Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I yield back the time.

Mr. REID. We have a number of votes scheduled. They are going to go by voice, I am told. Mr. President, we are going to have a cloture vote an hour after we come in tomorrow morning, and there is no reason we cannot be finished tomorrow, but that doesn't mean we will be finished tomorrow. We will have to cooperate and have to work out the time problems we have with the matters that will be pending after we complete the votes on these two measures now. So we could finish tomorrow. It is up to all of us. Otherwise, we may have to spill over a little into late on Friday.

Mr. REID

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 I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. 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.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, and all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk in the Marine Corps; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the agriculture committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Con. Res. 33.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Con. Res. 35, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Thursday, April 10, 2014; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the time until 10:30 a.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees; and that at 10:30 a.m., the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 574.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. At 10:30 a.m. tomorrow there will be a rollcall vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination of Michelle Friedland to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit. If cloture is invoked, there would be up to 30 hours for debate prior to a vote on confirmation of the nomination, unless an agreement can be reached. Upon disposition of the Friedland nomination, there will be a cloture vote on the Weil nomination to be Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division at the Department of Labor. There could then be up to 8 hours for debate prior to a vote on confirmation of the Weil nomination.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 345, S. 2199, the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, the Senate will be in morning business until 12:30 p.m., with the time equally divided and controlled. The Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. for our weekly caucus meetings, as we always do on Tuesdays. Measure Placed on the Calendar--H.R. 2575 Mr. President, I understand that H.R. 2575 is at the desk and due for a second reading.

Mr. REID. I object to any further proceedings at this time.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, Ralph Waldo Emerson said this: ``America is another name for opportunity.'' ``America is another name for opportunity.'' Today this body, the Senate, should put Emerson's words to the test as we turn attention to the question of equal pay. For working American women, millions of whom are primary wage earners for their families, the Paycheck Fairness Act represents a unique opportunity, a chance to better provide for themselves and their families. It is unconscionable that American women currently take home an average of 77 cents for every dollar their male colleagues earn for doing the exact same work. Wage disparity is true regardless of whether a woman has a college degree, what job she holds or how many hours she spends at the office or factory or wherever it might be. Consider this just for a brief moment: For a woman to make the same salary as a man in 1 year for doing similar work in America, she must work not only that year but also an additional 3 months and 8 days. That is why today, April 8, the eighth day of the fourth month, is Equal Pay Day. It represents the extra work American women have to put forth to provide for their families. This is an injustice and should not be permitted to take place in America. While President Obama and Democrats have made significant progress toward helping women achieve equal pay, there is still much for us to do. Five years ago the very first law President Obama ever signed, the first act he performed in the Oval Office, was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Remember, this is the legislation based on the good woman who found out--after having worked at this place for so many years, having additional responsibilities than all the men--they were all getting paid much more than she. She was the boss getting paid less than the people who worked for her. Why? Because she is a woman. The Lilly Ledbetter legislation is the biggest step Congress has taken on behalf of women to help them with their wages since the Equal Pay Act of 1963. The bill provides that the statute of limitations doesn't begin to run until someone finds out they are being cheated by their employer. The legislation helped address the pay gap, but women still suffer from discriminatory wage disparity. The Paycheck Fairness Act goes a step further by providing protections for women in the workplace. This legislation addresses unequal wages by empowering women to negotiate for equal pay and giving employers incentives to obey current law. I was happy to hear all the news accounts that I was able to be briefed on--along with those I listened to on public radio while I was doing my exercises--the detailed accounts about how women are not treated fairly. The legislation we are working on enables women to fight against wage discrimination while also preventing retaliation against employees who discuss salary information. Before Lilly Ledbetter and even today if you discuss what someone else makes you can be fired. That is the way it is in most places in America. It would finally give much needed assistance to victims of gender-based pay discrimination. Simply put, the Paycheck Fairness Act gives American women the fair shot they deserve. Unfortunately, efforts to address this issue have not been well received by Republicans. A similar bill addressing equal pay--despite a Republican filibuster--passed Congress and the Congress before that. Let's hope the third time is a charm for American women. Let's hope Republicans will finally do what is right. In any other circumstance Republicans would be up in arms with this type of economic discrimination--I would hope. They should be up in arms in terms of equal pay for women also. Why is it that so many Republicans are content to allow women working the same hours in the same job to make less money than their male coworkers? It is hard to comprehend, since women make up nearly half the U.S. labor force and more than half of the people enrolled in college. We are finding that the majority of students enrolled in professional schools, law schools, medical schools are women. Is it reasonable to assume that women should be treated unfairly? Is it reasonable to assume that Republicans in this body have wives, daughters or sisters who are or will be affected by this wage disparity and shouldn't we do something about it? I urge my colleagues to keep those loved ones--people such as my daughter and my many granddaughters--in their minds and in their thoughts when considering the question of equal pay for women. We will have the first vote the day after tomorrow. We will have this vote. To do otherwise would simply be unfair. Recognition of the Minority Leader

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 4:30 p.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar Nos. 556 and 502; that there be 2 minutes for debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to each vote; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote, with no intervening action or debate, on the nominations in the order listed; further, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order to the nominations; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. REID. I object.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, would my friend give the subject matter of those three amendments?

Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, is the Alexander amendment, which the Senator from South Dakota suggested, the 350-page amendment that was offered last week?

Mr. REID. Before my friend from South Dakota leaves the floor, 2964 is the big one?

Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, I am happy to see a number of Republican colleagues come to the floor. We have been talking about this issue for days now and to discuss, I thought, the subject of equal pay for women. But there has been no talk about equal pay for women. The closest of anything in that regard that has been suggested has been a bill that says if you have to work overtime, then you have a choice of going home or doing the overtime. The reason we don't have laws like that is because the employer can take advantage of the employee because the employee is at the beck and call of the employer, and I think most labor laws would protect against that now. I am surprised we have literally heard no one come to the floor except on the one occasion--and I could have missed it--where the Republican Senator made the statement that Senator Mikulski's legislation was a trial lawyer's dream. The women who have come to the floor to talk about this--and the men who have come to talk about this today, including the Presiding Officer, and I heard his statement--are simply trying to say we need to be sure this is a fair shot for the middle class, and in this instance it is women. But the Republicans always want to change the subject. Why don't we have a debate on whether women are entitled to have the same pay as men? The Senate is debating the motion to proceed to the equal pay bill, so the question before the Senate is whether we should even begin debate on this matter. If Senators wish to offer amendments, they would have to begin the debate. I am always happy to talk about amendments, but the amendment of my friend from South Dakota is nothing that is reasonable. What that amendment does is offer lots of amendments. I think if we look closely at this 350-page amendment, we might even find the kitchen sink in it. It has everything else in it. It is really a perfect example of trying to divert attention from the subject at hand. This is not a serious effort to legislate equal pay for equal work. My colleague's unanimous consent request would also allow for a potentially unlimited number of amendments. We have been there before, and we know that does not work. Providing an unlimited number of amendments is just another way of saying they want to filibuster the bill, which they have done so artfully over the last 5 years. My door remains open to further discussions, but I object to the requests that have been made, including the one that I anticipate from my friend from Tennessee.

Mr. REID. Is there anything pending? I want to make sure there are no pending requests for unanimous consent.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, what is the pending business?