Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President. I will just be 30 seconds. I will respond to the comments made by my ranking member. She and I have worked so closely together, and we just have a difference of opinion about this one particular piece of this bill, which is an important piece, so I will respond to her comments in a minute. I do agree with one thing she said, which is there could be other amendments offered to maybe make this bill better. But I wish to ask my ranking member through the Chair: This amendment is pending. We are going to vote on this amendment. This amendment could potentially get 60 votes plus. If this amendment is voted in by the will of this Senate, even though she has reservations about it which she has beautifully outlined--as she always does--but if this amendment is on the line and let's say other amendments are offered and some pass and some fail, is she inclined to vote for the bill? This is the only question I am going to ask her. I will restate it. I said to the Senator from Maine, with whom I have worked very well--we have worked together, but we have a different view about this particular program. This is an amendment. I agree with her that amendments should be offered on this bill. I am hoping our leadership can work that out. If this amendment is agreed to by 60 plus--we may get 70 votes for this amendment; we don't know. We are picking up support for it. Although some people are opposed, we are getting a good amount of support for it. Does the Senator from Maine believe she could then vote for the bill?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for those comments. She has left a window of opportunity open for, hopefully, some compromises as we move through the amendments on this bill. I yield back the floor to the Senator from Rhode Island.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, before my colleague leaves the floor, I want to say I did not realize he was such a fan of Elizabeth Warren. I was really under the impression that he and some of the leaders on that side had some objections to her style of leadership. But they surely have quoted her today because she was the author of this oversight report to which they keep referring. So I am so happy to know that the Senator from South Dakota and the other Senators who have spoken think so much of Elizabeth Warren because she is the one who wrote this report that said this might look like TARP II. Now, that is what Elizabeth Warren says, and evidently my good friend from South Dakota really appreciates the leadership she is giving on this subject. Because the community bankers--not Elizabeth Warren, not bureaucrats in Washington, whom the Senator from South Dakota is defending--his own community bankers--yes, in South Dakota, his community bankers--wrote to Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, his leader, on behalf of the nearly 5,000 members of the Independent Community Bankers. A Communist group, a very liberal group this group of independent community bankers is. A big government group independent community bankers are. They have written a letter to the Senator from South Dakota. Evidently, he did not open his mail today. Madam President, they write: I urge you to retain the Small Business Lending Fund in the Small Business Jobs Act. It is the core component of this legislation.

Ms. LANDRIEU. No, I will not yield. I will say one thing to the Senator from South Dakota. If I took out the words ``big government,'' ``taxes,'' or ``regulations,'' neither the Senator from South Dakota nor most of the Members on the other side could finish a sentence, because they can't debate a specific. He gets up and starts talking about higher taxes and more regulations. This bill has tax cuts in it. This bill doesn't have any regulations in it. This is a small business lending program. My good friend, the Senator from Alabama, read the statement written by the political operatives beautifully. I am sure I will hear it on the Rush Limbaugh radio program today. I don't need a speech to read. I have hardly read one thing except the thousands of letters that are pouring in, asking us to help small business. I will say with as much respect as I can to the ranking member of the Banking Committee, because I know I heard him say this bill didn't go through the Banking Committee: I wish to agree, and thank God it didn't. Because you know the last two bills that did? One was TARP I, which nobody likes. Then TARP II came through that committee, and then the big bank regulatory bill came through that committee. So I hope the ranking member isn't trying to convince me or the Republicans that that committee has produced great legislation. I say that with respect to the chairman of the committee. I know he is going to hear this and be aggravated. But to stand up and say because the small business lending bill didn't go through the Banking Committee, which has been roundly criticized by their side for too much regulation, is more than I can stand. Thank goodness, this didn't go through the Banking Committee. It came straight from the hearts of bankers in our communities and small businesses who don't need any committee in Washington to tell them what is going on at home. They don't need any lobbyists to tell us what is going on. They can't get money. We have given out money to Wall Street. We have given out money to the big auto companies. When it comes to giving out a small $30 billion to our own community banks, the Republicans say no. Then I have to hear the Senator from Alabama and the Senator from South Dakota--and I want whoever is listening to hear this: They say this is a big government program. The money doesn't even go to the government; it goes to the community banks. It is a voluntary program to community banks, and it then goes to business. I will say again that there were Democrats who came to me and said--I am the chair of the committee--Senator, we don't trust the private sector. We don't think that if we give them this money, they will lend to our small businesses. Can't you do a direct lending program? There is a lot of support for a direct lending program. But knowing the GOP the way I do, I said to my friends, my colleagues: You know, if I thought I could get one or two or three Republicans for a government direct program, I might do that because it would be more efficient, but they are so mad at the government right now and they have everybody all riled up, so let's do it through our community bankers whom we know, whom they know and support. So we craft the program to be a voluntary private sector lending program to healthy banks, and they want to say no, because, they say, it is like TARP. Well, let me tell my colleagues one Senator who is a Republican who doesn't think it is TARP, and that is Senator LeMieux from Florida. Another Senator who doesn't think it is TARP is the good Senator from Ohio, George Voinovich, who says it is not TARP. But the Senator from South Dakota, who came to talk about how we can't help small business, actually voted for TARP. The Senator who just spoke against this provision voted for TARP, to give money to banks and big banks with no strings attached. Yet he comes to the floor and now he can't help our community banks in their efforts to help small businesses. Every community bank, independent bankers, ABA, they are all supporting this. They didn't support TARP; many of them did not. They were afraid of it. They didn't like it. They still complain about it. This isn't TARP. I know my colleague is here from the State of Washington. How much more time is remaining?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I wish to yield the 8 minutes to the Senator from Washington, who was extremely instrumental in designing this program. Perhaps the Senator knows I am evidently having some difficulty explaining to some of the Senators from the other side how this is not like TARP. Maybe the Senator from Washington can do a better job than I have been able to do. I wish to thank her for coming to the floor. I yield 8 minutes to the Senator from Washington.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Absolutely. The Senator is correct. He refers to this long list, which I have read several times on the floor. It is quite lengthy. These are not liberal organizations. They are not even Democratic or Republican organizations. They are business organizations, including the American Apparel and Footwear Association, the Arkansas Community Bankers, American Bankers Association, the Marine Retailers--these are conservative-to-center organizations. This isn't the Sierra Club. These are conservative organizations that are supporting this. This is a private sector approach. It is $30 billion that will multiply to $300 billion. We have boxes of letters from small businesses saying all they have--as the Senator from Michigan knows--is the credit cards that they have to pay 16 to 20 percent on. Senator Cantwell almost choked me up when she said that one of the businesses in her State had to take out a loan at 50 percent. How do you make money when you are borrowing money at 50 percent interest? We have a program where they can walk down the street and go to their community banks and borrow not from the payday lenders but from the community bank. The Republican caucus wants to tell us this is like TARP so they can put a bumper sticker on their car for the election. The Senator from Florida is correct. There are any number of conservative organizations from all of their States that are supporting this.

Mrs. LANDRIEU

Mrs. LANDRIEU. Yes.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Absolutely, this is a jobs bill. The Senator from Michigan represents a State that has been one of the hardest hit States, the automobile industry. She has firsthand experience there. She knows these numbers as well as I do: From 1993 to 2009, 65 percent of jobs have been created by small business, and only 35 percent of the jobs were created by big business. If some people are wondering why this recovery seems to be a jobless recovery, it is because it is. Big businesses have a lot of profit right now. Has anybody noticed that the stock market is going up? They are sitting on their cash. Has anybody noticed what Goldman Sachs reported lately? They did very well out of this. If you want a recovery with jobs, where people can actually go to work, earn a paycheck, and pay taxes to help us get out of this deficit, and stimulate demand, you better support this. I am so tired of hearing the other side, I say to the Senator from Michigan, when they come down here and say: But the NFIB says that there is no demand. First of all, the National Federation of Independent Business did not say that. So to their credit, I want to say on their behalf--although they have not come out strongly in support, they are not opposing, they are neutral--their own survey said that 40 percent of NFIB'S membership--a very conservative organization--said they didn't need any money. But that leaves 60 percent who said they could not get the loans they had asked for. So this whole argument that says there is no demand--I want the Senators who vote against this to go back and try to give a speech on Main Street. I challenge you, all of you who might consider voting ``no'' on this amendment, I want to see you go home and stand on any Main Street and try to say to your people--look them straight in the eye and say: We know down here there is no demand. Nobody needs any money because nobody is selling anything, and there is no demand.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, I yield for that purpose.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes. It will create many jobs, and maybe we can then have a recovery that has jobs associated with it. That is the effort. We have fashioned this so that it is going to make money for the Treasury. It is not related to TARP funding. It is only for community banks. It is only for small business. I see the Senator from Michigan. I wish to yield time to her, if she wishes to speak, and then the Senator from Oregon and the Senator from Washington wish to speak as well.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Senator from North Carolina, and I ask unanimous consent to yield the next 15 minutes to the Senator from Florida.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I see several Members on the floor. I am going to speak for 2 minutes, and then Senator Klobuchar for 1 minute, and Senator Merkley for 10; and if somebody else comes, we will put them in the queue. Senator LeMieux may want to add a word. I ask unanimous consent for that.

Ms. LANDRIEU. This says: Is small business credit in a deep recession? This is the NFIB. They are one of the most conservative business organizations. I want to read to you their executive summary. It says: Forty percent of small businessowners attempting to borrow in 2009 had all of their credit needs met. Forty percent. Ten percent had most of their needs met. Let's say that 50 percent had most of their needs met. That means that 50 percent of the 27 million small businesses in America did not have their needs met. This is not the Sierra Club here. This is the National Federation of Independent Business, one of the most conservative business groups. I don't know who wants to come to the floor and say they don't know what they are talking about. I think they do on this subject, and on others. I don't agree with them on everything, but they are very legitimate when it comes to what their members say. They said that 50 percent did not get their needs met. The financial institutions extending lines of credit during 2009, when the country was operating at a high level--the same survey--a few years earlier, before the recession, said that 90 percent of businesses were finding the credit they needed. That is why we were having great economic times, because small business could get credit. This is economics 101. This is not complicated. Right now small businesses have credit card debt up to here. They are paying 16 and 24 percent. Maybe that makes the other side happy. They have no equity in their homes to borrow, and here we have a provision trying to give community banks some capital, healthy small banks to lend to small businesses. We know there is a need. Fifty percent of NFIB's own membership says they cannot get the money they need, and we have to fight? I see the Senator from Minnesota. She has a very important part of this amendment. I would like to turn the floor over to her.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I appreciate those remarks. A portion of the LeMieux-Landrieu amendment is to step up exports. The Senator from Oregon has been one of the key designers of this program. He is going to speak about a very important point that we have been debating today. That point is this oversight report that was written by Elizabeth Warren, who now seems to be a very good friend of the other side. She wrote this report, and they held it up saying we have to listen to Elizabeth Warren. It is very interesting because I think they have had some problems with what she has been doing. Nonetheless, they think this report bolsters their argument. I ask the Senator from Oregon to comment about this report because I think it has been misrepresented. I am confident it has been misrepresented. It basically says it is inconclusive. They are not sure this program is going to work. I will tell you who is sure this program is going to work: our community bankers, our small business associations that have written thousands of letters. Is anyone opening their mail? I am not going to listen to a bunch of bureaucrats up here who are not sure something is going to work. I would like to listen to the hometown folks, and that is what this amendment is about.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I see the cosponsor of this amendment. I will ask unanimous consent for him to be recognized. But before I do, I wish to ask a question of the Senator from North Carolina. Senator Hagan is on the floor. I would like to pose a question, if I may, because she was a banker, I understand. I would like to ask her if, in her view as a banker--I think it might be interesting to hear from somebody who was actually a banker. Senator Burris was a banker. He spoke--what does she think about this program. If she was still a banker, would she be interested in accessing this capital from the Treasury and how it might help small businesses in the communities she used to lend to, if she would be so kind as to answer that question.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Florida for his outstanding remarks and for his ability and his willingness to stand for the people of Florida because his State has had a great deal of difficulty, not unlike the State of California. I see the Senator from California and the Senator from Illinois are on the floor and they want to speak. I would like to turn the next 5 minutes over to the Senator from California, but before I do, I want to respond to something the Senator from Florida said. The Senator from Florida may not be the only Republican to vote for this amendment because today Senator George Voinovich said he would support the amendment. He is quoted today, if this quote that was reported in the paper is correct, as saying there is a real need out there to provide some money to some of these businesses and to get banks back involved. He said: We have got to start doing something. Voinovich dismissed claims by fellow Republicans, including Snowe and Minority Leader McConnell, that the lending program resembles TARP because it involves Treasury Department loans to banks. Republicans have nicknamed it TARP, Jr. ``I don't buy that,'' Voinovich said. `` That is just messaging.'' As I said, my good friend from Florida may not be the only Republican to stand up and vote for this amendment, and I hope others will because this could mean a great deal to small businesses throughout America. This is for small business, it is for jobs, it is to get this recession over. We have to focus on Main Street. Mr. President, the Senator from California would like the next 5 minutes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I see the Senator from Illinois. I will ask unanimous consent for him to speak for 2 to 3 minutes. But before that, I wish to thank the Senator from California. The Senator from Illinois would know this, but this issue, this provision came originally from an idea that Senator Boxer and Senator Merkley had. She deserves a tremendous amount of credit. Of course, she represents the largest State in the Union. Of course, she represents one of the States that has high unemployment. Of course, she listens to the people of her State and they are saying: Senator, where is the money to create the jobs? I will submit this for the Record. The Senator from California does not need to see this because she knows it: Jobs lost by small business. Do we want to know why this recession is happening? I wish I had this blown up: 81 percent of the job losses come not from big business, not from Wall Street. I understand Wall Street is having fancy lunches. They had a lot of fancy lunches on Wall Street today. Do you know who is not even eating lunch, there is no brown bag to put it in? Small business. The Senator from California is a great Senator, fighting for her State. She has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. The Senator from Illinois knows this as well. I thank her for putting this provision forward. I am happy to pick it up and try to carry the ball a little way down the field.

Ms. LANDRIEU. It is not. The Senator is absolutely correct. That is why I spent the majority of this day trying to be responsive to the several arguments that have been raised against it. I thought the Senator from Oregon did a beautiful job, much better than I did, explaining the nuances of this report that has been used to criticize this program. But again, it is a private sector approach which the other side usually likes. It is community bankers whom we know, to small businesses that we know need the help. I cannot quite understand where this opposition is coming from. I said earlier, if you are looking for a bumper sticker for the election, go look elsewhere. Don't put a bumper sticker on the backs of small business in America. They don't deserve it. The letters are heartbreaking. The letters from Illinois are heartbreaking. Women who have waited for 20 years while they raised their children finally start their business and I have to hear from the other side they don't like the bumper sticker? This is not about bumper stickers. We have waited a year and a half to get on a bill for small business. The House has already passed this bill. It is laughable, to try to go home to your district. I don't care whether you are in Arizona or South Dakota or Alabama, you will be laughed out of the townhall meeting if you go home and try to explain that you don't think small business should get money from their local bank. They don't have the money to buy a train ticket to New York. I mean, this is not funny. So unless somebody comes down here and gives me a relatively good argument--and I have the greatest respect for the Senator from Maine. We have never argued about anything on our committee. This didn't even come to our committee so we never argued about it. We have not argued about one thing because we feel so strongly. But for some reason this has become a political football. She did not make it that way and neither did I. Somebody did, but neither one of us did.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I see other Members on the floor. Senator Burris had spoken earlier. I wish to say there was an organization we failed to mention, but the Minority Bankers of America also have given their support to this. We are getting constant letters of support in. I can speak for a few more minutes. I don't know if anyone else is interested in speaking. We still do not have a vote on this, so I will continue, I guess.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, to the Senator from Michigan.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I see the Senator from Maine. In all fairness, we have had a lot of time. I want to yield 1 minute to the Senator from Minnesota. Then I will be happy to yield. We have no time agreements. There are no scheduled votes. I am most certainly not holding up this vote. The leadership is not here. I am not sure when we are voting. I know Members want to leave. I am not holding up the vote. We are ready to go to the vote at any time, but we do not have any agreement to go to the vote.

Ms. LANDRIEU. The Senator from Michigan is absolutely correct. That is why this is so flabbergasting to me, because the Senator is correct. The TARP, some of us voted for it, some of us did not, but there are some legitimate criticisms of it. I mean, it went to a lot of the big banks, bigger banks. It did go to some middle-sized banks, I will concede that to the opponents. They have pointed that out, that it went to some middle-sized banks. But what we did not do was connect it to lending. They took the money and they cut the line of credit. We are trying to fix that. This is an amendment to fix what we did not do correctly. This is an amendment supported by bankers, by small businesses. It does not go to big banks. They are not even eligible. It is voluntary. They do not have to take it. If any Senator wants to vote against this and go home and say: Look, I can only give you credit cards with 16 percent interest--your people in Michigan cannot survive that, the Senator knows. They cannot survive it.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am hoping we can vote right now, if possible. I know the Senators all have schedules. The Senator from Maine was very kind to say she could even speak after the vote. I appreciate that everybody has been so patient today. We have had a good debate. We are trying to get to a vote on this bill. We are waiting for the leadership, but people are going to have other appointments. The Senator from Maine has agreed to speak after the vote, which is very nice. I suggest the absence of a quorum.