John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, over the years it has become more and more apparent that two great democracies, the United States and India, are well suited for not only a partnership but also a friendship. Our cooperation could mean not just increased economic opportunities for both nations but also the opportunity for the United States and India to join together to spread the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, tolerance, and the rule of law throughout the world. As a founder and cochair of the Senate India Caucus, I have had the privilege to work closely with Indian officials, Indian Americans, and many other friends of India here in the United States to help promote the already flourishing relationship between our two countries. There is no clearer evidence of this great friendship than the revolutionary civilian nuclear agreement before us, which the House recently passed and we will vote on today. This landmark agreement represents the latest example of the United States and India, the world's largest democracy, working together on issues of mutual benefit. It will bring about an unprecedented level of cooperation between us, helping India to meet its growing energy demands, while forging new economic opportunities for everyone involved. The initiative will serve both the interests of the United States and the interests of India, with its more than 1 billion citizens. In light of its track record as a responsible actor on nonproliferation issues, India is an appropriate and worthy partner in this historic deal. The agreement will pave the way for cooperative efforts in peaceful civilian nuclear power, while simultaneously addressing concerns about nuclear proliferation. I understand well the need for careful monitoring to protect against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and I am pleased with the safeguards contained in this agreement. But as the nation of India continues to grow, their need for new, clean, and affordable energy sources grows as well. Helping India develop a safe and responsible nuclear industry will give its people the resources they need to grow their economy and strengthen their nation, while helping America's nuclear industry in the process. Most importantly, if we do nothing, the people of India will have no option but to look elsewhere for nuclear assistance. That would be unfortunate for both nations. We must remain a strong partner for India, not just in the area of civil nuclear cooperation but also on larger geopolitical matters. If we approve this long-overdue agreement, we will send a strong message that India and the United States stand together as friends to face even the most difficult and pressing issues of our time. As we look ahead to the future, each of our nations will do so with the confidence that it has a friend, ready to work together.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, when the Texas A&M sailboat Cynthia Woods capsized off the coast of Texas, Safety Officer Roger Stone was trapped below deck with two other men. It was a frightening event, which would have put anyone into a panic. But Stone, thinking of his crewmates before himself, pushed Steven Guy and Travis Wright out of the upturned sinking boat's cabin, saving their lives. He did not have time to escape. Roger Stone was a heroic Aggie. The remaining crew was rescued by the U.S. Coast Guard 26 hours later. Only after Steven Guy and Travis Wright retold the story did Roger Stone's family find out what happened. While the pain of losing a loved one is tremendous, the Stone family should find some comfort in Roger's courageous and selfless acts. His brave sacrifice is a lasting testament to his great character and personal strength. Roger was originally from London, England, but came to Texas to work at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston. He had been sailing his entire life. Roger and his wife Linda were engaged on a sailboat and were married in the port--Veracruz--that the Cynthia Woods was bound for. Throughout Roger's career he was always serving others, from teaching younger sailors to helping competitors. In addition to his wife Linda Stone, Roger was survived by his daughter Elizabeth Stone, son Eric Stone, mother Doris Stone, and sister Valerie Stone. These heroic actions are something we all can admire. At the age of 53 Roger gave his life to save the lives of others. This ultimate sacrifice is embodied in chapter 15, verse 13 of the Book of John, ``Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.'' This courageous deed leaves a lasting legacy for his wife and his children. While Roger's friends and family will mourn his loss, the people of Texas will honor with solemn pride his heroism. I join today in commending his courage, and honoring his sacrifice.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today I honor the life of a highly respected and gifted Baptist pastor, Caesar Arthur Walter Clark, Sr. Born on December 13, 1914, in Shreveport, LA, Reverend Clark spent his life devoted to the teaching of his faith, blessing many around the State and Nation by his work. He died Sunday, July 27, 2008, at age 93 in Dallas, where he spent more than five decades preaching at Good Street Baptist Church. Reverend Clark showed his passion for preaching throughout his life, starting as a 19-year-old pastor of the Israelite Baptist Church in Longstreet, LA, where his fiery sermons earned him the nickname ``Little Caesar.'' After joining Good Street Baptist Church in 1950, Reverend Clark helped build the church into a 5,000 member congregation. It was through his work with the local NAACP chapter that Reverend Clark met Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., and invited him to give a speech hosted by Good Street Baptist. Reverend Clark cared as much about the presentation of his sermons as the presentation of his actions. He sought to live what he preached to the best of his ability, becoming a mentor to many. As a result, Reverend Clark's sphere of influence extended far beyond the pulpit. For example, he worked to improve the lives of his parishioners and members of the community by opening daycare centers, a credit union, a legal clinic, and low-income housing. In addition, he served as vice president of the National Baptist Convention and as president of the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas. Reverend Clark's service touched many lives; in particular, Reverend R.E. Price, pastor at Mt. Zion Baptist Church in Dallas. Reverend Price said, ``Dr. Clark was a man of great integrity and a speaker for all occasions. It was a privilege to serve with him in various leadership roles as his advice was always sage. Most of all, he was my friend.'' Reverend Clark's accomplishments as a pastor and civic leader have earned him the respect and admiration of many. He leaves a legacy of good works, a mighty faith, and a purpose-filled life. I join with his family and friends in celebrating Reverend Clark for his long life of service to God and community.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I thank my good friend for that clarification and for the wisdom he has brought to Federal energy policy. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I note that the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is on the floor. I wonder if I might address a question to my good friend from New Mexico. Many are alleging that one of the root causes of our current financial distress stems from insufficient regulatory oversight of financial markets. That is a criticism which some allege to be applicable to our Nation's energy markets--the theory apparently being that lax oversight has allowed speculators and manipulators to artificially increase prices for oil and gas. Given that you were Chairman of the Energy Committee at the time of passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 I wonder if you might want to comment on the regulatory authorities that were addressed in that act. As I recall, EPACT significantly increased the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's ability to not only oversee markets but to punish manipulation within those markets.

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I appreciate the comments of my colleague, and I share his sentiment both toward the desirability of markets and the need to ensure that those markets operate fairly and efficiently. My specific inquiry relates to the standard of review which attaches to any enforcement proceedings under these enhanced authorities. While I agree with the need for greater oversight in the operation of these markets, it seems to me that along with its enhanced oversight authority the FERC has an obligation to protect the due process rights for those against whom it might bring causes of action. Did EPACT bring about any change in the standards of review which would attach to enforcement proceedings under these new authorities?

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I thank the Chair.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I was pleased to see a report that the continuing resolution that will keep the Government running while Congress adjourns during the election period and beyond, that the continuing resolution proposed by the Democratic leadership in the House will actually eliminate a moratorium or a ban on drilling and exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf, which is, of course, the submerged Federal lands off our coastlines which are reported to have, by all of the experts, huge volumes of oil and gas. This actually represents a tremendous development in the Congress. For a long time now we have been saying we need to develop more of America's natural resources, American energy at home, so we would be less dependent on imported oil and gas from the Middle East. Until this point, those entreaties, those pleadings, those requests had fallen on deaf ears, it seemed. But I congratulate the Democratic leadership in the House. This could go down as a bipartisan success of which we should be proud. I remind our colleagues this is only part of the equation. We have said we need to find more American energy so we would be less dependent on imported oil from the Middle East. Where might we find that? It has been documented that deep sea exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf, the submerged lands off our coastlines, could produce as much as 14.3 billion barrels of oil. That is a lot. The western oil shale-- which I am unclear whether the continuing resolution will deal with, but which has currently received a ban on development and exploration of western oil shale--is projected to have the equivalent of 800 billion barrels of oil. That is even more than the Outer Continental Shelf. Then there is, of course, the Arctic Coastal Plain which is estimated to have 10.4 billion barrels of oil, for a total estimate of 824.7 billion barrels of oil right in the good old U.S. of A. This would eliminate all oil imports, once it was on line and was being produced, for more than 198 years. These are fantastic numbers and time periods. I know it is hard to conceive, but even if these numbers are not exactly right, what it demonstrates is that we have a lot of great oil and gas reserves in America. And all of the money that T. Boone Pickens, through his advertising campaign to raise the visibility of this issue, all the money which he has documented, which we are sending overseas to buy oil and gas, we could actually reduce that dramatically by producing more at home. We have said, of course, it is only part of the equation. While we need to find more, we also need to use less. Yesterday we also did the third leg of the stool. We voted to extend the various tax credits and subsidies that would encourage development of alternative sources of energy. In Texas, we are known as an energy State. I bet most people would be surprised to know that in addition to oil and gas, we are the No. 1 electricity producer in the Nation from wind energy. Obviously, those alternative sources of energy are very important. I caution my colleagues to the fact that no matter how much we act to eliminate the moratorium on the ban on offshore exploration, we still haven't done enough to open western oil shale. We still haven't done anything to open exploration and production in the Arctic Coastal Plain. I know while this 824 billion figure seems like a lot, it is estimated, once on line, it would produce about 3 billion barrels of oil a day, reducing our dependency. Just as the President's elimination of the executive ban on offshore exploration is a hopeful sign and elimination of the Federal moratorium on exploration and production in the Outer Continental Shelf is likewise a hopeful sign, it is a necessary but not a sufficient answer to the problem. That is because significant oil and gas reserves that exist in America, where producers and leaseholders already have a right to explore and produce that oil and gas and where they have invested more than $2 billion into these projects, because of lawsuits, opponents have blocked drilling in a way that, unfortunately, is going to take years and years and years to resolve. There are many examples of litigation thwarting approved drilling projects on existing leases. The area I am talking about specifically is, the Federal Government has leased land and approved drilling in the Beaufort Sea off the coast of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Too often, long-term planning and heavy investments of human and financial resources necessary to develop and produce these reserves are frustrated, and future investment discouraged, when projects that have been extensively reviewed and approved by the responsible Federal agencies are shut down and effectively thwarted by frivolous litigation. It is undisputed that oil and gas can be extracted from below the surface in a cleaner and more environmentally sensitive way than ever before. This is something that is vividly demonstrated by the fact that if you land or take off from an airplane at DFW Airport in the metroplex of Texas, the Dallas-Fort Worth area, you can actually land at the DFW Airport and you will see a number of drilling rigs on the DFW Airport property. What they are drilling through there is something called the Barnett Shale, a prolific producer of natural gas right there in a highly populated area. It is being done in an environmentally responsible way, a way that is safe to the human occupants of that area and a way that, because of modern drilling technology, you can use a single well bore and basically go in all directions by thousands of feet and produce a lot more natural gas than you could have using old drilling technology. So just like when it comes to coming up with better sources of alternative energy, technology has produced a more efficient, more environmentally responsible way of drilling for oil and gas right here in the United States. But to get back to my point, even if we lift this ban--all of these bans--unless we do something about the limitless litigation that prevents drilling from ever starting, we might as well have done nothing because this effectively shuts down drilling and production of American energy as much as any moratorium could. Unless we reform this litigation system, any repeal of a drilling ban does nothing to help consumers at the pump. So I urge my colleagues to work with me and all of us who are interested in trying to find a solution to this tremendous dependency on foreign oil. Lifting the moratorium is an important step. I congratulate the Democratic leadership coming together with Republicans who have been calling for this for many months now. But no one should be fooled--and this would be the most cynical of all--if Congress pretended to actually be solving a problem when we know that this frivolous litigation effectively bans development of America's natural resources. This would be the most cynical move of all if we did nothing about that second part, about the frivolous litigation, because already I think people across America look at Congress as appearing to do things, perhaps superficially appearing to be responsive to their concerns, but in the end roadblocks continue to exist which impede, if not block, any realistic reform or progress on the particular subject. So this is something I hope we will not give up on. I think today if, in fact, we do pass a continuing resolution that eliminates the moratorium on Outer Continental Shelf exploration development, it will be a great day. It is a necessary--again, a necessary--but insufficient way of addressing the ultimate dependency on imported oil. We know high energy prices affect our economy. As a matter of fact, even though prices have dipped some, the fact is, today, according to USA Today, the average price of gasoline is $3.72 a gallon in America. It had gone as high as $4.11 a gallon and has come down a little bit, but it is hard to remember just a year ago a gallon of gasoline sold for an average of $2.80 a gallon. In other words, it is up about 92 cents a gallon over a year ago, even though it has come down a little bit. The underlying problem that is putting so much pressure on gasoline and oil prices is, of course, the law of supply and demand and the fact that growing economies such as India and China are using more and more energy, which means we are competing globally for the same oil, which, of course, unless we produce more, the law of supply and demand tells us the price will continue to go up. So we should not be fooled into thinking we have solved the problem by eliminating only the moratorium on the Outer Continental Shelf--and there is more that remains to be done with the western oil shale and the Arctic Coastal Plain--we should not fool ourselves into thinking we have solved the problem, even if we were to lift those moratoria, unless we address this frivolous litigation that has had a way of bogging down this development in areas already leased and where leaseholders and producers have already invested billions of dollars. We need to do something about that. So I hope we will return--if not this week--and my hope would be we could do this at the same time. There are a number of proposals. Congressman Shadegg over in the House of Representatives has done good work in this area. Senator Ted Stevens from Alaska has some very good and interesting proposals. I have heard Senator Kit Bond of Missouri talking about some ideas he has. I have a proposal we have been working on that we think will address the delays in this frivolous litigation, while preserving to those who were genuinely harmed the right to recover compensation if, in fact, there is damage as a result of some misconduct on the part of the individuals who are producing or exploring for energy in America. So far so good. I think we ought to acknowledge the progress that is being made after all of these months. But we are not there yet. I hope we will see continued cooperation as we actually help to bring down the price at the pump and reduce America's dependency on imported oil in a way that endangers our national security and threatens our economy at a time when our economy is quite fragile indeed. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for an additional 5 minutes.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I want to say a few words about the principles that will guide my consideration and my vote on the proposal made by the administration, by the Secretary of Treasury, Henry Paulson, and Ben Bernanke, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. I have to tell you I am extremely upset we find ourselves in this terrible situation. I can tell you the phone calls I have been getting from my constituents are that they are overwhelmingly angry at how we could possibly find ourselves in this situation. First of all, I think there has been a perception that--listening to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson--is actually not true: that this is somehow a bailout for Wall Street. In other words, the people who have profited mightily from the enormous sums of money that have been made recently on Wall Street, in the end, they are going to get off scot- free and the taxpayer is going to end up holding the tab. That is completely unacceptable. First and foremost, I think we need to ask ourselves how we can protect the American taxpayers. The vast majority of Americans played no part in the collapse of some of the largest financial institutions in America, and they should not be forced to pay the price for the irresponsible and risky conduct of those who were at fault. Secondly, we need to make sure this American economy remains stable and that small businesses, which are the lifeblood and the job creators in our economy, have the ability to grow and to create new jobs. I think in the end economic growth is the key. What can we do to keep this great economy growing and producing jobs? I believe responsible tax relief helps small businesses grow and helps create jobs. Now, how would I know that? Well, all I would have to do is look back to the tax relief we passed in 2003, which cut the dividends and capital gains rate, which gave rise to a net increase of about 7 million jobs in America. That is what life was like before we hit the subprime mortgage crisis and high energy prices. But we ought to look to what works, and we should not use this as an excuse to grow the size of Government and increase the size of the tax burden on hard-working American families and small businesses because that will make things worse, not better. Third, we need to ask ourselves if this proposal does enough to safeguard transparency and accountability. Frankly, I think a lot of work needs to be done here. I think the very fact that Moody's and other entities which actually grade the investment value of many of these mortgage-backed security projects completely missed the target and failed to predict the precipitous drop in value of these subprime mortgages and the securities that are backed by these mortgages is evidence this is simply an opaque and nontransparent system and that not even the people who should know were able to evaluate what the true value of these mortgage-backed securities were. So I think we need to have certainly more transparency in this process, and we need to make sure those who are responsible are held accountable. I am very pleased to hear in today's news that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has decided to investigate, among others, the actions of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to determine whether fraud or corruption on the part of key players was the cause or contributed to the cause of our current financial turmoil. After the collapse of Freddie and Fannie, I sent a letter to the Attorney General of the United States, Michael Mukasey, and asked for a full investigation because in 2006 the very titans of industry who reaped millions of dollars in financial gain ended up with a slap on the wrist and no criminal penalty for cooking the books in order to generate larger bonuses and financial returns for themselves. That is completely unacceptable. We need to make sure those who are responsible for precipitating this financial crisis are held accountable. If that means they are guilty of crimes, they should go to prison and pay the price as an example to others who would take advantage of the American taxpayer and would be motivated by the kind of greed that lets them forget their responsibilities not only to their shareholders but to the American people themselves. So I am pleased the Attorney General is taking an aggressive posture and the Federal Bureau of Investigation is going to be conducting a thorough investigation. I say let the chips fall where they may. I do not care who it is. I hope they will pursue that to the fullest extent of the law. Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to come and address these very important topics, and I hope that as the days go by Congress can work together in a bipartisan manner to try to find a way to address these problems. But certainly the initial proposal by the Secretary of Treasury is unacceptable on a number of bases, but he has my commitment, as do my colleagues, that I will do my best to work with him to try to protect the American taxpayer.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I wish today to honor the life and service of a dedicated marine, MSG Kenneth Nathaniel Mack. On May 5th, 2007, Master Sergeant Mack gave his life in service to his country fighting in Iraq. In his 23 years of service to the U.S. Marine Corps, Master Sergeant Mack proved himself a dedicated marine and a trusted colleague to all who served by his side. Born in Goldsboro, NC, on December 18, 1964, Kenneth's family soon moved to Texas, where he graduated from Southwest High School in 1982 and attended Tarrant County Junior College in Fort Worth. While still in college, Master Sergeant Mack joined the Marine Corps Reserves, following his love of country, as well as his interest in automotive repair work. While many of his fellow students considered weekends simply a time to relax, Kenneth chose to spend many of those weekends at military drill in Abilene. In 1991, Kenneth was called upon to serve his country in combat during Operation Desert Storm. It would not be the last time he served on a far-away field of battle. Following the conclusion of the first gulf war, Kenneth returned home, married his wife Peggie, and started his family. Like so many members of our Nation's Reserve forces, Kenneth worked hard to balance his military service and civilian job with his family life. He succeeded, as evidenced by the lasting legacy of love and compassion that he left behind with his family. He cherished his time with them and was known for always bringing the family together. In 2004, Kenneth was once again called to serve overseas and deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. After helping to liberate the Iraqi people from an oppressive government regime, Master Sergeant Mack returned home. In March of 2007, he answered his country's call for the third time, returning to serve in Iraq. Sadly, just a few short months later, Master Sergeant Mack was killed by an improvised explosive device while conducting combat operations there. In honor of his service and his selfless sacrifice, Congress passed legislation earlier this year naming the Wedgwood Station Post Office the ``Master Sergeant Kenneth N. Mack Post Office Building.'' Master Sergeant Mack will be remembered across Texas for his generosity and loving attitude towards children, which extended well beyond his own family. He will also be remembered for his enthusiasm for hobbies such as scuba diving, skydiving, and motorcycle riding; and his love for the U.S. Marine Corps. MSG Kenneth Mack is survived by his wife, Peggie; his children, Candace, Courtney, Shyquadra, and Nathaniel; his mother, Mahalia S. Mack; and his brothers, Timothy and Robert. It is my honor today to share Kenneth's story, and pay tribute to his remarkable service and sacrifice for this country, which shall be forever indebted to him.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Pending looking at what the majority leader sent over, on our side we look forward to supporting that, should it be as represented by the majority leader. Reserving the right to object, I will object at this time until we have a chance to look at that.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today I commend James Ketelsen for his vision and commitment to transforming the hopes of tens of thousands of students and families across the country through Project GRAD, an education reform program that he started when he was chairman and CEO of Tenneco in Houston, TX. Project GRAD has helped these students realize their academic potential and many of them have completed their college education with the assistance of Project GRAD scholarships and mentoring support from Project GRAD staff. Project GRAD evolved from a scholarship program that began under Mr. Ketelsen's leadership at Tenneco. In 1988, the company began to fund a 4-year scholarship program for eligible graduates of Davis High School, at the time Houston's lowest-performing high school. By 1992, the number of Davis graduates entering college had more than quadrupled. Still, high school graduation rates and college matriculation rates continued to fall short of Mr. Ketelsen's expectations. He believed that Davis students--and all students from economically disadvantaged communities--were capable of much more if given the right investments and the right commitment. ``It's not the kids!'' he insisted. Armed with that belief, Mr. Ketelsen has dedicated the last two decades to making an enormous difference for America's highest needs students. Today, Project GRAD has expanded to 13 communities and reaches more than 120,000 students and families from California to New York, Alaska to Georgia. In the longest-served group of schools, GRAD scholars are completing college at a rate 92 percent above the national average for students from similar demographic backgrounds. A statistically significant sample of GRAD scholarship recipients who have completed college shows that the proportion who graduated with majors in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--concentrations of dire need for the national economy and national security--exceeded the national average for minority students by 71 percent. In the coming academic year, more than 7,500 students will attend college, funded by a Project GRAD scholarship. GRAD has already sent high school graduates to more than 100 institutions of higher education, including many of the most highly selective colleges and universities in the Nation. At the beginning of high school, many Project GRAD students would never have dreamed of attending Rice, the University of Texas, Texas A & M, Harvard, Yale, MIT, Cornell, Emory, Georgetown, or the University of Virginia. Yet, Mr. Ketelsen's Texas-sized vision, determination, and remarkable leadership of Project GRAD have transformed those expectations. I am grateful for the energy and enthusiasm with which Mr Ketelsen has served America's children and families. Recently, Mr. Ketelsen announced his decision to step down from his post as chairman of the board of directors for Project GRAD USA. Although he is retiring from Project GRAD USA, he plans to remain active with the Houston chapter of Project GRAD. I join with my colleagues in saluting James Ketelsen for his efforts to improve education and career opportunities for children in inner-city schools. The return on his investment in education will continue for generations to come.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I say to the distinguished majority leader, we have had productive meetings, as I said, with the Finance Committee staff and the Joint Tax staff. We are consulting now with the Governor of our State and with other officials who have responsibilities in the areas most affected by this devastating hurricane. We think after consultation, hopefully over the course of the afternoon, we can wrap this up. But it is going to take all of us working together to try to reach that resolution. I am hopeful we can get there, but we are not there yet.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I share the majority leader's hope that we will be on a glidepath toward completion of the Senate's business on a timely basis. I largely support the provisions of this bill. We have been consulting with the Finance Committee chairman, Senator Baucus, and Senator Grassley, the ranking member, and in good consultation with the staff. The problem is that as proposed, my State, the State of Texas, where 2 million people are without power because of the devastation of Hurricane Ike, are being treated in a discriminatory manner under some of the provisions of this bill. I am hopeful--indeed, I am optimistic--that we can work through these issues. Our initial discussions have been very productive. I expect we will be able to reach some resolution, but we are not there yet. For that reason, I reluctantly object.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I reiterate my thanks to the Senator from Montana, the chairman of the Finance Committee. He described what I had understood, and we are reading the fine print to make sure that is how it is written. I anticipate that we will be able to be satisfied with that. As Senator Hutchison knows because she and I traveled the affected area, the two areas most affected were Galveston and Orange County. The fact that specific counties were listed does not limit relief to areas that may have been, as a matter of fact, disproportionately impacted, such as Orange. So I am glad to hear that confirmed for the record because it is very important. As we have all said, it is still very early and there is a lot of work to be done in just assessing the damage. As a matter of fact, before the storm, there was a projection that the surge of water that would be pushed up by the storm could reach a level of 25 feet--a wall of water being pushed up the Houston ship channel. It was projected that 125,000 homes would be destroyed. According to the computer models, there was a projection that as much as $81 billion in damage would be done. At that time, we were principally concerned with making sure that lives were saved and, of course, in the immediate aftermath with the search and rescue operation. But that assessment, of course, fortunately, is going to be a lot lower than the computer models projected because the surge was not quite as bad as predicted. The storm hit in a way that didn't push that 25-foot wall of water up the Houston ship channel. As I said, we are grateful for all of the cooperation. I hope we will be able to come back when we have firmer numbers and a more detailed assessment, and we will experience a similar sort of cooperative spirit in trying to make sure the people of Texas are treated on the same basis that other victims of natural disasters in other parts of the country have been treated.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, earlier the majority leader came to the floor and propounded a unanimous consent request on the tax extenders package, and I told him that while I supported the legislation, there are a lot of good things in the bill, I still had some concerns about the disparate treatment of the State of Texas, especially related to Hurricane Ike. I am pleased to report that as a result of discussions with the Finance Committee--Senator Grassley, Senator Baucus, and their staff--I believe we have achieved our goal of getting fair treatment for the State and the victims of Hurricane Ike. I wanted to come to the floor and express my gratitude to Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley. We are reviewing the final language, but subject to that, I think, as far as I am concerned, there is no objection to proceeding to the bill. As I toured the hurricane-damaged area last weekend----

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I appreciate the generous comments of the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee. I especially enjoyed the part where he said we may come back later for more once we have been able to do further assessments. That is an important part of the rationale for agreement on this bill. We understand we can't do everything that needs to be done in this bill because the hurricane only hit this last weekend. There are a lot of people who have yet to be able to get back to their homes, a lot of folks without power, a lot of damage that is ongoing that cannot be fully calculated. I had the chance, when traveling around the damaged area, to witness the destructive capacity of this huge hurricane and hear from a lot of my constituents, a lot of displaced Texans who were trying to find the necessities of life, including food, water, and shelter. Of course, they were very anxious to know about their homes, whether they would be able to return home, when they would be able to return home, and what they would find when they got there. I appreciate that the chairman of the Finance Committee has included in the extenders package things such as bonus depreciation and expensing. These may seem like arcane subjects, but they actually mean a lot. They will mean a lot to the people of my State when it comes to rebuilding and getting back on their feet and getting back to work. I understand the unique circumstances we find ourselves in and the need to get the extenders package passed, which, as I said earlier, I support. I offer my congratulations to Senator Cantwell, who is on the floor, and Senator Ensign for their leadership. They have been working hard and long at trying to get this done, and I know we are almost over the goal line. Included in the package is an extension of the State and local sales tax deduction. This is something that is important to my State and to the other States that do not have an income tax. Because, of course, you can deduct your Federal income tax from your--or your State income tax from your Federal income tax, but if you don't have a State income tax, as Texas does not and, I might add, never will, this provides a level playing field by allowing the deduction of State and local tax. This also includes an extension of the very important research and development tax credit which helps many companies in Texas and around the country be competitive in the globalized economy. This measure also includes the extension of several renewable energy tax credits that have helped grow the Texas renewable energy industry. I know my colleagues get a little tired of Texans always bragging about Texas, but I am not going to stop now. We are No. 1 in the production of electricity from wind energy. Many people think of Texas as an oil and gas State, and we are that, but we are much more. We are an energy State. Credits for wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, hydropower, clean renewable energy bonds, fuel cell, and credits for residential energy efficiency home improvements are helping to diversify our Nation's energy portfolio and are a significant contribution toward answering the energy crisis we find ourselves in today. This measure also supports the clean use of coal. Coal, of course, is cheap. It is domestic. We have a lot of it. We are sometimes called the Saudi Arabia of coal here in the United States. Its use is essential to helping reduce our dependence on imported energy from abroad. Of course, coal can burn dirty, and we need to continue to do the research and development that is so important to finding ways to use that energy with which we have been endowed here in this country in a way that results in not only good and inexpensive energy use, but also a good, clean environment. We need to spur the advanced technology market to capture carbon and sequester it. Of course, the Federal Government has sort of been involved in a start-and-stop effort to try to do that kind of research. As a matter of fact, two cities in Texas, Jewett and Odessa, were finalists in the Federal Department of Energy effort to do an extensive research project into clean coal technology. Unfortunately, that got so big and expensive that the Secretary of Energy decided to basically go another way. The fact is we have the geology in Texas because of a lot of old oil wells that could sequester carbon dioxide, and we also know that the capture of carbon dioxide has many beneficial uses, particularly when it comes to secondary recovery and tertiary recovery in old oil fields. Another key part of solving our energy crisis is the transformation of our transportation sector through the use of plug-in electric vehicles and other alternative fuels. This package establishes a new credit for consumers who purchase plug-in electric vehicles. Now, I am still a little bit skeptical of how many people in my State of 24 million people are going to decide to trade in their pickup truck for a plug-in hybrid vehicle that has a battery that will go maybe 40 miles. That won't get you very far, particularly out in west Texas. But I think in a lot of places, that kind of technology, hopefully, will come to the market as soon as 2010. I know GM is going to introduce the Volt and I know other car manufacturers will be introducing their own models of these plug-in electric hybrids, and I think this new credit will provide that choice and that option to consumers in Texas. So I thank, again, Senator Grassley, Senator Baucus, and the Finance Committee staff. I wish to extend my appreciation to my colleague, the senior Senator from Texas, Senator Hutchison, for all of her hard work. We have tried to work together, and have worked together, in the best interests of our State, but also in a way that I think creates a win/ win for the people of America. I believe this effort is the first step to making Texas whole again, and I trust that our colleagues who have expressed so much sympathy and concern for the people of Texas who were affected by this terrible hurricane will have long memories. When we come back after this bill is passed, we will continue to work together on other important measures to make sure that each of our States affected by natural disasters, wherever they may be, will be treated in a fair and evenhanded sort of way. Senator Hutchison, of course, has been taking the lead when it comes to working on what I anticipate will likely be a supplemental appropriation request. But as I said at the outset, this hurricane is very recent. There are still a couple million people without power, and the assessments are still being done. But we will be back and we will be seeking the further--not only words of support from our colleagues, but something real and tangible in terms of support for the people of our State. I see my colleague, the senior Senator from Texas on the floor, and I certainly yield the floor to her.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as the Senate knows, yesterday we voted to pass the Defense authorization bill. However, one of the casualties of yesterday's process--which was unique, to my knowledge; we actually had only two rollcall votes on amendments to the Defense authorization bill, which I don't think has ever happened before, and many important amendments were blocked by the process, amendments that might have been included in the managers' package. I wish to mention just one of those, which is the Military Voting Protection Act. This was originally offered as a freestanding bill earlier, but then it changed to become an amendment to the Defense authorization bill because we thought it was particularly appropriate, as we were dealing with the needs of the men and women in uniform around the world, that we also respect and enforce their right to cast a vote. We know from 2006 statistics alone that of all of the eligible civilian and military voters around the world who were eligible and who actually requested an absentee by mail ballot, only 5.5 percent of those votes were actually counted. That is a disgraceful statistic and one we need to do something about. I compliment Senator Levin, Senator Feinstein, and others for working with us during the process of the Defense authorization bill to come together on what I believe was a clear and acceptable amendment to all sides, but because of the bizarre process we found ourselves in yesterday, this bill was basically a casualty of that process, as I say. So what I am hoping to do is take a bill we worked on that is very important in order to protect one of the most important civil rights of our men and women in uniform--the right to vote--and hopefully, by unanimous consent today, we can pass this bill and get it on its way to the President for signature in due course. I don't see any reason, since we did work together on this on a bipartisan basis and it has been cleared by both sides, there would be any objection.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I am disappointed that the other side would object. This is the same amendment that was already cleared by the Rules Committee, so I don't understand what the process is that the Senator is referring to. I hope this isn't just another delay tactic. It is something that really cries out for us to address. I have to say, when I travel back to my State and talk to my constituents, they absolutely believe this Congress is dysfunctional. If we can't find some way to come together on a bipartisan basis to pass noncontroversial voting rights protection for our military such as this, I guess there is not a lot of hope for doing other, perhaps more complicated, more involved things. This is very straightforward. To have an objection to this bill which has already been worked on and cleared through the process and which was a casualty of the bizarre process by which we adopted the Defense authorization bill, without any right, really, to offer any amendments such as this, is, frankly, beyond me. In the remaining few days this Congress is in session, I hope whatever concerns the Senator was referring to which have not been made known to me will be addressed. I will come back here every day, if necessary, and offer a similar unanimous consent request. I would ask those on the other side who object to the passage of this bill to offer me some explanation for what the specific concern is. If there is a problem we can eliminate by working with them, we would be glad to do it. But to just stonewall this important amendment to protect one of the most basic civil rights for our men and women in uniform--the right to vote--is, frankly, beyond me. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN. So let me ask unanimous consent at this time that the Rules Committee be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3073, the Military Voting Act. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment at the desk be agreed to-- by the way, that is the amendment we worked on with Senator Bennett, the ranking member, and Senator Feinstein, the chairman of the Rules Committee, together with Senator Levin and Senator Warner. I ask unanimous consent that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed at this point in the Record.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, we can open America's energy resources right here at home so that we would have to spend less money buying that oil from the Middle East or from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Americans are feeling the pinch of high gas prices, and not just when they fill their gas tank. They feel it at the grocery store, and in the cost of fuel for the schoolbuses run by the school districts around the country, even for our law enforcement officials who drive police cruisers. These high gas prices affect all of us, and we could do something about it today, right here in Congress, by our being part of the solution and eliminating the moratorium on offshore exploration and development of the oil shale out in the Midwest and up in the Arctic, where we could produce as many as 3 million additional barrels of oil a day right here at home, and reduce the amount of money we send to the Middle East to buy that oil. We know also that it would create jobs here in America to produce it. So there are a number of things we can do right here in the United States at this time that do not result in overregulation and strangulation of an already struggling economy. We have seen financial institutions, such as the Bank of America, stepping in and shoring up the market and preventing some of the losses. And while there is no doubt this consolidation of the financial markets is painful for many, we have to focus on long-term solutions that will put the economy back on track. Again, this situation calls for a calm, nonpartisan discussion that looks for the real root of the causes of this crisis and the best ways to recover from it. We should remember the old carpenter's adage to measure twice and cut once. We can't afford to make hasty decisions that may in the long run hurt our economy. We may never be able to foresee every crisis that our country or our economy will face, but I do know that America is built to weather any storm. American ingenuity and the engine of capitalism will always rebound, if we will let it. Mr. President, I yield the floor

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, this week I witnessed the devastation and destruction of Hurricane Ike in Texas, and, of course, that destruction has extended beyond the State of Texas to other parts of the country as well, leaving thousands of people without homes, millions without electricity, and countless without water and the necessities of life. I traveled with the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the President of the United States over the past few days surveying this devastation and trying to do everything we could collectively, together with the Governor of Texas, the National Guard, the Red Cross, and many volunteers, to get people back to their regular routine, hopefully back in their homes, back to work with power restored and the necessities of life being provided as soon as possible. There are a lot of people working to make that happen, from private businesses to the electric utilities that are trying to get power back online to the oil companies. All are working as hard as they can to get life back to normal as soon as possible. I also witnessed firsthand the importance to the Texans who were personally affected by this catastrophe of a calm, reassuring response from the Government, a disciplined approach to the problems, and a sense of optimism from their leaders about the future. What people want from their Government is not panic, is not hyperbole, is not partisan attacks and the blame game. What they want is their leaders to talk about how we are going to methodically work through this challenge and find a solution to the problem. Unfortunately, in Washington, we are facing a very different but nevertheless very real storm in our financial markets. The problem is, we have witnessed the most recent string of failures that have not seen any precedent since perhaps the Great Depression. The collapse of companies such as AIG and Lehman Brothers, the purchase of Merrill Lynch by the Bank of America, the probable sale of Washington Mutual, all on the heels of a massive Government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, point to a financial system in serious trouble. Today we do not yet know where this will all lead, especially how far the fallout from the troubled subprime mortgage industry will reach. The irresponsibility of so many financial institutions has touched almost every segment of our economy, and the effects are far from over. While I have heard from many of my colleagues demand for quick Government action to counter this downturn, I would caution all of us that the most important approach is to take a deep breath, to consider the facts, and then to act carefully and deliberately, working together across the aisle to identify the actual causes of this crisis and what we might do to make things better. The first thing you need to do in a crisis is to take stock of the situation and identify the specific problems that need to be addressed so we can be sure or as much as humanly possible that we don't overreact or actually try to treat a problem that doesn't exist or to make something bad even worse, indeed. Now, if there ever were a time, is a time for level heads and bipartisan cooperation, not overreaction and not partisanship. Now is the time for an earnest and probing discussion. It is clear that many factors have contributed to this problem, and I have to say both political parties share part of the blame. In the 2 years since our Democratic colleagues have taken over, Congress has failed to address the rising debt of the Federal Government, with deficits at record levels, important tax relief that has not been made permanent and which will expire in 2011, and all attempts at addressing American energy production and, of course, rising prices at the pump. All of those efforts have effectively been blocked. But rather than engaging in the blame game, which is a world class sport in Washington, and pouncing on this crisis as an opportunity to point fingers, the American people need for us to come together and have a serious, nonpartisan discussion, investigation, and resolution of these challenges. One thing that should be crystal clear, however, is that mixing public purposes and private enterprise in a quasi-governmental entity is a dangerous business, if not more so, than the free market itself. The unprecedented collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has sent shock waves throughout our financial system. That is why 2 years ago I joined several of my colleagues in an attempt to reform government-sponsored entities. That is what these two entities, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, are called, government-sponsored entities. Unfortunately, folks on the other side of the aisle blocked every attempt at that time to reform this broken system. At the time, I suppose things seemed to be working pretty well. But as we know now, these institutions were rotten to their core and destined to ultimately fail. Looking back on those actions then, they seem even more urgent now than they did then. Now that these institutions have failed, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are calling for investigations they rejected 2 short years ago. Representative Barney Frank at that time said: These two entities--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate those problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing. I have said things in the past that I have later on learned to regret or had cause to revise and correct. I bet Barney Frank wishes he could take those words back today. We have colleagues in this body who went so far as to ask the President to immediately reconsider his ill- advised reform proposals. They are the reform proposals we have now enacted, unfortunately now that the horse is out of the barn and Fannie and Freddie have failed. It is difficult to think that we may have had a chance to head off the collapse of Fannie and Freddie and prevent a lot of turmoil we are facing now. But, indeed, with the benefit of hindsight, if we had acted 2 years ago or even 5 years ago to implement the reforms we have now since implemented, we could have headed off this calamitous failure of these two huge quasi-governmental institutions. Then, of course, there is the fact that Fannie and Freddie faced increasingly well-documented corruption and mismanagement. In 2006, some of the very leaders of those entities paid huge civil fines for basically cooking the books to make the profit look better than it actually was in order to reap huge financial bonuses. Yet for some reason, the Department of Justice gave them effectively a slap on the wrist, a civil fine rather than prison time and true accountability. Because of the intertwining nature of these quasi-governmental entities, Fannie and Freddie, they developed ultimately a powerful lobby group and became institutionalized in the Government. They developed, in effect, a political shield that made them invulnerable to the kind of scrutiny that private enterprise ordinarily would have and that proper oversight would produce. I have sent a letter to the Attorney General of the United States asking for a full investigation into what happened with Fannie and Freddie and to find out how two institutions that are so central to the issuance of mortgages in the United States could have been so poorly managed that they had to be bailed out by the American taxpayers. Fannie and Freddie have proven that direct governmental involvement does not necessarily mean better management, nor does it preclude financial disaster. In fact, the Government involvement itself may have created a false sense of security that made it less obvious that these entities were, indeed, increasingly a house of cards. What was the result? The result is now at least an estimated $200 billion tab for the Federal taxpayers, maybe higher in the end. All told, Reuters has estimated the Federal Government bailouts to date have totaled roughly $900 billion. Between Fannie and Freddie, Bear Stearns, the FHA, and an assortment of other programs, we will spend almost $1 trillion of the American taxpayers' money. This kind of spending on private entities and loans cannot protect the economy and will only result in higher taxes to pay for it and further dwindling of the value of the dollar. That is why rather than reacting hastily and increasing the cost to the taxpayers, we need to cool down, take a breath, and look at the economy more closely. No one suggests that regulation is not appropriate in the right circumstances, but the Democratic candidate for President, Senator Obama, used the word ``regulate'' or ``regulation'' or a variation of those words 26 times in a single speech this last week--26 times. What we need to ask ourselves is if we have the right systems in place to oversee and effectively regulate industry where necessary. Anyone who has studied corporate law can tell you there are plenty of laws and regulations governing the conduct of business entities. The question we ought to be asking is, are they working effectively or is the redtape and bureaucracy self-defeating? What can we do to improve the regulatory regime, not necessarily use it as an excuse to grow the size of Government along with an increase in the tab the taxpayers invariably will pick up? Rather than taking over businesses and guaranteeing against failure, how can we, working together in a nonpartisan fashion, create a more effective framework to help business succeed? The most important thing to remember is that the free enterprise system will weather any storm and will bounce back if we let it. But if we use this as an excuse to grow the size of Government, to create new bureaucracies, to create more redtape, and to create an increase in the cost of Government, then it will crowd out the new job creation we need in order to keep this economy strong. So instead of trying to box in our economy and control it from Washington, DC, how it works in every minute detail, we should be creating the most fertile environment for the economy to grow. Overregulating the economy is like planting an oak tree in a flower pot. Even if it survives, it will never get very big. There are some things Congress can do and can do quickly. We can reassure the American worker that we will keep taxes low rather than allow them to grow and increase. We can keep taxes low for individual Americans, for corporations, for small businesses. We can make sure the capital gains rate is low. We can do what Senator McCain has proposed and lower the corporate tax rate, which is the second highest in the world. Does it make sense to increase corporate taxes because we can stand up here and rail against corporations and excess of the market or does it make sense to make it more likely that these corporations will actually create jobs in America because of a more favorable tax regime rather than go abroad and create those jobs because the cost of doing business is too high here? Another thing we can do is we can help cut out-of-control Federal spending. That would help the economy. Spending more Federal dollars will only take away from the people the resources we need to strengthen the economy--the small businesses that innovate and drive competition, the workers who make industry run, and the consumers who return money to the economy. Another thing we can do is commit to free trade. Free trade creates jobs in America from the agricultural produce we grow to the products we manufacture that we have new markets for in other parts of the world. If we make a commitment to open new markets to fair and equal trade, we give new outlets for American goods and produce. Trade has always helped businesses grow, and it creates new jobs and higher wages right here in America. That is why one thing we could do to help stimulate our economy and get the economy back on track is to pass the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, something that Speaker Pelosi has blocked for many months now. We can open America's energy resources for more domestic exploration and production. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 3 minutes.