October 31, 2007: The Senate agrees to proceed to debate on S-CHIP

[17:50]
The Senate has adjourned until 10:00 tomorrow. The next procedural vote on S-CHIP is scheduled for 1:00 a.m. Friday morning unless leaders agree to a different time.

[16:59]
Now Mike Enzi (WY) on why he just voted against S-CHIP. He says that the new bill is no different than the old bill and "that it still stinks."

Enzi is in line with the Bush Administration in asking for a bill that requires that the first 90% of children to receive benefits under the bill be at or under 200% of the poverty line. Enzi says that over-privileged children are awarded benefits under the bill before under-privileged kids through an approach called "income disregard."

He also has a problem with the fact that some adults are still covered under the bill, although he concedes that the bill will transition adults out of S-CHIP and into Medicaid with time.

He says that the bill will award health coverage to some illegal immigrants because its identity verification requirements are not stringent enough.

He says that the idea of paying for the S-CHIP increase with an increased tobacco tax won't work because to pay for the program year-after-year, the amount of smokers in the U.S. would actually have to increase. At the same time, he says, we are trying to get people to stop smoking.

[16:55]
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) is giving a speech about torture. It is a little over-the-top. Talking about light and barrios and referencing Churchill.

"I feel it is my duty to push toward this moment, and with the strength that God has given me, to push toward the light."

But his point about torture policy is fair. It is to ask, "What path is our country going to choose?"

Whitehouse says he is torn on the Mukasey nomination for Attorney General, but it sounds like he is leaning against supporting Mukasey due to Mukasey refusal to deem waterboarding a torture technique. Yes, he is going to oppose the nomination because he does not want to "go down the dark stairway."

[16:45]
The S-CHIP bill cleared a procedural hurdle in the Senate as 62 senators voted to return to floor debate on the measure. The vote was 62-33, with no Democrats opposing the motion to proceed to the bill and fifteen Republicans voting aye, including Alexander (TN), Collins (ME), Coleman (MN), Corker (TN), Hatch (UT), Stevens (AK), Grassley (IA), Snowe (ME), Specter (PA), Roberts (KS), Sununu (NH), Lugar (IN), Smith (OR), Domenici (NM), and Murkowski (AK).

Senators Bond (MO) and Hutchison (TX) appear to have changed their tune on the bill, if one considers that they voted in favor of it a month ago.

Warner (VA), Bayh (IN), Obama (IL), Biden (DE), and Wyden (OR) did not vote.

Precap:

Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) said yesterday that he planned to hold a vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to the S-CHIP bill. This vote was scheduled to take pace not earlier than 18:00 this evening. It would require 60 votes for passage. Last month, the measure had the support of 67 senators.

When cloture on a motion to proceed is achieved, senators are no longer able to offer amendments to the bill.

Yesterday, though, Reid expressed disbelief when his unanimous consent request to move this cloture vote to follow completion of the Farm Bill. Republican leadership objected to the notion of agreeing to schedule a cloture vote on a bill the terms of which were not yet known. So, the cloture vote on the motion to the bill remains set for tonight.

It is still quite possible that Senate leadership will agree on some other way to proceed to the S-CHIP bill, in which case the Senate would not vote tonight on cloture.

October 30, 2007: Amtrak Reforms Passes; Cracks Develop in Senate Stance on S-CHIP

[20:26]
The Senate adjourned earlier this evening. It will return to session tomorrow at 12:00. After a one-hour period of morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of a motion to proceed to the S-CHIP bill. A motion to proceed only requires 50 votes to pass, but if a cloture vote on the motion to proceed is required, 60 senators will have to vote in the affirmative. Reid will likely not allow such a vote to go ahead if he does not have the 60 votes. I'll be interested to see how this plays out tomorrow and whether some other arrangement will be hammered out in the meantime.

[19:13]
Durbin is taking care of some Senate business. Reid often handles these matters. Perhaps is is occupied with negotiations over S-CHIP and the farm bill.

[19:13]
Richard Durbin (IL) is speaking about Iraq.

[18:48]
The Senate is in quorum call. Not much has happened since the Senate voted to pass the Amtrak bill.

I am anticipating Harry Reid's closing remarks; especially interested to see what he says about the future of S-CHIP and when the Senate will take up the Farm Bill.

Republican supporters of S-CHIP told Reid that they needed a couple of days to shape the bill so that it would garner more Republican support, whether that be the White House or House voters.

Reid propounded a unanimous consent request to vote for cloture on the S-CHIP bill late Wednesday but then take up the Farm Bill before returning to S-CHIP in a couple of weeks. The Republican leadership objected to this arrangement, leaving plans for the bill up in the air. The Republican leadership did not want to vote for cloture on S-CHIP when it remained unclear what the S-CHIP bill was going to look like. A successful cloture motion would limit further debate on the bill, making it harder to amend ex post facto.

[18:06]
Claire McCaskill (MO) is giving an elegy for Porter Wagoner. She says that Wagoner was from Missouri.

[16:55]
The Amtrak bill has passed with the support of virtually all of the Democrats and a majority of the Republicans. The bill now has to get the approval of the House of Representatives.

[16:40]
The Senate is in the midst of final passage of the Amtrak Reauthorization Act of 2007. A decent number of Republicans have voted against it, but it will pass with bipartisan support.

[16:11]
The Senate is voting on a DeMint (SC) amendment to the Amtrak bill. The amendment would require Amtrak to print on each ticket the amount of federal subsidy going toward the ticket. This amendment does not have very much support and it will not pass. Its detractors, including Lautenberg (NJ), argued that airline tickets do not feature the amount of federal subsidies supporting each ticket sold. The cost of printing this on each ticket would also be prohibitive, said Lautenberg, because the amount of subsidy could change.

[15:03]
The S-CHIP bill might be falling apart in the Senate. Lott (MS) says that there are "huge problems" with current negotiation on the bill. He says that Senate proponents of the bill including Hatch (UT) have gone around Republican leadership in trying to reach a deal on the bill. As far as Lott can tell, the new version of S-CHIP that the House passed last week actually costs more than the version of S-CHIP that Bush vetoed.

Republican leadership and a certain contingent of Senate Republicans have objected to a Reid unanimous consent request that would have moved the Senate right into S-CHIP upon completion of the Farm Bill. The objecting contingent wants to know what the S-CHIP bill is going to look like before they will agree to return to debate on it.

[14:51]
Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) is speaking on the floor. Based on what he is saying, the Senate is not going to return to S-CHIP this week. Maybe not next week either. He said that Republican proponents of S-CHIP (e.g. Hatch (UT), Grassley (IA)) asked him for more time to come up with some changes to the legislation that will make it acceptable to the President or, in lieu of that, veto-proof.

The plan will be to work on the Farm Bill and then come back to S-CHIP in a couple of weeks. Once the farm bill is complete (which could take awhile!) the Senate would vote on a motion to proceed to cloture on the S-CHIP bill. You need 60 votes for that. Reid seemed to suggest that even though 67 senators previously voted for S-CHIP that somehow the Senate wouldn't have 60 votes for cloture on a return to S-CHIP.

[12:38]
The Senate has recessed for party lunches. Back in action at 14:15.

[12:10]
The Senate is voting for cloture on the Amtrak bill. Quick aside: After every vote, the senators mill around on the floor chatting about this and that, making it impossible for anyone to speak. It is the president pro tempore's responsibility to get the Senate back in order. Certain senators, sitting as president pro tem, are better at this than others. A lot of time, robert Byrd will turn on his mike in the audience and ask for order. Today he tells Bob Casey (PA), who was sitting as president pro tem, "Please crack that gavel, that's what it's for."

Result (60 yeas needed): Cloture succeeded

Yeas: Most senators
Nays: Republicans such as Coburn, Barrasso, Shelby, and Sununu

[11:43]
First vote of the day. The clerk will call the roll. The question is on the Coburn Amendment to the Amtrak Bill, No. 3474. See 11:16 entry below for explanation of Coburn's Amtrak amendment.

Result: 67-24 voted nay, the amendment was not agreed to

Yeas: Some Republicans and McCaskill (MO)
Nays: Everyone else

[11:38]
Now there is some back and forth between Coburn and Amtrak floor managers Lott and Lautenberg. Coburn says that American Airlines saved $30m last year by restricting food service. And you know what, he says, we still fly American Airlines. We just buy our food before we get on. He says that Amtrak loses $250m on food service every three years.

Lautenberg worries that if food service is cut on a line, people are not going to ride the line at all, and it will have to be cut.

[11:26]
Trent Lott (MS) is helping to manage the Amtrak bill on the floor. He is responding to a Coburn (OK) amendment on Amtrak food service (see below, 11:16).

He says that if the Amtrak lines can't offer food service, you might as well terminate the line. If you're on an overnight line, what are you going to do if there's no food service? Still, Lott agrees that Amtrak needs to look at how it manages its food service.

Lott, though, has a problem with Coburn's amendment to the extent that it requires Amtrak to renegotiate food contracts if, after one year, it is losing money on food service for a particular line. The amendment goes further to require termination of food service if Amtrak is losing food service on a particular line for two straight years. Lott can't support this.

[11:16]
Tom Coburn (OK) is offering an amendment to the Amtrak bill, No. 3474. It affects food service on Amtrak. "Anybody knows," says Coburn, "that when you fly American Airlines you can buy a Milky Way for $3." His amendment requires Amtrak to report yearly on how its food and beverage service is managed.

Under the amendment, all line would have to submit quarterly reports on food service profit or loss to the Secretary of Transportation. If a line loses money on food service during any one fiscal year, it must renegotiate its food service contracts (including labor). If during two consecutive fiscal years, a line loses money on food service, it must terminate food service. It can only recommence food service on that line after the passage of one year and with the approval of the Secretary of Transportation.

Coburn points to a chart showing that year-after-year, federal subsidies to Amtrak have increased. Coburn doesn't mind too much federal subsidies to Amtrak, but if Amtrak can't break even selling food and beverages, it should stop offering them, says Coburn. "I can't figure why we're subsidizing peoples' purchase of Three Muskateers and bottled water. The airlines know how to take advantage of a captive audience, he says. Why can't Amtrak do it?"

In general, the federal subsidies allow Amtrak to continue to operate on those lines that lose money. One example of a line making money is the Acela line that runs from DC to Boston.

[11:07]
Soon there will be a cloture vote on the Amtrak Reauthorization Act of 2007. The bill extends federal subsidies to the Amtrak service lines.

This will limit debate. One or two votes on remaining amendments could follow. Then the Senate will recess for a couple of hours. Later this afternoon or tonight, expect a vote on final passage of the bill.

The bill has broad, bipartisan support and should easily pass.

[11:05]
So far this morning, general speeches. Edward Kennedy (MA) reappeared in the Senate for the first time since undergoing surgery to clear blockage in an artery. He spoke about the S-CHIP bill, which the Senate could turn to this afternoon.

Ben Nelson (NE) spoke about Iraq.

Monday, October 29, 2007: Senate Resumes This Afternoon

Barbara Boxer (CA) will control the first sixty minutes of the session, presumably to talk about the CA wildfires and/or this hubbub about Julie Gerberding. Ms. Gerberding, the head of the CDC, submitted written testimony to Congress last week but her testimony appeared to have been significantly censored by the White House. The testimony pertained to the impacts of global warming on public health. Boxer chairs the Environment and Public Works committee.

For its part, the White House seemed to say that it deleted six of 12 pages that Gerberding would have submitted because Gerberding went beyond the area of her expertise in parts of the written testimony. President Bush's science adviser, John Marburger, was behind the redaction. In his view, Gerberding's prediction that global warming would exacerbate air pollution-related diseases conflicted with findings by a UN panel studying the same issue. It is ironic that the White House would ever find fault with a finding because it conflicted with the conclusions of the UN.

From a Constitutional standpoint, it is worrisome that the White House would interfere with Congress's ability to gather information so as to shape better public policy and write the best legislation possible. True, Gerberding is a member of the Executive Branch and therefore serves "at the pleasure of the President." However, she is also one of the country's foremost experts on public health. It is wrong to deny her opinion to Congress — a.k.a. the People's Branch, or as Robert Byrd (WV) would say, "The Congress is the People. The people!"

Gerberding has since said that the official (edited) testimony more or less said what she had intended to say and that the editing did not affect her statement. Boxer has nonetheless demanded that the White House turn over all versions of Gerberding's written testimony including drafts.

--

There won't be any votes today. Tomorrow, the Senate will vote for final passage of the Amtrak Reauthorization bill.

Once that's done with, it appears that the Senate will return to consideration of the S-CHIP bill. The House passed more or less the same S-CHIP bill that President Bush vetoed earlier this month. The most natural place for the bill to be amended in compromise is the Senate. One of Bush's closest allies in the Senate, someone like Jon KYl (AZ) could offer as an amendment to the bill the terms that President Bush would agree to. The Senate could then vote on that "counteroffer."

Otherwise, you have to wonder why the Senate would spend more time on this bill that still has not shown the ability to get an override vote in the House.

Hold on!

The official Senate definition of a hold is, "An informal practice by which a Senator informs his or her floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The Majority Leader need not follow the Senator's wishes, but is on notice that the opposing Senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure."

The hold has traditionally been a dark art of the Senate, something done cravenly in the cloak room. However, Chris Dodd (CT) took to the floor today to announce that he was putting a hold on the latest proposed update of the FISA bill because it grants immunity to telcomm companies that aided the Bush Administration's efforts to eavesdrop on the conversations of Americans absent a court order in the wake of September 11th. Perhaps this signals a new era of the hold, in response to new Senate law that took effect in September mandating that senators slapping holds on bills come forth into the light six days later.

Here's the deal. The majority leader can bring a bill to the floor by one of two methods. First, he can do so through a unanimous consent request. This is how hold foil most legislation. One senator frustrating unanimous consent prevents a bill from seeing the floor by refusing to allow the majority leader to call it up this way.

But, the majority leader can also make a motion that the Senate move to consideration of a particular bill. All this motion needs to succeed is a simple majority vote (51 yeas). However, the motion itself is up for debate and therefore can be subjected to a cloture vote. This means that 60 senators must vote for a motion to proceed on the bill before it even reaches the Senate floor.

Are there 60 votes in favor of the FISA bill that grants retroactive immunity for telecoms that breached their clients' Fourth Amendment rights? Maybe we'll find out!

I have read that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) plans to use every procedural tactic in the book to evade Dodd's hold on the bill. If he calls for a motion to proceed to the bill in mid-November, we will know that he is taking this unorthodox approach to bringing this bill to the floor.

October 26, 2007: Dodd places a hold on new FISA bill

[14:03]
The Senate is done for the day. See you Monday but not until Tuesday for the next vote.

[11:01]
In a surprisingly frank speech on the Senate floor Christopher Dodd (CT) has announced that he has placed a hold on a new version of the FISA bill, which was passed by the Intelligence committee last week.

Dodd says that he has placed a hold on the bill because he does not believe that telecom companies should be granted retroactive immunity for cooperating with government requests to access the private communications of telecom customers.

It is unusual for a senator to state publicly that he or she has placed a hold on a bill. Holds are a common quirk of the Senate. Basically, for a bill to proceed toward debate on the floor of the Senate, senators must unanimously agree to bring it up for a "first reading." Because this action must unanimously agreed to, one single senator can hold up a bill by refusing to consent to the bill's first reading. This is what Dodd has done.

The new version of the FISA bill — the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 — would replace a hastily passed update of the legislation that the President signed into law in August. In hindsight, the Democratic Congress regretted passing a bill that fell short in protecting the civil liberties of Americans. The new FISA bill is supposed to fix shortcomings in the August bill.

However, there has been dispute over a provision in the new legislation that would grant to telecom companies retroactive immunity for their complicity in the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping of conversations by ordinary Americans in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

Jay Rockefeller (WV), who heads the Intelligence committee, championed the immunity provision last week. It later came to light that he had received a significant increase in campaign donations from telecom companies in 2007, totaling some $42k.

Thus, because of Dodd's hold the bill that Rockefeller's Intelligence committee signed off on last week appears to be stalled in the Senate. Of course, that leaves Americans still under the governance of August's dubious update of the FISA bill.

Preview

:The Senate is in session this morning but there won't be much action today. The Senate doesn't vote on Fridays or Mondays anymore.

Reid (NV) filed cloture on the Amtrak bill this morning. This limits further debate on the bill. I expect the Amtrak measure to pass next Tuesday. It provides $11b over the next six fiscal years for improvements to Amtrak and perhaps an addition of some intercity routes.

October 25, 2007: Internet Tax Moratorium Will Continue

[19:45]
The Senate has just adjourned. Hey, no votes tomorrow. None Monday, neither. So if votes are your thing see you Tuesday!

Seriously folks, the Senate picks up tomorrow at 9:30 with general speeches until 14:00 or so. Scheduled to speak are Dodd (on vacation from Iowa), Dorgan, and Inhofe (for up to 2 hours—lookout!)

[19:38]
Carper (DE) is back talking about Amtrak. He makes the point that a lot of the tracks that Amtrak cruises on are freight-owner, i.e. Burlington, Mo-Pac, etc. He says, hey, part of the reason Amtrak runs into problems is that the freights have priority on their own lines.

So maybe some of the $11b of this Amtrak authorization will help alleviate that problem. I don't know if that means building new lines (unlikely—where to build them) or buying some sort of "lease" on the freight rail lines. He says that there is increasing traffic on the freight rail lines because of the rising cost of gasoline and air travel.

[19:31]
John Sununu (NH) was a big proponent of extending the internet tax moratorium. For his part, he wanted to see it made permanent. Hey, he says, the moratorium would have expired Nov. 1. Yikes! He says, yeah, it took 32 seconds to pass in a unanimous consent request, but a lot of work went into it.

You know, with all the to-do surrounding a lot of legislation in Congress, it is amazing that something as real as the specter of internet taxes gets passed without so much as a "nay."

[19:23]
Carper (DE) is following up on the internet tax moratorium. He is talking about how it prevents states and localities from adding tax surcharges to people's internet bills.

The internet tax moratorium will be extended for several more years, depending on what agreement the Senate and House reach in reconciling their respective bills. The Senate just today passed by a unanimous vote an extension on the moratorium by seven years. The House passed a four-year extension.

It is impressive that this legislation could be passed without so much as a voice vote. This means, essentially, that not one senator had an objection to extending the moratorium on internet taxes.

Carper is talking about how a permanent moratorium is maybe not the best idea. He used to be governor of Delaware. He says that inevitable technology changes lend credence to piecemeal extensions of the moratorium rather than a permanent ban on state and local internet taxes.

[19:18]
Harry Reid (NV) interrupts to offer a unanimous consent request. Senate business. Introducing an act to extend the moratorium on taxing the Internet. This bill is being passed—

Oh, wait, here's Mitch McConnell (KY) the minority leader. No, he's not objecting. He most certainly wants to see this bill pass. This is a bill to continue the moratorium on internet taxes for another seven years, which is actually twice as long as the moratorium passed by the House. McConnell says that the moratorium should be permanent.

Calendar notes. No votes tomorrow, no votes Monday. Votes will pick up Tuesday with completion of Amtrak legislation.

[19:15]
Tom Carper (DE) is speaking in favor of the Amtrak Reauthorization bill. This bill authorizes the government to spend $11b on Amtrak safety, improvement, and expansion over a seven-year period through FY 2012—

[18:14]
There were a couple of votes earlier today on amendments to the Amtrak Reauthorization bill. Both were defeated.

Right now Sherrod Brown (OH) is talking about home foreclosures.

[17:30]
Right now Robert Byrd (WV) is speaking in tribute to the late Paul Wellstone. A senator representing Minnesota, Wellstone died five years ago today in an airplane crash. He was a vocal critic of the decision to launch a war in Iraq.

Byrd is closing his tribute with a poem, "a remarkable poem for a remarkable man." The poem is "God, give us men!" by Josiah Gilbert Holland.

Looking heavenward, Byrd says, "Thank you God for this man, this remarkable man, Paul Wellstone. Whence cometh another?"

Roll Call: DREAM Act

The DREAM Act, a.k.a. an act for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors, failed to get past a cloture vote earlier today. It garnered 52 yeas to 44 nays.

The DREAM Act represented what is likely the final Democrat attempt in 2007 to get across some sort of change in immigration policy. The Act would have given aliens who entered the country illegally at less than 16 years of age but who were not yet 30 the chance to obtain U.S. citizenship granted they had achieved certain educational goals or entered the military.

A "yea" vote was a vote supporting the Act.

Here is how senators voted:

Yeas: Most Democrats and Bennett (UT), Brownback (KS), Coleman (MN), Collins (ME), Craig (ID), Hagel (NE), Hatch (UT), Hutchison (TX), Lott (MS), Lugar (IN), Martinez (FL), and Snowe (ME).

Nays: Most Republicans and Baucus (MT), Conrad (ND), Dorgan (ND), Landrieu (LA), McCaskill (MO), Pryor (AR), and Tester (MT).

There were no-votes from: Boxer, Dodd, McCain, and Kennedy.

So, that was 12 Republicans voting for the Act and seven Democrats voting against it.

Roll Call: Southwick Nomination

Earlier today, the Senate invoked cloture on the confirmation of Judge Leslie Southwick for appointment to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The vote was 62 to 35 with 3 no votes. Where cloture is concerned, if a motion survives cloture it is as good as passed. The final vote, following moments later, is perfunctory.

Here is how the votes broke down for the Southwick confirmation:

Yeas: All Republicans and Akaka (HI), Byrd (WV), Carper (DE), Conrad (ND), Dorgan (ND), Feinstein (CA), Inouye (HI), Johnson (SD), Lieberman (CT), Lincoln (AR), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR), and Salazar (CO).

Nays: The remaining Democrats

Kennedy (MA) was among the no-votes. He is still recovering from surgery to clear blockage from his carotid artery.

Obama (IL) logged his first roll call vote in at least two weeks.

October 24, 2007: Senate Confirms a Judge; A DREAM Dies; Amtrak Talk

[19:31]
The Senate is still in session. Senators have been speaking about a reauthorization of Amtrak funding, S.294. The bill is being managed on the floor by Lautenberg (NJ) and Lott (MS). Lautenberg said just now that two hours after the Senate convenes tomorrow there will be a vote on a Sununu (NH) amendment to the bill.

What's interesting about this Amtrak authorization is that it's got 41 co-sponsors. That's a lot of co-sponsors. And, more than a handful of them are Republicans: Burr (NC), Hutchison (TX), Cochran (MS), Collins (ME), Lott (MS), Smith (OR), Snowe (ME), Specter (PA), Stevens (AK), and Warner (VA).

This Amtrak bill, which reauthorizes Amtrak funding for FY 2008-2012, will get passed. What exactly it will look like could be determined over the next few days of Senate debate.

[17:49]
The Senate is just now coming out of a quorum call. Reid is on the floor now.

The Senate is going to move to the Amtrak bill. He says it's long overdue and that they want to complete it. No one's playing games with it, he says.

There won't be any votes yet today. He says he wants to see debate today, and amendments offered tomorrow and Friday. So it looks like no Farm Bill until next week.

[15:21]
Senators Trent Lott (MS) and Frank Lautenberg (NJ) are on the floor trying to make the case for a bill they have authored that would bolster Amtrak, adding lines and whatnot. Lott said that he has been working so much on this bill with his friend from New Jersey that his fellow senators are starting to call him "Senator Lottenberg."

Lott wants to see more Amtrak lines. More lines dedicated solely to Amtrak, such that they aren't sharing track with freight lines.

It is unclear whether there is going to be any kind of vote on this bill. Lott has just said that they have not gotten the go ahead to bring the bill up for a second reading (i.e. have it considered seriously on the floor).

[15:01]
The Senate is in a quorum call. I'm not sure what's up next. Perhaps the Farm Bill.

[14:49]
In a test vote, senators earlier today blocked the DREAM Act from moving forward by a count of 52-44. The support of 60 senators would be necessary for the Act to withstand a Republican filibuster. See below for a brief discussion about the DREAM Act.

Dick Durbin (IL) on the DREAM Act: "What crime did these children commit? They committed the crime of obeying their parents and following their parents to this country. Do you think there was a vote in the household about their future? I don't think so."

House member and Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo suggested that there should be an immigration raid of Durbin's press conference in favor of the bill.

[13:18]
Earlier today the Senate confirmed the Honorable Leslie Southwick to become a judge for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Senate Passes Labor, Health, & Education Spending

Last night, the Senate passed the Labor, Health, and Education Spending Bill FY 2008 by a count of 75-19. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation because it exceeds his budget request. The Senate version of the bill amounts to $9b more than the President's request. The Senate will now send conferees to negotiate a common bill with conferees from the House.

A Judicial Nomination

The Senate begins floor action at 9:00 when it considers the judicial nomination of the Honorable Leslie Southwick, a judge from Mississippi whom President Bush has nominated to serve on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. There is clearly some Democratic support for the nominee, or else the nominee would not advance beyond the Judiciary Committee, out of which Judge Southwick was reported favorably.

It's DREAM Time

After the nomination is dispensed with, the Senate will move on to the contentious topic of immigration. This time the legislation is something called the DREAM Act. DREAM stands for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors.

Near as I can tell, this legislation would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to cancel the removal or adjust the status of an (illegal?) alien to one of "an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence" if five conditions are met:

1) The alien has been continually present in the U.S. for 5 years;

2) The alien was younger than 16 years old at the time of entry and is not yet 30;

3) The alien appears to be a person of good moral character since the passage of the act;

4) The alien has been admitted to an institute of higher education OR has received a high school diploma or GED;

and

5) the alien--

(i) is not inadmissible under paragraph (2), paragraph (3), subparagraph (B), (C), (E), (F), or (G) of paragraph (6), or subsection (C) of paragraph (10) of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)), except that if the alien is inadmissible solely under subparagraph (C) or (F) of paragraph (6) of such section, the alien had not yet reached the age of 16 years at the time the violation was committed; and

(ii) is not deportable under subparagraph (E) or (G) of paragraph (1), paragraph (2), subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (3), paragraph (4), or paragraph (6) of section 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)), except that if the alien is deportable solely under subparagraph (C) or (D) of paragraph (3) of such section, the alien had not yet reached the age of 16 years at the time the violation was committed.

Interpretation: I'm not even going to pretend that I know what 5) pertains to. I'll do some more reading and get back to you.

But, it seems that under the Act someone who entered the U.S. illegally at, say, 15 years of age could get citizenship by obtaining a diploma or enrolling in an institute of higher education.

I expect fierce Republican opposition to this bill and, most likely, a filibuster.

October 23, 2007: Senate Passes The Labor, Health, and Education FY 2008 Spending Bill

[21:05]
Earlier this evening, the Senate passed the Labor, Health, and Education FY 2008 Appropriations bill by a count of 75-19.

The Senate is still in session, considering a judicial nominee.

[18:27]
I missed the outcome of the Cardin Amendment. The senators have moved onto a vote for a different amendment. This is the second of 10 roll call votes that the senators must complete before final passage of the Labor, Health, and Education FY 2008 Spending bill.

This second in a series of votes is on an Ensign (NV) amendment that bars funds to pay social security benefit payments under an agreement with Mexico. It is getting a lot of votes. And you have to wonder why a roll call vote is needed here. All it takes is one senator to demand it. This amendment will pass easily.

[17:51]
A schedule for handling the rest of the amendments has been agreed to. There will now be two minutes of debate, equally divided, on a Cardin Amendment, No. 3400. So, there will be some more votes tonight. The Cardin amendment, co-sponsored by Gordon Smith (OR), has something to do with extending a benefit to Afghan and Iraqi translators that are coming into the U.S.

[17:46]
The Senate hasn't done anything for the last couple hours. Reid (NV) just spoke and it sounded like this bill won't be finished until tomorrow. There are still a bunch of amendments remaining and the two sides are still trying to reach some agreement as to how to handle them. Reid read through a proposed agreement and then Mitch McConnell (KY), the minority leader, said Hey, I've still got one potential snag over here so we need to go into a quorum call. Which is where the Senate is right now.

[15:47]
There was supposed to be a string of votes starting by now but the Senate remains in quorum call. Most likely senators are working a deal off the floor to reduce the number of remaining amendments needing a roll call vote.

[15:15]
Senator Harkin (IA), who is managing this bill on the floor, said earlier that a string of votes on amendments would begin at 15:30.

[12:37]
The Senate will soon recess until 14:15. There will be a final vote on the Labor, Health, and Education bill later this afternoon.

John Kerry (MA) is now proposing an amendment.

[12:18]

Vote on DeMint Amendment

This DeMint (SC) amendment changes the way that money is granted to a job training program by requiring that the grant be awarded only after competitive bidding. The $3.7m for the programs are currently earmarked for two AFL-CIO agencies. Under the amendment, they could still get the funding, but they'd have to bid on the award just like anyone else. DeMint says, "Please vote no on the motion to table." Specter doesn't believe the award process needs to be changed. He says, "Vote aye to table."

Result: Motion to table agreed to 60 to 34.

Yeas: A bipartisan slew of senators
Nays: Republicans and Feingold



[11:59]

Vote on Coburn Amendment

This amendment seems to cut a bunch of earmark spending out of the bill and devote that money to health care for children of low-cost families. Specter says that the earmarks that would be stripped amount to less than 1% of the bill and perhaps it's the 99% that we should be worried about cutting down. He adds that covering low-income children will be accomplished through S-CHIP. This amendment is not likely to pass.

Result: The motion to table the amendment is agreed to 65 to 26.

Yeas: A lot of senators (bipartisan)
Nays: Republicans and Feingold, McCaskill

[11:34]

Vote on HIV/AIDS Funding Amendment

The Senate is now voting on an Enzi (WY) amendment to the Labor, Health, and Education bill. The amendment comes in response to a provision that Pelosi slipped into the bill in the House. Pelosi's provision changed the way that funds would be distributed under the Ryan White Act of 2007. It would direct $6m in FY 2008 HIV/AIDS funding to San Francisco alone; note that a total of $9m would be disbursed under the Act, such that San Fran would alone get two-thirds. Enzi had co-authored a revision of the Ryan White Act earlier this year that would have dropped San Fran's funding to around $3m by changing the formula under which Ryan White funds were distributed. Dianne Feinstein (CA) opposed the amendment by saying that San Fran could not cope with such a drastic drop in funding over a one-year period.

Result: The Amendment is agreed to 65 to 28.

Yeas: Most Republicans and Harkin, Durbin, Tester, Prior, Nelson, Dorgan, Levin, Casey...
Nays: Some Democrats and Specter, Bunning,

[11:24]
The Senate has been debating a Coburn amendment that would direct earmarks in the bill worth $398m toward health insurance coverage for the children of low-income families. Coburn and Jim DeMint (SC) have made it their mission in the Senate to offer a continuing series of amendments to any and all bills aiming at scrapping or screwing with other senators' earmarks. Coburn frequently observes that a child born into the U.S. today is born with $400,000 of unfunded liabilities. His point is not that earmarks are driving up the national debt but that congressmen are voting on bills because those congressmen have earmarks in the bills. If it weren't for the earmarks, a lot of these bills wouldn't get passed, he argues.

Among the earmarks he would scrap with his amendment is $42m for an international labor organization apparently under the auspices of the United Nations.

Tom Harkin (IA) responds. The Coburn amendment doesn't devote one cent to children's health; it would only take money away from children's health programs under the bill.

[10:17]
Senators Mike Enzi (WY) and Tom Coburn (OK) are talking about how the current version of the Labor, Health, and Education Spending Bill FY 2008 would change the formula that money is dispensed under the Ryan White Act of 2007, having the effect of routing an increase in funds to San Francisco. Ryan White Act funding goes to care for those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

Coburn says Pelosi is behind it. I don't quite understand how this works, but historically, San Fran has gotten a lot of money. The reauthorization of the Ryan White Act earlier this year changed the formula that apportioned money under the act. The current version of the Labor, HHS, and Education bill changes that formula once again by introducing a stop-loss provision. This prevents San Francisco from losing a bunch of funding at once. Under the Pelosi provision, San Fran would get $6m out of the $9m total funding under the bill.

Enzi has offered an amendment to do away with the stop-loss language that Pelosi inserted in the current version of the Labor, HHS, and Education bill. This is the whole Enzi amendment:

"At the appropriate place in title II, insert the following:

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds shall be made available under this Act to modify the HIV/AIDS funding formulas under title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act."

The "title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act" refers to the Ryan White Act.

Now Dianne Feinstein (CA) is speaking in support of the current bill. She confirms that the attempted "fix" of the Ryan White Act is a "Pelosi fix." Feinstein says that drops in funding need to be limited to amounts "that can be absorbed within one year." She says that 23,000 San Franciscans are living with HIV/AIDS. Feinstein was mayor of San Francisco when the AIDS epidemic was first recognized.

Coburn responds. He says that the amount of dollars spent on HIV/AIDS patients in San Fran is 2.5 times that spent on the same patients throughout the country. Yes, San Fran will take a 30% on its funding, but the patients there will still be getting more funding than patients elsewhere in the country. This amendment is about keeping the fairness that was in the Ryan White Act.

Feinstein's main point is that the cut is too drastic to be absorbed within one year.

Now Arlen Specter (PA) is asking Feinstein some questions. Specter gets right to the heart of the issue. The fact that the Pelosi fix refigures the Ryan White funding formula and ends up adding $36m to the bill because of the stop-loss provisions. Specter sounds skeptical but says he hasn't decided how he'll vote on the amendment.

Phone Companies Dial $, Rockefeller Picks Up

From the New York Times, 10/22/2007:

"Executives at the two biggest phone companies contributed more than $42,000 in political donations to Senator John D. Rockefeller IV this year while seeking his support for legal immunity for businesses participating in National Security Agency eavesdropping.

"The surge in contributions came from a Who’s Who of executives at the companies, AT&T and Verizon, starting with the chief executives and including at least 50 executives and lawyers at the two utilities, according to campaign finance reports.

"The money came primarily from a fund-raiser that Verizon held for Mr. Rockefeller in March in New York and another that AT&T sponsored for him in May in San Antonio.

"Mr. Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, emerged last week as the most important supporter of immunity in devising a compromise plan with Senate Republicans and the Bush administration."

This has to do with a new warrantless surveillance bill that will come before Congress in the coming months. The bill reworks what's known as FISA, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The first FISA legislation came out in the 1970s. The new bill would scrap a hastily passed revision of FISA that Congress rubber-stamped in August.

Rockefeller (WV) chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee. Last week, he came out in support of granting retroactive immunity to telecomm companies that allowed the government to access without a warrant what under the Constitution were presumptively protected communications. These eavesdropping episodes occurred in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks when President Bush authorized a program of warrantless wiretapping.

Arguably, the phone company capitulations constitute a breach of contract with those customers whose information and/or communications were seized by the government without a court order.

For a time, it was unclear whether the Democrats in Congress would grant telecomm companies retroactive immunity. A version of the bill granting immunity to phone companies passed the Senate Intelligence committee last week.

However, House Democrats have so far been unwilling to extend immunity to the phone companies under the House version of the new bill.

As the article mentions, the Rockefeller fundraisers took place in San Antonio and New York City. Rockefeller represents West Virginia. He is up for re-election in 2008.

I will be looking closely at this bill when it is under debate in the Senate. I fully expect to hear a scrupulous critique of it from Russ Feingold (WI).

Monday, October 22, 2007: More work on Labor, HHS, & Education Spending '08

[20:20]
The Senate has adjourned. It will return to business tomorrow at 10:00. At that time, expect a series of votes on amendments to the Labor, HHS, and Education Spending Bill FY 2008. A vote on final passage of that bill likely will come mid-afternoon. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill because it exceeds his budget request by $9b.

Emily Pierce of Roll Call reported that the Democrats in Congress fully expect Bush to veto the bill but are offering it nonetheless to set the groundwork for eventual passage of it and other spending bills through a process of negotiation. Pierce also suggested that Democrats could end up packaging a bundle of spending bills together for presentment to the present in a year-end omnibus spending bill "guns-a-blazing."

[19:26]
CSPAN-2 is re-airing some comments from Harry Reid (NV) from this morning. The White House has upped the total amount of the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental funding bill for FY 2008. It will now be in the amount of $196b. This is a raise of $46b over what the White House had previously indicated it would ask for (the figure usd to be $145b). He is comparing the Iraq War funding with the S-CHIP bill, which Bush vetoed. He says that the Iraq War is paid for with debt and then a supplemental. S-CHIP was paid for under the terms of the legislation, he says.

Reid is making clear that the Senate is going to fight this supplemental request. The war has already cost the U.S. $750b, says Reid, most of that borrowed from other countries. He says the the senators will fight for a change in strategy.

[18:57]
Harkin (IA) has just announced that there won't be any more votes tonight. However, votes are likely to start hot and heavy tomorrow morning at 10 eastern. He says that if you've got an amendment that you want considered, you'd better get it in tonight. The Senate is now in a quorum call.

[18:38]
Barbara Boxer (CA) is talking about the fires that are raging in her state. She says that her state is in a fight right now to save homes, businesses, and lives. The fires have blossomed under a mixture of high temps, very dry air, and Santa Ana winds. The Santa Ana wind is a strong, hot, dry wind that blows in winter from the deserts of southern California toward the Pacific Coast. The fires have damaged areas in Malibu and threatened parts of San Diego County. She says that the state and the federal gov't must work closely to keep the fires from advancing. She said that she has already gotten help from FEMA. She did not say anything about money aid but it seemed she just wanted to get word out about what is happening. She has no doubt that President Bush will declare a national emergency for the area, which opens up federal funding conduits.

[18:28]
The Senate has just voted to accept a Menendez (NJ) amendment 89-3. Harkin says that there could be more votes night, but he's just not sure. He is clearing some amendments that have been agreed to by both sides.

[16:36]
The Senate is an a quorum call. C-SPAN2 is playing some classical music with a lot of French horns in it. I have heard it on CSPAN-2 before.

Anyway, the pending business before the Senate is the FY 2008 Labor, HHS, and Education spending bill. The Senate bill is in the amount of $607b. This makes it the largest domestic spending bill, larger even than FY 2008 Defense ($463b). Of the $608b, $455.4 is being budgeted for mandatory programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The rest, or $151.6b, is discretionary spending, i.e. the money is being earmarked. The mandatory programs are just that—mandatory; they must be funded. For the mandatory spending in this bill to approach the total amount of the Defense Bill is astounding. Of course, the defense bill does not include the $180b in supplemental funding that DOD Secretary Gates will ask Congress for later this year for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But, hey, with $455.4b in spending on mandatory programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, who says we don't already have socialized medicine in the U.S.?

Bush has threatened to veto this bill as is because it exceeds his budget request.

[15:31]
Tom Harkin (IA) is talking about when the Labor, HHS, and Education bill will get done. Noon tomorrow is the goal. HHS stands for Health and Human Services. Harkin is the chairman of the Labor, HHS, and Education committee. He is managing the bill on the floor along with Arlen Specter (PA), the ranking member.

Harkin says that there will be votes tonight unless the two sides can agree to amendments and clear them by a unanimous consent agreement. Any one senator can hold up a unanimous consent agreement.

There will be some votes tonight, says Specter, starting at 17:30. He says he knows that the Senate doesn't usually vote on Monday evenings but that the bill won't get done by noon tomorrow unless the amendments are cleared or the senators start voting tonight.

When Given Choice, Senators Lean Toward Spending

I'm going to take a quick look at how recent Senate voting on amendments to the Labor, HHS, and Education Spending bill indicates that the senators are having a hard time cutting out spending on earmarks. All of these votes occurred on Thursday, October 18.

1.

The first vote occurred at 12:33. The question was: Should the Senate limit a funding provision with respect to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service? This Center, honoring the veteran U.S. Representative from New York, would be based in Harlem. I would think it unusual to establish a Center for a Congressman who is still actively serving. According to Jim DeMint (SC), Rangel himself put the earmark in the House version of the bill. The earmark is in the amount of $2m. The Center does not yet exist. It would be installed at the City College of New York.

The amendment was defeated, 34-61.

It was supported mostly be Democrats but received support from the following Republicans: Alexander (TN), Bond (MO), Cochran (MS), Collins (ME), Craig (ID), Hagel (NE), Hatch (UT), Lott (MS), Lugar (IN), Murkowski (AK), Shelby (AL), Specter (PA), Stevens (AK), Voinovich (OH), and Warner (VA).

The following Democrats voted to limit funding for the Center: Bayh (IN) and Feingold (WI).

2.

Second, an amendment that would provide funding so that the Department of Health and Human Services could research and try to go after these rogue, resistant staph infections that have been popping up around the nation. In its own words, "[An amendment] to provide funding for activities to reduce infections from methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and related infections."

OK, hard to argue this one. It passes 90-3. Coburn (OK), DeMint (OK), and Inhofe (OK) vote against it.

3.

Third, an amendment to add more spending to the bill for the Mine Safety and Health Administration. This is a Byrd (WV) amendment. Byrd explains it:

"Today, I am offering an amendment that would add $10 million. Did you hear that? It would add $10 million to MSHA's budget. These funds are necessary to enable MSHA both to complete the safety inspections required by the law and also to implement the mandates required by the MINER Act."

It passes easily, 89-4. Voting against are Cornyn (TX), DeMint (SC), Inhofe (OK), and Kyl (AZ).

4.

Fourth, a Brown (OH) amendment "To provide funding for the Underground Railroad Educational and Cultural Program." It is in the amount of $2m.

It had broad support and passed 81-12.

5.

Now for a different outcome, we take a look at an earmark that would have provided $1m for a museum dedicated to Woodstock. Tom Coburn (OK) offered an amendment that would take the $1m away from the Woodstock earmark and devote it instead to provide additional care for pregnant women, mothers, and infants.

Democrats moved to table the amendment. They needed 50 yeas to table (i.e. kill) it. They did not succeed

The motion to table the Coburn amendment got 42 yeas, to 52 nays, and failed to pass. When a motion to table fails, the underlying amendment is usually then allowed to pass by a voice vote, which is what happened with this amendment. So, no $1m of federal money for a museum devoted to Woodstock.

Democrats generally opposed taking money away from the Woodstock museum. Zero Republicans voted in support of saving the Woodstock earmark. Democrats voting against tabling the Coburn amendment, i.e. voting to take money away from the Woodstock museum included Feingold (WI), McCaskill (MO), Landrieu (LA), and Webb (VA).

Presidential Candidates and Senate Voting During the Week of Oct. 15-19

It's hard not to talk presidential politics when one is covering Senate matters. Sam Brownback (KS) dropped out of the race today but that still leaves Hillary Clinton (NY), John McCain (AZ), Christopher Dodd (CT), Barack Obama (IL), and Joe Biden (DE). I have found it interesting to observe how many votes these senators are showing up for amidst their campaign scheduling.

Dodd (CT) has announced that he is renting an apartment in Iowa and will live there with his wife and children until the caucuses are over. He is arranging to have his daughter enroll in kindergarten there. Dodd was in and out of the Senate already this past week. He missed the only vote of Oct. 15. Then on Oct. 16 he was there for the first four votes of the day but missed a 16:16 vote only to return for the next vote at 17:01. The Dems were lucky he got back for that 17:01 vote because they needed 50 votes to table a Dole Amendment and got exactly 50. So Dodd's vote truly counted. But then in eight votes the following day (Thursday), Dodd was a no vote in all eight.

As spotty as Dodd has been, Clinton and Obama have been virtually absentee senators of late. Sure, they sometimes show up for the important, final-passage-type votes. But in that tabling motion of Oct. 16, when the Dems had exactly 50 to kill a Dole Amendment, Obama, Clinton, and Biden were no-votes. Had Dodd also been absent, the Amendment would not have been tabled and, under Senate rules, it is customary to concede that an amendment is agreed to if a tabling motion is unsuccessful.

Clinton had the quirkiest voting record of the last week. Look back to Oct. 16 where the Senate voted eight times—seven times on amendments to the Commerce, Health, and Science Spending bill, and then finally a vote on final passage of the bill. Clinton—and Obama for that matter—were no-votes for the entire day. Even Biden made it back for a vote on the final passage of the bill.

Now look at Oct. 18, eight more votes, all on amendments to the Labor, HHS, and Education Spending Bill for FY 2008. Clinton is there for the first vote of the day at 12:33, a vote to table a DeMint Amendment that would limit funding for a Charlie Rangel Public Service Center in Harlem. She votes against limiting funding for the building (an earmark, by the way, which Rangel himself seemed to insert in the bill in the House). Then Clinton misses three votes before returning at 15:37 to vote against a Corker Amendment that would take money away from an earmark in the bill devoting money to the construction of a Woodstock museum...in New York. Then Clinton leaves for the rest of the day, missing three more votes.

Obama, who is running in part on a platform of education reform, didn't show up all day. Actually, Obama didn't enter a single vote all week.

McCain missed a few votes on Thursday but was generally present last week. Biden is in and out, showing up for a few more votes than Clinton.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007: First Impressions of the Labor, HHS, & Education Spending Bill '08

[16:34]
The Senate continues to work on spending legislation for FY 2008 as it begins to debate an appropriations bill covering the Departments of Labor, Health & Human Services, and Education.

Tom Harkin (IA) chairs the respective committee so he is managing the floor action.

The bill exceeds the President's budget request by $11b. In other words, when the President submitted his budget to Congress, its sum total in dollars was $11b less than the Senate's proposed budget covering the same departments.

The Senate's bill increases overall spending in these areas by $7b over last year's figures. This means that the President's budget represents a $4b budget cut for these departments compared to last year's spending.

Harkin reiterates that the bill adheres to Congress's pay-go budget restrictions. In other words, he says that the bill is paid for. I don't know that this is necessarily true. My understanding of pay-go is that if Congress is going to increase spending in one area it will take spending away from another area or it will find new revenue to cover the new spending. That's all well and good. However, if you observe that the country runs a deficit, it is not correct to say that the bill is "paid for." All you are really saying is that the bill isn't going to add to the deficit. It is possible that new revenue could cover the new spending but as far as I know, there has not been a dramatic uptick in revenue.

Anyway, President Bush has already threatened to veto Congress's version of this bill.

Note that the Senate version of the bill will be altered through the upcoming process of amendment. It will then be altered further during a process known as conferencing where House and Senate versions of the spending bill are reconciled. So, right now the Senate version of the bill exceeds Bush's budget request by $11b; that figure could rise or fall depending on what happens in the week ahead.

The Senate and the President disagree on the following items, among others. The National Institutes of Health. Bush's request is $279m lower than the Senate. Head Start. The President's request is significantly lower than the Senate's. Pell grants. The President's max grant is $4500 while the Senate goes to $4800. Job training. Senate would add $4.8b to the program while the President would pare $1b from it.

This spending bill is the sixth of twelve that are supposed to be passed every year. Last year, I believe only one of twelve was passed.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007: Senators Pass FY 2008 CJS Appropriations Bill

[~19:30]
The Commerce, Justice, and Science Spending Bill FY 2008 has passed 75-19 with 6 no votes (Obama, Clinton, Warner, Kennedy, Inouye, and Isakson).

Bush says he will veto the bill if it comes to his desk with a dollar figure above what he budgeted. The Senate version of the bill exceeded Bush's request by $3.2b. The bill now goes to a conference with the House, where the House and Senate versions of the bill are reconciled.

[19:12]
The Senate is in the midst of a vote to recommit the CJS Spending bill with instructions to the CJS committee to pare $3.2b in spending from the bill. Mitch McConnell made the motion.

Here is the vote...44 aye, 50 nay, 6 nv.

It is now time to move to final passage of the bill.

[18:27]
This Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations FY 2008 is close to a final vote on passage.

Mitch McConnell (KY), the minority leader, has just moved to recommit the bill to committee with instructions to pare $3.2b from it, making it in line with the President's request for the total dollar amount on the bill.

Mikulski respectfully opposes this request.

Richard Shelby (AL), who co-chaired the bill with Mikulski, also opposes the motion to recommit.

Trent Lott (MS) rises to support the motion to recommit.

Robert Byrd (WV) opposes the motion. He asks senators to rise and say what programs they want to cut to eliminate $3.2b from the bill.

Arlen Specter (PA) opposes the motion because he believes Congress cannot surrender its role in the appropriations process, which is granted to it under Article I of the U.S. Constitution. Is the President wiser than the Congress, asks Specter. Byrd gives him an amen from the background, audible on C-SPAN2. Rather, Specter supports passage of a balanced budget act, which would restrict Congress day-by-day.

[18:01]
Right now a vote to table the Vitter Amendment (see below).

Yeas: Democrats and Stevens (AK), Lugar (IN), Collins (ME), Snowe (ME), Specter (PA), Hagel (NE),
Nays: Republicans and Landrieu (LA)

Motion to table agreed to with 52 yeas. That means that 46 yeas came from Dems. Landrieu voted yea but that leaves four Dems that didn't vote. They include Kennedy (MA, recovering from surgery), Clinton (NY, campaigning), Johnson (SD, still not healthy), and Obama (IL, campaigning).

Hagel, not running for re-election, seems to be loosening his approach to voting. But I have to imagine that the Dem leadership is getting on Hillary and Obama. This tabling vote was a little too close.

[17:53]
There is about to be a vote on whether to table a Vitter Amendment that would cut off Community Oriented Policing (COPS) grants for communities that are failing to enforce federal immigration policies. Joseph Biden (DE) just spoke in opposition to the amendment.

Vitter says that there are certain "sanctuary" cities that flaunt their status as sanctuaries. In order to get serious about enforcing immigration laws, we need amendments like this, says Vitter.

Mikulski says that this is a very important vote imminent in the Senate. She opposes Vitter's amendment. She speaks for smaller cities. These cities, she says, can't afford to be the federal cop on the beat. They have the right to decide how they best want to fight crime.

Also, says Mikulski, what does this do for potential witnesses of crimes. Are you going to be more likely to report a crime if you are worried that the authorities are going to question you about your immigration status?

I think what she's saying is that if amendments like Vitter's get through, there's a chance that the bill is dead.

Vitter responds. He says that local law enforcement has no duty to enforce federal law affirmatively. However, these jurisdictions cannot establish a set policy that prohibits and/or inhibits communication with federal authorities.

[15:56]
Now an amendment cutting NASA funding. NASA was seeking some add'l funding under the thinking that when Space Shuttle Columbia was lost NASA had to spend emergency funding for reasons related to the disaster. In turn, it had less money to go around for research and everyday expenses.

The Ensign Amendment adds $150m to the Justice Dept. budget for prosecuting illegal aliens who commit crimes. It offsets that expense with cuts to NASA.

Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX) said that cutting NASA funding is a security threat. She mentioned something about the Space Shuttle as we know it being phased out by 2015 with a new "passenger-return" vehicle taking its place. If these cuts go through, says Hutchison, there will be an extended gap during which America cannot venture into space while other countries like China and India and Russia would be able to do so.

The Senate is now voting to table (kill) the amendment.

[15:28]
Senators are voting on amendments to the Commerce, Justice, and Science Spending Bill. Right now there is about to be a vote for emergency funding for NASA. Bill Nelson (FL) is opposing an amendment that adversely affects NASA. Nelson says that NASA is being starved of funds. The amendment is by John Ensign (NV). Nelson says, "Here comes Senator Ensign wanting to punish NASA again."

Hold on a second. Barbara Mikulski (MD) makes clear that the Ensign amendment that the Senate is about to vote on is not the NASA amendment Nelson was so hot about.

The Ensign amendment that the Senate is currently voting on is instead in the form of an offset. That is, it pays for a child protection act by taking money from certain tech programs, to wit:

"Provided further, That an additional $7,845,000 shall be available to carry out the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 offset by a reduction in the amount available for the Advanced Technology Program under the heading 'Industrial Technology Services' in title I of $7,845,000."

It appears that this amendment has plenty of bipartisan support and will pass. Still, someone must oppose this bill or else it wouldn't be subject to a roll-call vote. My guess is that the senators in opposition are those whose home states host the tech programs that are being cut to pay for a renewal of the Adam Walsh Act.

[11:05]
Byron Dorgan (ND) is starting to fight back against growing sentiment that ethanol is not going to be a viable gasoline substitute. He observes that the media is talking about an "ethanol glut" driving down the price of ethanol, thereby hurting farmers. Certainly, a lot of corn comes out of his state. But he is saying that the gasoline companies are preventing their franchisees (the corner filling stations) from selling E85. E85 is gasoline containing 85% ethanol. The gasoline companies accomplish this by requiring their franchisees to buy gasoline only from the parent company, i.e. ExxonMobil or BP. These companies do not make E85. Therefore, of course E85 is not going to be available at your corner gas station.

[10:40]
Senators Johnny Isakson (GA) and Saxby Chambliss (GA) are offering an amendment to alter the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Georgia senators assert that the Army Corps of Engineers is required under the ESA to release water from two lakes near Atlanta (Allatoona and Lanier) in order to put enough water in the Chattahoochee River to save the endangered mussels and sturgeon that reside in the water.

The amendment would specify that the ESA could be suspended during drought conditions when, for instance, a population's drinking supply is threatened. The senators are saying that Atlanta's drinking water supply is not real dependable because too much water is being let out of the reservoirs.

I'm not sure which bill this amendment is offered upon. I don't think it is the pending legislation, i.e. the Commerce, Justice and Science Spending Bill. It is probably being proposed as an amendment to the upcoming Health & Human Services Spending bill.

Hutchison Is Considering a 2010 Run For Texas Governor

Texas Republican senator Kay Bailey Hutchison will not seek re-election after her current Senate term and may leave before her term ends in 2012 to run for Texas governor, a spokesman for the senator said.

Hutchison is considering stepping down in two years in order to allow her replacement to gain experience in the Senate before facing election in 2012.

The people of Texas re-elected Hutcihson just last year. The next Texas gubernatorial election is in 2010.

If Hutchison leaves her Senate seat and wins the governorship, a temporary appointee would fill her seat in the Senate. The governor would select the appointee, who would serve from 2010 to 2012. Depending on the timing of that appointee selection, Hutchison could pick her own replacement.

House Votes Thursday on S-CHIP Override

Recent reports indicated that Republicans believed they had the vote to sustain the President's veto.

Kennedy Undergoes Artery-Clearing Procedure

Last Friday, eight-term senator Edward Kennedy (MA) underwent a procedure at Mass General to have some blockage cleared from his carotid artery. The surgery was described as non-invasive and preventive. Kennedy is due to miss some time in the Senate as he recovers. He is not supposed to miss much time.

Kennedy did not vote today in a Senate vote on an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, and Science Spending Bill.

Monday, October 15, 2007: Resume Consideration of Commerce, Justice and Science Spending

[19:32]
John Thune (SD) is offering a new amendment. It would cut wasteful spending in some areas (he did not elaborate) and offer new funds for law enforcement in Indian country.

[19:27]
Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) is closing up Senate business for the day.

There are 8 Dem Amdts. and 26 Rep. amendments left to deal with. Reid says that the Senate will finish this bill tomorrow. If we have to get the Sergeant at Arms out here to bring people in for votes, we'll do that. Now he says maybe it will take until Wednesday morning. People wanna finish appropriations bills. When we finish this, we'll have seven left. I'm wondering if the Republicans are wanting to stop us from passing these bills. He threatens to table the Republican amendments. "I have the nation's business to be concerned about." We're back in town, we need to get back to legislating.

One way or another, we'll work through these amendments. He says he will hold off filing cloture because he wants to get the amendments all worked out. It sounds like, though, that 14:30 is the deadline for getting amendments agreed to. Otherwise, a successful cloture vote would significantly reduce the number of agreements that could be voted on thereafter.


[18:57]
Right now Barbara Mikulski (MD) is clearing amendments to the bill. This is a final step before a vote for passage of the bill. These amendments are not controversial or have been subject to some larger deal so that they can be agreed to by a voice vote. Right now Sens. Mikulski and someone else off screen are the only senators voting "aye" but no one is voting no, so "the ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it, the amendment is agreed to."

There are 36 amendments pending. Staff will be working all night to get most of the rest of them cleared.

Mikulski says that a final vote could come tomorrow but she did not say that it would come tomorrow, leading me to believe that it could come very late tomorrow but more likely Wednesday.

Note: The New Eavesdropping Bill

A new wiretapping bill has cleared committee in the House, meaning it will only be a matter of time before Senators have a chance to debate it. I wanted to take a few minutes at the outset to look at this bill and examine what it does.

First, it effectively repeals a wiretapping bill that Congress passed without much debate over the summer. In hindsight, Democrats have come to believe that they cow-towed to the Bush Administration on this summer's wiretapping bill, a.k.a. The Protect America Act of 2007, which essentially enshrined as law prior Bush wiretapping policy and procedure.

After passing the bill, Democrats appeared to utter a collective, "Oops!" Civil libertarians assailed the bill because it represented Congress's approval of warrantless wiretapping, arguably an unconstitutional procedure. This new wiretapping bill completely scraps this summer's bill.

Second, the big hub-bub so far has been this debate between House Democrats and President Bush about whether to grant immunity to the telecommunications companies that opened up their records and their hardware to Bush Administration eavesdroppers—apparently in violation of their own customers' privacy rights (whether those rights come from contract or from the Constitution, or both—I don't know).

The Bush Administration's main problem with the bill seems to be that it does not grant these telecommunications companies immunity.

I believe that this issue of immunity is not the most important aspect of the bill needing debate. I want to hear more about the "blanket" warrants.

Also, there will be serious debate about whether the bill should "sunset." The current bill expires after two years. Bush wants a permanent bill.

A Quick History

Under the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), passed in the seventies, the government HAD to go to a hush-hush intelligence court, a.k.a. a FISA court, to get a warrant for ANY eavesdropping.

This Bush Administration ignored this law during the nascent stages of its War on Terror. It did not go to a FISA court to get warrants before conducting surveillance of telephone conversation coming into or out of the U.S. This policy was exposed and created a controversy.

The surveillance law passed this summer allows the government to eavesdrop without a court order on communications conducted by a person reasonably believed to be outside the U.S., even when the communications flow through the U.S. communications network — or if an American is on one end of the conversation — so long as that person is not the intended focus or target of the surveillance.

To me this concept of "so long as that person is not the intended focus or target of the surveillance" is hard to grasp. But I think it means that if the communications are those of an individual specifically targeted in an investigation, the government must get a court order (warrant) before going ahead with the surveillance. If the government just stumbles upon two guys talking, they can listen in without a court order. I don't know, still doesn't sound that good.

The New Bill

The Democratic bill would allow the government to eavesdrop on a foreign target or group of targets located outside the United States. However, if there is a possibility the targets will be communicating with Americans, the government must get an "umbrella" or "blanket" court order to conduct surveillance for up to one year. In an emergency, the government could begin surveillance without a blanket order as long as it applies for court approval within seven days, and it is approved within 45 days.

There is still some question in my mind as to how the government knows who's under the "blanket" and who is not.

And, by the way, a quick prediction. The telecomm companies will most definitely get their immunity.

First Democrat Announces Designs on Domenici Seat

Democratic Albuquerque mayor Martin Chavez plans to run for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by six-term veteran Pete Domenici. Domenici announced last week that he would retire due to declining health. His term ends effective 2009.

Heather Wilson, U.S. Representative from the Albuquerque area, has also announced plans to run for the vacated seat. Wilson, a Republican, is regarded as a Domenici protegee.

Chavez is the first high-profile Democrat to announce his candidacy. An Albuquerque native in his third term as mayor, Chavez had been eyeing a bid for governor in 2010.

But Domenici's retirement has shaken things up in New Mexico. Chavez, 55, also served four years in the state Senate.

New Mexico is something of a swing state. Domenici won six elections in the state but the state's other senator, Jeff Bingaman, is a Democrat. Regardless of who the candidates turn out to be, the 2008 race for the open New Mexico senate seat will be close.

Add Domenici To List of Retiring GOP

Six-term Republican senator Pete Domenici (NM) will not seek re-election in 2008, putting another Senate seat up-for-grabs in next year's election. Fellow Republican senators Chuck Hagel (NB), John Warner (VA), and Wayne Allard (CO) have also announced their retirement, effective 2009.

Domenici's announcement will add even more pressure to a Republican Senatorial Campaign sure to be stretched thin come next November. In addition to the seats left vacant by the aforementioned retirees, 22 incumbent Republicans will be defending their seats in 2008, compared to 12 Democrat incumbents defending seats.

Notably, Domenici's New Mexico, Warner's Virginia, Hagel's Nebraska, and Allard's Colorado are all quite capable of putting Democratic senators in Washington. Just look at the other senators from those states: Bingaman (NM), Webb (VA), B. Nelson (NB), and Salazar (CO). All Democrats.

It's very early to start making predictions. But, there are 51 Democrats in the Senate right now. Say 2 of the 12 Dems fail to protect their seat. Down to 49. Say 4 of the Republicans fail to protect their seats. Up to 53. Say three of four vacant seats go to Dems. That's 57 Dems in the Senate. Count on moderate Republicans to side with Dems on certain measures and you get pretty close to a filibuster-proof Democratic senate.

Domenici, who has recorded over 13,000 votes in the Senate, cited health concerns as part of the reason for his decision to step down. New Mexico governor and Presidential candidate Bill Richardson said he had no interest in running for the seat.

However, Congresswoman Heather Wilson has announced she will run for the vacated seat. Wilson, a Republican, currently represents a district largely comprised of Albuquerque. She is known as a Domenici protegee, so this is a pretty logical move for her.

House Vote on S-CHIP Veto Override Set for Oct. 18; Pelosi Looks For 14 More Votes

The House will attempt to override President Bush's S-CHIP veto in an October 18 vote. Congress is in recess this coming week. This off-week will allow House Democratic leadership to work on representatives—of both parties—in an effort to flip roughly 14 members who had previously voted against the $35b expansion of the children's health insurance program.

In his radio address yesterday, President Bush acknowledged that he was open to hammering out a compromise between his proposal for the program, an expansion of $5b over five years, and the bill that Congress has passed, which expands the program by $35b over five years. Bush's Health Secretary, Mike Leavitt, repeated the compromise offer today, though he remained vague as to how much more funding the Bush Administration would accept.

The Democratic leadership is not too interested in the compromise offer.

"You cannot wring another ounce of compromise out of this," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) said last week.

In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is clearly more interested in finding the votes than she is in rewriting the legislation.

"Right now, we have the next 10 days to two weeks to try to peel off about 14 votes in the House," she said.

It seems that the House vote-counters believe they have 274 votes in the bank, even though only 267 members voted for the measure when it was passed in September. The "magic number" is probably around 288.

It is also quite likely that Senate GOP champions of the bill, namely Orrin Hatch (UT) and Chuck Grassley (IA) are talking to their Republicans colleagues in an effort to find enough votes to get to a 2/3 majority.

GOP Senators Want Craig to Resign

After Larry Craig said he would serve out the rest of his term—which ends after 2008—GOP senators responded today with renewed calls for Craig's immediate resignation.

"I'm calling on Sen. Craig to keep his word," said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who is in charge of the GOP's 2008 Senate election fundraising. "If he loves his party, and he loves the Senate, the honorable thing to do is to resign."

Minnesota republican senator Norm Coleman, who previously called for Craig's resignation, said he respected Craig's right to defend himself in court, but that Craig was duty-bound to resign.

"I would hope that he would live up to what he said he would do," Coleman said.

Craig's surprise decision to stay in the Senate brings on the full pressure and intrigue of a Senate Ethics Committee investigation. Craig pleaded guilty on August 1 to a charge of disorderly conduct after he was alleged to have solicited sex from an undercover policeman in a Minneapolis airport bathroom using a bizarre series of toe taps and under-the-stall hand waves. Craig said as recently as last weekend that he would resign from the Senate if a Minnesota judge would not allow Craig to withdraw the guilty plea. The Judge denied Craig's request yesterday but Craig said he felt the need to stay on.

Craig has at least one supporter remaining in the Senate, fellow Idaho senator Mike Crapo, who urged Craig to fight calls for his resignation.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune had this account of the June 11 airport incident:

It all started on June 11 when Craig, on a layover between flights, entered a restroom at the airport. He stood outside the door of [undercover cop Dave Karsnia's] stall peering in, then entered the adjacent stall when it was vacated and placed his roller bag in front of the door. He then tapped his foot, slid it closer to Karsnia's and moved it up and down slowly, according to court documents.

Craig then swiped his left palm up along the bottom of the stall, exposing more of his fingers each time. Karsnia then placed his badge under the divider and Craig yelled, "No!"

Craig refused to come out of the stall, leaving only when he was told by Karsnia he was under arrest. He did not flush the toilet. He explained the foot-tapping by saying he has a "wide stance." He said his hand was near the floor to pick up a piece of paper.

Porter said the facts support a conviction. Craig "knew or should have known his entrance into Sgt. Karsnia's stall with his eyes, foot and hand are the type of acts that would tend reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others," the judge wrote.

Senate Killed Coburn Amendment Aimed at Cutting Pork

U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) released the following statement yesterday after the Senate defeated his amendment to strike six earmarks from the fiscal year 2008 Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations bill and use savings from those projects to help the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute unsolved civil rights crimes. Coburn amendment 3243 was defeated by a vote of 61 to 31.

“Congress could have advanced the cause of justice and helped resolve unsolved civil rights crimes. Instead, Congress showed that its insatiable appetite for pork comes first,” Dr. Coburn said.

“Many politicians rationalize these votes by claiming they can fund high and lower priority projects at the same time. Yet, last week’s vote to raise the debt limit by $850 billion demonstrates that Congress’ refusal to make choices has consequences. When Congress does not set priorities it always borrows more and places an even greater burden on future generations. Families across America don't have the luxury of loaning themselves any money when they've maxed out their credit. Yet, that is what Congress does routinely. By voting against this amendment, Congress cheated not only victims of civil rights crimes, but future generations as well,” Dr. Coburn said.

Coburn amendment 3243 would have directed savings from the following earmarks to the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division:

* $500,000 for the Maritime Museum in Mobile, Alabama
* $300,000 for the Fairbanks Museum and Planetarium in Vermont for the “Eye-In-The-Sky” Program
* $300,000 for the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, Illinois
* $500,000 for the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama
* $500,000 for an interpretive buoy system along the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail
* $450,000 for an undersea vehicle in Mystic, Connecticut

Earmarks, everybody! Get 'em while they're hot!

Friday, October 5, 2007: Senate Adjourns for October Recess; Back on Oct. 15

Today, the Senate convened at 9:30 for a pro forma session. According to the Senate glossary, a pro forma session is a brief meeting (sometimes only several seconds) in which no business is conducted. It is held usually to satisfy the constitutional obligation that neither chamber can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other.

The Senate will then stand in adjournment until 2:00 p.m. on Monday, October 15.

At 2:00 p.m. on Monday, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 3:00 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, and with the time equally divided and controlled between the Majority and Minority. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 3093, the Department of Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Act. The first vote is expected to occur around 5:30 p.m.

During the week of October 15, the Senate is expected to complete consideration of H.R. 3093 and may turn to the consideration of H.R. 3043, the Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations Act, and any other items cleared for action.

Guilty Plea Stands But Craig Will Serve Out His Term

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Idaho Senator Larry Craig issued the following statement in reaction to today's ruling by the State of Minnesota District Court Fourth Judicial District allowing the guilty plea to stand:

"I am extremely disappointed with the ruling issued today. I am innocent of the charges against me. I continue to work with my legal team to explore my additional legal options.

"I will continue to serve Idaho in the United States Senate, and there are several reasons for that. As I continued to work for Idaho over the past three weeks here in the Senate, I have seen that it is possible for me to work here effectively.

"Over the course of my three terms in the Senate and five terms in the House, I have accumulated seniority and important committee assignments that are valuable to Idaho, not the least of which are my seats on the Appropriations Committee, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the Veterans' Affairs Committee. A replacement would be highly unlikely to obtain these posts.

"In addition, I will continue my effort to clear my name in the Senate Ethics Committee - something that is not possible if I am not serving in the Senate.

"When my term has expired, I will retire and not seek reelection. I hope this provides the certainty Idaho needs and deserves."

Craig had said as recently as Sunday that if the Minnesota judge did not allow Craig to withdraw his guilty plea stemming from a bizarre sex-sting incident in a Minneapolis airport bathroom, Craig would resign immediately.

However, Craig has reneged on that promise. His term is up at the end of 2008.

Thursday, October 4, 2007: Appropriations Package for Justice, Commerce, and Science

[17:16]
Mikulski (MD) said something about how senators would have until Monday (this coming Monday or Monday the 15th?) to offer amendments to the bill. Either way, this appropriations package will not be finished by tomorrow.

[17:14]
Bill Nelson (FL) rose to thank his fellow senators for going along with certain NASA funding that Nelson added to the Senate version of the bill, but which was not in the House version. Nelson said that the funding was more or less a reimbursement to NASA for emergency funding NASA had to expend to conduct repairs on the space shuttle, Columbia. "Now," Nelson said, "we've got to make it stick in the conference [with the House]."

[16:39]
Senators are now voting to table (kill) a Coburn Amendment to the pending bill, an FY 2008 Appropriations package that covers the Departments of Justice and Commerce plus the government's science programs. Overall, the package is worth $56 billion. Judging from Coburn's reputation for tackling "waste, fraud, and abuse" it is likely that the amendment cleaves spending from the bill. Fifty votes to kill the amendment.

Coburn Amendment is tabled 61 to 31——

Ayes: Most Democrats plus Shelby, Crapo, Martinez, Sessions, Dole, Cochran, Bond, Bennett, Murkowski,

Nay: Coburn, DeMint, Vitter, Smith, Hatch, Roberts, Inhofe, Grassley, McCain, Lugar, Kyl, Thune, Coleman, Specter, Chambliss, Barrasso, Collins, Burr, Bayh

Precap

Senators Barbara Mikulski (MD) and Richard Shelby (AL) are the floor chiefs of an FY 2008 Appropriations package for the departments of Justice, Commerce, and Science. Science referes to NOAA and NASA among others.

Mikulski intimated that one senator was, at this point, holding up the entire bill. She asked that senator to come to the floor. "I will be patient, and I will be cordial," she said, "up to a point."

Shelby and Mikulski believed that the bill should be easy enough to pass later today. We'll see if that happens. It sounds like there is a one-senator obstacle at the moment. Any one senator can hold up a bill, essentially, because it takes a unanimous vote to bring the bill up for formal consideration. These are the so-called "secret holds" of the Senate. Infamous.

Overriding the Bush S-CHIP Veto

On Wednesday Oct. 3, President Bush vetoed bipartisan legislation expanding a children's health insurance program known as S-CHIP. Both houses of Congress now have to vote by a 2/3 majority to override the veto in order to enshrine the bill as law. This was Bush's fourth veto as president—the first three being two stem cell bills and one Iraq timetable measure. Congress did not override any of those three prior vetoes.

The Senate has enough votes to get the job done. Sixty-seven senators have already voted in favor of the bill, so no arm twisting in the Senate.

When the House passed the S-CHIP legislation last week, it did so by a 265-159 vote. Accounting for empty seats, and assuming all House members vote on the override, the House would have to offer 289 votes to get to the 2/3 super-majority required for a veto override. That number could drop to, say, 287 if persistently ill House members who have not been voting recently remain absent for the S-Chip re-vote.

Regardless, about 15-20 representatives are going to have to switch their vote on the bill if an override can succeed. Eight democrats (including Dennis Kucinich), generally from rural and/or conservative districts also voted against the bill. One Democrat voted "present."

Supporters of S-CHIP, with support from labor unions and political groups such as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, are planning a media campaign targeted at the markets of those Representatives who are either on the fence or generally vulnerable heading into the 2008 election. Those ads will run this coming weekend and all of next week when Congress is on recess.

Thus, you can expect the House veto override vote to happen sometime during the week of Oct 15. The magic number is somewhere around 288.

Wednesday, October 3, 2007: FY 2008 Defense Spending Bill Passes By a Voice Vote

RECAP:

Senate passes Department of Defense Appropriations FY 2008 by a voice vote. The bill is now in conference where conferees are trying to work out differences between House and Senate versions of the bill. When a "conference report" is agreed, both houses will vote to pass the conference report.

Notes.

The Lindsay Graham Amdt to enhance border security passed 95-1, the sole "nay" vote being that of George Voinovich (OH).

The Russ Feingold Amendment that would enact the redeployment of troops from Iraq fell by a vote of 28 "yea" to 68 "nay."

Warner Treated for Irregular Heartbeat

Overnight, John Warner (VA) checked into a Washington D.C.-area hospital and was treated for an irregular heartbeat. It sounds like he's going to be out for a few days. Warner was very present on the floor last week as the senators debated the Department of Defense Authorization Act FY 2008. Warner, a one-time Secretary of the Navy, is an influential member of the Armed Services committee.

Notes on Department of Defense Appropriations FY 2008 (Bill Passes 10/3/2007)

Beginning today, senators are debating the FY 2008 Department of Defense Appropriations bill. This bill directs the U.S. Treasury to cut the Dept of Defense a check. President Bush's budget called for $463.1 billion. The version before the Senate totals $459.6 billion. Last year's Defense Appropriations bill amounted to $419.9 billion. Note that this DoD Appropriations bill does not include Iraq and Afghanistan war monies. Congress will debate a "Supplemental" Defense Spending Bill later this year.

This bill does include a 3.5% pay raise for military personnel as well as $1 billion for new National Guard equipment. Appropriations chairman Robert C. Byrd has mandated that no Iraq-withdrawal-type amendments be attached to this package. The Senate leadership wants to get this thing done and get it to the President by the end of the week.

UPDATE: Senate passes FY 2008 DoD Appropriations Bill by a voice vote on 10/3/2007. The bill is now in conference, where conferees are trying to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions.

Tuesday, Oct. 2, 2007: Senate Opens Debate on Defense Appropriations FY 2008

[18:38]
Senate has adjourned for the day. Back at you tomorrow early—9:30 eastern for resumption of debate on Department of Defense Appropriations FY 2008.

[17:12]
Senate is in quorum call right now. Senators are able to bring their amendments to the floor for the DoD Appropriations Bill FY 2008.

This afternoon, Senators voted to table a Barbara Boxer (CA) Amendment that would prohibit the Armed Forces from using "waivers" to enlist any citizen who had a felony on his or her criminal record within the five years prior to enlistment. Boxer said that "common sense" dictated passage of this amendment. Daniel Inouye (HI) rose in opposition to the amendment. You might recognize Inouye as the young Hawaiian medical student who joined the Marines from Ken Burns's "The War" on PBS. Inouye said that the amendment was too harsh, that it would nonetheless keep too many good soldiers out of the army. And he pointed to Jena, LA, and asked if the youth accused of attempted murder should be kept out of the Army. Inouye's point was to say that some jurisdictions prosecute crimes in ways that differ from other jurisdictions.

[14:00]
The Senate is still on lunch recess. But I wanted to do a quick Senate personnel update.

Sadly, Craig Thomas (WY) died earlier this year. Thomas was a mystery to me. Since I started following the Senate closely two years ago, it seemed like Thomas was hardly ever on the floor until early this year when he was all over the place, making speeches about nearly every bill under debate. I noted that he had lost a lot of weight and was losing some hair but I didn't really think much of it because he seemed so energetic. He died of leukemia on June 4, 2007. He has been replaced by John Barrasso, a Republican and state senator. Barrasso joins Mike Enzi to form the Senatorial delegation of Wyoming. I will remember the way Thomas went out, so eager to take to the floor when he knew his days were waning.

Switching tones, I wanted to note that Larry Craig (ID) is still active in the Senate and has been voting during roll-call votes. Yet, there is some question about whether he will step down when/if a Minnesota judge denies Craig's request to withdraw a guilty plea that Craig submitted following an odd scene in a Minneapolis airport men's bathroom during which Craig was said to be stomping his foot, peeking through a stall slat, waving his hand under a neighboring stall, and, apparently, soliciting sex from an undercover officer.

[12:18]
The Senate has recessed for lunch. The morning was not all that exciting. Some general speeches, lots of time in quorum call.

Precap

After having yesterday passed the Dept of Defense Authorizations Act FY 2008, the Senate begins debate on an Act appropriating funds to the DoD for FY 2008. The Authorization prescribes how the money will be spent. The Appropriations Bill actually moves the money.

Senator Daniel Inouye (HI) is in charge of the bill on the floor. He has made it clear that he doesn't want any amendments thrown onto this bill so as to slow it down. Congress want to conference this spending bill and get it to the President by Friday.

The bill is in the amount of $460 billion. This does not include so-called "supplemental" funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate will debate that "Supplemental" later this year. At that time, senators will attempt to attach conditions to the Supplemental funding such as Iraq withdrawal timelines.