Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, tomorrow morning the Senate will debate the cloture motion relating to the Pryor nomination until 10 a.m. Following that debate, the Senate will proceed with the cloture vote. Therefore, the first vote of tomorrow's session will be at 10 a.m. Following the cloture vote, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 14, the Energy bill. It is the chairman's intention to continue to work through amendments tomorrow, and Senators should expect votes throughout the day. As a reminder, cloture was filed in relation to the bill tonight, and that cloture vote will occur on Friday morning. We have a lot of work to complete prior to adjourning for the scheduled recess. I encourage all Members to make themselves available for a busy day tomorrow.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will resume consideration of S. 14, the Energy bill. Under the order, the Cantwell second-degree amendment to the electricity amendment will be debated for 2\1/2\ hours. Following the disposition of that amendment, we will have 60 minutes prior to the cloture vote on the Estrada nomination. This will be the seventh cloture vote on his nomination. Following the cloture vote, we will resume the electricity amendment and, hopefully, we will reach an agreement for the consideration of the two Bingaman second-degree amendments on electricity. The chairman has stated it is his desire for the Senate to work its will on those second degrees and then vote on the underlying electricity amendment. We hope to reach an agreement to allow for that to occur at a reasonable time this afternoon. In addition, there have been discussions about debating and voting in relation to several climate-related amendments during today's session. I certainly hope we can reach reasonable time limits on the amendments as we go forward, so we can have a productive day on the Energy bill. Senators should be prepared to work into the evening with votes as we move through the remaining amendments.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, first of all, I appreciate the assistance of the distinguished assistant leader on the other side of the aisle in moving the Energy bill forward. We had the opportunity yesterday to have a bipartisan meeting with the President of the United States, who once again called for this body to address energy as expeditiously as possible, allowing appropriate time for debate and amendment. The President set out his energy policy 2 years and 2 or 3 months ago and has called upon this body to work its will. The House has done that and passed a bill. We have not done that and the American people deserve it. That is why we brought this bill to the floor on May 6. That is why we have spent 17 days on the bill. That is why we are working as hard as we can to complete this bill in the next 3 days. I think we are working well together. It is a complex bill. We debated days and days last year. It has been taken through committee this year and marked up and brought to the floor appropriately. We are making real progress there. The issue of judges, though, bothers me. It has been brought up every time I say we have to keep moving forward and that we owe it to the American people on this Energy bill, and then we have a few votes on judges. That is brought up as if that is slowing down progress on the Energy bill. It disturbs me. First of all, all we are saying is let's give Miguel Estrada an up- or-down vote. That is all we want. If you don't like him and you want to vote against him, do it. We think that when judicial nominees come from the White House to us under advice and consent, we deserve the opportunity to express that advice and consent, and the only way we can do that is by voting. Each seat here has one vote. Let people express their will and, if the nominees are successful, fine. If not, we will move on. That is what we are saying. I also want to make it clear on what we are having to do this week. Clotures filed on our side of the aisle don't require any debate. They require a vote and that is all we ask. Again, we want to keep things moving. We have been willing, as I said time and time again, to stack the votes among the other energy amendment votes. We don't require the debate or time. It is the other side that is requiring the time. Another issue we have not really talked about, at least on the floor, is these votes on district judges, which is essentially unprecedented, which is being required of us today, if we look to the past, if we compare it to the past. The whole issue on both sides of the aisle is that many, if not most, of these could be approved by unanimous consent. Many, if not all, confirmations have to be by rollcall votes. Because there is this call from the other side of the aisle for rollcall votes, which traditionally in this body have been handled, for the most part, through voice votes, we are having to factor those rollcall votes, which take time, into the Senate schedule if we are going to demand justice around the country. If we do not get these judges confirmed, justice is, in effect, delayed. So they put a huge demand on us--really me as majority leader--demanding what has not been done in the past, rollcall votes, which take time and we have to factor them into the schedule, which does delay our schedule unnecessarily, and it means later hours at night and starting 30 minutes earlier in the day to accommodate the demands they are putting on us. That, to me, is challenging. It is challenging that we work on this important Energy bill and, for the most part, these rollcall votes on the district judges are challenging. To make that point, if we go back to the 105th Congress, there were 100 judges--20 circuit and 80 district judges. In that Congress, there were 25 rollcall votes--7 circuit, 18 district. So on about 25 percent of the 100 judges, rollcall votes were required. If we move to the 106th Congress, there were 72 judges confirmed, and 18 of those were rollcall votes. If we go to the 107th Congress, there were 100 confirmed and 59 rollcall votes. And if we go to the 108th Congress, the present Congress, 37 judges have been confirmed. We have had to have 28 rollcall votes. What is interesting is that of those 28 rollcall votes, 23 were unanimous. So we had rollcall votes, and all 100 Senators, or everybody present and voting, voted to confirm. Eighty-two percent of them were unanimous. We can see this trend going back to the 104th Congress when there were 73 judges confirmed, and there were zero rollcall votes. What has happened in this Congress, because of the request from the other side of the aisle, is this demand that all of these judges, not just the circuit judges, but the district judges, have rollcall votes. Therefore, it has made it very difficult. When it is brought up that our voting on judicial nominees is slowing the work of the Senate down, I ask the other side to at least consider what happened in the 103rd, 104th, and 105th Congresses in terms of the number of rollcall votes required.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am going to come back later today and comment on the fact that today is the anniversary of Medicare. I know we want to move on to the pending bill. It was a historic day in 1965. On this day, President Johnson took the historic and bold action of signing Medicare into law. Since that time, Medicare has helped millions of seniors cover their health care needs, but Medicare, in 1965, was designed to treat episodic illness and did not include the most powerful tool in medicine today--prescription drugs. I mention this only because we have an opportunity before us, this body already having spoken its will in passing a comprehensive Medicare reform bill that strengthens and improves Medicare and includes prescription drugs. The House has done likewise. We are currently in conference. By working in conference, we will greatly strengthen and improve Medicare. Over the course of the day, I know there will be other statements, but there will also be a service and a statement about Medicare at the White House later today. We have a great opportunity before us. I wish to share with my colleagues that the conference is going well and sometime after we come back from the recess, we will have a bill to bring back to this body.

Mr. FRIST. Yes.

Mr. FRIST. Yes, 1965; 38 years ago.

Mr. FRIST. Well said.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. All time has expired?

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, just briefly, I wish to respond because I can tell both in opening and closing the Senate each day that we are going to come down to this same sort of dialog of our side of the aisle wants to move this bill through and the Democrats, or the other side of the aisle, are saying we are not slow walking this and we need more time. There is going to be sort of the setup at the end of the week with the other side saying we just haven't had enough time. I want to make it clear to my colleagues that for the last month this bill came before the Senate 16 days. This is the 16th day on the bill. We are going to spend every day this week on it. These are not new issues. These are issues that we debated, that we talked about, that we hashed and rehashed last year. Indeed, it was 7 weeks and 24 days, and the issues are essentially the same issues. In this Congress, we have gone through the committee itself, and it came to the floor on May 6. We spent 16 days on it. We are going to spend the next 4 days. When I hear these statements either from the Democratic leader last night or the potential of a charge at the end of the week that, Well, Democrats just didn't want to finish the bill--those are the Democratic leader's words--I am beginning to think there is some delaying, there is some slow walking. I say that because I set up this schedule a long time ago. We are now early in the week for this final week being spent on the bill. Yesterday we had the other side of the aisle objecting to setting aside CAFE and laying down the electricity bill. Yet we just had the assistant Democratic leader and the Democratic leader last night say, Well, we just got it on Friday. The whole point of laying it down yesterday was so we could look at it, so we could debate it, and so we could talk about it. Yet we spent all day yesterday--or they spent all day--objecting to laying it down and to setting other amendments aside. It is too early to get into this sort of finger pointing back and forth. But I can tell from the Democratic leader's statements--no, we are not slow walking it, that you are going to accuse us of slow walking it--all I can say is that it is early enough in the week, and if we stay focused and if we expeditiously and systematically address the issues, we can complete this bill. I encourage both sides of the aisle to allow the managers to deal with these amendments and organize in a systematic way so we can debate. It is our No. 1 priority this week so that we can do what the American people deserve, we can pass a bill which has been adequately debated and appropriately amended and which fulfills what both sides of the aisle want to do; that is, to develop good energy policy. I yield the floor.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I want to very briefly comment on the Energy bill. I did not make a statement on the bill and indeed was a bit disappointed on the progress we made yesterday for lots of extenuating circumstances. I do want to point out my absolute commitment to aggressively addressing the bill this morning and over the course of this week. Today, we do begin our 16th day, our 16th day of consideration on this Energy bill on the Senate floor. Just to point out to my colleagues, 16 days is longer than we spent on any other single bill this year. In fact, it is twice as long as we spent on the Medicare reform bill, the Medicare prescription drug bill. I say that only to encourage my colleagues to come to the floor, offer amendments, allow us to offer the amendments so that we can debate and vote on the amendments that people are at least considering. Time and time again the statement is made that we spent 7 weeks on this bill last year on the Senate floor. Seven weeks, that was 24 days that we spent last year, and last year the bill didn't go through committee. It was not marked up. It wasn't debated in committee. It was taken straight to the floor. Now we have a bill that was marked up, debated in committee, and now we spend 16 days on it. We need to finish this bill this week. We need to stay focused with it and we can't tolerate the sort of delays we have seen to date. We need to aggressively recognize that we have a period of this week and use the time that is available. The issue of organizing how we do these amendments and sort of getting them done procedurally is what I have been concentrating on, but I think all of us have to step back and recognize the substance of this bill is what is important. It is incumbent upon us as U.S. Senators to address an issue that has been put forth by the President. An Energy bill has been passed by the House of Representatives, and we have a bill on the Senate floor that we are debating and we must address and finish and complete this week. A strong energy policy is what Americans want. It is what Americans deserve, a policy that, indeed, balances new production with conservation, with the development of renewable resources, all of which is crucial to strengthening our economy and our national security. In terms of the economy, we know this bill will have a direct impact on the creation of jobs--not just 100,000 jobs or 300,000 or 400,000 but 500,000 jobs it is predicted this bill will create. We know what has happened with natural gas prices. We have seen what has happened with those prices just since we have been discussing this bill. Again, it calls upon us to pass this Energy bill which sets out our policy. While we have addressed issues, not as aggressively as I would like, gas prices have shot up. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has made the statement that there is no end in sight. To put this in some sort of perspective on a personal level, 80 percent of the Nation's 35,000 laundromats have raised prices in the past year due to high natural gas prices. Folks who have to take their laundry to the corner Sit and Spin are facing, every day, prices that increased over the past several weeks and months and may well increase into the future. That is why we need to respond and respond expeditiously. If you take it beyond the personal level to the industry level, the U.S. chemical companies are closing plants. They are laying off workers. They are looking to expand their own production, not domestically but expand it abroad, as a result of high prices. Next year, the United States is expected to import, to bring into this country, approximately $9 billion more in chemicals than it will export. American industry is caught between regulations, on the one hand limiting the supply of natural gas, and regulations encouraging its use on the other. The result is rising gas prices with some industries cutting jobs. Again, I want to keep coming back to jobs because it is an Energy bill, an energy security bill, but it is also a jobs bill. We find some of these industries not just cutting jobs but sometimes being priced out altogether. And, of course, consumers are being hit with higher and higher electric bills. We need to diversify our sources of energy. We must do so in a way that lessens our reliance on foreign sources. So when you summarize and step back, our energy policy should be one that is consistent with our foreign policy; that is, it is independent and it is secure. By increasing America's domestic production of clean coal, of oil and gas, nuclear, ethanol, solar, and other renewable energy sources, we increase not just our energy supply but we increase our national security. Furthermore, by passing the comprehensive energy package we will be creating jobs; as I mentioned, as many as 500,000 jobs. Indeed, the Alaskan pipeline, for example, will create at least 400,000 jobs alone. The hundreds of millions of dollars that will be invested in research and development of new technologies will not only benefit the environment, which we know will be benefited, but it also will create new jobs in engineering, in math and chemistry, science, physics. So, in summary, we cannot continue to dither or delay. We need to focus over the next 4 days on this bill, bring amendments to the chairman and ranking member, bring them to the floor for debate so we can vote. We simply cannot let the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering in any way deny the American people energy that is cleaner, that is more abundant, and, indeed, more secure. We need to take action this week for the sake of our economy, for our national security, and ultimately, and what is probably the bottom line, for our fellow Americans who are paying these bills each and every month. It is time to pass an energy policy for the 21st century. I am confident we can do so this week. I yield the floor.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will resume consideration of S. 14, the Energy bill. It is our intention this morning to reach an agreement to allow for the disposition of the two pending CAFE amendments. In addition, the Senate will conduct its third cloture vote on the Owen nomination at 12:15 today. Therefore, Senators should expect the possibility of several votes prior to the party lunches. Members will be notified when the first vote is scheduled. The Senate will recess, following the cloture vote, until 2:15 p.m. for the weekly party lunches, and for the remainder of the day the Senate will resume debate on the Energy bill. The Senate may also resume debate on the Chile and Singapore free-trade agreements. This morning we would like to lock in the agreement for the consideration of those two bills. Therefore, Senators should expect votes throughout the afternoon and into the evening.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, today Senator Alexander and I introduce legislation to award a Congressional Gold Medal to Clarksville, Tennessee native Wilma Rudolph for her contributions to women's athletics and racial equality in the United States and the world. I take a moment to say a few words about this remarkable woman. Wilma was the 20th of 22 children in her packed family. After overcoming scarlet fever, double pneumonia and polio, Wilma went onto win three Olympic gold medals in track and field. She became an international star and a hero to the people of Tennessee. Wilma showed the world that hard work and determination could overcome nearly anything. Wilma was inducted into the National Track and Field Hall of Fame in 1973 and received the Humanitarian of the Year Award of the Special Olympics in 1985. She was the first woman to ever receive the National Collegiate Athletic Association's Silver Anniversary Award in 1987. And in 1989 earned the Jackie Robinson Image Award of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Wilma remains the only woman ever to have received the National Sports Award, which she was granted in 1993. Wilma Rudolph is an inspiration to all Tennesseans and is eminently deserving of the Congressional Gold Medal. I urge my colleagues to confer this well earned honor. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, today Senator Alexander and I introduce legislation to award a Congressional Gold Medal to Clarksville, Tennessee native Wilma Rudolph for her contributions to women's athletics and racial equality in the United States and the world. I take a moment to say a few words about this remarkable woman. Wilma was the 20th of 22 children in her packed family. After overcoming scarlet fever, double pneumonia and polio, Wilma went onto win three Olympic gold medals in track and field. She became an international star and a hero to the people of Tennessee. Wilma showed the world that hard work and determination could overcome nearly anything. Wilma was inducted into the National Track and Field Hall of Fame in 1973 and received the Humanitarian of the Year Award of the Special Olympics in 1985. She was the first woman to ever receive the National Collegiate Athletic Association's Silver Anniversary Award in 1987. And in 1989 earned the Jackie Robinson Image Award of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Wilma remains the only woman ever to have received the National Sports Award, which she was granted in 1993. Wilma Rudolph is an inspiration to all Tennesseans and is eminently deserving of the Congressional Gold Medal. I urge my colleagues to confer this well earned honor. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, as in executive session I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Calendar No. 296, Earl Yeakel III, to be U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Texas; I further ask that there then be 5 minutes for debate, equally divided between Senators Hutchison and Cornyn, and 5 minutes for Senator Leahy; further, I ask that following that debate, the Senate proceed to a vote on the confirmation of the nomination, with no further intervening action or debate; finally, that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the nomination at 4:50 p.m. on Monday, under the exact same conditions.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will be in a period for the transaction of morning business for 30 minutes. Following that time, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 2555, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. We disposed of a number of amendments during yesterday's session, and I understand there are a few issues remaining. I reiterate that I hope we can expedite consideration of these amendments and proceed to final passage of this bill at an early hour today. We would then like to proceed to two additional appropriations bills this week. In addition, we have the Chile and Singapore free trade agreements that we would like to consider this week if possible. Those bills are considered under fast-track procedures and have limited debate. I hope we will not use the time allotted under the statute and we can complete those two bills prior to finishing our business this week. We will be devoting the entirety of next week to the pending Energy bill. We will have a full week's consideration, with debate and votes throughout the week. I have had the opportunity to talk with the managers of that bill, and they have been working very hard to have this bill addressed on the floor in an orderly, systematic way so that we can work toward completion of that bill beginning Monday. I do expect lengthy sessions next week as we try to complete our work on that bill, which has been pending since May 6. I also remind Senators that at 3:40 p.m. today we will observe a moment of silence to honor the memory of our two fallen Capitol Police officers, Officers Chestnut and Gibson. Members are encouraged to be in the Chamber for that moment of silence.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I also wish to mention that tomorrow the U.S. Treasury will start rolling out additional child tax credit checks of up to $400 to over 25 million taxpayers over the next 3 weeks. Millions of America's working families will be getting a well-deserved break in the form of a tax rebate from our Federal Government. In fact, in Tennessee over 525,000 taxpayers will receive these child tax credit checks. This tax relief is much deserved, and I am pleased that we are able to begin delivery of those checks. In this body, we passed the Jobs and Growth Tax Act, which is the third largest tax relief package in history, increasing that child tax credit from $600 to $1,000. We will continue to work on a whole range of issues that will strengthen our economy over time. Next week, we will be addressing energy reform, and we will continue working on such issues in the coming weeks and months as medical liability reform and a host of other legislative issues that we believe strongly will create jobs, will grow the economy, and will help American families meet their bottom line. I yield the floor.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, 5 years ago on this day, Officers J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson were killed in the line of duty defending the United States Capitol. At 3:40 p.m. on Friday afternoon, July 24th, 1998, a deranged gunman burst through what is now called the Memorial Door and shot Officer Chestnut in the head. The gunman then moved to the first floor where he attempted to enter the majority whip's office. There, he met Officer Gibson who blocked the intruder and opened fire. A gun battle ensued and Officer Gibson was fatally shot. Officers Chestnut and Gibson lost their lives that day for us, for this Capitol, for the United States of America. Officer Chestnut, a father of five, was only months away from retirement. His sister-in-law said that J.J. was ``the most wonderful man you would ever meet . . . He just wanted to enjoy his garden and enjoy his children.'' A Vietnam vet, Officer Chestnut spent 20 years in the Air Force before serving 18 years as a Capitol Police Officer. He was recognized by all of his colleagues as a dedicated, kind, and good man. John Gibson, also an 18-year veteran on the Capitol force, was a father of three. He was described by friends as generous and God- fearing. Only a few days before the shooting, he told one of his colleagues that he had never had to use his weapon, but if he did, he would be focused, and concentrate on the task at hand. Little did he know how soon he would be tested, and how valiantly he would perform in our service, in the Nation's service. Officers Chestnut and Gibson will always be remembered for their personal and professional integrity, their bravery, and their sacrifice. We honor them today with a brief moment of silence.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I now ask for the regular order with respect to S. 14.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will be in a period of morning business for an hour. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 2555, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Yesterday, we made progress, as the Senate was able to dispose of the Byrd amendment with a vote of 43 to 50 on waiving the budget. It is my understanding that this morning, at approximately 10 o'clock, Senator Boxer will be prepared to offer an amendment to the bill. Senator Cochran will be here, and it is my hope we can try to reach short time agreements on amendments that are offered as we go forward. It is our desire to finish this bill today or this evening, if necessary. That would enable the Senate to consider another appropriations measure this week prior to resuming the Energy bill next week. Again, Members should notify the managers of their intention to offer amendments to the Homeland Security bill this morning. The chairman and ranking member would then be able to discuss an order of consideration of these amendments. With the schedule announced, I will now yield myself time from my allotted time in morning business. First, let me ask the Democratic leader, through the Chair, if he has any comments on the schedule. I now yield myself my allotted time in morning business.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the Laci and Connor Peterson murders in California have brought before the American people a critical question that deserves a response: When a criminal attacks a woman who is pregnant, killing both her and her unborn child, has he killed one victim or two? I believe the answer is two. Laci Peterson was not the only person killed but her unborn baby, Connor, was also murdered. Unfortunately, there is a loophole in Federal law that does not permit prosecutors to charge suspects with killing both mother and child. Twenty-seven States have moved to close this loophole in their State laws. Indeed, California is one of those States. That is why State prosecutors have charged Scott Peterson with the deaths of his wife Laci and his son Connor. I believe it is long past time for the Senate to close this loophole for Federal crimes. We have been working with our friends across the aisle since June 26 to reach an agreement to bring up this bill but so far we have been unsuccessful. But we are not going to give up. Thus, I ask unanimous consent that, at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar item No. 89, S. 1019, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2003, under the following conditions: 2 hours of debate equally divided in the usual form; further, that no amendments be in order and that all points of order be waived; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage of the measure, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we have been working on this very important issue with the other side of the aisle, and it is absolutely critical that we address the issue, we believe, as soon as possible. Therefore, I am very pleased that we are hearing what the nature of the amendments might be. This is the first time I have heard what those amendments could possibly be. I look forward, again, to working to bring this bill to the floor as soon as possible. I am sorry that my friend from Nevada objects to bringing up this bipartisan bill now. We believe it is a critically important bill that does deserve prompt consideration. Sharon Rocha, the mother of Laci Peterson and the grandmother of Connor Peterson, has written an eloquent letter asking that the Senate quickly pass this bill, pass this bill as soon as possible. The House of Representatives, as my colleagues probably know, has passed this very bill twice but the bill keeps being blocked in the Senate. I know my colleague from Ohio, who is the sponsor of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, has been working very hard, mentioning to me almost daily the need to get this bill to the floor as soon as possible and to address this important issue. Thus, I yield to my distinguished colleague from Ohio.

Mr. FRIST. I thank my distinguished colleague from Ohio for his longstanding leadership on this particular issue. We all know the issue has been highlighted by the recent tragic events with the Peterson family. Again, both my distinguished colleague from Ohio, as well as another colleague I will turn to shortly, have been at this a long time. We appreciate their leadership and look forward to addressing this issue on the Senate floor when we have that opportunity. I would now like to turn to my colleague from South Carolina, the champion of this bill when he was in the House of Representatives before coming to the Senate. I yield to my friend from South Carolina.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, in closing, I look forward to working with the Democratic leadership in terms of bringing this to the floor of the Senate as soon as possible. It really does boil down to the fundamental question of when a criminal attacks a pregnant woman, killing both the woman and her unborn child, has there been one or two victims? That is what this legislation addresses in a very direct fashion. Mr. President, I ask that my following remarks be taken from leader time.