Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. The Senator from Illinois is absolutely correct. I have listened to this debate, and it is not just the debate today on speculation, about whether we should do that. It is whether we should bring energy tax credits, whether we should repeal oil company tax breaks and whether we can invest in alternative energy. Every time, the only answer we get from the other side is, no, we are not going to do that. We want to drill more. I would say to my colleague that drilling for oil is a false promise to the American people that it will bring down their prices substantially as we head off to our August break. Even their own Presidential candidate has said drilling oil only brings psychological benefit. We don't need any mental health care. We need real reductions at the pump. Even President Bush's own energy experts say drilling more oil will not produce a significant decrease in the price at the pump. As I truly believe and I think most people understand in this country, until we invest in long-term energy independence, all we are going to do is see the oil companies get more profits and our prices go up. The bill we are offering today and hope to move to will begin to deal with that and that addresses the issue of speculation. I hope we move to that. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY. The Senator from Illinois is absolutely correct. Every time we have come out here to try to broaden the energy debate and to bring down the price of gasoline and get to energy independence, we have heard from the other side: Oh, no, there is only one answer, and that is drill more. We have given them that. In fact, yes, the oil companies have 68 million acres of land today that can be drilled, but they are choosing not to. Why? Because if they increase the supply, the price is going to drop. So what good does it do for us to give them even more of our Federal lands, because their benefit is keeping the price high.

Mrs. MURRAY. I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Illinois.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to talk about the fact that the Senate is going to have an opportunity to vote on cloture to move us to an important bill that will address the issue most of my constituents in the State of Washington, as well as all those in the country, are facing, and that is the high price of gasoline today--$4.45 is what I paid last weekend when I went home to Washington State. This is having an impact on our families, on our communities, and on all of our businesses--on everyone. It is important that we address this issue. The bill that is being offered, which we hope to get past cloture and filibuster from the other side, is not a silver bullet, but it is an attempt to get at what we believe is a fundamental part of the solution, and that is the manipulation of the oil marketers by a few greedy traders, thereby increasing the cost you and I pay at the pump. We are not asking for a large energy bill, but we are saying it is important that we address this issue in a way that will produce relief as quickly as possible in some way for our consumers as we head out a week from now for our August break. I have been listening to this debate, and I have to say I am fairly surprised by all of those who come to the floor and say: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Unless we get to offer amendment after amendment after amendment on drilling more, and drilling more, and drilling more, then we are not going to allow the Senate to deal with the issue of speculation, which Members on both sides agree is critical that we address. I think it is important that we step back for a minute and go back in history and talk about energy and this Senate's history over the last 8 years and this White House's history over the last 8 years. Democrats understand there are short-term solutions for the crisis facing us, but we also need long-term solutions because we believe, at the end of the day, that we have to decrease our dependence on oil. We have to decrease our dependence on oil, otherwise this Senate body, 10 years from now, will again be debating whether to open up more drilling. Meanwhile, we are all supposed to ride our bikes until we have more oil out there again, and then the next generation gets to debate oil again. We want to break this cycle. We want to get to long- term energy independence. We want to create new alternatives for people. We want that new technology to be invested in so that consumers 10 years from now, and the next generation of Senators who are here and consumers out across the country, don't have to listen to this debate again. We can get there, but it is not easy. Eight years ago, this country elected two oilmen to the White House. No surprise: Every energy debate since then has focused on how we can drill more for oil. Here we are today, a week before we leave for the August recess, and those on the other side want to take us right back to drilling again. Let me remind our colleagues what Senators on this side of the aisle have been doing for some time. When we got the majority a year and a half ago, we said: Okay, with the majority, we want to begin making inroads on focusing on energy independence which, by the way, will reduce the cost to everybody as the consumption decreases. We looked at CAFE standards. We were successful, not in doing it quickly, but at least beginning to make progress on setting CAFE standards so our cars will be using less fuel. That is part of reducing the price of gas in the long term and our dependence on oil. We also looked at an energy tax package. In fact, we brought an energy tax package to the floor of the Senate that would create incentives for alternative energy. It costs a lot to develop new technology for energy. We said it is time for the Government to put its backing there and provide tax credits for these companies so they can do the research that is necessary to get that alternative technology out there. What did the other side do? Filibustered. Blocked it. And today, those investors are not out there investing in new technology. Democrats said we need to move this bill. It is part of our plan in the long run to reduce the price of oil to create those alternatives. We were blocked on the other side from doing that. A few months ago, Democrats said: It is important to look at how we can stop this increasing, spiraling cost as soon as possible. We put together an energy package, and one of the key components was focusing on the oil companies, who were reporting record profits at the time-- and by the way, still are today--and we tried to repeal some of the oil companies' tax breaks they currently get so that those costs would go back to consumers and reduce our prices. What happened? We brought the bill up, and it was blocked by the other side. Why? Because they wanted to focus on drilling more oil. We have tried many ways on this side to focus on the larger picture of energy and how we can reduce consumption, how we can get to energy independence, how we can focus on making sure those high gas prices that my constituents and others pay today--and by the way, when this administration took office 8 years ago, gas was $1.46 a gallon, but because of the energy bills that have been pushed by the other side that focus on drilling, it is now $4.45 a gallon in my home State. Yet here we are today, as we try to focus on speculation in the markets, and what does the other side say? Oh no, we need to drill for more for oil. Well, that hasn't worked in the past. We have already, several years ago, added an additional--and I see my colleague from Illinois here on the floor--I believe it was an additional 8 million acres to be leased in this country. We added that. Did it reduce the price of gas at the pump?

Mrs. MURRAY. Well, I say to the Senator from Illinois, he is absolutely correct. In fact, in the past few days, a headline from Reuters read: ``ConocoPhillips' Earnings Rise With Record Oil Prices.'' The oil companies are making a lot of money, so what is the other side's answer to every energy debate we have? Give them more money. I say to my colleague from Illinois, I know he goes to the President's State of the Union Addresses every January, as I do, and we sit in the House Chamber and listen to what the President is presenting to us. I wonder if the Senator from Illinois remembers 2\1/2\ years ago, the President's third State of the Union, I believe it was--and I rose with excitement when I heard the President say this to us: Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem: Now, this is the President of the United States in his State of the Union speech. America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world. The best way to break an addiction is through technology. These are not my words, but those of the President of the United States. Yet every time we have tried to bring a bill to the floor to break our addiction to oil, we are stopped because the other side wants to drill more oil. So I say to my colleague from Illinois, does it feel to him as though we are trying to break our addiction to oil here?

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the statutory time be yielded back, the joint resolution be read three times, passed, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table; that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record, without any intervening action or debate.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 896, H.J. Res. 93, the Burma Sanctions Act.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY. I assure my colleague from Pennsylvania, I was listening carefully to his comments. He has traveled worldwide, and I am certainly interested in his viewpoints. I hope I didn't make him feel rushed at all, and I appreciate what he had to say. Housing Mr. President, this week, tens of thousands of homeowners traveled here to the Nation's Capital, and lined up for hours--and even days--in hopes of taking advantage of a mortgage counseling workshop through the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. These homeowners came from as far away as Boston or Miami--all because they are struggling to hold onto their homes, and they need help with their mortgages. Many others are now steps away from foreclosure because they have seen their mortgage rates rise out of control, or because their mortgage now exceeds the value of their home because property values have plummeted. Now, while many of the homeowners who came to DC this week were able to get help, there are millions more across this country in the same position who are still in need of assistance. Nearly 8,500 families file for foreclosure each day. And as many as 2 million homeowners could lose their homes this year. Fortunately, we will have a bill before us soon that will enable the Federal Government to lend a helping hand to many of those families. The housing package that passed the House on Wednesday includes a variety of provisions that would restore stability to the housing market, provide assistance to communities hurt by this crisis, and help prevent thousands of foreclosures. We have considered much of this package before, but it has been blocked by Republicans who have preferred to drag their feet than to address this crisis. We now have another chance, and I have come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to support this legislation and get help into the hands of the homeowners and communities that need it. Those of us who go home each weekend to talk to their constituents know how worried our families are about the economy--and about whether something will happen to threaten their ability to keep their homes. It is hard to overstate how serious the housing crisis has become. There are communities across this country where people are literally abandoning their homes because they can't afford their mortgages, and they can't find a willing buyer. As I said, as many as 2 million families could lose their homes to foreclosure this year. And reports estimate the number of families facing foreclosure is higher than at any time since the Great Depression. At the beginning of this crisis, many of those people were subprime borrowers who received adjustable-rate loans or who were the victims of loan scams. But as home values have dropped across the country, the problem has spread. Families with strong credit, who received fixed- rate mortgages, have seen their homes drop in value by tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over the past couple of years. Their mortgages are now under water, and thousands of them are at risk for foreclosure too. This is a problem even in regions that have been relatively healthy, like my home state of Washington--where more and more people tell me they are worried that they will be stuck with homes they can't afford. The housing legislation that we will consider soon may be one of the most important steps we take this year to help our faltering economy because it addresses the root of the problem--the housing crisis. So I want to take the next couple of moments to talk about three of the main provisions of this bill to explain why we must act now. First, the bill provides $180 million to give counseling agencies the resources to reach out and help struggling homeowners. Counseling is one of the most cost-effective tools we have to help families who are on the verge of foreclosure. Counselors can help families negotiate with their lenders, readjust their payments, or learn how to budget their expenses better. And it is incredibly important that we provide the resources now so that we can help families before they reach the crisis point. Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to meet a single mother from Ohio who had fallen on hard times, which in turn led her to fall behind on her mortgage. Luckily she was able to talk to a counselor, and she and her children were able to stay in their home. She explained that when she got behind, she was overwhelmed. She told me she didn't know what to do. She said, ``This isn't something they teach you in school.'' This bill would help more families like hers get help. Despite the numbers who traveled to Washington, DC for help this week, far too many homeowners still don't know they have options when they get behind on their mortgages. I fought alongside Senators Mikulski, Schumer, and Brown to include this counseling funding back when this bill was first debated in April. It comes on top of a $180 million initiative that my ranking member, Senator Bond, and I included in the 2008 Transportation-Housing Appropriations Act. And I want to thank Chairman Dodd and Ranking Member Shelby for helping to protect the funding in the most recent package. Next, the bill makes some important changes to help modernize the Federal Housing Administration and enable it to help more homeowners refinance their mortgages. First, it raises the loan limit to take into account the increase in home prices over the last several years. This is very important because in many communities, home prices are higher than the current loan limits, meaning FHA mortgages aren't an option. It also provides $300 billion to enable the FHA to back loans and help as many as 400,000 homeowners at risk of foreclosure get more affordable--and less risky--mortgages. These changes will help stabilize the housing market and encourage more mortgage holders to give borrowers a more affordable loan that will enable them to keep their homes. Now, while I support these measures, I want to add--as chairman of the Transportation and Housing Appropriations Subcommittee--that this bill is also putting a lot of new responsibility into the hands of the FHA. That agency currently has close to 300 vacancies and it has the money to fill them. Unfortunately, it has been burdened by the painfully slow hiring processes at HUD. It is my understanding that FHA Commissioner Montgomery, and our new HUD Secretary, Steve Preston, are determined to reverse this hiring record and get more people on board soon. I certainly hope they succeed. But I also recognize that as we head into the new fiscal year, we may need to take measures to boost the salary and expense funds provided to the FHA as well as get money to the agency to improve its computing capabilities. I intend to address those needs when the Appropriations Committee marks up the next Supplemental Appropriations bill in September. Finally, I want to caution my colleagues on the Banking Committee that we will all need to continually monitor the lending activity and the funding balance of the FHA's existing mutual mortgage insurance account as well as the new homeownership preservation entity fund established in this bill. None of us wants to saddle taxpayers with unnecessary risk as we try to help homeowners. This bill establishes a new board that will face the daunting challenge of deciding which homeowners can and can't be helped under this new program. But Congress will also need to do its part to monitor the fiscal health of both the new and old FHA accounts to ensure that the taxpayer isn't guaranteeing loans that have no hope of being repaid. The whole hope of this legislation is about calming the housing markets and using the FHA guarantee to entice mortgage holders to give borrowers a better break--an affordable loan that will keep them in their home. But we must ensure that taxpayers don't end up holding the bill for unsalvageable loans. Finally, the bill would take important steps to strengthen Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by establishing a new regulator. It also provides temporary authority to allow the Treasury Department to take action when needed to keep them stable. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the foundation of our system to finance homeownership in the U.S., and it is absolutely critical that we take decisive action to help quickly restore confidence in them. We started work on this bill in February because Democrats wanted to get help into the hands of homeowners who need it. But despite the desperation people feel in communities across this country, some Republicans have preferred up to this point to stall and block this bill. Now, I was very happy to see President Bush finally drop his opposition this week. And I hope my Republican colleagues will help us get this bill to his desk as quickly as possible. Especially when it comes to helping people keep their homes, timing is everything. A family that gets access to housing counseling before they start missing mortgage payments can still save their home. And I hope we will finally be able to make that possible for thousands more families in need. I hope when we finally get this bill out of here, we will be able to make it possible for more families to feel secure in this country again. Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer and look forward to the vote tomorrow morning. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I understand that S. 3335, which was introduced earlier today by Senator Baucus, is at the desk. I ask for its first reading.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask for a second reading and object to my own request.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the cloture vote on S. 3268, and if cloture has not been invoked, and the Senate has subsequently invoked cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the House amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221, then postcloture debate time on Friday, July 25, be divided in 30-minute blocks, beginning at 10 a.m., and until 1 p.m., and as specified in a subsequent order; with postcloture time running during any recess or adjournment of the Senate; that when the Senate convenes on Saturday, July 26 at 9 a.m., after the opening of the Senate, the time until 11 a.m. be equally divided and controlled by the leaders or their designees, with the time from 10:40 a.m. to 10:50 a.m. controlled by the Republican leader, and the time from 10:50 a.m. to 11 a.m. controlled by the majority leader; that at 11 a.m., all postcloture time be yielded back, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the House amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221; that if the motion is successful, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table and the motion to concur with an amendment be withdrawn; further, that if cloture is invoked on S. 3268, then the provisions of this agreement be null and void.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:15 a.m. tomorrow, Friday July 25; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of S. 3268, and immediately proceed to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on S. 3268, the energy speculation legislation. I further ask that the time from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m. be equally divided and controlled by the leaders in alternating 30-minute blocks of time, with the Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that Senators have until 10 a.m. Friday to file second-degree amendments.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, tomorrow, after 9:15 a.m., the Senate will proceed to a cloture vote on the energy speculation bill. If cloture is not invoked, the Senate will immediately proceed to a vote on a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur with respect to H.R. 3221, the housing reform legislation. Therefore, Senators should expect two rollcall votes beginning at around 9:15 a.m. tomorrow.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have had a very important debate today about energy which I spoke about earlier today. I come to the Senate floor this afternoon to talk about another issue that is also important; that is, to raise awareness about one of the most heartbreaking and alarming consequences of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the 5 years since we invaded Iraq, we have seen a disturbing increase in the number of young men and women who are returning home, struggling with the psychological impact of the war and then, sadly, take their own lives. About 1,000 war veterans who are being treated by the VA attempt suicide each month. It is a problem that is affecting many communities across the country. Earlier this month, we lost a young man in my home State of Washington, just hours after he went to the VA in Spokane to ask for care. He was, in fact, the sixth veteran in that community to take his own life this year. Currently, the Spokane VA is investigating all of those cases. I have spoken to Secretary Peake, and he has assured me his team is on the ground taking a hard look to see what went wrong and what they can learn from that case. But while I appreciate the work Secretary Peake and the Spokane VA are doing, the fact is this is a serious problem across the country. Every suicide is a tragedy. Those young men and women are someone's son or daughter, someone's best friend, possibly someone's spouse or even a parent. Our hearts go out to all of those families and their friends. These deaths are an urgent reminder that we have to keep our eye on the ball. We owe it to all of our servicemembers and veterans to demand that the VA and the Department of Defense make it a national priority to bring those numbers down. I acknowledge that the VA is taking steps to reach out to our veterans and their families to let them know that help is available. This week, in fact, the VA is rolling out a public service campaign in Washington, DC. It is part of a 3-month-long pilot program, and the VA is going to be running a series of ads on TV, on buses and trains, and on the subway. Those ads are going to highlight the VA's 24-hour suicide prevention hotline. The number for that is 1-800-273-TALK. It will help assure our veterans it is OK to ask for help. I truly applaud the VA for that effort because it is a good step. We have to absolutely get the word out to veterans and their families. If this helps prevent one tragedy, then it is more than worth it. I applaud the VA. I hope the Defense Department will also publicize that number among its Active-Duty troops so when they leave the service, they will already be aware of it. But this is only a step. An ad campaign is only as good as the resources that are there when our servicemembers call and ask for help. If we truly are going to make a difference, we need a much bigger effort. We have to do more to reach out. We have to do more to break down the barriers to those seeking mental health care. We need to back up those efforts with enough resources and money to ensure that when a veteran goes into the hospital asking for help, the VA offers the best care possible. While I applaud the idea of publicizing the suicide prevention hotline, I believe the military and the VA must reach out long before our young men and women pick up that phone and call for help. That is going to take creativity and leadership. The VA and the Defense Department can't keep doing things the way they have always done them because the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not like any we have fought before. Our All-Volunteer Force has been on the ground in these two countries for longer than we fought in World War II. Troops get very little downtime. Many of them are serving their third or fourth and sometimes fifth deployments. This is a stress that is taking a toll on everyone. For many of them, it gets worse when they come home to the pressures of everyday life or financial strains or family problems. That is especially true for members of the National Guard and Reserves because, unlike Active-Duty troops who return from battle to go to a military base where there is a support network, many of our Guard and Reserve members go home right away to family pressures and to civilian jobs they need to start right away. The military and the VA have to update their resources and outreach efforts to match the challenges our troops face when they return. That safety net has to be in place before they ever leave the military. That means we must have creative programs that help our servicemembers transition from that battlefield back to the home front. It means providing family and financial counseling to any servicemember who needs it, and it means developing a way for the military or the VA to follow up with our servicemembers, especially those who have already asked for help with psychological needs. We have to also encourage our servicemembers and veterans to seek care when they need it by breaking down the barriers that prevent them from asking for help. The VA and the Defense Department have to take strong steps to change the military culture so that servicemembers no longer fear that seeking care will be viewed as some sign of weakness or one that could hurt their career. Even more important, servicemembers and veterans must be convinced if they ask for help, doctors and staff will take them seriously and provide the care they need. I personally have heard too many tragic stories about veterans who have gone to the VA in distress, only to face a doctor who underestimated their symptoms and sent them home to an end in tragedy. When someone with a history of depression or PTSD or other psychological wounds walks into one of our VAs and says they are suicidal, it should set off alarm bells for everyone. We can't convince veterans or servicemembers to get care if they think they will be met with lectures and closed doors. That is simply unacceptable. At the very least, we have to ensure that staff at military and VA medical centers have the training to recognize and treat someone who is in real distress. Finally, we have to provide the resources to back up all of these efforts, starting with making sure that the suicide prevention hotline is staffed with enough trained professionals to provide real help to someone in need. I hope that will be the case. Unfortunately, this administration has failed for 8 long years to make good on its promises and provide the resources for our veterans to carry them out. Time and time again it has taken leaks and scandals to get the administration to own up to major problems at the VA--from inadequate budgets to rising suicide rates about which I am talking today. Its response to rising costs has been to underfund research and cut off services for some of our veterans. We have to do better than that. Servicemembers and veterans need more than an 800 number to call. They need psychiatrists and psychologists who understand the horrors of war and the stresses our troops feel. We also have to make sure we have the facilities and systems set up to accommodate the troops who will be entering the VA system in the next decade. We have to fast-track research into the signature injuries of this war, such as traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder, so we understand how to diagnose and treat those conditions. We need to speed up efforts that will enable the DOD and VA to share records so that fewer servicemembers slip through the cracks as they transition from Active Duty to veteran status. Now is the time to invest in research and infrastructure. We cannot afford to wait. Many of us are familiar with the story of Joseph Dwyer, a young Army medic, made famous in a photo taken during the first week of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. In that photo, we have seen Joseph running toward safety with an injured Iraqi child in his arms. It is an epic image of bravery and compassion. When he came home, Joseph struggled to fit back into civilian life. He suffered from PTSD and, tragically, earlier this year, he died of what police are treating as an accidental drug overdose. That photo of Joseph Dwyer captured the incredible work our troops are doing every single day. But, sadly, Joseph's story is also now an example of what far too many veterans face when they come home. The photo of Joseph was taken during the first week of this war. Now, more than 5 years later, we ought to have the resources in place to treat the psychological wounds of war as well as we do the physical ones. But we don't. I ask my colleagues to put themselves in the shoes of a parent or spouse who has lost a child, a husband or a wife, or someone they know to suicide. I want them to think of all the questions they might be asking. We might not be able to provide all the answers, but we should at least be able to say we are doing everything we can to address the problem. We know there are many dedicated, hard-working VA employees who spend countless hours providing our vets with the best treatment possible. We also have to recognize the system is still unprepared today for the influx of veterans coming home. As I have told my colleagues before, a recent RAND study shows that one in four veterans is struggling with PTSD. It is the duty of the VA and of a grateful nation to be prepared to care for their unique wounds. In order to do that, we need strong leadership and attention to detail in Washington, DC, in Spokane, WA, and everywhere in between. At the end of day, this is not about bureaucracy. It is not about protecting turf. It is about saving lives. I am glad the administration plans to increase its outreach. It is a pilot program. It is only a small step. We have to make this a national priority to address this tragedy. The administration has to back up its efforts by reaching out to our servicemembers, veterans, and their families. We have to break down the barriers that prevent our servicemembers and veterans from seeking and getting mental health care, and we have to provide adequate resources. No matter how anyone feels about this war, our troops are heroes. They have done everything we have asked of them--and more. It is time our commitment measured up to theirs. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business but for the time to count against the 30 hours.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bills be read a third time and passed, en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, en bloc, and that any statements relating to the bills be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: Calendar No. 832, S. 2766, and S. 3298, introduced earlier today by Senator Murkowski.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, all of us who go home and listen to our constituents each weekend know one thing and one thing only is on their mind these days; that is, the rising price of gas. I have made a habit of writing down what I pay each weekend when I fly out to Washington State, and when it hit $4 a month or so ago, I was aghast. Imagine what everyone filling their tank in Washington State is thinking now that the price in my home State is pushing $4.50 a gallon. We need action. We need action now. For months, Democrats have been trying to address this problem by providing short-term relief along with a long-term strategy. For months, we have heard only two things from our friends on the other side of the aisle: No, and drill. Democrats know there is no silver bullet to this crisis. It is going to take a series of steps, both short term and long term, to bring some sanity back to the situation. Today, we are going to vote on another of those short-term solutions, and we are going to try to end excessive speculation in the markets. Democrats believe we have to rein in Wall Street and our traders who are unfairly driving up these oil prices. With regard for nothing but their own profits, some traders are bidding up oil prices by buying huge quantities of oil just to resell it at an even higher price. For nearly 8 years now, the Bush administration has turned a blind eye and let these questionable practices continue with virtually no oversight. Some experts are saying this kind of trading now accounts for 20 to 30 percent of what we pay at the pump. The Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn, was on the floor earlier and asked for specific citations. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record remarks from a series of economists, such as Gerry Ramm of the Petroleum Marketers Association, the Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the former Director of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and others.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act of 2008 that the Senate is going to move to proceed to will shine a light on those trading markets. It will increase oversight and reporting on oil trading, and it will significantly improve the resources available to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. While addressing speculation is not the silver bullet that will bring prices down at the pump, we do believe that by increasing our oversight and regulation, we will ensure that consumers are better protected in the months and years to come. Unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, our friends on the other side have their message down pretty pat now. They say no to any reasonable solutions we offer, and then they turn around and say we just need to drill more. We say fast-track our domestic production. They say no. We say increase the supply of oil now. They say no. We say accelerate investments in alternative energy to help break that addiction to oil. They say no. And now we say end excessive speculation. I hope they won't say no again. Do they offer anything more than no? Well, yes. They say drill, drill, and drill--a plan that even their party's leaders said has mainly psychological benefits, a plan that even President Bush's own team says will not affect our oil prices, and a plan that will not produce a drop of oil for 7 to 10 years. Unfortunately, their plan on that side is nothing more than a continuation of the Bush-Cheney big oil love affair that got us into this mess in the first place. Republicans seem committed to fattening big oil's bottom line. Well, Democrats are more worried about your bottom line. The oil companies made $250 billion last year. It is time for us to deal with consumer prices. We have tried to do things the Republican way for 8 years now and unfortunately what we hear from them today is more gimmicks and tired old ideas, the same status quo. With record gas prices and our economy spiraling deeper into recession, Democrats think it is long past time for a bold new direction. We hope our Republican counterparts will join us today and move this bill forward. I yield the floor.