John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. CORNYN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, may I ask how much time remains on this side of the aisle in morning business?

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. If the Senator will yield for a quick question?

Mr. CORNYN. I wanted to ask the distinguished Senator, earlier before he was able to come to the floor, there was a unanimous consent request offered with regard to the ALS registry, and I, on his behalf, lodged an objection, although I have no personal objection. I just want to ask the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma if it is his understanding it was on his behalf?

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I understand why we find ourselves in this terrible posture today and why some people are calling this Congress the broken Congress, the dysfunctional Congress. If you look at the chart that was alluded to a moment ago about the last 31 days of the Senate, we have had 15 days of the last 31 days actually in session. We have had 10 rollcall votes. We have had 10 rollcall votes in the last 31 days. As a matter of fact, we should be having rollcall votes now on the farm bill, which is the bill I thought was before the Senate. But, instead, our colleagues from the other side of the aisle decided to put on this show for the American people to try to portray themselves as passing legislation, although they knew it could not be done in the manner in which they proposed--while we should be passing the farm bill. Let me talk for a moment about the opportunities that they have squandered by their mismanagement of the calendar over this last year. I asked the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, if he would agree to a unanimous consent request, and also the majority leader, to help fund our troops who are in harm's way during a time of war. They objected to that. As a matter of fact, Republicans attempted to call up the Veterans appropriations bill before the Veterans Day holiday, and the Democrats objected to bringing up that bill. Just to be clear, this is the appropriations bill that funds veterans affairs and military construction and is important not only to keeping our commitments to our veterans but to maintaining a decent quality of life for the families who are left behind while their loved one is in harm's way in Iraq or Afghanistan and other dangerous places across the world. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle blocked that appropriations bill like they blocked the emergency funding for the troops that is needed in order to avoid the 100,000 notices to civilian employees of the Department of Defense that they are going to be laid off. They are going to get those notices before Christmas that they are going to be laid off by mid-February unless Congress does the job it should have done a long time ago. That is not even to mention--which I will mention--the funding necessary for the Department of Defense to operate in Iraq and Afghanistan to root out al-Qaida and other foreign fighters, Islamic extremists who are trying to kill American soldiers and who, if given an opportunity to reorganize themselves in Iraq, would use that as another launching pad to carry out murderous attacks against Americans and our allies. Just to be clear, the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, asked me about a meeting where the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State were present. I explained, as I have just explained here today, what the situation would be like if we failed to act, and as a result of their objection, we are not acting on a timely basis. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the Deputy Secretary of Defense to the Republican leader that is dated December 7, 2007, signed by Gordon England to the Honorable Mitch McConnell.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as the letter makes clear, while the Department of Defense has the ability to fund the troops in the field until mid-February--around March for the Marine Corps--this comes at great expense to those in the Department of Defense, both in and out of uniform. The only reason the Department of Defense can basically rob Peter to pay Paul in terms of paying its bills is because other activities will not be funded, to include training, repair of equipment, and salaries. This letter makes clear that under the current law, furlough notices must soon be issued, potentially right around the time Christmas hits. This is not any way to run the business of our Nation. Unfortunately, because of the way our colleagues have led the Senate, we have squandered a tremendous opportunity to solve the problems the American people sent us here to solve. We have had 66 votes on cloture motions--in other words, efforts to force legislation down the throat of the minority without an opportunity for debate or amendment. That is a guaranteed recipe for failure. As everyone in this body knows, under the rules of the Senate, neither the majority nor the minority can have their own way without bipartisan cooperation. That is the way to get things done. But, rather than get things done for the American people, what we have seen is a ``my way or the highway'' approach on the part of the leadership on the other side of the aisle. That is the reason we have had 63 votes, 63 votes so far this session, on the war in Iraq, with various attempts on the other side of the aisle either to attach strings to that money or to impose arbitrary deadlines on our commanders in the field or what I would submit is basically to insist on surrender dates. These are the same folks who called the surge a failure before it even started. They have said they supported the troops but yet, when it comes time to show their support by making sure they have the funding for the equipment and the training, to pay salaries, and to maintain a decent quality of life for their loved ones who are left behind, instead of acting on that stated support for the troops, have failed to act. I know the other side of the aisle has given us a copy of various unanimous consent requests to give us fair notice of their intention to ask for unanimous consent, and we have done the same. On behalf of this side of the aisle, I would ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 2363, which is funding for military construction and veterans affairs. I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I am disappointed to hear the objection. This is the same Veterans appropriations bill and Military Construction bill that was passed this summer by the Senate and this summer as well by the House. Why is it that it has been delayed all this time? This is funding for the very veterans who have sacrificed so much and given so much in the service to this country who are being told: No, we are going to hold that money back because essentially you are part of our political plans to put together a huge Omnibus appropriations at the end of the year and try to force the President and the minority to accept bloated Washington spending, when, in fact, there is no objection to passage of that Veterans bill or Military Construction bill, and it should be passed today by unanimous consent without further delay. Mr. President, I have one other unanimous consent request I would like to offer. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 3997, a bill to provide tax relief for our troops. I further ask that the amendment at the desk, which is the text of S. 2340 and provides for full funding of our troops, emergency funding for our troops, be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I regret the obstruction on the part of the majority. This provision, the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Tax Relief Act, would ensure that our military members are treated fairly under our own tax laws. It would make clear that combat pay can be treated as income for purposes of qualifying for the earned-income tax credit. It would also make improvements to the rules for mortgage bonds for veterans, clarify rules regarding survivor and disability payments, and continue to provide pay and benefits to National Guard and Reserve members called to Active Duty. I have already mentioned the component of it that would provide full funding on an emergency basis to our troops who are currently fighting and, unfortunately, some being wounded and dying in service to their country and protection of our freedoms, which has now been objected to once again. I will finish my remarks for this period where I started and say that we have squandered our opportunities to govern. The only way you can govern in the Congress is by building a governing coalition, Democrats working with Republicans to try to solve the Nation's problems. When one side or the other tries to jam their agenda down the throat of the other side, it does not work, and exhibit A is the dismal record of this broken Congress during this last year. I see why our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are getting nervous, why their desperation to pass legislation is beginning to show, because they realize they had the opportunity to lead, they realize they had the opportunity to govern, but they have squandered that opportunity. So now, in the last week and a half before the Christmas recess, they are out here trying to act as if the minority has obstructed them, when, in fact, if they had only met us halfway and worked with us to solve some of the big issues that confront our country in a bipartisan and constructive way, we would have met them halfway and we would have solved many of those problems.

Mr. CORNYN. I will.

Mr. CORNYN. The distinguished Senator from New Hampshire is exactly correct. My recollection is only 1 out of the 12 appropriations bills has actually been signed by the President, and that was after the fiscal year ended, meaning that essentially Congress is doing what no business, what no family could get away with; that is, basically to pay the bills on a timely basis. So it is another example of this broken Congress and squandered opportunity to work together to do our basic duty. Unfortunately, I think what we have seen now is an unfortunate game being played out where, rather than pass those bills on an individual basis, there is going to be an attempt to roll them into a giant Omnibus appropriations bill, which someone observed the other day is Latin for ``hold on to your wallet.'' The President has insisted that he is going to hold the line, as he well should, on wasteful Washington spending which would require tax increases on the American people at a time when the economy is entering into a flat period. It is exactly the wrong time--if there is ever a right time--to raise taxes.

Mr. CORNYN. I would.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the Senator from New Hampshire is absolutely correct. I would further say in response to his question, you know there is a marked contrast to the tone that was set at the very beginning of this Congress with the new majority in charge. The Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, who was on the floor earlier, said: I think the people across America said to us in this last election, we want you to compromise, we want you to find solutions, we do not want you to play to a draw with nothing to show for it. Well, that is in the Congressional Record on January 4, 2007. I agreed with that statement then. But, as I say, it stands in marked contrast to what we have seem demonstrated this last year. The Senator from New York, Mr. Schumer, who was on the floor earlier, on that same date said: All too often we in Washington get lost in the world of Washington, the focus on getting something done, something done for the American people gets lost. Well, I wish they had heeded their own advice because what we have to show for this last year is very little, indeed. Failing to take care of our most basic responsibilities, as the Senator from New Hampshire has pointed out, to fund the Government on a timely basis--the fact is, we find ourselves in a terrible position now, with just a few days remaining until the Christmas break to get that work done.

Mr. CORNYN. I would.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I agree again with the statement made and respond in the affirmative to the question propounded by the Senator from New Hampshire. This Congress has spent 11 months holding Iraq political votes that have had no chance of becoming law. We have had 63 votes thus far this session. In the meantime, while the majority has been fiddling, the business of the American people has not been done. I think about the issues besides those of national security that cry out for solutions, things such as border security and immigration reform. Couldn't we have used some of this time more constructively to solve one of the biggest domestic issues confronting the country today? How about energy policy? We have an energy bill that raises taxes on domestic producers and encourages our dependence on foreign oil, when we could have worked together to pass an energy policy that would have prepared us for the future. We have not done that. Health care, which is a tremendous concern of my constituents in Texas and elsewhere, we could have acted to deal with the health care access cost and quality crisis in this country, but we have not. I know there are other colleagues who wish to speak. I reserve the remainder of my time and yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, how much time remains in morning business on our side?

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, in a moment I am going to yield and ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Alabama be recognized for up to 10 minutes, followed by the Senator from Wyoming, Dr. Barrasso, for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. CORNYN. I would.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today I recognize the many schools in my State of Texas that are working to close achievement gaps and provide their students with an excellent education. Last week, the U.S. News and World Report issued the very first national rankings for the Best High Schools in America. Out of more than 20,000 schools that were evaluated, one school in south Texas, Hidalgo Early College High School, ranked 11th among the top schools that provide ``a good education across their entire student body, not just for some students.'' I will have more to say about the other schools on the list in separate remarks, but today I would like to focus on the extraordinary story of Hidalgo High School, home of the Pirates and 850 Hispanic students in grades 9-12. Hidalgo, TX, is a small town, population 7322, on the U.S.-Mexico border about 250 miles south of San Antonio. Although Hidalgo is the fourth largest U.S. port of entry, unemployment tops 11 percent and nearly 40 percent of the population is below the poverty level. Over a quarter of the students at Hidalgo High are limited English proficient. Yet this school has a 94-percent graduation rate. A grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006 has allowed Hidalgo High and the University of Texas-Pan American to develop an innovative partnership for college preparation. All students at Hidalgo High School are enrolled in the Early College High School Program, where they will earn both a high school diploma and an associate's degree or up to 2 years of credit toward a bachelor's degree. Students receive college level credit from the University of Texas-Pan American. The class of 2010 will be the first class to participate in this program for a full 4 years. According to Hidalgo High Principal Edward Blaha: We continuously strive to seek high expectations for all students in their academic, civic and social endeavors and to provide them with opportunities for a successful transition to higher education and the marketplace. . . . Our high school program is designed to engage students in active, collaborative learning that emphasizes the development of critical thinking skills to be applied to real-world concepts. Congratulations to Principal Edward Blaha, the faculty and staff, and all of the students and their families at Hidalgo High School on achieving this distinction. The decision to pursue the Early College High School Program provides students with the educational opportunities necessary to generate economic and intellectual progress. I am proud of your vision, hard work and achievement.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I believe we have two speakers on our side in morning business this morning. I would ask unanimous consent that I be allotted 15 minutes of that, and Senator Graham from South Carolina be allotted the second 15 minutes.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I differ with the distinguished Senator from Illinois. Obviously, the bill that was voted on earlier contained numerous restrictions and deadlines on deployment of our troops in Iraq. For that reason, cloture was denied. It is not that there wasn't support. Indeed, I would hope there would be unanimous support to make sure our troops get the emergency funding they need in order to continue military operations until such time as Congress can appropriate the remainder of the President's request of $196 billion. It is important to note that this is emergency bridge funding for the troops. While I don't disagree with the distinguished Senator from Illinois that the military can borrow from Peter to pay Paul and move funds around within their budget to avoid disaster up until about mid- February, the fact is, the White House has now warned that 100,000 civilian jobs depend on this emergency funding. Here is a story from the Army Times dated December 10, 2007, that says the Department of Defense is sending notices of layoffs this week--2 weeks before Christmas--to 100,000 civilian employees warning them, unless Congress acts, they are going to be out of a job. This is not the way to show our support for the troops. In fact, this is nonsupport for the troops. It is important to note what is included in this emergency funding that should be voted on today and decoupled from the debate over the Omnibus appropriations bill or any other continuing resolution. Here are the most notable provisions: One, operation and maintenance funding--this finances a broad range of activities, including combat operations, transportation of personnel and equipment, fuel, equipment maintenance, and general base support for our troops. It also funds the Iraqi security forces and Afghanistan security forces. If we have any hope of bringing our troops home sooner rather than later, it is because we have succeeded in training the Iraqis to take our place, to provide that security so we can bring our troops home as soon as possible. By not providing the funding, we are delaying that prospect, not advancing it. The third general category is funding for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization--the Joint IED Defeat Organization--which is dedicated to finding new ways to neutralize the primary threat to our troops in Iraq, which is improvised explosive devices. We ought to be providing the funding for this Joint IED Defeat Organization so they can save the lives and limbs literally of American troops. This emergency funding being blocked by Senate Democrats would go to repair, replace, and upgrade military equipment. It also provides for military personnel funding, special pay and benefits, including hazardous duty pay for our troops, as well as the Defense Health Program. Those are the categories of items being blocked by today's objection by the Democratic leadership. I am disappointed by the decision to block this emergency funding for our troops in Iraq. This is the material support we can provide to show our troops we are behind them, regardless of our differences on the war or how the war is being conducted. We see time and time again how this Congress, egged on by special interest groups such as Moveon.org, has been willing to use our troops as part of their political debate. This is particularly appalling when we are the ones who first asked and voted--by a vote of 77 to 21, I believe, 77 affirmatively--for the use of force in Iraq. We are the ones who voted and have the responsibility for authorizing that use of force. For us now to deny the funding they need to foster a situation where money has to be moved around from accounts just to get by and 100,000 civilian employees are being put on notice that they are going to be out of a job unless Congress quits playing a game is simply unsustainable. Last January, of course, we unanimously confirmed GEN David Petraeus to lead our forces in Iraq. As we all know, there was serious concern about the way the military operations in Iraq were being conducted, and many, if not all, of us called for a new way forward. We unanimously agreed that General Petraeus was the right man for that job. In fact, I am proud to say that vote to support General Petraeus's nomination and that vote of confidence in the new strategy, the so-called surge of forces in operations in Iraq, proved to be a correct one. General Petraeus, with his counterinsurgency strategy and with the hard work and dedication of our men and women in the military, has brought us closer to a stable Iraq that many had simply given up and thought not possible. Reports are appearing daily in the newspaper and on the electronic media showing that violent attacks continue to decline in Iraq and communities across that country. Reports show people not only feel safer, they are safer. Refugees who have left Iraq to go to Syria and other places to protect their lives and their families are now returning to Iraq because Iraq is safer. Taxi drivers have resumed their old routes in neighborhoods without regard for whether predominantly Shiite or Sunni, and neighbors and families previously separated by the war are reuniting as refugees are returning by the busload. My colleagues have had a chance to show their support for the troops. Unfortunately, we see that support sorely lacking. The call of groups such as Moveon.org seems to be so loud and has such command on the other side of the aisle that it drowns out these positive reports about the improved security situation in Iraq. It leads some, unfortunately, to block emergency funding that our troops need in order to carry out continued security operations and training for Iraqis to take our place so we can bring our troops home. Unfortunately, they end up being part of the partisan political games that tend to dominate Washington, DC. My colleagues who continue to insist that Iraq is lost and that the surge has failed or that Iraq is not making political progress are not talking about the Iraq of today. I have said it before and I will say it again: Betting against the men and women of the U.S. military is always a bet you will lose. When our colleagues on the other side of the aisle said that all is lost even before the surge started, frankly, they have been proven wrong. They lost that bet by betting against the men and women of the U.S. military. Michael Totten, a reporter embedded in the once volatile region of Fallujah, wrote last week in the New York Daily News: There's a gigantic perception lag in America these days. The Iraq of the popular imagination and the Iraq of the real world are not the same country. Secretary of Defense Gates said on Saturday that: Civilian deaths across Iraq are down about 60 percent. Recently, there was the lowest number of single-day attacks across the nation in three and a half years. The progress is real. But it is also fragile. Why in the world, given this progress and given the fragility of the conditions in Iraq, would my colleagues on the other side of the aisle deny the emergency funding that our troops need? What possible rationale could there be for making that part of the political games and dysfunction that seems to dominate the Congress? We have to make our policy decisions based not on the Iraq many have remembered from the past but the situation on the ground today which is improving, rebounding, and growing. Yet we still hear the doomsayers and those admonishing General Petraeus and his strategy. I am reminded of something a professor once told me when he said speaking louder doesn't make you any more right. We need to listen to the facts and not the loudest voices. We all have an important question to ask ourselves. It is not about should we have gone into Iraq or why we went into Iraq. Those questions are now relegated to the history books. The fact is, we are there. The question we must ask now is, Given the current situation in Iraq and the Middle East, what is the best course of action for the United States? We should ask ourselves, Will withdrawing troops from Iraq before securing it make us any more or less secure at home? I have no doubt--and history will agree--that the more stable we can make Iraq, the better chance they have of becoming a fully functioning partner in the Middle East, a democracy governed by Iraqis. A precipitous withdrawal, whether caused by deadlines imposed by Congress or by cutting off funding or by leaving funding in doubt, as our Democratic colleagues have done by objecting to this unanimous consent request today, would be detrimental to the security and stability of Iraq and would endanger American lives at home. How could that be? The intelligence community tells us that a power vacuum in Iraq left by a rapid American withdrawal would create a failed state and an opportunity for al-Qaida to reassemble and reorganize. It would create an opportunity for a training ground and an organizing location for al-Qaida and Islamic extremists to launch future terrorist attacks against the United States or our other allies or American forces in the Middle East. Such action would also likely necessitate future American military operations in the region that would put us behind where we are today, not advance where we are today. I think we can all agree that kind of scenario is completely unacceptable and certainly not in the best interest of the United States. The situation in Iraq, as it stands now, needs a continued military presence with a force large enough to handle potential problems until the Iraqis are able to govern and defend themselves. The more capable the Iraq military and police forces become, the fewer of our troops are necessary to assist them in that effort. But it does not help them to cause them to question whether we are going to provide the financial support for our troops and for the training of Iraqi military and police forces. But that is exactly what the Senate is doing today by blocking this unanimous consent request. Many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, still now, are left to claim that the lack of Iraqi political reconciliation is the reason they are dissatisfied with the outcome in Iraq, having lost the argument by the improved security arrangements as a result of the surge and the counterinsurgency strategy of General Petraeus. I have to wonder whether we are holding the Iraqi Government--Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 more minutes.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about an issue that should be the first priority of this Congress, and that is to fund our troops during a time of war, to make sure they have the funds they need, to have the equipment, to have logistical support and other support they need in order to fight this global war on terrorism. There have been a lot of rumors circulating around Congress about what the way forward is going to be on the appropriations--I can only call it a mess--that confronts us when only 1 appropriations out of 12 bills has been signed by the President. Yesterday I heard the reports for the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, David Obey, which said he was pulling the proposed omnibus appropriations bill because he was upset with negotiations on that. He said this--and this is the one part I do agree with-- I want no linkage whatsoever between domestic [spending] and the war. I want the war to be dealt with totally on its own. We shouldn't be trading off domestic priorities for the war. I would rephrase that that we should not be doing anything to tie the fate of our troops to wasteful pork projects or excessive Washington spending. I am glad to see the distinguished majority whip on the floor because I do have a unanimous consent request that I know he will be interested in. Unanimous-Consent Request--S. 2340 I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 484, S. 2340. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, by now moving the goalposts, saying first the surge would not work to now having to declare the obvious, that the surge is working and the military situation is better, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the naysayers are saying: Well, really the problem is a lack of political reconciliation. But I have to ask whether we--a Congress that has proven itself to be dysfunctional over the last 8 months or 11 months now--whether we are holding the Iraqis to a different standard than we would actually hold ourselves to. We have not exactly been a model for how Congresses should function. I think it is unfair for us to continue to move the goalposts and say that the significant reconciliation efforts that are occurring in tribal areas, in the provinces, and local areas do not count because clearly they do count, with things like the Anbar awakening and the work being done around Iraq now from the bottom up, as opposed to the top down, which is helping to make for a more secure Iraq, and making sure that Iraqis, rather than Americans, are principally responsible for maintaining security and safety in Iraq, in conjunction with American military troops. I am discouraged and disappointed that our colleagues have blocked this emergency funding for our troops, putting 100,000 civilian employees of the Department of Defense in doubt during this Christmas season as to whether they are actually going to have a job come February and causing our troops to question our commitment to support them during a time of war. That is not the message this Senate ought to be sending, and I urge my colleagues to reconsider. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 minutes for myself and then the remainder of our time to the Senator from Utah, Mr. Hatch.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I am not without sympathy for the position argued by the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee. I think the list of horribles he has recounted by the fact that the AMT is not indexed and will cover up to roughly, I believe the figure is now, 23 million taxpayers unless we act--I am not without sympathy for what he is trying to do here. But the problem is, we are not going to agree on this side to raise taxes against the American people in order to pay for a tax cut for others. It is simply that clear. We are not going to agree to raising taxes, particularly at a fragile time for the economy, by what some have estimated would be $80 billion a year. I believe three simple principles will help us find a solution. One is that we ought to protect the middle class from the rise of the AMT which President Clinton vetoed a full repeal of in 1999. I wish he had not done that then. That would have protected us from where we are today. We ought to pass the expiring tax provisions, the so-called tax extenders for capital gains and dividend rates and other tax relief which have contributed to 50 months of continuous and uninterrupted job growth since tax extenders relief was passed in 2003. We ought to do both without raising taxes on the American people. Unfortunately, we know a tax increase is like throwing a wet blanket on the American economy. The AMT, if we don't act, will hit about 870,000 of my constituents, up from 150,000 now. It sounds to me as if the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee is sympathetic to the direction we would like to move that this bill, unfortunately, does not represent. But as long as we are presented with a choice of cutting the AMT by raising taxes, I don't believe we are going to see any progress. I yield the floor.