Christopher Dodd

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. I thank my colleague. It is a very good suggestion; once again, a very good suggestion. The door is open for business. If anyone has amendments, we would like to have Members come over and offer the amendment. In the meantime, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DODD. Yes, I withhold.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, if my colleague will yield, he raises a very good point. In fact, I had a discussion with Senator Dorgan on a similar issue, but the same point of an equity interest involving the cost of premiums where you have a very well-built levee and should the premium be the same as one with a 50-year-old levee--that is a legitimate point, it seems to me. We talked earlier with Senator Vitter about costs and values. We disagree with him on that issue, but he makes a case, as the Senator from South Carolina does, that we need to strike this balance well so we are not locking in permanent costs, and not also falsely contributing to a rise in the cost of real estate in a time when we are dealing with oversupply and trying to move properties. I am sympathetic with what my colleague is trying to achieve. There is an equity interest he has identified that I think has legitimacy. The question is, How do we satisfy that in a actuarially sound program? I commend him for the idea. I am grateful to him for withdrawing the amendment. It gives us a chance to work on it and examine it in a way that will hopefully satisfy him. I cannot promise him this, obviously, because the Senator from Alabama and I have to deal with the House. I come with an open mind to the equity issue he raises with his amendment.

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that no further amendments be in order except as provided in the previous agreement with respect to the McConnell and Reid amendments; that the previous order with respect to rollcall votes on Monday, May 12, be modified to reflect that the previously ordered votes occur on Tuesday, May 13, after the Senate convenes and following the opening sequence of events, there be 60 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled between the leaders, or their designees, prior to the commencement of the votes ordered under a previous order; that prior to each vote there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled in the usual form; that after the first vote in the sequence, each succeeding vote be limited to 10 minutes in duration; that other provisions of the previous order remain in effect; provided further that if cloture is invoked on the motion to proceed to H.R. 980, then all postcloture time be yielded back, the motion to proceed be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DODD. Madam President, after the vote on the Durbin amendment, there will be no further votes today, no session on Friday, and no votes on Monday. Let me turn to the Senator from Illinois.

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I think we are prepared to vote on the Durbin amendment.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 8, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to hold a hearing entitled, ``Goods Movement on our Nation's Highways.''

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 8, 2008, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``More Work, Less Resources: Social Security Field Offices Struggle to Deliver Service to the Public''.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, my colleague from Louisiana would like to enter into a discussion. Before we make any additional motions, I yield the floor to my colleague.

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

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Senator Shelby, my ranking member, will be here shortly. We now invite Members to come and offer amendments. We would like to get time agreements, if we could, under each amendment so we could give our colleagues an indication of how much time may be necessary.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I call up the substitute amendment and ask for its consideration.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, we are about to go into recess here for the weekly lunches. I say to my colleague from Mississippi, Senator Wicker, and those who are interested in the addition of wind coverage in this flood insurance bill, I am not sure of the fate of this bill now in light of some of the motions that have been filed on a bill where I hoped we could deal straightforwardly with flood insurance issues. So it may all have come to naught, anyway, in all of this, which I regret deeply. But putting aside that possibility, I want to respond briefly on the wind request. I am very sympathetic to this request. It is a very legitimate issue to be raised about the damage that wind does. There was some $17 billion in claims on flood, of course; in fact, more than that. We are in arrears in that amount. We have no idea what the cost of this program would be with wind, if we add wind. That is my problem with agreeing to the amendment of Senator Wicker and others. All of us who live in coastal States are fully aware of the kind of damage wind can produce. But in candor to my colleagues, if they turn to me and say to me: ``How much does this cost?'' I cannot answer. I am stymied in a sense to respond to the question. The estimates run high and low. What I am committed to doing--and I want my colleague from Mississippi and others to know this--we have a commission we have adopted in this legislation specifically for the purpose to getting at the bottom of this so we can develop a program that clearly would cover those kinds of circumstances. There will be more debate and discussion. But I say to him, in candor, I am sympathetic. He makes a point I have made and others have made over the years, to those of us who live within 100 miles, as so much of the country does, of our coastal regions. I have listened to Gene Taylor, a Congressman from Mississippi. He has come to my office and laid this out for me in detail. Senator Schumer of New York has talked about it, as well as Senator Martinez has talked about it, the damage done in their respective constituencies as a result of wind damage. The simple problem I have, if one of my colleagues turns to me and says: Can you tell me what this will cost under the program? I cannot answer the question. We are right now trying to, of course, excuse the $17 billion worth of debt that FEMA owes. That is part of the premium costs people are paying in. We need to get a program in place, because on June 1 hurricane season starts. In the absence of any program at all, this entire expense can fall in the taxpayers' laps. We are all painfully aware of how damaging Mother Nature can be. The headlines of every newspaper in the country today are of course about the devastation in Myanmar where thousands have lost their lives. I presume with 120-mile-an-hour winds that ripped through these communities, it was not only flood damage that caused the tremendous destruction. This can happen. It is happening all over the globe these days. So we need to address this. But in terms of this bill and trying get this piece done, it poses a significant burden for me as the chairman of this committee. This bill passed out of our committee unanimously and not without expressions being made by Senators Schumer and Martinez about the wind issue. Again, I am sensitive to their concerns. The flood program covers 5.5 million homes and businesses, and the wind program would substantially increase the number of policies provided by the Federal Government, taxing the administration of the program and putting taxpayers on the hook for greater losses, without any question. In 2005, the hurricanes resulted in $17 billion in flood claims, an amount that completely overwhelmed the flood program. We collect $2.5 billion in premiums each year. About $1 billion of that is administrative costs. So when you are down to a fraction, you get $17 billion in claims on flood, how much would you have to raise those premiums to include the potential wind, where wind damage was five times that of flood in 2005, in those hurricanes that ripped through? Again, I do not know the answer to those questions in terms of cost and what it would be. But it could literally price the program out of the possibility of people affording it. And what makes the program work is that people pay into it here that allows us to deal with these kinds of catastrophes without going to the Federal Treasury to pay for them. So an expansion of this size could literally overwhelm this program, the flood insurance that is at a significant risk of sinking under the weight of wind. Flood insurance is already in a precarious position. I want to make sure anything we do here will work to stabilize that program. I am committed to finding a solution. In fact, had it not been for the housing crisis I have been literally spending 98 percent of my time on--and the Presiding Officer is a member of our committee--we are consumed with this issue of how we deal with foreclosures, which is also a problem, I might add, in some of the very States we are talking about that are facing these problems coming to hurricane season. We would have spent a substantial amount of our time on these related issues, the catastrophic issues our colleagues from Florida talk about, my good friend, Bill Nelson, raises all the time that the people of Florida care deeply about. We will get to that. The problem is that the window is closing on our time to do things. This program expires in September, the flood insurance program--there is no program. So we have a limited window to get this right. I deeply regret that people have come over offering cloture motions. The energy issue is huge. But when you end up messing up a piece of legislation such as this, despite my offers to everyone to have up-or- down votes on related amendments, to wind and flood and these problems here, it does not help. An awful lot of people are going to get hurt. An awful lot of costs are going to go up. A lot of damage is going to be done because we cannot spend 24 hours around here doing one thing, and that is deal with flood insurance.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 3:15 p.m., the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the following amendments: Wicker amendment No. 4719, the Vitter amendment No. 4722, and the Vitter amendment No. 4723. Further, I ask that there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided between the two votes and that there be no second-degree amendments in order prior to the vote. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that the first vote be a 15-minute rollcall vote and the remaining votes be 10- minute votes.

Mr. DODD. Senator Wicker and two amendments offered by Senator Vitter. I don't have the numbers in front of me.

Mr. DODD. Pending the agreement on that, at the conclusion of those three votes, the Senator from New Mexico be recognized for 15 minutes to talk about his amendment--assuming we can get an agreement to have a vote at 3:15.

Mr. DODD. Let me try to get an agreement here. One step at a time. The Senator from Louisiana wants to be heard.

Mr. DODD. Can I interrupt you for a minute?

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 6 p.m., the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the following amendments: Wicker amendment No. 4719; Vitter amendment No. 4722; Vitter amendment No. 4723; Landrieu amendment No. 4705, as modified further; further, I ask that there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to each vote and that there be no second-degree amendments in order prior to the votes. Finally, I ask consent that the first vote be a 15-minute rollcall vote and the remaining votes be 10-minute votes.

Mr. DODD. I thank the Chair and my colleague.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, in light of these objections, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 275, H.R. 980, and I send a cloture motion to the desk. cloture motion

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 7, 2008, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Turmoil in the Credit Markets: Examining the Regulation of Investment Banks by the Securities and Exchange Commission.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 7, 2008, at 9:30 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 7, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.