traumatic Brain Injuries suffered by troops in military action.  Sen. Stevens, the Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee says that no doubt it's good work but that the U. of Chicago should compete equally with other institutions to win grants from the National Institutes of Health for research monies.  He characterized the amendment as basically giving the U. of Chicago $2m.  He characterized it as an earmark and said everyone wants to offer similar earmarks but that we can't allow it to go on.

Sen. Durbin retorts that Traumatic Brain Injury has become the signature injury of this war.  Now him and Stevens are debating.  Stevens has an aide at his side and she hands him papers and whispers to him from time to time.  Stevens had said that if we spend $2m on this it will take money away from military readiness but Durbin disputes this.  The U. of Chicago is one of the premier institutes when it comes to this kind of technology, he says.  Durbin says, Yeah, it's an earmark.  I admit it.  I'm not doing it under the cover of night.  Is it so hard to come up with $2m for research on epilectic seizures when so many of our troops are returning with this problem?  

Durbin now asks for permission to modify and he has another amendment he has just sent to the desk.  He says it takes $2m from his and Sen. Obama's projects already in the bill.  We would take the money from "our own projects," he says, and can't fathom why Stevens should should have any argument against it.  It doesn't take away from military readiness, Durbin says.  

Apparently, they already had this argument in Committee and Stevens says Durbin wouldn't take "No" for an answer.  Stevens says funding for Health is not part of this subcommittee's purview.  He admits, he made a mistake several years ago by including research for breast cancer in a defense spending bill.  Don't tell me I'm objecting to brain research, Stevens says, I've been a victim of brain injury [He was in a bad learjet accident in 1978, which killed his wife and five others...]

Durbin eventually quits his argument, saying he does not want to belabor the point.

[15:00]

Now Sen. Ken Salazar (CO) is paying tribute to Sens. Inouye and Stevens.  
He offered an amendment, which passed without a roll-call vote.

[15:42]

Senator Byron Dorgan (ND) must be tasked with exposing largesse and waste in the country's Iraq-related spending.  He is talking about waste plaguing no-bid contracts in Iraq.  He lists contracting firms and their failures.  Halliburton, Custer Battles.  Contaminated water, security at the Baghdad Airport.  He is making virtually the same presentation today as he did last week.  We need to take a hard look at what's happening, he says.  How is the money we're appropriating being spent?  We have not lived up to our oversight responsibility, he says.  He has an amendment but says he knows it's not germane and would not survive a point of order.  It would crack down on war profiteers.  He wants it to be considered.  Current amendment set aside so this one can be considered.  

But here's Senator Stevens.  He is appalled by some of the information that Sen. Dorgan has brought before us.  I support such an effort, he says, and would  be open to an amendment allowing us to shoot such people, but...it is too broad, says Sen. Stevens.  It would apply government-wide, he says.  Sen. Dorgan's work should be considered, but it shouldn't be on this bill, Stevens says.  He makes a point of order that it violates Rule 16, and the Amendment falls!

At some point in here were two speakers and one amendment passage of interest:

—Sen. Judd Gregg (NH) appeared to be griping about the amount of emergency spending, questioning why the leadership was allowing so much "emergency" spending to pass when we have already been at the Iraq/Afghanistan war for several years.

—Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) declared drought conditions in the Great Plains and warned of impending catastrophe due to the extreme heat and the lack of rain.

—Sen. Chris Dodd's (CT) amendment passed 97 to 0; it includes expenditures of $6b for improvements to military machinery (trucks, etc.)  In its own words, its purpose is, "To make available an additional $6,700,000,000 to fund equipment reset requirements resulting from continuing combat operations, including repair, depot, and procurement activities."

[18:07]

Durbin's Amendment for $2m to U. of Chicago research on traumatic brain injuries was just tabled (killed) by a vote of 54 to 43.  It was pretty much party line.  

Now Stevens is raising a series of points of order to fell a number of proposed amendments.

The Senate is now in a quorum call.

[18:10]

Stevens is back on.  He wants to get through the rest of the amendments.  Four amendments get through without any objection from the other side (Sen. Inouye).  

The Kennedy Amendment is pending; Stevens suggests the absence of a quorum.  Mr. Akaka...

[18:12]

[20:28]

The Senate finished up a while ago.  They will, according to Majority Leader Frist, hopefully finish up the Defense Spending Bill tomorrow.  Then, on Friday Morning, the Senate will vote on a motion for cloture on the estate tax/min wage bill.

August 1, 2006: Gulf Coast Energy Bill Passes

[Today in the Senate, the big news was the passage of S.3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Bill.  It got 71 Yeas, and 25 nays.  Here's how it all went down...]

...The Senate reconvenes at 8:45 e.d.t. to resume consideration of S.3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security bill.  Coverage is on CSPAN2.

[10:22 edt]

So far this morning, party heavyweights have been slugging it out in partisan fashion about the current measures before the Senate as well as larger issues, such as what each party's priorities are.  Senate Minority Leader Reid has admonished the Republicans for the Minimum Wage measure.  He says that Nevada prohibits tips as counting toward the minimum wage salary.  A state like Nevada could no longer prohibit such accounting under the minimum wage measure before the Senate.  Assistant Minority Leader Richard Durbin (IL) is also on the floor, disputing the majesty of the estate tax repeal.  

Republicans speaking so far include Majority Leader Frist (TN), Asst. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY), and Senator Judd Gregg (NH).  Sen. Gregg noted that raising the minimum wage by $2.10 would be an increase of 40%, no small increase.  Sen. Gregg refers to the estate tax as "The Death Tax."

The Democrats are going heavy on the estate tax repeal effort as representative of the Republicans' priorities.

[10:27]

Sens. Reid and Durbin are having a little colloquy.  Reid notes that the Senate has spent more time this year on estate tax repeal than any other issue.

[11:59]

Sen. Jeff Sessions (AL) talked for awhile in support of the Gulf Energy Bill.  

So, too, Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN).

Now, Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) is explaining why America is "The World's Biggest Borrower."  He has graphics.  He is couching this in terms of the Republican effort to eliminate the estate tax for the wealthiest Americans.  Let's go borrow some more money from Japan and China, he says.  He posted a graphic showing that Pres. Bush has racked up more debt in his presidency than all other previous presidents combined.  Cutting revenue, increasing spending, and now cutting revenue some more, he wonders.  Sen. Conrad is the Budget Committee Ranking Member.  This is a farce, he says, a disaster for the economic strength of our country.  An estate must exceed $4m before any estate tax is due under current law he says.  Up to $7m in 2009; no estate tax in 2010.  Now a graph showing that the number of taxable estates is falling.  Of course, he is not mentioning how the estate tax will operate after 2010 if the proposed estate tax measure before the Senate is not passed.  

The U.S. borrows 65% of the money borrowed by countries in the world today, says Conrad.

Apparently, this estate tax reduction would run from 2012 to 2021.  If that's true, 2011 sounds like a bad year to die because after no estate tax in 2010, the rates will go back up in 2011, and the exemption would cover fewer estates.  According to the NYT, 18 families have lobbied Congress in the amount of $200m to repeal the estate tax.

How do you get out of debt, he asks.  You could try to do what the Germans did after World War I: inflate it away.  Inflate the value of your currency so much that you have more dollars to pay off the debt.  Sounds good except that in the hands of your citizens the purchasing power of that dollar drops markedly.  Or, you can cut spending and raise taxes, he says.  That doesn't sound so good either.  It's certainly not politically popular and therefore is not likely to happen.  It's an irresponsible proposal, he says.

[12:25]

Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ) comes on to respond to Sen. Conrad.  Kyl says let's compare those who worry about how much money the gov't has versus letting people decide what to do with their own money.  So, from this, it follows that it doesn't matter how much debt the government carries as long as its citizens have money in their pockets.  But I would say to Kyl, What if the money in the citizens' pockets turns out to be worthless...because the backer of that money, the government, is penniless, its only power being to call for the printing of more dollars...which are increasingly worthless.

[12:30]

The Senate has gone into recess.  C-SPAN2 is airing a clip from this morning's Washington Journal, including an interview with Sen. Mary Landrieu (LA).  She is the authority on the Gulf Energy Bill.  72 votes for cloture she says, which is a really strong vote.  She is talking about natural gas prices.  Now the revenue sharing.  This is the big issue.  Fairness concerns.  Landrieu really knows her stuff but I don't know that I trust her.  I feel like she's selling something.  She talks as though she's practised what she's gonna say.  

A graphic of numbers coming in from drilling leases that would be established under this bill.  It still helps reduce the deficit, she says.  Just because the federal government doesn't get it all doesn't mean it doesn't get more than it's getting now.  She's pro-drilling, basically, she says.  She supported ANWR, although she can understand opposition to it.  He asked her who her opponents were on this.  The CA senators are way up there because they are afraid that this will lead to drilling off of the California coast.  The House bill leans that way; the Senate bill does not.

She has a graphic showing that not much gas seeps into the environment upon drilling.  Only 1% of seepage is drilling-related.  63% of seepage is natural, says the graphic.

Now they are taking calls.  The first caller is an environmentalist, but from WV, and totally in support of the bill.  Landrieu is so smooth she says I haven't been to WV, but it is often on her mind.  Once we get this done, maybe we can work on something in WV she says.  Second Caller, in favor of drilling anywhere, but against federal government spending.  Leases are bidded; have to pay to bid; fed govt usually gets 100% but under this bill fed gov gets only 50%, 12% goes back to the environment.

Third caller, How can a country like Brazil be energy independent?  Can it happen?  This is the direction America must move in, she says.   We were energy indy, but in the 1960's something happened, America got off course.  We are importing from places that are dangerous.  It's dangerous to change into liquid in order to import it; the LNG ports are dangerous.  If we raise it at home, it never has to be liquified.  Also, ethanol.  It takes natural gas to make ethanol.  We'll get more information to you, but thank you for your question.  So, nothing about Brazil.

Buffer for Florida.  125 mile buffer.  A graphic of the buffer.  And, certain areas marked off for "military exercises".  So, that area cannot be drilled in.

Eroding coastline...trust fund to restore...It looks like 100 miles from LA, so Florida only gets 25 extra miles...another caller...pro-drilling...brainwashing in college...she supports drilling everywhere, has a biology degree...best friends are industry CEOs...tell the Middle East to go take a hike...Landrieu says she is correct and thanks her for sharing the perspective of a teacher...energy has to be produced, she says...[maybe she should tell people to use less energy]...

The show is wrapping up.  She warns the country that it has an attitude that nothing can hurt us and that needs to change...and there's gonna a tsunami to hit Seattle, and there's gonna be a Category Five into Long Island, so we gotta get ready...

Live senate coverage resumes at 2:15 eastern.
[12:58 edt]

[14:14 edt]

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (MD) is on the floor.  She is saying that Senators are unsure when they will vote on the pension bill, that it is being held up by the majority until the tax/wage bill is decided.  She calls for passage this week, before the recess.  Let's protect the mechanics and the pilots and stewardesses, she says.  Bring up the pension bill after we dispose of this coastal drilling issue, she says.  She yields the floor.

Now, Sen. David Vitter (LA).  He's got seven unanimous consent requests, no objection, entered into the record.

He supports S.3711, the Gulf Coast Energy Bill and he wants to dispel some myths regarding it.

[14:48 edt]

Sen. Tom Harkin (IA) spoke against the Gulf Coast Energy Bill.  He characterized it as a "missed opportunity" because it did not focus any attention on conservation efforts.  He underscored the senators' inability to offer any amendments on the bill because the majority leader brought the bill to the floor in such a way that amendments were forbidden.  He wanted to offer an amendment on CAFE standards, raising vehicle fuel economy.  He characterized it as a giveaway to four Gulf states (TX, LA, MS, and AL).  He read some lines from Harry Truman opposing a similar drilling effort.

Sen. Trent Lott (MS) came on afterward and noted that Harkin seemed to oppose the bill because it wasn't big enough.  And, that later this week, we would see Senators oppose a bill because it was too big (he is referring to the estate tax/min wage bill).

It will bring in revenue, he says.  If we don't pass the bill, there will be no revenue.  So, how can you say that the U.S. treasury is losing on this?  Lott says that the Gulf Coast states should benefit because they haven't in the past, because they have been hit by bad weather, have seen their shorelines eroded away, their estuaries tainted.  20% of the state revenue goes to local peoples, he says.  We've been getting zero for years, he says, for all the pumping and drilling in the Gulf.  We want to level it with what the West has been getting for years.  He says the measure is acceptable for Florida.  He says China is about to drill 60 miles off of the coast of Cuba which is within 60 miles of Florida.  So how can we not allow ourselves to do it?

Now Sen. Lott wants to speak about this week.  We need to put aside our pride, he says.  I wouldn't have taken this week up the way it is, he says, but somebody's gotta put it together.  This could be a real good week.  We need to produce, and we need to do it this week.  Have people not seen the number on how people view us?
Energy, pensions, working people, then there's the so-called Trifecta, three of something. A huge payoff on the trifecta:

—minimum wage
—extenders: tax credit for research and development, deduction for college tuition, capital gains rates for timber
—death tax compromise

[15:05]

Sen. Larry Craig says the Senator has just counseled me to stay calm but I paid $3.25/gallon for gas last night.  And it's government policy that's caused it.  America thought it could conserve its way out of the problem...sense of false security...he said it was stupid to take the coast off-limits for drilling...stupid...all in the name of the environment...improvements in science...not one drop of oil spilled as a result of Katrina...it was the politics of the seventies and eighties and nineties...gas was relatively inexspenive...

[15:30]

Senator Orrin Hatch (UT) supports the bill.  He also supports development of oil shale in the Western US, specifically Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.  His numbers show that the gas to be recovered under the bill will suffice to heat 6 million homes for 15 years.  

[But how much gas is this, really?  Six million homes for 15 years?  There are 110 million homes in the US, so this amount of gas is enough to last the entire country about ten months.  So that's what this measure is buying the country, ten months worth of natural gas.]

Hatch has supported conservation efforts in the past, he says.  He helped enact tax incentives for hybrid vehicles, and had to expense plenty of political capital to do so.  But he has not lost sight of the fact that the U.S. needs to produce more of its own oil and gas.

[15:35]

Now, Sen. Charles Schumer (NY).  He wants the CAFE standards.  He promises that if the Gulf Coast Energy Bill comes back from conference with the House including drilling in areas additional to those under the Senate bill, those on his side of the aisle will do everything they can to defeat it.  Let it be a warning, he says.  [The House version of the bill would allow drilling 100 miles off the coast of any state.    Such a provision would probably sink any such bill in the Senate.]

Sen. Leahy calls for an envoy, joins Sen. Chuck Hagel (NE) in doing so.  Imperfect results might come from negotiating with the likes of Hezbollah but fewer deaths will result.  We need a peacekeeping force to save lives.  We support Israel's right of self-defense.  Destroying Lebanon will not make Israel more secure.  Hezbollah might be strengthened by the destruction of Lebanon.  He yields and suggests the absence of a quorum.  The clerk will call the roll.  Mr. Akaka...

[15:48]

But here is Sen. Mark Dayton.  He is offering an amendment to the Energy Bill. He says it is his right, or should be, but because of parliamentary maneuvering by the Senate Majority leader...the tree has been filled...by such gimmicks as...changed the Bill's effective date, then changed it back again...uncalled for and unwise...mockery of Majority Leader's promise that Senate would vote on comprehensive energy reform by the end of the year...the days of this Congress are almost gone...

[17:50]

The Gulf Coast Energy Bill passed.  After it passed, Sen. Pete Domenici (NM) spoke for awhile, and said his thanks.  Sen. Frist spoke for awhile.  Sen. Reid announced that Sen. Max Baucus (MT) would not be here for the rest of the week in order to be with his family upon the death of Sen. Baucus's nephew, a marine who was killed in Anbar Province, Iraq.

Now, Sens. Ted Stevens (AK) and Daniel Inouye (HI) are talking about a defense spending bill.  This bill is for FY 2007 Defense Spending and is now before the Senate.

[17:53]

The Senate has gone into a period of morning business.  Sen. John Thune (SD) is on the floor.  He wants up to 15 minutes...[end of transmission]