American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 - Resumed

Floor Speech

AMERICAN HOUSING RESCUE AND FORECLOSURE PREVENTION ACT OF 2008--Resumed -- (Senate - June 20, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

HIGH GASOLINE PRICES

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there is no doubt that the subprime mortgage crisis is a timely and important issue, and it is a worthy topic for the Senate to have taken up. There is also little doubt that the single most important issue facing Americans at the moment is the high price of gasoline at the pump.

Indeed, it would be difficult to find a single American who has escaped the painful effects of the recent record spike in gas prices and who is not eager for Congress to do something about it. That is why I was so concerned to hear the Democratic nominee for President say last week he was not as concerned about high gas prices as he was about the fact that they rose so quickly. He would have preferred a ``gradual adjustment,'' as he put it, to the sudden shock we all got.

More concerning, not a single Democrat in the Senate has come forward to distance himself or herself publicly from his words.

The message of the junior Senator from Illinois was clear: High gas prices don't concern him as much as they concern most people. By allowing his comments to stand, congressional Democrats are being equally clear they agree with him.

The fact is, on the issue of lowering gas prices, congressional Democrats have had very little to say. There is a commonsense response and that is to increase supply at home in a limited, environmentally responsible way.

America floats on top of an ocean of untapped oil reserves three times the size of Saudi Arabia's. As an immediate response to high gas prices, common sense dictates we should be moving immediately to increase our own massive domestic supplies and add American jobs in the process. In the short term, there is only one answer to high gas prices, and that is more American energy now.

Looking ahead, there is no doubt something needs to be done about demand. But while congressional Republicans have a solution to the problem, our friends on the other side have shown a stubborn unwillingness over the years to do much at all about increasing domestic supply, and the result of yesterday's inaction is the strain American families are feeling today in the form of record-high gas prices.

By failing to address supply, even with gas prices at $4 a gallon, congressional Democrats are telling the American people $4-a-gallon gasoline is acceptable, that they should get used to it. Kentuckians are not interested in getting used to $4-a-gallon gas and neither am I.

Congress has the power to do something about high gas prices, and we should. Americans are looking to Washington for action. What they are getting instead from Democrats in Congress is a lecture on ``gradual adjustments.'' Americans do not need a lecture; they need relief.

While Americans grow increasingly frustrated with gas prices, Democrats in the House of Representatives are showing where their priorities lie. Among other legislative business this week, they scheduled a vote on whether to ban the interstate sale of monkeys. House Democrats also recently took up resolutions commemorating National Plumbing Industry Week and the International Year of Sanitation. These resolutions are important, no doubt, to some. Yet none of them will do anything to lower gas prices.

Americans frustrated about high gas prices are wondering why Democrats in Congress are talking about monkey trade, and I don't blame them. It is time Democrats took the issue of high gas prices as seriously as the American people do. It is time Democrats in Congress join with the Republicans and get serious about lowering $4-a-gallon gas and lessening our reliance on Middle Eastern oil.

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT REQUEST--FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION NOMINEES

Mr. President, I have indicated to my good friend, the majority leader, it was my intention to ask consent that we go ahead and confirm the FEC nominees. This agency has been essentially dysfunctional for most of the year because of disputes over the membership. I have given him notice that I would like to do that. I did not wish to surprise him.

Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that today, at a time to be determined by the two leaders, the Senate proceed to executive session under the following order: that the Senate begin consideration, en bloc, of the following Federal Election Commission nominations: Calendar No. 306, Steven T. Walther; Calendar No. 624, Cynthia L. Bauerly; Calendar No. 625, Caroline C. Hunter; Calendar No. 626, Donald F. McGahn; and the nomination of Matthew S. Petersen, PN1765, which is to be discharged from the Rules Committee; provided further, that there be 1 hour of total debate on the nominations, en bloc, with the time divided equally between the chairman and the ranking member of the Rules Committee. I further ask unanimous consent that at the expiration or yielding back of time, the nominations be confirmed, en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and, finally, the Senate return to legislative session.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?

Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, we are very close to being able to accept this. I think the consent agreement is appropriate. I think the times laid out are what we need. But I have a Senator who still has one more conversation with one of the nominees. He has been diligent. He has met with almost every one of them. He has one more. That person is in Europe now, and he has agreed to do that by telephone. So, in the next couple days, he will do that.

I have every belief that very early next week we should be able to complete these nominations. A number of these people have been very patient. They have been hanging on, basically living off their savings or their wife's work, whatever the case might be, but they have not been working because, as the Republican leader said, it has been nonfunctional, they have been out of work.

I think we can get this done very quickly. It is very important. It is important for Democrats and Republicans. We need a body there that questions can be submitted to, especially in the midst of this Presidential election and all the other elections going on around the country.

Based on what I have said, Mr. President, I object.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.

The Republican leader.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to hear the majority leader shares my concern that we do not have a fully functioning Federal Election Commission. In fact, yesterday, the Democratic nominee for President called the system broken. Today is another example of the broken system.

This battle has been going on for more than 2 years, believe it or not, starting with the recess appointment of very well-qualified and well-respected experts in this field. The three recess appointments expired at the first of this year, and two nominees have ultimately withdrawn, citing the need for gainful employment, both well qualified, but one, having been unfairly and falsely maligned, ended up withdrawing.

So here we are today, after an April 29 commitment by the majority, that a review of new nominees would be simple and a commitment to speedy review. I know that is what the majority leader hoped to accomplish but, in fact, here we are still.

Let me be perfectly clear, we have gone out of our way, willing to confirm nominees who many on our side believe are completely misguided on the matter they would be regulating.

But in the interest of obtaining a fully functioning FEC, it has always been my belief that the Democrats pick their nominees and we pick ours. I can't recall ever having made a Democratic nominee for the Federal Election Commission ``controversial,'' but that seems not to be the case when Republicans pick nominees. They are frequently demonized and declared unqualified.

Nevertheless, we are where we are, and hopefully we can get this done as rapidly as possible. There always seems to be a snag, and the snags always seem to be on the other side. I know this is something the majority leader is not happy about. He has just indicated he wants to move forward, and it is my hope we can get this done as rapidly as possible.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an article citing the Democratic National Committee's intent to file yet another frivolous lawsuit next Tuesday--one that was dismissed once before--against the FEC, citing their failure to act on a matter related to Senator McCain.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1.)

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the only way the DNC can maintain this suit is if there is a nonfunctioning FEC. Thus, in order for the DNC's already failed lawsuit to go forward, this package must be objected to, and they have done just that.

I hope this continued delay of getting a fully constituted FEC is not related to the fact that the DNC is trying to, we think, file a lawsuit on Monday. Those are the kinds of shenanigans which I don't think we ought to export from the campaign to the Senate. In the Senate, it strikes me we have an obligation to get this Federal Election Commission reconstituted and functioning, not to try to give one party's national committee or another some kind of advantage in a pending lawsuit.

So I am encouraged by the majority leader's desire to get these nominations completed. I know we are not having votes Monday, but we are in Monday. It strikes me that Monday would be a very good time to get these nominees confirmed, if, in fact, we can't do it later today if the snag the majority leader indicated could be cleared up. I know, because he has just said, he shares my view that we ought to get this job done, and I think the best time to do it would be today. The second best time to do it would be shortly after we convene on Monday.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source