Senate Proceeding on Apr 23rd, 2009 :: 6:16:00 to 6:30:50
Total video length: 12 hours 29 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:79 Duration: 0:14:50 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

6:12:05 to 6:19:30( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Mike Johanns

6:15:44 to 6:16:05( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: support of ploy support of my colleagues to stand in support of my motion to instruct the conferees which says this: don't just drop our amendment when you walk into the conference committee meeting. it says, rember we voted overwhelmingly against shutting off debate and using as littl

6:16:06 to 6:16:27( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: as pass complex cap-and-trade legislation. it says, don't forget that cap and trade which if passed will radically change the economic landscape of this great nation. and amendments to such a bill sh by the rules of the budget

6:16:28 to 6:16:50( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: process a process that was build for deficit redtion, not greenhouse gas reduction. it asks for leadership f senate conferees so the american people can witness a full debate on thi very, very important issue. now, where does that leave us one might ask the question, well, why is the motion necessary?

6:16:51 to 6:17:11( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: with such a strong against including instructions for cap and trade, isn't that message already clear? well, mr. president, the message is clear. but i think we have to be vigilant for some simple reasons. first relearned over the past several days that budget discussions are far from over.

6:17:12 to 6:17:33( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: reports indicate that negotiations will continue offer the next several days, maybe even in the next several weeks. memories fade. if we think that budget recollectioreconciliation is off the table we could be very mistaken. budget committee leadership from both the house and the senate has specifically noted that

6:17:34 to 6:17:55( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: debate on the inclusion of reconciliation instructions continues to be very intense. in other words, the use of budget reconciliation for cap and trade does remain a possibility. cap and trade could be slipped into law if the house instructions as currently written end up in the conference report.

6:17:56 to 6:18:20( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: for me, today's motion is about being able to say to nebraskans when i return home, look them in the eye and said "well, yes, i read that bill and i carefully considered its impact on you, your families and your businesses and your future. yes, i did everything i could to make sure people from nebraska

6:18:21 to 6:18:43( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: understood well tax burden likely to result," and, after considering all of those things i stood up and cast a vote "yes or no." we need to stand up to those who want to use reconciliation to stop our transparency and limit debate. i believe that both chairman conrad who i respect and ranking

6:18:44 to 6:19:04( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: member gregg who i respect are battling mightily to ensure that reconciliation instructions are not included. and today on the floor of the senate i commend them f that bipartisan effort. but they need our help. they need an army of united states senators whose concern is the interests of the american people.

6:19:05 to 6:19:27( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: a vote in support of this motion can do just that. we need this vote. we need to pass this motion. we need to insist that the text of the amendment which 67 senators, both republic and democrat supported, remains in the conference report on the budget so, mr. president, i appreciate

6:19:28 to 6:19:30( Edit History Discussion )

Mike Johanns: the community to express this -- the opportunity to express this.

6:19:31 to 6:19:52( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: i urge my colleagues to support this motion. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mr. gregg: if the senator would indulge me for two minutes i want to speak quickly on behalf of the senator from nebraska's amendment. he has outlined a lot of the substantive reasons why it's important it wouldn't be

6:19:35 to 6:21:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Judd Gregg

6:19:53 to 6:20:13( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: appropriate to do this te of huge policy on a 20-hour debate, no amendment situation, up-or-down vote but there is another issue that guess to the integrity of the senate and the purposes of the senate. basically, reconciliation is purely a senate events. the house doesn't need reconciliation. the house has a rules committee. they can determine how long debate's going to be, when

6:20:14 to 6:20:35( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: there's going to be debate and how many amendments there will be. the senate historically has been the place where people talk, to discuss, to air out an issue and then to have amendments on that that's the whole funds of the senate in our constitutional process.

6:20:41 to 6:21:01( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: and i find it i the house of representatives would try to dictate the rules to the senate in a dictating in a manner which basically goes at the fundamental purposes of the senate which is that the senate be a place where debate, discussion and amendment occurs on policy issues of great substance. i don't argue that

6:21:02 to 6:21:23( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: reconciliation isn't a useful and appropriate tool to be used and here and there are many reconciliation initiatives w i voted for but in the area that the senator has noted which is a massive change a huge tax on every person who turns on a light in every home in america, that shouldn't be

6:21:24 to 6:21:25( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: done under reconciliation.

6:21:26 to 6:21:46( Edit History Discussion )

and equally point, the house of representatives should not be expl telling the senate what the rules of the road are here in the senate. they have enough issues in their own right over there so at this point i think the senator from michigan wanted to recognized. at the come pleadings of the senator from -- completion of the senator from michigan,

6:21:47 to 6:22:09( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: unless the senator has further comments i would, the next member to be recognized on our side, would be senator grassley. the presiding officer: the sena mr. conrad: mr. president, with respect to reconciliation being used for cap and trade or climate change, there is no pro

6:21:50 to 6:25:35( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Kent Conrad

6:22:10 to 6:22:30( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: house side for that purpose. at least that's the stated intention of the speaker of the house of representatives. and there is no reconciliation instruction in our resolution here, at all, for let me just

6:22:31 to 6:22:51( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: happen to agr from nebraska. i personally did not believe that reconciliation should be used for this purpose. the republicans, when they were in a position, abused reconciliation. i believe that strongly.

6:22:52 to 6:23:13( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: reconciliation was designed for one purpose and one purpose only and that was our friends on the other side used it to dramatically cut taxes and increase the deficit. that was, to me, an absolute abuse of reconciliation. but two wrongs don't make a right and i don't believe using

6:23:14 to 6:23:35( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: reconciliation for major substantive legislation that is not fundamentally deficit reduction is an inappropriate use of one. number two, i think people will find that because reconciliation was designed for a very specific purpose, that it does not work

6:23:36 to 6:23:56( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: well for the purposes of writing major substantive legislation and i won't go into all the technical reasons why that's the case but it is the case. we will get to questions of reconciliation being used for other purposes, as well. i have argued

6:23:57 to 6:24:17( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: privately reconciliation ought to be reserved for deficit reduction but i do want to reconciliation instruction in the resolution coming from the senate and in the house the speaker has made clear that reconciliation would not be used for climate change legislation

6:24:18 to 6:24:38( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: or legislation. mr. gregg: would the senator yield for a question? mr. conrad: i am happy to yield. mr. gregg: i identify with your art that it should not used for major public policy initiatives which require debate and hearing in the senate and an amendment process. ar your logic on cap and trade

6:24:39 to 6:24:59( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: applies also to major health care overhaul? mrconrad: my logic does, and as i have made very clear over and over and over, publicly and privately, but,ou know, i don't get to decide. we have house conferees.

6:25:00 to 6:25:20( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: we have other senate co conferees and we have a white house who has an interest although they have no formal role in the budget process. they submit a budget but the budget resolution is entirely a congressional document. with that said i do want to indicate, i voted for the gentleman's amendment previously.

6:25:21 to 6:25:35( Edit History Discussion )

Kent Conrad: i'll vote for it again. but i do don't have any instructio and the house, through its leader don't intend to use reconciliation instruction for the purpose of cap and trade or

6:25:36 to 6:25:56( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: for the purpose of climate change legislation. mr. gregg: if the senator will yield for a further question, i the senator is one of the most influencal mbers of the senate and of the congress and when he says he wants something to happen, especially when it deals with the budget, i know it will. mr. conrad: i wish that were

6:25:40 to 6:26:20( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Judd Gregg

6:25:57 to 6:26:17( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: true. i wish the senate had been with me in the discussion the last few days tuesday. i yield the floor. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. i, motion to instruct

6:26:18 to 6:26:22( Edit History Discussion )

Judd Gregg: i understand we don't yet have an agreement to be able to move

6:26:23 to 6:26:44( Edit History Discussion )

forward on that and i first want to indicate that the chairman of t committee joined with the senator from nebraska in supporting his amendment to the budget resolution. but i believe it's not enough just to say what climate change. it's very important to say what

6:26:45 to 6:27:05( Edit History Discussion )

we will so, mr. president, that's what my motion to instruct does. it provides a positive direction for future climate and i want to thank my colleagues, senators boxer, brown, shaheen, cardin and lieberman, for cosponsoring this motion to instruct.

6:27:06 to 6:27:28( Edit History Discussion )

the budget we pass is truly about investing in america's fought. with all respect to our ranking member who i have great respect and fondness for, there is a difference in this budget in terms of priorities. no question about it. there is a big difference in terms of what we want to invest: nls, energy

6:27:29 to 6:27:49( Edit History Discussion )

care, jobs and i might say, coming from michigan -- jobs, jobs, jobs. so there is a difference in direction, in values, in priorities in this budget and i believe it is what the american people are asking for. our policy on climate change has got

6:27:50 to 6:28:13( Edit History Discussion )

as o budget if done right, climate change legislation will create new jobs, new industries and it will revitalize and strengthen our economy. so i will offer a motion to instruct in response to other amendments that say what we cannot do. my motion, on the other hand, is

6:28:14 to 6:28:35( Edit History Discussion )

what america can do, what we must do. my state of michigan is facing serious challenges right now. we have the rate in the country of 12.6%. the hard-working people, the families in michigan and other states that are struggling, need us to do a climate change policy right.

6:28:36 to 6:28:57( Edit History Discussion )

so that it does create jobs and transform our economy. our economy can't go forward with the same old dependent on foreign oil; pollution that harms our health and our economic interests. climate policy can and must look out for working families and businesses whether it's a

6:28:58 to 6:29:18( Edit History Discussion )

farmer, a tech engineer. that's why the motion to instructs that i will be offering, it rests to the of a climate policy that is well balanced to address all of create jobs in manufacturing and breaks america of our dangerous addiction to

6:29:19 to 6:29:40( Edit History Discussion )

foreign oil. we can't rely any longer on the same old technologies and the same old fuels, with new energy solutions come new jobs and new industries. america has always led the world in innovation and we can do it again,r. president, in a green energy economy if we do this right.

6:29:41 to 6:30:02( Edit History Discussion )

we're in the midst of evolution, an energy evolution. over 100 years ago henry ford revolutionized manufacturing in transportation with the automobile and the assembly line, and he also revolutionized the way we pay people in this country. he gave his workers $5 a day to work on the line when it wasn't

6:30:03 to 6:30:24( Edit History Discussion )

necessary to do that, because he wanted to make people that could buy his automobiles. and through doing that, that revolutionary policy to iest in workers, he helped create the middle class of this country. in the 1980's we had a computer revolution that changed the way we work, the way weigh communicate, the way we learn, way

6:30:25 to 6:30:48( Edit History Discussion )

the energy revolution of the 21st century will change our economy, i believe, if done right, and that's why the right kind of clate policy is so important. thmotion to strublght that i will b -- the motion to strubility that i be offering will protect and strengthen manufacturing. first we can ensure a level playing field on the world

6:30:49 to 6:31:09( Edit History Discussion )

doesn't hurt our bottom lines. this will protect u.s. manufacturers from international competitors that don't follow the same important environmental standards that our companies will have to follow. second, new manufacturing opportunities i believe that. for example, to meet the needs of new clean energy pro