Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask it be reported on behalf of myself and Mr. Byrd.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is my understanding that there are ongoing discussions with both sides of the aisle as well as the administration to come up with bipartisan, consensual language on this issue and that we are unable to clear the agreement at this time. Therefore, on behalf of several Republican senators, I object.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, isn't it true that we don't have to have unanimous consent to proceed to a vote? This is all that is being asked. We are not asking to adopt these amendments, but we are simply setting up an order and a time for the voting to begin. I just didn't want anybody to misunderstand what is being asked.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2447

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, we have no objection to proceeding to consider the amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, this amendment has been reviewed. We have no objection to proceeding to consider the amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thought the distinguished Senator from Tennessee made a very compelling argument about this amendment, which he has offered. We have heard him discuss his ideas on federalism, and there is no better proponent of clear thinking on that issue than the Senator from Tennessee. But what occurred to me when I was sitting here is that I have heard some of these arguments before. I started thinking back to the hearings that were held and the markup sessions that were held in the Governmental Affairs Committee, the committee of legislative jurisdiction, when the Department of Homeland Security was being created by Congress to more effectively--with a better Federal organization of talent and wherewithal--cope with the challenges from threats to the security of our homeland. Many of these issues were discussed in great detail. I remember the Senator from Connecticut, in particular, Mr. Lieberman, being in a position of leadership on the committee at that time. We had other talented Senators working on that authorizing legislation. What is happening to us, I am afraid, is as we get about the business of implementing the changes in our laws that were made by the creation of this new Department, and the creation of new agencies to implement and carry out these responsibilities in a coherent way--the policymakers have their guidance from that legislation, but we now here are considering an appropriations bill. We are not at a point where we are going back and reviewing in an oversight hearing or in a consideration of changes that ought to be made in the law. We are appropriating the funds to give to the Department and the agencies that were created and given these responsibilities. So to come in now with an amendment--and I hate to argue against this amendment because the eloquent argument on its behalf was very impressive, but this is the wrong vehicle and this is not the right way to deal with the problem. If we have made an error in requiring too expensive, too stringent, too illogical, unworkable requirements or laws, let's change them. Let's change them. But let's not try in an Appropriations Committee to halfway fund our needs. We do not have the money to pay for this program. That was pointed out very clearly. The REAL ID program is hugely expensive, and at some time there will be a day of reckoning. Maybe we are fast getting there. We have heard the warnings. I think we should heed the warnings and urge the legislative committee to think about modifying the authorities and the directives that are contained in the law--make it affordable, for one thing; decide, are State and local governments going to share the responsibility for these costs or is the Federal Government going to build up a huge Federal deficit trying to pay for the costs on an annual basis through the annual appropriations bills. Well, anyway, as my law school dean used to say, it is not a horse that is soon curried. This is something that is going to take some time and effort, and we need to rise to the challenge the Senator from Tennessee presents to us and come up with a more thoughtful and workable and affordable way to deal with this issue. So I am going to oppose the amendment because I think it should be done legislatively, and the problem cannot be solved with adding money and adding new language which is legislative in nature. I hope the Senate will carefully review the options we have and try to do the responsible thing.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2416 Withdrawn

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, there is no objection to proceeding to consider that amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I make a point of order against the Landrieu amendment, that it is legislation on an appropriations bill, in violation of rule XVI.

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I rise to compliment the distinguished Senator from Colorado. In his statement, he is right on when he is talking about the fact that there is no other bill we have pending in the Senate that is more important than the bill we are considering here today, the funding of the Department of Homeland Security and the agencies which are charged with the responsibility of carrying out the authorizations that have been passed earlier creating the Department following the 9/11 attacks on our country. This is serious business. I compliment the Senator on the manner in which he is carrying out his duties as a new member of this body-- relatively new member. He has important committee assignments, and we appreciate the commitment he has shown during consideration of this bill and the discussion of amendments and the offering of amendments to try to help make sure that the work product we produce is the best we can produce for our great country and our homeland. Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. I make a point of order.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2425, as Modified, to Amendment No. 2383

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, we have no objection to the amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.