Media Stakeout Following Senate Policy Committee Luncheon With Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator John Cornyn

Press Conference

SEN. MCCONNELL: Well, the Republican lunch didn't have quite as prominent a guest as the -- as the Democratic lunch, but we did have two conservative economists to give us their takes on the second tranche of the TARP and on the stimulus package and had an active discussion in that regard.

I would just make this observation with regard to the -- to the TARP, if any of you can hear. The -- most of our members are extremely interested in what the second tranche of the TARP may be used for, and expressed varying degrees of discontent with the Summers letter, which came out, I believe, yesterday. We'd like to hear more from the new president and his team about just exactly how the 350 billion (dollars) would be used.

As most of you will recall, back in late September and early October an overwhelming majority of my conference voted for the original financial rescue package. We had a sense, based on the representations that were made at the time, that it was about saving the financial system. The outgoing administration then ended up using it for an automobile bailout. And I think I'm safe in saying that the -- that diminished significantly the enthusiasm among Republicans for the second tranche of the TARP.

Having said that, we're certainly willing to listen to the new administration, the incoming administration, about how it believes these funds ought to be used and look forward to getting -- to learning more with some degree of specificity about exactly how these funds would be used.

With that, let me call on you, John.

SEN. CORNYN: Well, it seems like it's been a long time since the election on November the 4th, but here the United States Senate is, convened with 98 senators, and the seat in Illinois unfilled, as well as the seat in Minnesota.

Regarding Illinois, Republicans have always taken the position the best way to remove the taint of an appointment made by a governor who is soon to be indicted, and who's already been charged with very serious crimes involving corruption, would be to have a special election. The Democrats, particularly Senator Durbin and others, had said -- had agreed with that. President-elect Obama had agreed with that.

Now, after a very confusing couple of weeks, they've reversed course entirely. And Mr. Burris, it seems, will be seated this week, with a proper certificate recognized under Rule II of the Senate rules.

Conversely, they've taken a very difficult-to-understand position with regard to the Minnesota seat. Under Minnesota law, a court -- which was created yesterday, three-judge court -- will decide what votes were cast in that elections (sic) validly, consistent with Minnesota law. And it may go on for a matter of weeks or perhaps even months. But the Democrat leadership has taken the perplexing position that Al Franken should be seated, even provisionally, even if he lacks the very same sort of certificate and documentation that they resisted Mr. Burris's seating because he lacked.

Our position is that Norm Coleman and Al Franken and the people of Minnesota are entitled to know who won the election as a result of all valid votes cast. We won't know that for some time now, but it will be decided by the people of Minnesota and not by power brokers here in Washington, D.C.

But we reiterate the best thing that could have happened would be to have a special election and remove the taint from this appointment in the first place.

SEN. MCCONNELL: Take a couple of questions, if there are any.

Q (Off mike) -- from the Obama administration to address the concerns? Do you want a second letter from -- (off mike) -- Summers, or is --

SEN. MCCONNELL: Well, I think most of my members feel like the Summers letter was not sufficient to get their support. Now, there will be some Republicans who will support -- who will oppose the resolution of disapproval. But I think it lacked the specificity and the -- and, frankly, the representation. It was going to be used in connection with a financial system that would comfort a significant number of our members.

And I would remind you that we had a very, very large bipartisan majority for the original financial rescue package. It enjoyed the support of a big majority of my members, as well as the Democrats. I think that's not likely to be there if the Summers letter is the only representations we get from the incoming administration.

Q Mr. Leader, have you heard from President-elect Obama or anybody on his staff as far as outreach is concerned, trying to -- (off mike) -- report, or have you expressed your concern to him directly or anybody on his staff directly?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Yeah, I've talked to him. He's talked to a number of our members. He'd very much like to have Republican support. And in the most constructive way possible, I'm suggesting to you and I've suggested to him that a way to get that is for these representations about how the money might be used to be more specifically targeted to the problem that we thought we were advocating this money for back in October.

Q (Off mike.)

SEN. MCCONNELL: Well, we haven't seen the stimulus (thing ?) yet. There's been lot of talk about what the composition of it may be. We heard an interesting proposal at lunch that is worth, I think, considering, and that was a two-year elimination of the payroll taxes, put a lot of money back in the hands of business and in the hands of individuals, both of whom pay the payroll tax, another idea to put money back in the pockets of the American people that might be worth considering.

But we haven't seen the package yet. We've discussed the various aspects of what we think might be in it. Republicans generally speaking, from Maine to Mississippi, like tax relief. Maybe a payroll tax elimination for a couple of years is a thing worth taking a look at.

Thanks a lot.

Source