Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the issues facing the crisis in the auto industry as well as the Department of the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP. As the economy continues its severe downturn, American families across the country face challenges on a level not experienced for decades. With hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost each month, small businesses and millions of Americans struggling to meet everyday needs, the Federal Government is being challenged to come up with new solutions. We are clearly in a unique time as we are experiencing an economic downturn unparalleled since the Great Depression. Our Government has already taken a number of emergency actions to prevent an economic calamity but new crises continue to develop. The latest and, of course, we think right now the most noticeable crisis is the potential collapse of the domestic auto industry. Unlike many other industries, the auto industry touches millions of jobs and many manufacturing and service industries throughout the Nation. We are not talking only about autoworkers in assembly plants, we are also talking about auto suppliers, dealerships, repair shops, steel, glass, and plastic industries. These auto-related jobs are not just in big cities such as Detroit and Cleveland, St. Louis, or Kansas City, those jobs support families in small- and medium-sized communities across rural America in places in my home State such as Dexter, Fenton, Mexico, Riverside, Maryville, Moberly, Versailles, and Joplin. I have been meeting with many of these people in the last few weeks. But despite the real need for temporary emergency assistance to save jobs in Missouri and across the country, I do not support a taxpayer- funded blank check that will prop up failed business models without getting the changes that are vitally needed. It is a disservice to the American taxpayer to throw good money after bad, when these big businesses contributed to their problems. I share and understand the ``bailout fatigue'' of most taxpayers, a lot of folks in my State, and we are troubled by the Government intervention in the private market. But I think it is important to note the failures of the auto companies, like the financial markets, are more than just a failure of the markets and the industry. It also occurred due to Government actions, some of which were pushed by the Congress. Congress helped bring about $4-a-gallon gasoline that pushed car sales down before the credit crisis--in which we also had a hand--shut off car loans. Our country, however, is facing a unique economic emergency and now is not the time to point fingers of blame. It is a time to examine carefully all policy options, including the option of doing nothing. But doing nothing for the auto industry would mean allowing them to go into bankruptcy. Unfortunately, bankruptcy takes several years, and many consumers would not purchase a car or a truck from a company in bankruptcy. In fact, recent research studies suggest that 20 to 30 percent of shoppers avoided purchasing domestic autos in October due to the speculation of bankruptcy. In other words, bankruptcy would likely lead to the end of the auto industry. If they were to go into chapter 11, debtor in possession financing is required to get out of chapter 11, but with the credit markets frozen, where would they get that money? That is what we are talking about today. The collapse of the auto industry would not be without cost to the taxpayers. The loss of hundreds of thousands--if not millions--of jobs would severely strain our social safety net, as taxpayer funds would have to be used for unemployment benefits, health care, and other necessary social services. For these reasons, I decided I would not turn my back on families, small businesses, and communities in Missouri and across the Nation, but I would also not turn my back on taxpayers and simply throw money after the problem. Facing an economic crisis that is only going to get worse, I believe--I have believed, as I do now--action is necessary. This is why I worked to craft a bipartisan bill with my colleagues: Senators Levin, Voinovich, Stabenow, Brown, Specter, and Casey. This bipartisan bill, called the Auto Industry Emergency Bridge Loan Act, would provide temporary emergency assistance to the auto industry but hold the companies accountable by requiring specific plans with real and significant cost-control measures and cuts. Specifically, the Levin-Bond bill includes three key principles. First, the bill must have strong taxpayer protection. This means taxpayers will be repaid for the emergency assistance, and taxpayers would share in the turnaround profits of participating automakers. Second, the bill includes executive accountability so that failed executives will not be rewarded for poor management. Third, and most important, the bill includes significant financial reform so that recipients of taxpayer funds must demonstrate they have a plan to ensure long-term competitiveness, health, and profitability by bringing their costs under control. This bill would require all stakeholders--including management, labor, creditors, and shareholders--to make sacrifices. The companies must take real restructuring reform measures that address unproductive and duplicative lines and legacy costs that are burdensome. Our original bill said we must have the Secretary of Commerce make that decision because that is not a decision we in this body can sit down and make with stacks of plans in front of us. We want experts in the Department of Commerce and those they bring in from the outside to determine whether these plans are workable, whether they meet the criteria. One of the ideas that has been floated is to have a car czar to bring together interested stakeholders, including management, unions, and creditors, to negotiate long-term financial viability plans for participating auto manufacturers and component suppliers, or we need an oversight board to oversee the use of emergency loan funds and implementation of any completed financial viability plans to make sure the fundamental reforms are made. If there is a czar to be appointed, I strongly suggest and I am sure the current administration would consult closely with the Obama transition team to make sure they had somebody who was mutually acceptable who would work in the Commerce Department with the resources there to advise the Secretary, the President, and the President-elect that these plans are, in fact, viable. It is important to note that the plan we understand is being discussed--and our bill--does not provide any new taxpayer funds. Instead, it uses previously appropriated funds to provide the emergency bridge loans under the program. These funds are then to be repaid to that fund to be used for the original clean car retooling program. Similarly, using these new funds will not be allowed to change any of the clean car efficiency requirements originally imposed on automakers. It is encouraging for me and my colleagues to hear in the media that many of the people working on it--the leadership--have stated publicly their support for the general approach and principles outlined in the Levin-Bond bill. While the news has been generally encouraging, we have not seen any details of the bill being developed by the Democratic leadership. I have been unable to find out from the White House if they have seen the details or the wording. It is absolutely important, to secure the votes to pass this bill in the Senate, that it contain these key principles: taxpayer protection, executive accountability, and a viable long-term plan specifically laid out so that we know where they are going. Without that, I do not believe the Senate can or should pass that bill. There must be strong powers to ensure that restructuring measures will be enforced. The czar should be appointed, if we get one, by the administration, in cooperation with the President-elect. Providing even a short-term bridge loan without a real enforceable plan is not a responsible approach. Funds must be conditioned on a strong restructuring strategy so that the taxpayers have confidence that it is a bridge loan to somewhere that will lead to long-term financial viability, competitiveness, health, and profitability.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Before closing, I offer a few comments on the TARP program. Since enactment of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act in early October, the Treasury Department has spent almost all of its initial $350 billion under TARP to recapitalize several banks and financial institutions. It has been reported that the Treasury Secretary may request the remaining $350 billion as early as this week. Under the law, the President must submit a written request that details the Treasury Secretary's plan to use the additional funds, and Congress has 15 days to enact a disapproval resolution. However, given the track record of the Treasury's use of the initial $350 billion of TARP funds, it is difficult for many of us to feel confident that the Department will spend additional funds in an effective and efficient manner. The administration is going to have to demonstrate that it has addressed a number of very serious implementation issues. As a Senator from the Show Me State, I expect to see them. Some of these issues are related to the management and oversight of the funds as reported last week by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the GAO. In its report, the GAO uncovered a number of management and oversight deficiencies that raise serious questions about the program's integrity, accountability, transparency, and effectiveness. Frankly, the GAO's findings were very troubling. The GAO pointed to the Treasury Department's inadequate staffing, failure to establish a mechanism to track billions in taxpayer funds provided to the banks, and failure to establish a system on how it would monitor compliance with executive compensation limitations required by the legislation. In other words, it appears the Treasury is unable to tell taxpayers how their funds are being spent and whether the money is being spent in a reasonable and effective manner. I don't think that is acceptable. The GAO also uncovered other troubling findings, such as Treasury's lack of action to address the foreclosure crisis. As we all know, the housing foreclosure crisis is at the center of the financial credit crisis. In recognition of this, the EESA included specific language for the Secretary to address the housing crisis. Unfortunately, Treasury has not taken sufficient action as communities and families across the country continue to be devastated by foreclosures. Loan modification efforts are failing, as evidenced by the Treasury Office of Comptroller--the OCC--data released this morning. According to the OCC, about 36 percent of borrowers were more than 30 days past due on loan payments 3 months after their loan was modified and nearly 53 percent were more than 30 days late after 6 months. What is going on here? These findings raise significant questions, if not doubts, about both private and Government loan modification efforts, including those through the Department's so-called HOPE NOW Program. As I previously warned, the administration's and Congress's push to use the Federal Housing Administration to prevent foreclosures by refinancing subprime and troubled loans may end up costing taxpayers a lot of money in the near future. Rescuing the FHA through taxpayer funds is not surprising to those who have watched the FHA closely and know they have longstanding management and oversight problems and lack of resources. Clearly, a more aggressive, comprehensive, and smarter approach to the foreclosure crisis must be taken if we are to recover from the recession. The housing crisis has now spread from subprime mortgages to prime mortgages as economic factors impact borrowers' ability to pay their mortgages. Due to expansion of the mortgage crisis, it is critical that we find measures to protect and create jobs. The importance of jobs and its impact on the housing crisis further raises the importance of devising a responsible rescue package for the auto industry since millions of jobs are at risk--over 3 million jobs in the Nation, 220,000 jobs in Missouri. TARP has also disappointed me by the ad hoc implementation of the program. Prior to the creation of TARP, the Department seemed to be improvising on a daily basis its intervention with financial markets. One of our intents in creating TARP was to provide a structure and coherency to the Government's approach to the financial crisis. That we have not seen. Before this and the next administration submit a request for the remaining TARP funds, we expect to have answers to the questions and issues raised by the GAO and others. The Government needs to provide more certainty on how it will address the financial and economic crisis and provide answers to taxpayers on how it has spent taxpayers funds already provided. These are very serious times. I want to see action by this Congress. I want to see us move quickly. But I also want to see action by the auto industry to advise the czar or the Secretary of Commerce, and I want to see action by the Treasury to give us a better idea of how TARP funds are being used, how they will be accounted for, how they are going to be implemented, and how they are going to be used. If they don't have an approach, I will come forward with a suggestion on how we restructure those home loans that are in crisis. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Brownback be added as a cosponsor to S. 3715, the Auto Industry Emergency Bridge Loan Act.

Mr. BOND. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr President, today I recognize and pay tribute to a good friend and longtime colleague in public service: Brad Scott. I have known Brad for more than 20 years, first as a dedicated and effective employee, and later as a visionary Government administrator. On January 9, 2009, he will step down from his post as a regional administrator of the General Service Administration after 8 years of innovative and dedicated service. We sometimes joke that the term ``Government efficiency'' is an oxymoron, but not when Brad is in charge. He can make things happen. At a time when political concerns seem to dominate much of the landscape, Brad has worked across the aisle to get things done by focusing on the common good and doing what is best for Missouri and the Heartland Region. We all know that in the Federal bureaucracy, it is much harder to complete a project than to derail it or to do nothing at all. Red tape is an all-too-real phenomenon. But since Brad came to the GSA in 2001, he has not stopped building. In 2001, he brought a set of successful business policies to a GSA region that was suffering from underutilized space and low return on investment. He also worked hard to build consensus between local communities, the private sector and Government on large-scale projects. He was able to revitalize blighted areas in many of our largest cities by constructing or renovating iconic buildings that now enhance local economic development. He also permanently strengthened these local communities by creating and maintaining jobs. Brad's accomplishments are too numerous to name. Several of his major contributions include: the construction of First IRS Center in Kansas City, new Federal courthouses in Cape Girardeau and Jefferson City, and the conversion of the Old St. Louis Post Office into a heavily utilized State building. Brad's long list of accomplishments speaks to his vision, dedication, and uncanny ability to guide key development projects through the bureaucratic maze. Losing Brad Scott as Regional GSA Administrator will be a real blow to Missouri but the State has been fortunate to have him in that role for so many years. I know that he will continue to be an active participant in issues facing Missouri and the region just as he has always been. Brad, thank you for your service and I look forward to many more good things to come.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, the distinguished majority leader was kind enough to mention the fact that several of us on our side have been working with leading Members on his side of the aisle to come up with a compromise proposal that would come to the aid of the auto companies which are facing a very serious situation, without mentioning specific ones or others, but to say this is a critical time to move to prevent perhaps the bankruptcy or the disappearance of a major auto company, which would cause chaos in our country. Over 3 million jobs are related to the auto industry--from the auto assembly plants, to the auto dealerships, to the parts suppliers. So we have been working on a bipartisan basis. On my side of the aisle, Senator Voinovich and I have been working with others on the Democratic side. We took the basic construct of the measure the majority leader had introduced. We took the money out of a previously passed bill, which would not cause as much concern down Pennsylvania Avenue, and we provide that the money will go back into that program as it is returned. In my view, it is essential we work something out. I will tell the majority leader we have made great progress. We are down to the point now where wording challenges are about the only remaining things to deal with. I strongly believe it is in the interest of the country, particularly all of those families whose jobs depend upon the auto industry, and the States, the local governments, and the Federal Government to move something forward. So I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined on Thursday, November 20, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a bill to be introduced by Senators Bond and Voinovich and others; I further ask that there be no amendments in order, with 2 hours of debate equally divided, and following the use or yielding back of the time, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage, and that if there are not 60 votes in the affirmative, the bill be placed on the Senate calendar.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it is a real pleasure to join and partner with my good friend, Senator Mikulski, on this initiative to save American jobs, help American families, support the auto industry, as she has just said, and put America back on wheels. During those tough economic times, we believe this proposal will help American families afford the cars, small trucks, and SUVs they need to get to work, to take their kids to school, and encourage investment needed to boost auto sales which will help save American jobs, help middle-class families, and support the auto industry. Selling cars, again, is one of the most important things we can do for the entire auto industry, by encouraging now tentative buyers who are worried about making the payments to go ahead and purchase. This is the best way to get our auto industry back to work and provide the jobs people need. In my home State of Missouri and throughout the Nation car sales have declined sharply in recent months, and there will likely be a further decline as the economy struggles. Cars and trucks are one of the largest purchases for households. Most rely on some kind of financing to acquire the vehicles. By making interest payments and sales and excise taxes deductible, this program will help middle-class families afford the cars, SUVs, and light trucks they need to get to work and take their kids to school. This should mean real savings to middle-class families who are struggling to pay a mortgage or rent, buy groceries, and afford health care. This proposal also helps the struggling auto industry and millions of jobs that are dependent on them: auto suppliers, steel and glass manufacturers, and the car dealers. There are closing car dealerships in Missouri. They are shutting their doors, laying off workers, cutting jobs. Others are facing real squeezes. They, too, may be facing this same crisis if they do not get people purchasing cars. With our economy shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs over the past several months, it is critical that we act now to prevent further losses to an industry that touches the entire Nation. Now, in addition to this tax proposal, I think we must take action to provide bridge loan financing to Detroit's big three auto companies. The idea of getting Government involved in the free market is troublesome and potentially dangerous to the health of our system, but I strongly believe we have to act in unique times of crisis when millions of workers are in danger of losing their jobs. We are clearly in this unique crisis. We are experiencing a crisis unparalleled since the Great Depression. It is for that reason that I will not turn my back on hundreds of thousands of Missouri jobs. Now is the time to act. Unlike many other industries, the auto industry touches, as I said, millions of manufacturing and servicing jobs across the Nation. Over 100,000 auto workers are in assembly plants, more than 1 million workers are at auto dealerships in every State, over 300,000 workers are in the wholesale end of the auto industry, over 800,000 workers work in auto repair, and over 500,000 workers are in auto parts plants. These autoworkers are not just in big cities such as Detroit. Autoworkers are found supporting families in small- and medium-sized communities across rural America. In my home State of Missouri, small towns such as Maryville in northwest Missouri have 10,000 people, and 1,800 families depend upon the 200 workers at the Federal-Mogul plant. They are making steering systems. Closing that plant will be a tough blow to the Maryville community dependent upon it. We have 500 jobs at the Dura plant in Moberly, 400 at the Gates plant in Versailles, 170 at the Modine plant in Joplin. On and on it goes, like a long list of just about every Missouri small- and medium-sized town. We cannot afford to pull the plug on the manufacturing backbone of rural America. These auto-dependent jobs, whether they are union or not--and many are not--provide very good wages. They are manufacturing jobs that support middle-class families. They provide health care benefits for families, retirement for the elderly, and a couple weeks of paid vacation. Without these blue-collar jobs, many of these middle-class families would slip back into lower incomes with no health care, little hope for college, and an uncertain future. We have to fight for working people and their jobs and not allow their employers to go under. Despite the real need for temporary emergency assistance to save jobs in Missouri and across the country, I do not support a blank check from the Government. I want to make sure we are not simply throwing good money after bad. It is critical that any rescue include three basic principles: First, the bill must have strong taxpayer protection. This means any bill must ensure that taxpayers are repaid for their emergency assistance and that taxpayers share in the turnaround profits of participating automakers. Second, the bill must include executive accountability so that failed executives are not rewarded for poor management. I do not know about you, but I am offended when I read in the paper that companies getting Federal bailout money are using it to pay bonuses. Some of them said they have already set the bonuses aside. Well, if they set the bonuses aside, they set them aside as their company was going down. Getting money from the Federal Government should not enable them to make those bonus payments. I have seen one major Wall Street firm saying it is going to stop bonuses until this crisis is over. I think that is something we should commend. I think that is a practice that ought to be followed. Third, and most important--and this is key--the bill must include significant financial reform so that recipients of taxpayer funds demonstrate that they have a plan to ensure long-term competitiveness, health, and profitability by bringing their costs under control. Funds should be conditioned on a strong restructuring plan for the industry and for each recipient to have funds so that this aid is a bridge to somewhere, not a bridge to nowhere. That is why I need to emphasize the need for a real financial strategy that will put the Detroit big three on the road to competitiveness, health, and profitability. I believe we ought to set up a system where a responsible Government agency, a Secretary-level official, has to approve the continuing plans, the goals, the definable standards that must be met, and that official ought to hold them accountable for accomplishing the purposes, cutting the costs, and making the tough business decisions that are necessary to assure profitability. Well, these are things I believe most of my colleagues want to see. I do not believe anybody wants to see the auto industry go down. But there is real concern that if we put in some money now, we may be back seeing them in the same condition several months down the road. Well, the time has come for the auto industry to lay out for Government officials in their ability to approve the release of these funds if they have a plan. And as they go forward, they ought to be required to show the approving official that they are taking those steps that are necessary to make their plants and their companies profitable. Some ask: Why don't we just allow the automakers to fall into bankruptcy like some in the airline industry? We all know bankruptcy has successfully allowed many airlines to get back in the air. I am afraid it would be a disaster for the thousands of parts and service businesses dependent on major automakers. How would they get credit to run their operations to supply a company in bankruptcy? How would the bankrupt company in the current crisis get the credit it needs to emerge from bankruptcy? Who is going to buy a car from a bankrupt company? What protections would they have for their warranties and other requirements they have for servicing? Others say a financial rescue has no place in the free market. I agree that generally that is a good question. But even free markets need oversight and a safety net. That is why we have the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Each of these agencies is designed to take emergency actions in times of emergency. Clearly, that is what we have. That is why we should respond now. There have been a lot of discussions on the source of funding for the auto industry, whether it should come out of the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, or the Department of Energy's Section 136 program. I am pleased to see that there seems to be broad support for assisting the auto industry despite the differences in funding. I support either or both of these measures of support, provided we meet the conditions I laid out which include significantly laying out a plan to profitability, cost cutting that will be approved and then will be monitored by the appropriate Government official who has the power to continue to release the funds. I will discuss in other remarks how the TARP has changed in purpose from what we were told it would be. It has continued to change. I am afraid it has caused a great deal of uncertainty, which, obviously, markets do not like. But before closing, I wish to suggest an area where there is great need and where I believe the funds under the Troubled Asset Relief Program can and should be used to give the economy a major boost, creating the jobs we badly need, and that is in State and local government infrastructure. Despite the Government's efforts to thaw the credit crunch, State and local governments continue to face hardships in municipal bond financing. People were telling me, once we got the money into the banks, credit would loosen up and municipal bonds could be sold. So far, we are not seeing that. State and local bond and debt financing is still a problem. In Missouri and throughout the Nation, many infrastructure projects are being delayed or scaled back due to credit problems, the inability to get credit, and they have not faced it in many years. Even State and local governments with high credit ratings are struggling to obtain affordable financing. In Missouri, for example, we have some $800 million approved in debt to rebuild our bridges. The city of Kansas City, MO, has $200 million it is ready to spend on its water and sewer infrastructure. The St. Louis Airport is badly in need of funding for $100 million in upgrades to facilitate commerce and continue to provide jobs. I believe the funds should be used to purchase those portions of those debts that can be used to put people to work in 2009. Not all of the $800 million on fixing bridges is going to be spent in 1 year, but there should be a reasonable judgment as to how much work can be started when construction season begins in the spring. We ought to be willing to have the Federal Government provide the funding and get the debt issuance in return, which, if they fund it at the current going rate for debt with the Federal Government, should be a no-cost ultimate cost to the taxpayer or an addition to the debt. But what these infrastructure jobs will do right now is provide work so that working men and women will be able to do things such as buy cars, provide for their families, spend the money to get the economy growing again. I urge Treasury to consider assisting the municipal bond market through the TARP program. It will not only boost infrastructure investments, build the critical infrastructure we need to make our economy go forward, but it will create jobs. As has been said many times before by people a lot smarter than I, a good job is the best social policy we have. A good job is the basis of the economy. What we are advocating today in the bill I cosponsored with Senator Mikulski is a way to get cars sold so they will create jobs all up and down the chain in the auto industry and provide a bridge to somewhere for the future of the auto industry so they will get their costs under control, keep them out of bankruptcy, and make the changes that are needed to be competitive in the national and the world market. I urge my colleagues to join with us in the legislation by Senator Mikulski and also in pushing to use the TARP funds for investment in municipal bonds that will put people to work on infrastructure.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it is a real pleasure to join and partner with my good friend, Senator Mikulski, on this initiative to save American jobs, help American families, support the auto industry, as she has just said, and put America back on wheels. During those tough economic times, we believe this proposal will help American families afford the cars, small trucks, and SUVs they need to get to work, to take their kids to school, and encourage investment needed to boost auto sales which will help save American jobs, help middle-class families, and support the auto industry. Selling cars, again, is one of the most important things we can do for the entire auto industry, by encouraging now tentative buyers who are worried about making the payments to go ahead and purchase. This is the best way to get our auto industry back to work and provide the jobs people need. In my home State of Missouri and throughout the Nation car sales have declined sharply in recent months, and there will likely be a further decline as the economy struggles. Cars and trucks are one of the largest purchases for households. Most rely on some kind of financing to acquire the vehicles. By making interest payments and sales and excise taxes deductible, this program will help middle-class families afford the cars, SUVs, and light trucks they need to get to work and take their kids to school. This should mean real savings to middle-class families who are struggling to pay a mortgage or rent, buy groceries, and afford health care. This proposal also helps the struggling auto industry and millions of jobs that are dependent on them: auto suppliers, steel and glass manufacturers, and the car dealers. There are closing car dealerships in Missouri. They are shutting their doors, laying off workers, cutting jobs. Others are facing real squeezes. They, too, may be facing this same crisis if they do not get people purchasing cars. With our economy shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs over the past several months, it is critical that we act now to prevent further losses to an industry that touches the entire Nation. Now, in addition to this tax proposal, I think we must take action to provide bridge loan financing to Detroit's big three auto companies. The idea of getting Government involved in the free market is troublesome and potentially dangerous to the health of our system, but I strongly believe we have to act in unique times of crisis when millions of workers are in danger of losing their jobs. We are clearly in this unique crisis. We are experiencing a crisis unparalleled since the Great Depression. It is for that reason that I will not turn my back on hundreds of thousands of Missouri jobs. Now is the time to act. Unlike many other industries, the auto industry touches, as I said, millions of manufacturing and servicing jobs across the Nation. Over 100,000 auto workers are in assembly plants, more than 1 million workers are at auto dealerships in every State, over 300,000 workers are in the wholesale end of the auto industry, over 800,000 workers work in auto repair, and over 500,000 workers are in auto parts plants. These autoworkers are not just in big cities such as Detroit. Autoworkers are found supporting families in small- and medium-sized communities across rural America. In my home State of Missouri, small towns such as Maryville in northwest Missouri have 10,000 people, and 1,800 families depend upon the 200 workers at the Federal-Mogul plant. They are making steering systems. Closing that plant will be a tough blow to the Maryville community dependent upon it. We have 500 jobs at the Dura plant in Moberly, 400 at the Gates plant in Versailles, 170 at the Modine plant in Joplin. On and on it goes, like a long list of just about every Missouri small- and medium-sized town. We cannot afford to pull the plug on the manufacturing backbone of rural America. These auto-dependent jobs, whether they are union or not--and many are not--provide very good wages. They are manufacturing jobs that support middle-class families. They provide health care benefits for families, retirement for the elderly, and a couple weeks of paid vacation. Without these blue-collar jobs, many of these middle-class families would slip back into lower incomes with no health care, little hope for college, and an uncertain future. We have to fight for working people and their jobs and not allow their employers to go under. Despite the real need for temporary emergency assistance to save jobs in Missouri and across the country, I do not support a blank check from the Government. I want to make sure we are not simply throwing good money after bad. It is critical that any rescue include three basic principles: First, the bill must have strong taxpayer protection. This means any bill must ensure that taxpayers are repaid for their emergency assistance and that taxpayers share in the turnaround profits of participating automakers. Second, the bill must include executive accountability so that failed executives are not rewarded for poor management. I do not know about you, but I am offended when I read in the paper that companies getting Federal bailout money are using it to pay bonuses. Some of them said they have already set the bonuses aside. Well, if they set the bonuses aside, they set them aside as their company was going down. Getting money from the Federal Government should not enable them to make those bonus payments. I have seen one major Wall Street firm saying it is going to stop bonuses until this crisis is over. I think that is something we should commend. I think that is a practice that ought to be followed. Third, and most important--and this is key--the bill must include significant financial reform so that recipients of taxpayer funds demonstrate that they have a plan to ensure long-term competitiveness, health, and profitability by bringing their costs under control. Funds should be conditioned on a strong restructuring plan for the industry and for each recipient to have funds so that this aid is a bridge to somewhere, not a bridge to nowhere. That is why I need to emphasize the need for a real financial strategy that will put the Detroit big three on the road to competitiveness, health, and profitability. I believe we ought to set up a system where a responsible Government agency, a Secretary-level official, has to approve the continuing plans, the goals, the definable standards that must be met, and that official ought to hold them accountable for accomplishing the purposes, cutting the costs, and making the tough business decisions that are necessary to assure profitability. Well, these are things I believe most of my colleagues want to see. I do not believe anybody wants to see the auto industry go down. But there is real concern that if we put in some money now, we may be back seeing them in the same condition several months down the road. Well, the time has come for the auto industry to lay out for Government officials in their ability to approve the release of these funds if they have a plan. And as they go forward, they ought to be required to show the approving official that they are taking those steps that are necessary to make their plants and their companies profitable. Some ask: Why don't we just allow the automakers to fall into bankruptcy like some in the airline industry? We all know bankruptcy has successfully allowed many airlines to get back in the air. I am afraid it would be a disaster for the thousands of parts and service businesses dependent on major automakers. How would they get credit to run their operations to supply a company in bankruptcy? How would the bankrupt company in the current crisis get the credit it needs to emerge from bankruptcy? Who is going to buy a car from a bankrupt company? What protections would they have for their warranties and other requirements they have for servicing? Others say a financial rescue has no place in the free market. I agree that generally that is a good question. But even free markets need oversight and a safety net. That is why we have the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Each of these agencies is designed to take emergency actions in times of emergency. Clearly, that is what we have. That is why we should respond now. There have been a lot of discussions on the source of funding for the auto industry, whether it should come out of the Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, or the Department of Energy's Section 136 program. I am pleased to see that there seems to be broad support for assisting the auto industry despite the differences in funding. I support either or both of these measures of support, provided we meet the conditions I laid out which include significantly laying out a plan to profitability, cost cutting that will be approved and then will be monitored by the appropriate Government official who has the power to continue to release the funds. I will discuss in other remarks how the TARP has changed in purpose from what we were told it would be. It has continued to change. I am afraid it has caused a great deal of uncertainty, which, obviously, markets do not like. But before closing, I wish to suggest an area where there is great need and where I believe the funds under the Troubled Asset Relief Program can and should be used to give the economy a major boost, creating the jobs we badly need, and that is in State and local government infrastructure. Despite the Government's efforts to thaw the credit crunch, State and local governments continue to face hardships in municipal bond financing. People were telling me, once we got the money into the banks, credit would loosen up and municipal bonds could be sold. So far, we are not seeing that. State and local bond and debt financing is still a problem. In Missouri and throughout the Nation, many infrastructure projects are being delayed or scaled back due to credit problems, the inability to get credit, and they have not faced it in many years. Even State and local governments with high credit ratings are struggling to obtain affordable financing. In Missouri, for example, we have some $800 million approved in debt to rebuild our bridges. The city of Kansas City, MO, has $200 million it is ready to spend on its water and sewer infrastructure. The St. Louis Airport is badly in need of funding for $100 million in upgrades to facilitate commerce and continue to provide jobs. I believe the funds should be used to purchase those portions of those debts that can be used to put people to work in 2009. Not all of the $800 million on fixing bridges is going to be spent in 1 year, but there should be a reasonable judgment as to how much work can be started when construction season begins in the spring. We ought to be willing to have the Federal Government provide the funding and get the debt issuance in return, which, if they fund it at the current going rate for debt with the Federal Government, should be a no-cost ultimate cost to the taxpayer or an addition to the debt. But what these infrastructure jobs will do right now is provide work so that working men and women will be able to do things such as buy cars, provide for their families, spend the money to get the economy growing again. I urge Treasury to consider assisting the municipal bond market through the TARP program. It will not only boost infrastructure investments, build the critical infrastructure we need to make our economy go forward, but it will create jobs. As has been said many times before by people a lot smarter than I, a good job is the best social policy we have. A good job is the basis of the economy. What we are advocating today in the bill I cosponsored with Senator Mikulski is a way to get cars sold so they will create jobs all up and down the chain in the auto industry and provide a bridge to somewhere for the future of the auto industry so they will get their costs under control, keep them out of bankruptcy, and make the changes that are needed to be competitive in the national and the world market. I urge my colleagues to join with us in the legislation by Senator Mikulski and also in pushing to use the TARP funds for investment in municipal bonds that will put people to work on infrastructure.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. It is a rare occurrence in the Senate to get this level of strong bipartisan cooperation, and I thank the chair and our colleagues on the Commerce Committee, Senators Inouye and Hutchison, for their support on this issue. As you mentioned, I, too, am concerned that the administration will ignore the impartial legal opinion articulated by the GAO on slot auctions and proceed with their ill-conceived plan. The flying public and taxpayers are not well served by carrying through on a plan that will only lead to increased delays and costly litigation. Our aviation system needs a comprehensive overhaul, operationally and technologically, to fix the problems of congestion. An untested scheme to further tax airlines and passengers is certainly not what is needed. The delayed and weary flying public deserves better. Should the administration proceed with their illegal auction scheme, it will do nothing to reduce congestion and will only postpone needed reforms to the system. The problem of chronic congestion and delays in our aviation system deserves the full attention of all of the stakeholders involved in aviation--from the administration and Congress, the airlines, airports, customers, and the air traffic controllers and operational personnel that keep our system moving. With the GAO's legal ruling, it is my hope that we can move past this failed idea and work towards a real solution. I look forward to working with you and our Commerce Committee colleagues in addressing the fundamental causes of delays and congestion throughout our system and thank you all again for your continued leadership and support on the issue.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I am in strong agreement with the bipartisan leadership of the Foreign Relations Committee. I will address those issues shortly. But, first, since we have a rather full legislative calendar this evening, I will touch briefly on the financial system rescue, a rescue of a locked-up credit system which is having its impact on Main Street, where I live in the hearthand, and in every community in the Nation where credit is locked up. Today I was advised that the State of Missouri cannot issue bonds to build highways. The State of Maine is also having trouble. Local governments can't get loans. There is no money available in the credit markets for municipal bonds at reasonable rates. There is a threat that workers will not get their paychecks if businesses or payroll companies cannot get the loans they need. Families will not be able to get loans for college education, to buy a car, to buy a home. Farmers will not be able to get operating loans they must have in Missouri to begin their normal agricultural operations. When I came to the floor a week ago yesterday, I said we must pass something. At that time I said the Treasury's proposal lacks accountability, taxpayer protection, and transparency. Thanks to the good work of our negotiators--and I commend the Senator from Connecticut, Mr. Dodd, Senator Gregg from our side, and the House negotiators for putting in those elements, as they are critical--the taxpayers have a triple level of protection against losses. The CBO has come out with a score saying it will be far less than the $700 billion. There are some who think we might recoup all of it, but it is far cheaper than continuing the process we have right now where Federal tax dollars are being used to come to the rescue of failing savings and loans, investment banks, and we don't get any equity from those efforts. We don't have a means of recouping it. What is even more important, it does nothing to unlock the credit gridlock that threatens to bring this economy to a halt, with workers losing their jobs, small businesses unable to operate. Yesterday, I strongly urged that we raise the Federal deposit insurance limit from $100,000 so small businesses that have more than $100,000 don't have to continue taking their money out of the banks, leaving the banks less capital available to make loans, in order to get protection of U.S. Treasury deposits. I heard the stories, and I talked with a broker in Missouri yesterday who said: Small business clients are trying to move all their money out of banks above $100,000 and put it into Treasuries. Again, I am delighted that the leaders, our negotiators, and the bipartisan leadership in both Houses agreed to extend the FDIC limit to $250,000. We will be looking at all of those things, as well as general regulation of the financial markets when we return. I have lots of ideas. If anybody cares, I will be sharing them at the appropriate time. I am also delighted that we are going to include the tax extenders, tax extenders that businesses need to continue to operate; tax extenders that, unfortunately, would only extend on a year-to-year basis but are necessary for profitable operation so businesses can continue to hire and build the economy. Probably the greatest part of that is delaying the burdensome and punitive alternative minimum tax that is now threatening to hit many middle-income working Americans, unless we pass this bill. Another element, on which my colleague from Iowa, Senator Harkin, has been a leader, is getting disaster relief. Residents in Missouri need it. Iowa needs it. Our neighbors in Illinois need it. Many other places in the Nation need disaster relief. That is another must-pass piece of legislation. To return to the subject that the Senators from Connecticut and Indiana are addressing, we currently have before us a number of legislative opportunities that, if we act and act properly, would send a reinforcing signal to our allies and friends in the world that the United States values and appreciates their support and cooperation. We all know that anti-Americanism is growing throughout the world. It is most evident in the socialist vitriol being spewed by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, and the widespread suspicion throughout the Muslim world about America's intentions. In places such as Southeast Asia and south Asia, where we are competing for influence with an emerging China, we must increase our engagement and strengthen our economic and strategic links with countries such as India, which I will speak to in a minute. Let's face it, we have a lot of work to do in rebuilding America's image abroad and increasing security and stability throughout the world. But we have a number of opportunities before us, opportunities we must act upon. The way in which we get there is by engaging and deploying our Nation's smart power. This consists of, but is not limited to, public diplomacy efforts, educational exchanges, deployment of more Peace Corps volunteers and USAID foreign service officers, and supporting free-trade agreements and increased economic engagement. The first target of opportunity where America must act is Colombia. Congress must act on the Colombia FTA and renew the Andean Trade Preferences. Doing so would solidify our image as a nation committed to helping a strategic ally in Latin America that is, in fact, standing shoulder to shoulder with us. Colombia is a remarkable success in the fight against terrorism and narcotrafficking that needs to be told. It is a country where its pro- American leader, President Alvaro Uribe, has led a surge against narcoterrorists militarily while simultaneously improving the overall security, economy, and safety of the civilian population. They have done so while ensuring that protection of human rights and adherence to international humanitarian law are fully integrated into their security forces. In my visit there just over a month ago, I was greatly encouraged by the tangible evidence I saw of a country in complete transformation. Just 6 years ago, in 2002, as much as 40 percent of Colombia was controlled by terrorist groups and ruthless narcotics-trafficking cartels. Many of my colleagues visited Colombia at that time and brought back grim reports of a country slipping into a failed state.

Mr. BOND. Well, Mr. President, might I ask consent to conclude my remarks.

Mr. BOND. Yes.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and thank my colleagues. Since 1998, the United States has been supporting the counternarcotics effort President Clinton initiated known as Plan Colombia, and today our mutual objectives have evolved from a strict counternarcotics focus to encompass counterterrorism activities as well. Our investment has paid off. With U.S. aid to Colombian security forces and assistance and trade preferences under the Andean trade preferences agreement, the Colombian people have been positively transforming their nation. Others, however, under the Andean trade preference agreement in Bolivia and Ecuador have produced less encouraging results, even taking sides with aggressively hostile Hugo Chavez. I believe we ought to have a debate about extending them the full benefits of the Andean trade agreement. If I had the opportunity to offer an amendment, I would have limited the questionable Governments of Ecuador and Bolivia to 1 year while giving much longer protection to Colombia. The message is simple: reward our friends and allies in the world, not those who wish us ill or support our enemies. Colombia has been our friend and ally in an increasingly left- leaning, anti-American Latin America. We must take the opportunity to reward and thank them by passing the Colombia FTA. This agreement also benefits America's economy by increasing exports and generating jobs. Upon entry into force of the agreement, over 80 percent of U.S. exports of agricultural, consumer, and industrial goods to Colombia would enter duty-free immediately. The Colombian free-trade agreement will benefit America. Another strategically important part of the world where the United States has an opportunity to increase cooperation and deploy its smart power is in India. India is a friendly democracy strategically sitting between the two places American strategists worry most about: China and the Middle East. We are natural allies as two of the world's largest democracies and we should be much closer. And the feeling, by and large, is mutual among the people of India. India has more Muslims--150 million or so--than any other country in the world except Indonesia, which I have spoken extensively on this floor about engaging more proactively. Positive engagement of American smart power and increased economic opportunities will help prevent the likelihood of al-Qaida or radicalization of this large Muslim population. During my trip to India in March of 2006, the major item of interest to all of the Government and private-sector officials I met, from Prime Minster Singh to businessmen in New Dehli, was the support for the civilian nuclear technology agreement which was signed as I was in the air. I was asked about it when I landed and could not answer. But I spent a day being fully briefed by our Embassy and intelligence officials. After extensive discussions with Indian and American officials, as well as intelligence briefings, I reached the conclusion that this agreement is a very positive step for the United States and India. It would aid in cementing a good working relationship with the world's largest democracy in a strategic part of the world. I support this agreement and agree with our bipartisan leadership that we must defeat the amendments which would merely delay and possibly sidetrack approval. India has three paramount challenges ahead that it must address: First, it must improve its infrastructure and roads. Second, it must deal with the extreme poverty of its huge rural population. Thirty percent of its population live below the official poverty line. Third, India, just like the United States, must be able to meet the demand for increases in energy. A strong relationship between India and the U.S. is vital to ensuring peaceful development and continued prosperity in South and Southeast Asia. Regional rivalries, particularly with China will continue to heat up in a race for energy to fuel both India's and China's rapidly expanding economies and societies. An increase in nuclear power production in India through the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement would help to cool these rivalries in their race for energy resources. In a land where air quality is a major problem, despite recent improvements, this agreement would allow India to meet its surging energy requirements in an environmentally friendly manner. Further, increasing the supply of energy in India, make no mistake about it, also indirectly helps consumers at the pump here at home as well. In addition to nuclear power, during my visit I also encouraged the development of clean coal technology. With the fourth largest coal reserves in the world, India and the U.S. should work together to develop that source of energy as well. Developing energy solutions together with India will increase our engagement and lead to other economic opportunities for Americans. I hope my colleagues will support this agreement between the United States and India without amendment. It will safeguard Indian nuclear facilities and help meet the surging demand for global energy supplies in this critical Nation. And most importantly, it will solidify our relationship with a strategically important country that for too long suffered under the burden of a Soviet-style economy. Now it is opening its market, shares our democratic values, and is on its way to becoming one of the world's three largest economies. I urge my colleagues to act on solidifying our partnership with two critically important countries, Colombia and India. Tribute To Senator Pete Domenici Mr. President, I want to say that the passing of the mental health parity bill will be a great tribute to a wonderful friend, Pete Domenici, a true icon. He has been a longtime champion of this issue, and this will be a great testament to his leadership. I worked with Pete on the Budget Committee. I say thanks, Pete, for making me take all the tough votes. It was ugly but necessary, just like the financial rescue package. He is most recognized for his work on energy. I am very proud to have supported him in his efforts over many years to develop an abundant energy resource, long before $4 gasoline brought the issue home to every American. Just as important to me, I will miss the great friendship of a wonderful man, Pete Domenici, and his magnificent wife Nancy. Pete is known for his devotion to his friends and family--to his wife Nancy of 50 years and their 8 children. Pete is also known for his devotion and dedication to New Mexico. Born and raised in New Mexico, Pete has served his State in the U.S. Senate now for 36 years--making him the most senior Senator New Mexico has ever had. Pete has also earned the title as the only Republican to ever be elected by New Mexico for a 6-year Senate term--in a State not known to lean Republican. Pete's contributions to his State are well known to his constituents in New Mexico--whether it is fighting for solutions to the State's water crisis, supporting New Mexico schools, or ensuring New Mexico gets their fair share of tax dollars. Pete's contributions to our Nation are also well known. He understands the importance of keeping America as a leader in science and technology and has worked for improvements to the math and science education our school children need to succeed. Pete has also fought passionately for fiscal responsibility to ensure tax payer dollars are spent wisely and curbing nuclear proliferation to keep our communities safe. In recent years, Pete has used his role as chairman or ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to fight for our Nation's energy security. Pete worked across the aisle to pass the first comprehensive energy legislation since 1992. Because of Pete and the bill he got through Congress, our Nation began investing in our own energy sources.This bill provided incentives to expand the production of energy from wind, solar, geothermal and biomass sources to promote cleaner alternative sources of energy. Pete also ensured that this bill promoted research and development of hydrogen and fuel-cell technology. Pete didn't end the fight for our Nation's energy independence in 2005 though.Since that time, he has been a leader in the Senate calling for more action. Before the gas price crisis that is now affecting families across the country, Pete sounded the alarm.He has called for bringing relief to families struggling with pain at the pump by tapping our own domestic supplies of gas and oil. Pete has proposed the commonsense proposal--the Gas Price Reduction Act--to end our Nation's energy crisis. It is this foresight, this leadership, and this passion to making our Nation a better place and for making our communities better for our families that will make Pete Domenici missed by all--Republicans and Democrats alike. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I regrettably do not support H.R. 2095. The bill we have before us packages together three bills into one vote with no amendments dealing with Rail Safety, Amtrak, and capital and preventive maintenance grants for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, WMATA. The Rail Safety provisions of the package by themselves would have had my support. I fully support efforts to address hours of service requirements for train operators and positive train control for our freight and passenger railroads. However, I remain concerned about both Amtrak provisions and the WMATA portion of the full package that we are voting on tonight. The majority leader has filled the amendment tree so that no amendments can be offered on this package, and we are faced with an up or down vote on some very key funding areas under the jurisdiction of Transportation Appropriations. This extra spending will place a strain in excess of what our current budget allows. I understand the need to have passenger rail service as an alternative mode of transportation. However, I feel strongly that Amtrak should undertake the reforms necessary to be worthy of taxpayer dollars by tying funding to certain expectations and benchmarks. As the Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member for the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, THUD, I am not given enough of an allocation to meet all of our funding needs. This authorization package provides levels of appropriations that can not be realized, including both Amtrak and WMATA, and will further strain our subcommittee funding decisions. Regrettably, the Amtrak provision in this bill offers none of the key reforms in Amtrak's governance or operations that link resource allocation to consumer demand. With no reforms and an authorization level of $13.3 billion over the next 5 years, I find it hard to support these levels when the money will not be there. With regard to funding for WMATA, the bill includes an authorization level of $1.5 billion over 10 years for capital and maintenance projects. These grants would be over and above the grants for which WMATA is otherwise eligible. The authorized grants would not be available to any other jurisdiction. Although WMATA should be encouraged to make necessary reforms in its governance and financing, such encouragement should not require the creation of an entirely new Federal funding program which excludes other jurisdictions which have long since taken such prudent steps to upgrade and maintain their existing capital.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak as in morning business.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I come today to talk about the subject that is on the minds of people all over America--certainly it is on the minds of my friends in Missouri--and that is the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. Yesterday afternoon, the House of Representatives voted on this important bill. Unfortunately, the bill failed to gain sufficient support on the floor despite strong leadership from both the Democratic and Republican Parties. The negative outcome of the House vote is disappointing, and clearly the financial markets registered their displeasure. I was further disappointed by finger-pointing that occurred after the vote. But I am heartened that everyone realizes the financial credit crisis is still with us and that Congress needs to get its job done. We must get our job done. We will get it done. We owe it to our constituents, our communities, our economy, and our country. That means, first, no more finger-pointing, no more political blame games. Those we have to put off the table. We need to stop the bleeding. Right now, there is a fire raging. To mix the metaphors, we need to stem the flow of the bleeding or put out the fire. The institutions are asking for our help to come to this immediate rescue. Beyond that, we need to take a broad view of the needed changes in our regulatory system. There are mistakes and omissions. There is lots of blame to go around. There are lots of areas where Congress acted or did not act, the administration acted or did not act, and the agencies did not do the proper work. As a 22-year housing authorizer and appropriator, I have some strong views as to what needs to be done, and I have offered those on the floor, citing a letter I sent to the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the SEC, and the leadership of the banking committees in both Houses. I would only amend that today to say we need, either in this bill or--probably in this bill--we need to raise the limit of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance so that individuals, farmers, small businesses that may in the course of their business operation have more than $100,000 do not pull it out of the banks, thus endangering the capitalization of the banks. We want those people who are the lifeblood of our economy to be able to keep it in their local banks, the regional banks, the community banks, and not draw it out and put it in Treasurys. I heard today from a broker in Missouri who has been asked by small businesses if they can take their deposits out and put them in Treasurys. That may be a safe move, but right now that means they are going to reduce the deposits in that bank, which further puts pressure on banks, other institutions, that should not be any part of this problem. Now, Americans are angry about the prospect of using their tax dollars to fix Wall Street's problems. I, like many other Members of Congress, share that anger. I do not want to be doing this. I do not want to be supporting this. But what I really care about is protecting Main Street: the individuals, the families, the businesses, the farmers. We must act to prevent workers from missing paychecks, small businesses from failing, college savings plans and retirements put in jeopardy. This plan includes the transparency I called for when I spoke on this floor exactly a week ago. I was not satisfied with the Treasury plan. I said we must do something, but we must add three things: accountability, increased oversight, and increased transparency. Well, I called on my House and Senate colleagues to come together in a bipartisan fashion and work with the administration and other public and private sector experts to move quickly and boldly but responsibly to prevent another financial credit disaster. The leadership and negotiators from both sides did just that. It has been just 12 days since the Treasury Secretary and the Federal Reserve Chairman approached Congress about the need to act on this crisis. They said we must take temporary emergency action to get us through this financial crisis--the biggest financial crisis we have faced in a long time. As at least one commentator said, we are facing a financial ``stone age.'' This crisis is real. This is a rare moment. This is an emergency. The credit markets have been struggling mightily for the past several weeks due to the subprime housing crisis and falling home values. Despite unprecedented intervention by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, the credit market got worse. I commend those institutions for doing what they did, but that is not enough. They don't have enough tools in their toolbox. Clearly, it is time for a comprehensive and systematic approach in order to restore stability to the credit markets to make sure that all of us, and the entire wheels of the Nation, can have the credit we need to move. It is much more than about Wall Street; it is about average American families, individuals, small businesses, and farmers. Average American families are outraged at what is happening in the financial markets. They see excessive greed at the heart of the problem. They do not understand how many corporate executives make more in a day than many of them do in a year. They do not understand how some rich corporate executives can be paid to leave their company, given a golden parachute for failing at their job, not doing it and leaving their company in shambles. The folks in Missouri are also afraid this crisis will make them victims. They will be victims if we do not put the taxpayer credit, the Treasury credit on the line. It has brought down the rich and powerful. It should not bring down Main Street. That is what we are worried about. Back in my home State of Missouri, I heard from seniors who were asking me about their retirement accounts, parents worried about their children's college savings, families worried about their checking and savings accounts, farmers worried about where their credit lines will be and whether they will be able to get operating loans so they can go into the fields next spring to plant, small business owners and homeowners worried about their mortgages. Folks are worried about their jobs, their children's future, and their financial security. There is also a lot of anger, frustration, and disgust at why we have gotten to this point. I have heard those feelings loudly and clearly. I share those feelings. As I said before, frankly, I don't want to be here--not as a Senator, not as a Missourian, not as an American, and not as a family man. But I believe this is something we have to do. We have no choice but to act. We must act because the financial well-being and health of all Americans and our economy is in jeopardy. However, we must act responsibly. That is why I demanded increased accountability, strong oversight, and more transparency so that the taxpayers, communities, small businesses, farmers, and our financial system are never put in this position again. This doesn't mean we are giving a blank check to the Treasury; this means just not bailing out those who made bad decisions with no consequences. This is one of the points I got 5,000 calls about last week. Almost 4,999 of them objected specifically to golden parachutes and to excessive compensation for top corporate executives. Well, the compromise that the negotiators worked out dealt with those. This also means and the negotiators came up with a system to ensure strong balances so that taxpayer funds are protected while achieving the goal of preventing a financial meltdown. This bill incorporates those measures. This bill increases accountability by giving the Treasury Secretary specific powers to reduce executive compensation and cut golden parachutes. This bill increases taxpayers' protections by giving taxpayers an ownership interest in the firms they are helping to bail out. In addition, we expect the Treasury to do the analysis and to work within the market system to buy mortgages and other debts that are now at fire-sale prices below the prices those mortgages or other debt would sell for when the credit markets begin to function once again. That is the first level of protection. The first level of protection is to make sure Treasury has the power to put liquidity back into the system by buying this now fire-sale property at a reasonable price, but one at which the Treasury can later recover, and at the same time taking this bad debt off the books of the companies. They will be crippled by selling it below what they bought it for, but they will have liquidity again. The bill provides stronger oversight by creating a special inspector general. It will empower our U.S. Government Accountability Office to conduct ongoing audits and reviews of the program. It creates a new oversight panel of executive officials such as the Federal Reserve Chairman, and it sets up a special congressional oversight panel. This bill provides more transparency by requiring the Treasury to disclose publicly all transactions made under the bill. These are very positive improvements in the bill. Let me be clear. I would not vote in support of any bill simply to bail out irresponsible, incompetent, and greedy bankers--whether they are Wall Street or elsewhere--or investors. I will vote in support of a bill that protects the average Missourian, the average American family, the individuals, the communities, the small businesses, and the farmers. This is about doing what is right, not necessarily popular-- and popular this is not. Without a bill of these elements, the Federal Government will continue to use existing authorities with taxpayer funds to rescue financial institutions. That is why we need a bill that provides taxpayer protection, accountability, transparency, and oversight, in a systematic, controlled manner. In other words, with or without this bill, taxpayers will be on the hook. They will be asked to chip in. The problem is now, when we have tried--or as the Treasury and the FDIC have done and the Federal Reserve has done--to rescue firm by firm, we are putting more money at risk, but we are not solving the basic credit problem. The credit illiquidity is still there. Last week, I talked with a friend who deals in municipal bonds. Those are the bonds State and local governments offer. They are the ones that finance the ongoing operations of States and of cities, of counties, of revenue districts, of special districts. She told me the market was totally frozen. They can't go to the market. Continuing to just let the system go downhill and provide rescues for individual banks that may get into problems is not going to solve the liquidity problem--liquidity problems faced by businesses that have to meet their payroll, liquidity problems which would face farmers who try to get operating loans, liquidity problems that would face the average family if they want to get a loan to buy a house or a car. They can't get it. This measure we are talking about is protecting savings, retirement accounts, and investments of Missouri families and American families. It is about making sure no Missouri worker misses a paycheck. To me, it is about Missouri businesses, small and large, not going under. To me, this is about helping struggling homeowners in default so they can get their mortgages reworked. To me, this is about Missourians getting car loans, home loans, and student loans. In summary, I believe it is what is best for my Missouri constituents. It is imperative that we continue to work on this bill and consider other ideas to improve it. As I mentioned earlier, now both Presidential candidates back a proposal to increase the current Federal deposit insurance guarantee level from $100,000 to $250,000. That is a very good idea. I urge my colleagues to consider this proposal. Frankly, I think, at least for the time being, we ought to up that limit, but we need to do it soon, and we need to do it responsibly so there will not be a silent, backdoor run on banks and small businesses that have needs for large amounts of operating cash don't take all their money out of the small banks they work with and leave those banks in a perilous condition. We need to pull together and do what each of us individually can do to address the crisis. This also means troubled homeowners must seek assistance in avoiding foreclosure. Help is available through home ownership counseling. It is available due to funding I was proud to work on with my colleague, Senator Dodd, to provide last year. We provided $180 million. Based on the preliminary data we saw from one organization counseling homeowners, 69 percent of those who received that counseling were able to avoid foreclosure. That counseling is available now. The program is working. But we need troubled homeowners to contact their counseling agency before they get into foreclosure. Contact them if you are having problems. Call the HOPE hotline: 888- 995-HOPE. Again: 888-995-HOPE. A lot of the problem can be solved for homeowners if they get counseling. Before closing, let me express my appreciation to the House and Senate leadership and lead negotiators and their staff for the hard work and long hours they have put in over the past week to pass the greatly improved proposal, originally coming from the Treasury. I thank especially Senators Dodd and Gregg for representing and leading the Senate in the negotiations. I am proud of my good friend and Missouri constituent Roy Blunt for his work, along with Chairman Frank in the House. Their work is not in vain. I expect we will finish the job--I hope this week. We have to do it. There is too much at stake not to do the job and do it well. Tribute to Senators John Warner Mr. President, today I join my colleagues in saying goodbye, thank you, and best wishes to good friends leaving the Senate, especially a couple of Senators with long and distinguished service. One of those, who has been a hero of mine for a long time and has become a good friend, is John Warner. He is a Member in the Senate well known for his patriotism, for his long service to both his State and his Nation, and perhaps more than any other Member of the Senate, he is known for being a gentleman in the true meaning of the word. I would say he is a Senator to whom we can all look up. I did when I arrived, and from the beginning I learned a great deal. Now, as a fellow UVA Law grad, my good friend, the squire from Virginia, John Warner, who is retiring after 30 years of service, has left an indelible mark on this body. We will miss as much, though, the presence of his wonderful wife Jeanne. I think all of us in the Senate, at Senate gatherings, at Senate family affairs, know how much Jeanne adds to our family. She is truly a wonderful lady. She has cleaned up the squire a good bit. My wife Linda and I always enjoy and look forward to seeing Jeanne and John after their service in the Senate because they are good friends. Not only do John and I share the UVA Law connections, but he and I were on a panel at his school, St. Albans, along with several other distinguished Members of the Senate, and we had the opportunity to go back to the school that he had attended and my son attended. Let me go back to what John Warner has done in his impressive 32 years in the Senate. His service to the country began long before he was elected to this body in 1978. At age 17, John chose not to go back to St. Albans immediately but first chose to serve his country, enlisting in the U.S. Navy to help keep our Nation safe from Nazi Germany. He, again, answered his Nation's call to service at the outbreak of the Korean war, when he served in the U.S. Marine Corps. Since his service in our Armed Forces, John has been a tireless advocate for our military and for our veterans. For the soldier returning home after service, John has worked to improve the care our veterans receive, the care a grateful nation owes each and every one of our brave volunteers. As chairman of the Armed Services Committee, as vice chairman, as a ranking member, as a leader in the Armed Services Committee, John has worked to ensure that the military, particularly our troops on the field in battle, have the equipment and the resources they need. Under John's watch, the Senate always passed a Defense authorization bill, a feat that is not only achievable because of John's skill but because of the respect he has for Members on both sides of the aisle. John used this legislation year after year to modernize our military to make sure they meet 21st century needs. In this way and all others, John embodies the motto of his esteemed undergraduate Virginia school, Washington and Lee, which is ``Not Unmindful of the Future.'' John has always kept that responsibility to the future in mind as he has worked to keep our fighting forces the best in the world. But he has also done much in other areas. It has been my pleasure to work with him on the Environment and Public Works Committee. He was an invaluable leader, from whom I learned much. He was a great friend in passing the highway bill in 1998. I followed his work later on while working on the current highway bill. I owe a great deal to the skill, to the advice, and the leadership he provided in making sure we could meet the needs of our highways and our bridges. His guidance and leadership were extremely vital for the success of the bill I worked on. He has also kept his responsibility of the future in mind during his tenure on the Senate Intelligence Committee. It has been an honor, a pleasure, and a treat to fight side by side with John on the Intelligence Committee. He has always been looking to the future, to all our futures. He worked on the committee to help us prevent another devastating attack on our soil such as 9/11. John was an invaluable ally on the committee in our efforts to reform and oversee our intelligence operations. Probably the most important to me, with John's help, we passed probably the most important legislation I have had the opportunity to lead--the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--to assure we had an early warning system against terrorist attacks. Because of John's work in the Senate, his heart on the battlefield, our Nation is not only a safer place but, under his guidance, wisdom, and leadership, it has become a much better place. It has been a tremendous honor and privilege to serve with John Warner. He is an icon of the Senate. He will be missed for his ability to work across the aisle, for putting his country first, and for the friendship, personally, the friendship with Jeanne, his wife, and the rest of us. I join my colleagues in congratulating the Senator and his wife and thanking John for his many years of service. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I commend our ranking member on the Finance Committee for the excellent job he has done. He has talked a good bit about what needs to be done for the future to make sure we do not get into another crisis such as this. I share his view, and I believe now this body will have to address, as soon as we come back after the elections, a wide range of articles and bills that have been introduced. I sent a letter, about 2 weeks ago, to the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Fed, and the Chairman of the SEC, with copies to the leaders of the Banking Committee, talking about some of these pieces of legislation. One of the things the Senator from Iowa mentioned is the need to have more transparency--transparency in hedge funds. Transparency has been lacking. We have seen Wall Street develop many new products, derivatives. There is a new thing called a credit default swap, which I see that New York is regulating as an insurance product. Obviously, that has played a significant role in financial activities and could provide a problem if there is not proper oversight either as an option or as an insurance product. That is something we are going to have to address. A couple days ago, I introduced legislation which had been recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury for a Mortgage Origination Commission. Essentially, right now, we have too many people who are offering mortgages that are not regulated under the existing systems. Banks and savings and loans, obviously, are regulated at the State level. But we have many people who are offering mortgages by fax and by e-mail. I cannot get good enough spam filters on my computer at home to avoid getting those mortgage offers. But I can tell by looking at them that they are too good to be true. Many of these people offered subprime mortgages or alternate ``A'' mortgages, which essentially said: We will give you a mortgage, but we are not going to check your financial statement, we are not going to see if you are bankrupt or have a criminal record or even if you have a job. They issued these mortgages at very attractive rates, with a significant spike after the initial term and penalties for prepayment, and then they went out and the geniuses on Wall Street sliced them and diced them and they took these toxic products and spread the poison throughout our financial system and throughout the world's financial system. That is why we are in a major crisis. Another major savings and loan went down last night. We have had too many toxic products out there that have not been regulated. The Mortgage Origination Commission would set up the primary Federal regulators of products such as this to set standards for State regulation. Having been a Governor, I believe that where a State regulation can handle the protection of its citizens, it oght to do so. I hope my colleagues will consider the Mortgage Origination Commission bill I introduced and act on it because we cannot have unregulated mortgage originators going out and offering ``too good to be true'' deals to people who may be overly anxious to jump at too good a deal. This and the emphasis on trying to get people in no downpayment home mortgages have been a significant part of the problem. As I have tried to say, taking a no downpayment mortgage sets you up to see your American dream turn into your American nightmare. Home ownership does not come without headaches. I know about those headaches. We had to have our basement pumped out a few weeks ago. I have had a furnace go down on me. We have to finance it. If you do not have the money to make a downpayment, you probably are not in a position to take on the responsibilities of a mortgage. Beyond that, before people take a mortgage, they need to understand their financial conditions. When I traveled around the State of Missouri this spring, talking to homeowners, to housing advocates, to local officials who had seen the foreclosures sweeping across their State, they were using some of the money I joined with Senator Dodd, the chairman of the Banking Committee, in introducing last year and passing last year to put $180 million in mortgage foreclosure counseling. They were making progress on helping people restructure their loans. But the most important thing: Every single one of those people said: We need to make sure every homeowner who is thinking about buying a home has appropriate financial counseling. Because if you go into a mortgage without making sure it is a mortgage you can afford, you are asking for terrible trauma, disappointment, possibly bankruptcy, ruining your credit by taking on a home you cannot afford or more of a home than you can afford. So there are a lot of things that need to be done. I also urge stronger regulation of our government-sponsored enterprises. I also advocated that the Securities and Exchange Commission reinstate the uptick rule, meaning you can only make a short sale if the price is above the last price, preventing a group of hedge funds getting together and driving the price of the stock so low it causes commotion in the financial community and drives that stock down to a point where the company can no longer survive. These are some of the steps that need to be taken. I trust we will put a high priority, when we return, of making sure these regulations are tightened, that we get the kind of regulators for GSEs we need, that we enforce vigorously the ``no naked short selling'' rule that should have been enforced and was not. But, as I said earlier, we are in the middle of a crisis, and right now we have some of our very best people working on coming up with an appropriate solution to this problem. I came to the floor Tuesday morning and said we need to act, we need to act immediately, we need to act smartly and responsibly. That is what our leaders are doing. I said the three things that were missing from the Treasury Secretary's proposal were taxpayer protection, accountability, and transparency. Oversight is a very important part of that as well. If we do not act now, and act responsibly, we could find next week companies not able to make their payroll. Working families would find that the paycheck they are expecting does not come in, because I am hearing from people in our State and across the Nation that they cannot get credit. The credit markets are frozen. Possibly, that means no payrolls. It means for small businesses they cannot get the loans to continue to operate. They may be going out of business. Larger businesses may be put in a crisis state because they cannot get credit. If the family has home loans, and they want to refinance them, they may not be able to get them refinanced. What this market crisis is doing to the value of retirement accounts is truly frightening. A neighbor told me that their 401(k) had dropped so much that they were going to have to work well past retirement. I said: If we can solve this crisis and get the liquidity into it that we need, you can expect that the markets will come back, you can expect that some of that which you have lost will be restored, and we will put the economy back on track to move forward. Make no mistake about it, this isn't just talking about big Wall Street firms; this is talking about everybody on Main Street, whether it is businesses, whether it is families. For farmers in my country, in the heart of Missouri, most farmers get operating loans in the late winter so they can get the fertilizer, the fuel they need, the seeds they need to plant, or the operations they need to support their livestock industry to make sure they can take care of their cattle, their hogs. They are not going to be able to get it. So we need to come together as a nation on a bipartisan basis and fix this crisis. We cannot fail. We cannot leave and go home without doing something; otherwise, we are going to see the implications of this credit crunch. We will see tremendous drops in the markets if we fail to do our job. Credit will not be available and this economy will come to a crashing halt. This is the kind of outcome we cannot afford. I was very pleased that both Presidential candidates came back to meet at the White House, taking time off from the Presidential campaign, and that shows they are serious and they understand. We need to get this job done. I believe most people have heard now that each body has appointed one Republican, one Democrat to sit down and negotiate with the Secretary of the Treasury. On our side, I am very pleased that the distinguished ranking member of the Budget Committee, Judd Gregg, is a negotiator. He is a former Governor. He understands the budget implications. I think he is working to make sure the money that is recovered on the loans that are bought is paid back into a debt-reduction fund. I hope that will come out. We need to have, as I said, accountability, transparency, and stability, and that is going to be a major part of taxpayer protection. Purchasing the assets at the right value is going to make a big difference. I have talked to people from banks that are operating in a sound manner, and they say: Well, why are you helping the people who misbehaved? I said: We are not helping them when we pay 50 cents or 60 cents on the dollar for mortgages they hold for which they paid $1. What we are doing is putting liquidity back in the system. People said: Well, haven't there been criminal violations? I have noted on the floor previously that the FBI started some 1,300 investigations, as reported in the press. I don't have that fact of my own knowledge, but it was reported in the press that there are 1,300 criminal investigations. I hope some of these people who are peddling bad paper actually, if they did it with criminal intent, are prosecuted. Also, there will be civil and criminal investigations of the people who are operating the companies that went under. I think people want to know there is going to be a very thorough check, to see that if there is any criminal activity, it is appropriately punished. My constituents want to know that. My constituents want to make sure there are no golden parachutes, that there are no bonuses for executives who caused their companies to crash. I believe there has been agreement among the parties and with the administration that those provisions will be included as well. People want to see the economy get moving again. When people initially heard about this, they worried: What are we going to pay $700 billion for? We are not paying out $700 billion without getting something back for it. We ought to be buying it at a price where we can recover most, if not all, of what we paid. I hope we will get equity in the form of warrants or preferred stock from companies to cover any shortfall that may occur if we are not able to realize the value from the securities we purchased of the amount we put into them. All of these things are being worked out. If it sounds complicated, if my description is complicated, it is because this is a complicated piece of legislation. We are having to act in a manner that is going to demand the very best of all of us in this Chamber and in the other body to make sure we get it right and we can agree on it. I hope we will be able to take what our negotiators have presented and not try to pick it apart because if we pick it apart, we are likely to see the whole thing fall and not get it done. So we have Judd Gregg on this side. On the House side, my constituent and good friend Roy Blunt is leading the way. The House Republicans wanted to make sure they had their views heard. I know Roy Blunt will represent them well. When we went through the effort to get the House to pass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act amendments that I worked hard to pass on this floor, Roy Blunt, as the assistant minority leader, did an outstanding job helping us negotiate with both Republicans and Democrats to make sure we got the kind of bill that could pass that body and our body. As a result, it did. So I have great confidence in Judd Gregg and Roy Blunt. I know also that the fine Democratic leaders from the heads of the banking committees will do a good job. I hope they do it promptly because we need to have a solution. We need to take responsible action. We need to make sure there is oversight. I understand they have set up an oversight board that will watch what the Secretary of the Treasury is doing. We will have suggestions for the Secretary of the Treasury on how to make sure he uses the marketplace fairly to get a good value and to use the best information that is available to determine the value of these nonperforming loans, provide homeowners relief, where possible, so they can continue in their homes, and still pay back enough to make sure the taxpayers are compensated for the Federal dollars that are put up for it. We need transparency, finally, to make sure Americans know their money is safe, know that the companies in which they have invested, have stock, or have accounts are protected. This is a critically important mission. I don't think anybody wants to be working on the weekend, but we are going to be working this weekend. I just hope we do it and do it well and do it in a bipartisan fashion. After it is over, if you want to throw brickbats at each other, we do that well, and there will be plenty of brickbats to throw and everybody will take part and we will have a healthy, spirited debate before November. But until we get this solved, this has to be ``job 1'' for every one of us who is elected to represent people in the Congress. We must do it, and we must do it right. I urge my colleagues to give their good ideas to the negotiators for each party on each side of the body and follow what they are doing so we can adopt this measure in time to get the credit markets functioning again, to see that our economy gets going. So it is going to be a long, tough weekend, particularly for the negotiators. I am jealous that I don't have the opportunity to stay up all night with them and help them, but we have selected good Members to do that job. I wish them well, and I hope they have divine guidance because it is going to require a little bit of that, along with their other skills. It is important we get it done. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for 10 minutes after Senator Allard.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that goes to the heart of one of the major problems in our loan operations. We have had a system develop where no longer are loans just made available by the State-regulated banks and thrifts. Too many loan offers come over the Internet or by fax. I have not been able to develop a good enough screening program on my computer to keep them out. I know what kinds of solicitations are being made. They are being made by unregulated entities, people not subject to any regulation. As we say back home: We regulate the bricks but not the clicks. We regulate the banks and the savings and loans but not the people who offer you loans too good to be true by fax or Internet. Congress has already taken some steps to address the mortgage origination problem by developing a mortgage licensing and registry system through the Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 and protecting consumers by requiring greater mortgage loan disclosure requirements. In addition, I have worked with Senator Dodd, last year and this year, to include more housing counseling funding to assist homeowners. I strongly believe the Mortgage Origination Commission, proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury, is an important element to complement these efforts. As many of us know, the root cause of the current financial crisis is traced to the breakdowns in the mortgage market, led by the high level of failures in subprime mortgages. These failures occurred due to many reasons, but one major reason was the loophole in the Government's oversight and regulatory system for mortgage origination. Specifically, many mortgage brokers with no or uneven regulatory oversight originated a substantial number of all housing mortgages and over half of all subprime mortgages. To help close regulatory loopholes in mortgage origination, my bill contains the key components recommended by the Treasury. First, this legislation creates a new Federal oversight entity called the Mortgage Origination Commission. The Commission would be led by a Presidentially appointed Director for a 5-year term who would chair a seven-member board comprised of the Federal Government's key financial regulators: the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors. Second, the Commission would be empowered to develop uniform minimum licensing qualification standards for State mortgage market participants. As laid out in the bill, these standards would include personal conduct and disciplinary history, minimum educational requirements, testing criteria and procedures, and appropriate license revocation standards. The Commission would also evaluate, rate, and report on the adequacy of each State's system for licensing and regulation. The bill retains State-level regulation of the mortgage origination process, but the new Federal Mortgage Origination Commission would ensure that the States have adequate protections in place and improve transparency in the mortgage origination process by providing information on the strength of each State's standards. The Commission will also provide transparency in the securities market by providing evaluations and ratings on mortgages. Finally, the bill clarifies the Federal Government's enforcement and examination responsibilities over mortgage origination companies. Specifically, the Federal Reserve and the Office of Thrift Supervision would have clear authority over mortgage originators that are affiliates of depository institutions with a federally regulated holding company. States would have clear authority to enforce Federal mortgage laws governing mortgage transactions involving mortgage originators. In formulating this legislation, my goal was to develop a proposal to provide more effective regulation, transparency, and oversight in a streamlined manner. This bill enhances the current structure without creating a major new Federal entity. If enacted, the Commission could be up and running in a relatively short time. As I said, the legislation mirrors the Secretary of Treasury's proposal, and it is intended to be part of the overall response. I look forward to working with my colleagues to achieve this. I know time is running short. I hope they will carefully consider this proposal and perhaps include it in the bill coming to us or in separate legislation.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, while he is on the floor, I commend and thank the Senator from Colorado, Mr. Allard, for the great work he has done on housing. I commend him also for his great leadership on all aspects of energy. I join with him in recognizing the great contributions of Chairman Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, and, of course, Senator Domenici. We will miss his guidance and his leadership. But he has made a great contribution, and we are most appreciative.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, America is facing a financial crisis, and last night the President made the case for immediate action. It is critical we act now to protect jobs in Missouri and throughout the Nation. It is critical we act now to keep families' checking and college savings accounts safe. It is critical we act now to preserve seniors' retirements. It is critical we act now and eliminate this very real threat to our economy. If we do not solve this crisis, families will not be able to get home or car loans, employers will not get the day-to-day operating funds they need to meet payroll, the possibility of new jobs will grind to a halt as spending and investment stops. To fail to act is not an option. We must act now, but we must act responsibly. Any rescue plan Congress approves to stabilize our financial system must also increase accountability so we do not reward those who put us in this situation. Any rescue plan Congress approves must increase oversight so taxpayer dollars are protected and mistakes are not repeated. And any rescue plan Congress approves must increase transparency so Americans can know their money is safe. I have heard from folks in my home State of Missouri, and they want their Government to act now to keep this crisis from spreading from Wall Street to Main Street. But the folks in Missouri also want to know what their Government is going to do to protect their tax dollars. I have heard from hundreds of Missourians, probably thousands, now calling my office in DC, and in St. Louis, Kansas City, Cape Girardeau, Columbia, Springfield, and Jefferson City. All of these people want accountability. They want to know their tax dollars are not going to be used to bail out irresponsible executives who got us into this mess to begin with. These Missourians know that when they lose a lot of money at their jobs, they lose their jobs and they do not get bonuses for doing it, which is why from the start I have been calling on the administration to eliminate golden parachutes--no tax dollars for fat severance packages for failed executives. I was glad to hear last night the President state he now agrees. This is an important step in crafting a responsible plan. I have also stressed that there must be independent oversight of how the Treasury handles the credit we extend. I will not agree to hand over a blank check. I was pleased that the President now agrees there must be oversight. That is another important step in crafting a responsible plan. We also need to get taxpayer equity in participating firms. Taxpayers should get something for their money. Accountability and oversight, protecting taxpayer dollars--these are Main Street values. These are values that were absent on Wall Street when excessive greed and abuse of regulatory loopholes led to this crisis. These are also values that were absent when investors entered into investments they did not understand and some private citizens took on debt they could not afford. We must restore the Main Street values in Government, on Wall Street, and in our private lives. We must also restore bipartisanship. I have come to the floor a number of times to urge my colleagues to work together across the aisle to solve this crisis for our Nation. Now is not the time for partisan finger-pointing or partisan games. I have been disappointed to hear many speeches on the floor, with political talking points and in the press. Now is the time for quick and responsible bipartisan action that will stabilize our economy, protect taxpayers, restore accountability, and increase oversight to prevent another emergency in the future. While it is critical that we act now to address the financial crisis, we also must look to long-term reforms to prevent another crisis in the future. I have long been an advocate for stronger oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and a critic of those who were moving too slow to impose reforms of Fannie and Freddie. I have said there must be more effective oversight of GSEs. But there is also another problem we need to address. I mentioned that along with other things in the remarks I made last week, saying what changes need to be made by legislation and by administrative action and regulatory action. (The remarks of Mr. Bond pertaining to the introduction of S. 3581 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer, and I appreciate the forbearance of my colleague from Wisconsin. I yield the floor.