Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the rest of today was spent on a very important initiative that was really long overdue. That was addressing the issue of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. I very much appreciate the Democratic leadership working with us to have a unanimous consent agreement today where we could begin this morning and continue straight through in a very orderly way, have very good debate, very good amendments on the floor of the Senate, and then, 8 hours after we began, to come to a conclusion with a vote that will have a huge impact, an impact on victims of violence that were protected in some States but in many States were not. The issue at hand really boiled down to that single question, that when a pregnant woman is murdered along with her unborn baby, is there one victim or are there two? All of this is very simple. It is simple to me in terms of understanding it, but also simple in that it applies so directly to humanity. There is a case that I never talked about on the floor today. It came to mind this afternoon in a press conference later where there were four families that were victims of violence, and they told their stories. It was very powerful. I am not sure if it was captured by the news cameras there or not, or if many people will see it--very powerful stories. But it did remind me of a story, a recent case in my own State of Tennessee. It was an early morning in January, and two young men gunned down Tracey Owens on an empty street in south Nashville. Tracey was between 38 and 40 weeks pregnant, just about ready to deliver, could have delivered any day. The perpetrators said they believed they had hit the pregnant woman with their truck and they were afraid they would get in trouble. So they stopped and they got out, and as Tracey was laying there crying out for help, one of the assailants just looked at her and said: Here is your help. And with that, he shot her in the abdomen, actually shot her five times with a .22-caliber pistol. One of those bullets actually hit the baby and she was about ready to deliver. After murdering Tracey and her unborn baby, the two men went back to an ex-girlfriend's apartment. They cleaned the weapon off, and then they fell asleep. They were picked up after a motorist found Tracey's body and a witness at the scene told investigators they had seen the two men shooting at parked cars. Investigators quickly found the culprits, and they quickly confessed. The perpetrators now sit in jail awaiting the grand jury. A police detective in the case said: In my 22 years on the job, I have never seen anyone executed--and I mean executed--because someone thought they had hit the person with a vehicle. Tennessee is one of 29 States with a fetal homicide law on the books. So then the question arises, was Tracey's baby, who was only days away from delivery, also slain? That is what this bill was about today. That is what this act was about. That is why it is so important that this body responded and responded so positively with the final vote, now just an hour or an hour and a half ago. The answer to that question to me is simple. I think it is simple. Ultimately, no matter how you voted today, the answer is straightforward. The reason why I use this example is because it is so obvious. You only have to look at the autopsy results themselves. The medical examiner did not examine just Tracey alone; she examined the baby as well. Indeed, that is how we know that the baby was shot by one of those five shots. That little baby was hit. And common sense tells us that in examining the murder victims, the coroner was faced not just with one dead body but with two dead bodies. We have groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union which opposed the bill, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. They said that counting two victims is a ``dangerous attempt to separate a woman from her fetus in the eyes of the law.'' In other words, they tried to cast this as an abortion issue. One of the wonderful things about the discussion today is that everytime someone tried to cast it as an abortion issue, that was debunked and was made very clear that this is not an abortion issue. When a husband intentionally punches his expectant wife in the abdomen with the express purpose of causing a miscarriage, it is he who is separating the woman from the fetus. I would argue that when a boyfriend tires of his pregnant girlfriend and hires an assassin to dispose of the girlfriend and the baby, he is killing two human beings. One may even argue that the baby is in fact-- and many times is--the primary target. But we don't need to examine the motives of the perpetrators in these real life cases to reach those conclusions. Even if an assailant is unaware of his victim's pregnancy, should he, the perpetrator, decide whether or not the baby exists? Should we accept that because he didn't know when he was killing one person he was snuffing out the life of a second, there is no second crime? The Unborn Victims of Violence Act does. And now we know it is going to go to the President. This was the exact same act that passed in the House of Representatives and, thus, we know there is no stopping this one. It is going to go to the President. This act protects the rights of the baby to come into this world as the mother intends, and it holds the criminal responsible for endangering the life and the health of the child. We did have an amendment today from the senior Senator from California that was offered that said it was sufficient to add special penalties for attacking a woman who is pregnant. Indeed, it really pushed aside the intent of the underlying bill and said it is sufficient to add special penalties for attacking a woman who is pregnant. And tougher laws will assuage the feelings of the devastated family and compensate the mother for her sense of loss. All of that misses the point, the heart and soul of this underlying legislation. The harmed child is not notional. The harmed child is not a sense. The harmed child is not an emotion. The baby is real and the loss is real. Again, I wish my colleagues could have heard today the four families who suffered such real and tragic losses. The second life has been harmed, whether intentional or not. Verbal evasions and euphemisms simply cannot hide this plain fact. I think about an expectant mother, her excitement about her family, her future family, how she starts to show, and even strangers, when she walks by, begin to smile and ask, ``When is the baby due?'' You cannot help but think of friends who are throwing showers or the metro rider who stands up and offers his seat for that expectant mother. Our natural reaction is to celebrate the miracle of life and offer our love and compassion, not for a theory, or a theoretical baby, but for an actual baby--a baby we hope will be born and will be healthy. Well, this act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which now is going to be the law of the land, recognizes the simple reality. It is not about abortion, as its opponents took great pains to argue but which was debunked today. It doesn't undermine the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, as even pro- choice legal scholars admit. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is about simple humanity, simple reality. A child in the womb, whether you call it a baby or a fetus, is alive, it is real, and it deserves our best efforts to protect it from criminal harm, and with the action of this body today, and with the action of the House of Representatives in the past, this act will become the law of the land, soon to be signed by the President of the United States.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Friday, March 26. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and that there then be a period for morning business with Senators to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. The Senate will be in session tomorrow. However, no rollcall votes will occur. On Monday, the Senate will begin consideration of the welfare authorization bill. The chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee will be here on Monday to begin the amendment process on the bill. I do encourage all Senators who have amendments to contact the bill managers as soon as possible. As announced earlier, there will be no rollcall votes on Monday, but Senators are encouraged to come to the floor on Monday in order to make progress on the bill. I again want to congratulate Senators DeWine and Graham of South Carolina and all of the Members who participated in today's debate on the Unborn Victims of Violence bill. I congratulate all of them on the passage of the bill which will go to the President's desk for his signature.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, it has been a satisfying day. Shortly, I will finish the day with a third issue which means a great deal to me. I will be asking unanimous consent for action on a bill that promotes organ donation, and for other purposes. I would like to close on that third topic. The bill is called the Organ Donation and Recovery Improvement Act. For the 10, 12, to 15 years before I came to the Senate, that is what I had the privilege of doing, transplanting hearts and lungs together, for end stage disease, for people who would otherwise die but had the opportunity and blessing to be able to have taken out those diseased organs--out of somebody who otherwise would die usually within 3 to 6 months, and replace those with organs that would allow them to live 10, 15, 20, or 40 years. It is marvelous what American medicine and science can do generally, but also that the good Lord allows that miraculous procedure to happen today. It was only imagined not too long ago. This particular bill, which we will be passing shortly, represents the most significant reforms to organ donation in over a decade. It improves research, improves public awareness, and helps us improve the process, which makes organ transplantation possible. It is not hard to take the diseased organs out. The real challenge we have is finding the available, appropriate organs to transplant, actually implant into that chest. That is the shortage. People are dying every day, waiting for a heart, waiting for a lung, waiting for kidneys, a liver, or a pancreas, and the problem is the shortage of donors. But in truth, there are plenty of donors out there. It is how you get this potential supply to meet this huge demand. Right now, the supply is too small. When the demand is high, all these people are dying. If we increase the supply, these people begin to live. It is as simple as that. This legislation moves us in that direction. I want to applaud the work of Senator Chris Dodd, our colleague from Connecticut, who helped lead the fight to pass this legislation in the Senate, and also our colleague from New Hampshire, Judd Gregg, chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, Pensions Committee, for his support. This particular bill that will pass tonight was passed by the House of Representatives yesterday. I recognize the leadership of Representative Bilirakis and Billy Tauzin, who have been instrumental in leading this initiative in the House. Organ donation is one of the most challenging issues we face today because of this supply-demand issue. The real supply is bigger than the realized supply, and that is what this bill sets out to achieve. About 82,000 to 84,000 people are waiting today for an organ to become available. Many will become available tonight--hopefully, a lot-- tomorrow, and every day. But it is not enough. You have people dying. I will be speaking principally, using figures on America, the U.S. While organ donations increased by 7.5 percent since 2002, it is a small increase. The 84,000 people waiting have far outstripped that in terms of the number of people added to the waiting list. By improving public awareness to encourage organ donation, we literally save lives, hundreds and thousands of lives. This legislation takes a comprehensive approach. It will not solve the problem, but it is a comprehensive approach to increase organ donation and, at the same time, improving the overall efficiency of the organ donation process. I believe patients and families will soon benefit from this very important legislation tonight.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I now ask for their second reading, and in order to place the bills on the calendar under rule XIV, I object to further proceedings on these matters en bloc.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I understand there are three bills at the desk, and I ask that they be read for the first time en bloc.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following treaties on today's Executive Calendar: Nos. 14 and 15. I further ask unanimous consent that the treaties be considered as having passed through their various parliamentary stages, up to and including the presentation of the resolutions of ratification; that any statements relating to the treaties be printed in the Congressional Record as if read; and that the Senate take one vote on the resolutions of ratification, to be considered as separate votes; further, that when the resolutions of ratification are voted on, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be notified of the Senate's action, and that following the disposition of the treaties, the Senate return to legislative session.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask for a division vote on the resolutions of ratification.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 2201 be star printed with the change which is at the desk.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Madam President, I will have more to say later, but I do want to express my disappointment by the vote today, especially the actions of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. This legislation is essential if we are to accelerate the rate of job creation. The JOBS bill will bring our trade and tax laws into compliance with our trade agreements. It will also provide badly needed reforms to further stimulate manufacturing growth. As I mentioned prior to the vote, the bill was developed in a strong bipartisan fashion under the superb leadership of Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus. It was voted out of the Finance Committee 19 to 2. Every single Democrat on the committee voted in favor of the bill. That is why I am very concerned that the Democrats have now decided to filibuster yet another bill for what may be election year partisan purposes. It is a terrible mistake and one that will have a detrimental impact on the recovery of U.S. manufacturing jobs. Every day we delay action on this bill is another day American jobs are at risk, and every day of delay is inexcusable. As I mentioned, the European tariffs have already been imposed. The tariffs, in effect, are a European tax on U.S. manufacturers. By voting against cloture, our Democratic colleagues have voted, in effect, in support of the Euro tax on U.S. manufacturing. I had hoped our colleagues on the other side of the aisle would have been able to find the wherewithal to do the right thing. The Senate would pass this legislation by a wide margin if we could get through this election year posturing. I look forward to working with the leadership on this particular bill to see exactly where we should go from here and plan on doing that over the next couple of hours as we go forward.

Mr. FRIST. Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I know we will be starting to vote shortly, but I did want to make a few comments on behalf of myself and leadership because today we do have a chance to help U.S. manufacturers. The legislation was developed in an admirable, bipartisan way, with the two managers participating equally. Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus have worked very closely to develop this bill. I spent time with both of them yesterday, and the leadership on the other side of the aisle. We are working very hard. I would have liked not to have to have this cloture vote today, but it is clear it is the only way to get people moving along in a direction so we can work toward completion. This bill came out of the Finance Committee 19 to 2. It was cosponsored by the distinguished minority leader. It is a good bill. Every day we delay action has implications. European tariffs have already been imposed. In truth, these European tariffs are a European tax on U.S. manufacturers. The Europeans could be imposing right now a full $4 billion in sanctions that they have approved. So far they have not done so. They have chosen to begin with a 5-percent tariff which increases 1 percent each month. They have acted with restraint because they believed we would act quickly and that we would act responsibly. I believe this vote, indeed, will be a test of that faith. As has been discussed, we compete in a global economy. Some have suggested that we close our borders to the world. Some think we can retreat into economic isolationism. But we can't. We all, deep inside, know that. We should not. It would be a declaration of defeat. We are the most innovative society in the world. Our workers lead in productivity. We lead the world. If we are allowed to compete on a fair playing field, U.S. manufacturers will, indeed, lead the world. I think back to my home State of Tennessee. We compete well in the world economy. Exports increased 26 percent since 1997. Those exports support 232,000 jobs in Tennessee, and that is about 10 percent of the Tennessee workforce. We all know--again, this has been discussed over the last several days--U.S. manufacturers are increasingly burdened by unnecessary costs. A study by the National Association of Manufacturers on the effect of rising costs to the United States found that the costs imposed by Government have done the most damage to our U.S. manufacturing base. That study concluded that, while U.S. manufacturers have many challenges in today's global business environment, domestically imposed Government costs are damaging U.S. manufacturers and harming workers more than any foreign competitor. So now, when we can least afford it, we have this new Euro tax on U.S. manufacturers. Survey after survey of U.S. businesses confirms the same thing: The incentive to move jobs overseas is the direct result of the escalating cost of doing business right here at home. If we want to reverse the trend toward outsourcing, we have to address the issues that are motivating American companies to go offshore. Like all of my other colleagues, I know this is an election year. Like everyone else in this Chamber and most within the sound of my voice, I know in an election year there is this temptation to view everything through a political lens. There is a time and a place for politics. This is simply not that time and not that place. I urge my colleagues to come together and to do the right thing for American manufacturers, for American jobs, and for the American spirit. Every one of us should vote for cloture and be proud of that vote to repeal this Euro tax. We must move forward quickly on this critical legislation. We cannot afford to wait and risk having the world pass us by. cloture motion

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Texas, Senator Hutchison, for proposing an amendment to change the Federal Tax Code to permit those citizens that live in States without State income taxes to deduct State and local sales tax payments. The current law allows deductions from Federal income tax for State and local income and property taxes, but not for local and State sales tax. That is unfair. Tennesseans should not be unfairly penalized at tax time simply because the State decided to have a sales tax, not an income tax. Prior to 1986, individuals were permitted to deduct all State and local taxes on their Federal tax returns. But, when Congress enacted the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the deduction for State sales taxes was eliminated. My colleague introduced this amendment, which I cosponsored, because she and I both want to draw attention to this injustice. I also appeal to my colleagues' sense of fairness and ask that, in the future, my colleagues work with me to try to fix this problem. Again, citizens should not be penalized simply because their State does not have an income tax. Tennesseans could save more than $470 million on their Federal tax bills if they could deduct sales taxes. This retained income could provide an important economic stimulus to Tennessee. Changing the Code to permit deduction of sales tax is also consistent with the principle of fundamental fairness to all taxpayers. When deductibility for State sales taxes was eliminated in 1986, but deductibility for State income taxes was retained, it was a political compromise with no foundation in policy. It is long past time to rectify this fundamentally unfair and counter-productive result. I thank my colleague from Texas for submitting her amendment and drawing attention to this fundamentally unfair provision of the Federal Tax Code. I look forward to working with her on this issue in the future. amendment no. 2926 to amendment no. 2898

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, at this juncture I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to consideration of calendar No. 403, S. 1218.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Hollings amendment at the desk be agreed to, the committee substitute, as amended, be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read the third time and passed, the motions to reconsider be laid on the table en bloc, and any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, before we close tonight, I wanted to make a couple of comments. One has to do with a wonderful ceremony that we had today in the Rotunda where the Congressional Gold Medal ceremony honoring Dr. Dorothy Height was conducted. These ceremonies are a wonderful time in the sense that it allows each of us to go back as individuals and really celebrate, whether it is points in history, great leaders, icons, or pioneers, and indeed today in recognizing Dr. Dorothy Height we had all of those--a true icon, a pioneer, a leader, a hero, a woman who has had an indelible impact on not only one generation but multiple generations. In addition, today was her 92nd birthday. It had a special meaning for me in that just about a month ago I had the opportunity to lead a delegation of 10 Senators, including the distinguished Senator who occupies the chair at this juncture, on a civil rights pilgrimage through Alabama, and it continued on up into Tennessee. Over that period of several days, we had the opportunity to walk in the steps of true giants. I had the opportunity to spend some time today with, indeed, one of those giants of an era of which we are true beneficiaries, and that was Dr. Dorothy Height. She was the only woman among the big six who planned and led the civil rights movement, an extraordinary American, a woman who was truly fearless in a time of fear, a woman who was an optimist when the future was bleak, a woman who brought people together when others were fighting to keep society apart. As we sat in that wonderful Rotunda today, thinking about the great history and great patriots who are portrayed in the Rotunda, with the large dome above, you could not help but think how appropriate it was for her to join those patriots in the struggle she led, in large part the struggle for equality and that endowment of that right of life and liberty and pursuit of happiness. It was wonderful to be able to participate in that ceremony. I wanted, as we wait to close here shortly, to once again honor Dr. Dorothy Height for her tremendous leadership over many years. She said, right before the end of that ceremony, in her closing remarks, until the Good Lord is done with her, she has a lot more to do and people can expect her to continue to do a lot along the way.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Commerce Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2584, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the Collins and McCain amendments at the desk be agreed to en bloc, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, and the motions to reconsider be laid on the table.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Without objection, and I will not be making a statement this morning and would recommend that we go straight to morning business at the appropriate time.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, tomorrow, following morning business as just outlined, the Senate will begin consideration of the Unborn Victims of Violence bill. We had previously worked out a unanimous consent agreement and under that agreement there will only be two amendments in order, one by Senator Feinstein and one by Senator Murray. In addition, there will be a total of 6\1/2\ hours of debate on the amendments and underlying bill. Senators should expect several rollcall votes during tomorrow's session as the Senate completes action on the Unborn Victims of Violence bill. Mr. President, I will turn to the assistant leader if he has any comments to make. Before we close, I do want to say I was disappointed in the earlier cloture vote today. As has been outlined, the sanctions have begun. They began on March 1 and will continue with each passing day, just underscoring the urgency that we must address this JOBS bill, the FSC/ ETI bill, the bill we know now will jumpstart jobs. I did enter a motion to reconsider that vote. I hope Members will all rethink their desire to offer unrelated amendments and bring unrelated issues to the floor which have stalled the measure. If we are unable to come to some resolution, we will do what we are doing now and proceed to other Senate business with the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. If we are able to refocus--and I pledge to work with the Democratic leadership over the ensuing hours and days--our attention on the underlying measure, then we will return to that bill and finish it as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, let me very briefly respond. The implication is one amendment is holding this bill up. It is not. Reference has been made to overtime over the course of the day. As I said in yesterday's opening statement and closing statement, we are willing to consider other amendments on the bill that are really germane to the bill. It is not just one amendment. These are message amendments, and we have voted on overtime in the past. There are other amendments which the other side of the aisle wants to bring to make messages and to score political points. I notice it did start at 75, and maybe it is down to 15 or 12 or 10. It is not down to just one amendment. I pledge to keep working both sides of the aisle to get it down to a manageable number. Nobody is locked down on what we will do or what we will not do. I want to be able to complete this bill by staying on the bill itself. There is going to be a lot of legislation coming through. I believe we have a good agreement for tomorrow to proceed and finish that bill. I think next week we may be going to the welfare bill, if we can't come back to the JOBS bill. There is going to be plenty of opportunity to offer these messages, politically driven amendments. This FSC/ETI Jumpstart JOBS bill is not the bill to do it on. It is an important bill. We need to finish it expeditiously. We have Members on record today who want to finish this bill as written. It came out of committee 19 to 2 under the excellent leadership of Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus, who wants to continue to offer a whole number of message amendments--not just one, and not just two, and not just overtime. I say all of that so there is no misunderstanding. I will continue to fight to get this bill through. I am disappointed by the vote today and by actions which have held that up. As majority leader, I need to keep the body moving along. We are going to address, beginning tomorrow morning, a fresh issue on the floor of the Senate. I think we will have a very good debate, and we will complete action on that bill. If we can work through this, hopefully we can come back and address the JOBS bill in an orderly way. Then we can really have the end in sight and try to get it down to a manageable number of amendments that relate to the bill.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, March 25. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then begin a period of morning business until 10:30 a.m., with the first half of the time under the control of the majority leader or his designee and the second half of the time under the control of the Democratic leader or his designee; provided that at 10:30 a.m. the Senate begin consideration of H.R. 1997, the Unborn Victims of Violence bill, as provided under the previous order.