Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
STATEMENT OF POLICY, AND,
THEREFORE, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES
WHEN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
VOTE ON THE FEINSTEIN AMENDMENT
TO VOTE AGAINST IT AND TO
SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION AS
FILED.
MORNING
BUSINESS IS CLOSED.
UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER, THE
SENATE WILL RESUME CONSIDERATION
REPORT.
CALENDAR NUMBER 6, S.
23, A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 35,
UNITED STATES CODE, TO PROVIDE
FOR PATENT REFORM.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM VERMONT IS
MR. PRESIDENT, I
UNDERSTAND WE HAVE THE FEINSTEIN
DESK.
I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
FEINSTEIN AMENDMENT NUMBER 133
BE MODIFIED WITH THE CHANGES
THAT ARE AT THE DESK.
OBJECTION.
MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT
TO THANK THE DISTINGUISHED
SENATOR FROM ARIZONA FOR HIS
WORDS HERE THIS MORNING.
HE -- HE WAS PART OF THE SMALL
GROUP OF REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS WHO'VE WORKED VERY,
VERY HARD OVER THE LAST COUPLE
OF YEARS ON THIS BILL WITH THE
IDEA OF GIVING US SOMETHING THAT
WOULD ALLOW INVENTORS,
ENTREPRENEURS AND INNOVATORS IN
AMERICA TO COMPETE WITH THE REST
OF THE WORLD.
I'M ONE AMERICAN WHO FEELS WE
CAN COMPETE WITH ANYBODY,
ANYWHERE PROVIDED WE'VE GOT A
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
AND OTHER COUNTIES HAVE SET US
ENOUGH BARRIERS TO US OF THEIR
OWN, WE SHOULDN'T BE SETTING UP
STATES.
AND ONE THING WE CAN DO IS TO
TAKE A MAJOR, LONG OVERDUE
CHANGE OF THE PATENT -- PATENT
LEGISLATION AND GIVE US THAT
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
INVENTORS AND INNOVATORS IN
THIS.
WE'LL BE BETTER OFF FOR IT.
AND WE'LL CREATE JOBS.
BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE'LL SHOW
THE REST OF THE WORLD, AMERICA'S
OPEN FOR BUSINESS, AMERICA CAN
DO AMERICA'S BUSINESS, AMERICA
CAN BE THE INNOVATORS THAT
THEY'VE BEEN FROM THE TIME THE
FIRST PATENT WAS ISSUED -- I SAY
WITH PRIDE -- TO A VERMONTER
BACK IN A DAY WHERE THE
THEN-SECRETARY OF STATE, THOMAS
JEFFERSON, REVIEWED THE
APPLICATION.
IT WAS THEN SIGNED BY THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
GEORGE WASHINGTON, THE HEIRS OF
THAT VERMONTER WISH THEY HAD THE
COPY OF THE ORIGINAL.
IT WOULD BE WORTH A TAD RIGHT
NOW.
BUT PROBABLY MORE THAN THE
INVENTION WAS WORTH.
BUT IT'S A -- NOW, OF COURSE,
THEY'RE NOT REVIEWED BY THE
THE PRESIDENT.
THANK GOODNESS, THERE'S OVER
700,000 PENDING.
WE NEED LEGISLATION TO BRING
THAT UP TO DATE.
AND THIS ACT WILL PROMOTE
INNOVATION, IT WILL CREATE NEW
BUSINESSES AND, AS A RESULT, NEW
JOBS.
THIS IS BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION
THAT WILL ALLOW INVENTORS TO
SECURE THEIR PATENTS MORE
QUICKLY, HAVE BETTER SUCCESS
COMMERCIALIZING THEM.
NOW, THE PENDING AMENDMENT, OF
COURSE, BASICALLY WOULD GUT THE
BILL.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT WOULD
DESTROY ALL THE WORK WE'VE TRIED
TO DO IN THIS BILL.
IT WOULD ELIMINATE A MAJOR PIECE
OF THIS EFFORT, THE TRANSITION
TO FIRST-INVENTOR-TO FILE PATENT
SYSTEM.
FIRST- INVENTOR-TO-FILE IS THE
FIRST PART OF THIS LEGISLATION
AND ENJOYS SUPPORT FROM EVERY
LEVEL OF THE PATENT COMMUNITY.
THE ADMINISTRATION, THE
SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, THE HEAD
OF THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK
OFFICE, THEY ALL OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT.
A VAST ARRAY OF INDIVIDUAL,
INDEPENDENT, SMALL INVESTORS,
SMALL BUSINESSES, LABOR OPPOSE
THIS AMENDMENT.
THE FOUR SENIOR REPUBLICANS ON
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WORKED
SO *** THIS BILL.
SENATORS GRASSLEY, HATCH, KYL
AND SESSIONS OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT.
NEEDLESS TO SAY, MR. PRESIDENT,
I OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT.
THE AMENDMENT WOULD GUT THE
REFORMS INTENDED BY THE BILL.
IT WOULD, OF COURSE, BE A POISON
PILL TO THESE LEGISLATIVE REFORM
EFFORTS.
SUPPORTERS OF THE LEGISLATION
BEFORE US, RANGING FROM
HIGH-TECH AND LIFE SCIENCES
COMPANIES TO UNIVERSITIES AND
SMALL BUSINESSES, PLACE SUCH A
HIGH IMPORTANCE ON THE
TRANSITION TO
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE SYSTEM
THAN MANY OF THEM, INCLUDING
THOSE WHO RESIDE IN JUST ABOUT
EVERY STATE, WOULD NOT SUPPORT A
BILL WITHOUT THOSE PROVISIONS.
A VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD STRIKE
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE PROVISION
IS EFFECTIVELY A VOTE AGAINST
THE HEART OF THE AMERICA INVENTS
ACT, IS EFFECTIVELY A VOTE TO
KILL THE ACT.
A TRANSITION TO
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE HAS BEEN
PART OF THIS BILL SINCE ITS
INTRODUCTION FOUR CONGRESSES AGO
AGO.
YET UNTIL VERY RECENTLY,
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE WAS NEVER
THE SUBJECT OF EVEN A SINGLE
AMENDMENT IN THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE OVER ALL THOSE YEARS.
THIS SLDGES A PRODUCT OF EIGHT
SENATE HEARINGS, THREE MARKUPS
SPANNING WEEKS OF CONSIDERATION,
NUMEROUS AMENDMENTS.
NEVER WAS FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE
A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE.
SOME WELL-FANSED SPECIAL
INTERESTS THAT --
WELL-FINANCED SPECIAL INTERESTS
THAT DO NOT SUPPORT THE AMERICA
INVENTS ACT, HAVE MOUNTED A
CAMPAIGN TO STRIKE THESE VITAL
PROVISIONS, AND I URGE SENATORS
WHO SUPPORT THE GOALS OF THE
AMERICA INVENTS ACT TO VOTE
AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT TO STRIKE
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE.
MR. PRESIDENT, THE UNITED STATES
IS THE ONLY INDUSTRIALIZED
COUNTRY STILL USING
FIRST-TO-INVENT SYSTEM AND
THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.
A FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE SYSTEM,
BY CONTRAST, WITH THE PRIORITY
OF A RIGHT TO A PAT SENT BASED
ON THE -- PATENT IS BASED ON THE
EARLIER FILED APPLICATION, ADDS
SIMPLICITY AND OBJECTIVITY INTO
A VERY COMPLEX SYSTEM.
BY CONTRAST, OUR CURRENT
OUTDATED METHOD FOR DETERMINING
THE PRIORITY OF RIGHT TO PATENT
IS EXTRAORDINARILY COMPLEX, IT'S
SUBJECTIVE, IT'S TIME-INTENSIVE,
IT'S EXPENSIVE.
THE OLD SYSTEM ALMOST ALWAYS
FAVORS THE LARGER CORPORATIONS
AND THE DEEP POCKETS OVER THE
SMALL, INDEPENDENT INVENTOR.
THIS PAST WEEKEND, "THE
WASHINGTON POST" EDITORIAL BOARD
ENDORSED THE TRANSITION.
THEY CALLED OUR
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE STANDARD
A -- QUOTE -- "BRIGHT LINE" AND
THEY WENT AHEAD AND THAT SAID IT
WOULD BRING STOARNT THE --
CERTAINTY TO THE PROCESS.
THE EDITORIAL ALSO RIGHTLY
RECOGNIZES THE PROTECTIONS FOR
ACADEMICS TO SHARE THEIR IDEAS
WITH OUTSIDE COLLEAGUES OR
PREVIEW THEM IN PUBLIC SEMINARS
THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BILL.
THE TRANSITION TO
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE SYSTEM
WILL BENEFIT SMALL INVENTORS AND
INVENTORS OF ALL SIZES BY
CREATING CERTAINTY.
ONCE A PATENT IS GRANTED, AN
INVEBTER CAN -- INVENTOR CAN
RELY ON HIS FILING DATE ON THE
FACE OF THE PATENT.
NOW, IF YOU HAVE A PATENT, YOU
WANT TO RAISE CAPITAL, YOU WANT
TO GROW YOUR BUSINESS, YOU WANT
TO CREATE JOBS AND YOU'RE GOING
TO USE THE PATENT WHEN YOU GO
OUT TO INVESTORS AND SAY, HERE'S
THE PATENT I HAVE.
THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HOW DO YOU
KNOW THAT'S A PAT NOT THAT WE'RE
GOING TO BE --
PATENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
ABLE TO RELY ON?
AND THE ANSWER IS, BECAUSE I WAS
THE FIRST TO FILE.
AND THEN SPANNING MAYBE YEARS OF
INVESTIGATION, YOU CAN GO
FORWARD.
AND THE COST OF THE PATENT THAT
COMES WITH THE TRANSITION IN THE
SYSTEM SHOULD ALSO HELP THE
INDEPENDENT INVENTOR.
IN THE OUTDATED CURRENT SYSTEM
WHERE MORE THAN ONE APPLICATION
CLAIMS THE SAME INVENTION HAS
FILED, THE PRIORITY OF A RIGHT
TO A PATENT IS DECIDED THROUGH
AN INTERFERENCE PROCEEDING TO
DETERMINE WHICH APPLICANT CAN BE
DECLARED TO HAVE INVENTED THE
CLAIMED INVENTION FIRST.
IT'S LENGTHY, IT'S COMPLEX.
IT CAN COST HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.
SMALL INVENTORS RARELY, IF EVER,
WIN INTERFERENCE PROCEEDINGS.
A FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE SYSTEM,
HOWEVER, THE FILING DATE OF THE
APPLICATION IS OBJECTIVE, IS
RESULTS IN A STREAMLINED AND
LESS COSTLY PROCESS.
THE BILL PROTECTS AGAINST THE
CONCERNS OF ANY SMALL INVENTORS
AND UNIVERSITIES BY INCLUDING A
ONE-YEAR GRACE PERIOD TO ENSURE
THAT INVENTOR'S OWN PUBLICATION
OR DISCLOSURE CANNOT BE USED
AGAINST HIM AS PRIOR ART AGAINST
ANOTHER PATENT APPLICATION.
THIS ENCOURAGES EARLY DISCHOASH
YOU'RE OF NEW IN--
EARLY DISCLOSURE OF NEW
INVENTIONS, REGARDLESS OF
WHETHER THE INVENTOR ENDS UP
TRYING TO PATENT THE INVENTION.
THE TRANSITION TO
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE IS ALSO
NEEDED TO HELP AMERICAN
COMPANIES AND INNOVATORS COMPETE
GLOBALLY.
AS BUSINESS AND COMPETITION
INCREASINGLY OPERATE IN A
WORLDWIDE SCALE, INVENTORS HAVE
TO FILE PATENT APPLICATIONS IN
BOTH THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER
COUNTRIES FOR PROTECTION OF
THEIR INVENTIONS.
AFTER ALL, MR. PRESIDENT, ALL OF
US REALIZE THAT WE ARE AN
INTERCONNECTED WORLD.
AND WHEN YOU GO TO INVENT
SOMETHING, YOU WANT TO SELL
SOMETHING, YOU OBVIOUSLY THINK
OF GLOBAL MARKETS BUT YOU ALSO
THINK OF GLOBAL COMPETITORS.
IT'S A REALITY.
IT'S A REALITY OF TODAY.
AND SINCE AMERICA'S CURRENT
OUTDATED SYSTEM DIFFERS FROM THE
FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE SYSTEM
USED IN OTHER PATENT ISSUING
JURISDICTIONS -- ALL OUR
COMPETITORS -- IT CAUSES
CONFUSIONS AND INEFFICIENCIES
FOR AMERICAN COMPANIES AND
INNOVATORS.
HARMONIZATION WILL BENEFIT
AMERICAN INVENTORS.
COMMERCE SECRETARY GARY LOCKE
HIGHLIGHTED THE IMPORTANCE OF
THE FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE
PROVISIONS OF THE BILL IN HIS
COLUMN PUBLISHED IN "THE HILL"
YESTERDAY.
WOULD BE GOOD FOR U.S.
BUSINESSES, PROVIDE A MORE
TRANSPARENT AND COST-EFFECTIVE
PROCESS THAT PUTS THEM TO A
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD WITH THEIR
COMPETITORS AROUND THE WORLD."
SECRETARY LOCKE, WHO TRIES TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CREATE
JOBS IN AMERICA TO COMPETE WITH
THE REST OF THE WORLD POINTS OUT
HOW NECESSARY THIS IS.
HE WENT ON TO CONFRONT THE
ERRONEOUS NOTION THAT THE
CURRENT OUTDATED SYSTEM IS
BETTER FOR SMALL AND INDEPENDENT
INVENTORS AND HE DID IT HEAD-ON
BY EXPLAINING HIS STRONG OPINION
THAT THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.
THE FIRST-INVENTOR-TO-FILE
SYSTEM IS BETTER FOR THE SMALL
AND INDEPENDENT INVENTOR.
SO THE SECRETARY NOTED THE COST
OF PROVING THAT ONE IS FIRST TO
INVENT IS PROHIBITIVE, REQUIRES
DETAILED AND COMPLEX
DOCUMENTATION OF THE INVENTION
PROCESS.
IN CASES WHERE THERE'S A DISPUTE
ABOUT WHO THE ACTUAL INVENTOR IS
IS, TYPICALLY IT COSTS AT LEAST
$400,000 IN LEGAL FEES, EVEN
MORE IF THE CASE IS APPEALED.
BY COMPARISON, ESTABLISHING A
FILING DATE THROUGH A
PROVISIONAL APPLICATION AND
ESTABLISHING PRIORITY INVENTION
COSTS JUST $110.
CLOSED QUOTE.
MR. PRESIDENT, IF I WAS A SMALL
INVENTOR AND I THOUGHT I HAD
THOUGHT SOMETHING I WOULD APPLY
FOR A PATENT AND FACED WITH
PROVING THAT IT'S MY INVENTION
BY SPENDING $110,000 OR MORE
THAN $400,000, THIS VERMONT
QUICKLY.
I KNOW WHICH I'D PREFER.
AND SECRETARY LOCKE EXPLAINED
HOW THE $125,000 PROVISIONAL --
125,000 PROVISIONAL APPLICATIONS
CURRENTLY FILE EACH YEAR PROVE
THAT EARLY FILING DATES PROTECT
THE RIGHTS OF SMALL INVENTORS.
AND HE REITERATED THAT DURING
THE PAST SEVEN YEARS UNDER THE
CURRENT OUTDATED, CUMBERSOME AND
EXPENSIVE SYSTEM, OF ALMOST
3 MILLION APPLICATIONS FILED,
ONLY ONE PATENT WAS GRANTED TO
AN INDIVIDUAL INVENTOR WHO WAS
THE SECOND TO FILE.
THAT'S WHY OUR REFORM
LEGISLATION ENJOYS SUCH BROAD
SUPPORT.
I'VE ALREADY MENTIONED SOME OF
THESE SUPPORTERS BUT LET ME
HIGHLIGHT A FEW MORE.
JUST YESTERDAY, THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS
URGED EVERY SENATOR TO OPPOSE
THE EFFORT TO STRIKE THE
FIRST-TO-FILE TRANSITION.
THEY WROTE, THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS
SUPPORTS TRANSITIONING THE
UNITED STATES FROM
FIRST-TO-INVENT SYSTEM TO A
FIRST-TO-FILE SYSTEM TO
ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY COSTS AND
COMPLEXITY IN THE U.S. PATENT
SYSTEM, CLOSED QUOTE.
THE SMALL BUSINESS AND
ENTREPRENEUR COUNCIL SAID IT
OPPORTUNITIES IN THE
INTERNATIONAL MARKET WILL
THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATION CALLS THE
FIRST-TO-FILE SYSTEM CENTRAL TO
MODERNIZATION AND SIMPLIFICATION
OF THE PATENT LAW AND VERY
WIDELY SUPPORTED BY U.S.
COMPANIES.
INDEPENDENT INVENTOR LEWIS
FOREMAN, THE FIRST INVENTOR TO
FILE TRANSITION WILL HELP
INDEPENDENT INVENTORS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY BY STRENGTHENING THE
CURRENT SYSTEM FOR ENTREPRENEURS
AND SMALL BUSINESSES.
SIX UNIVERSITY MEDICAL COLLEGES
OF HIGHER EDUCATION ASSOCIATIONS
HAVE URGED THE TRANSITION TO
FIRST TO FILE SAYING IT WILL ADD
GREATER CLARITY TO THE U.S.
SYSTEM.
IN URGING THE TRANSITION TO A
FIRST-TO-FILE SYSTEM, THE
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE
TECHNOLOGY, WHICH REPRESENTS
SMALL AND MID-SIZED I.T. FIRMS
SAID THE CURRENT OUTDATED SYSTEM
NEGATIVELY IMPACTS
ENTREPRENEURS, PUTS AMERICAN
INVENTORS AT A DISADVANTAGE WITH
COMPETITORS ABROAD WHO CAN
IMPLEMENT
STANDARDS.
JUST NI ABOUT THAT.
WE KEEP -- JUST THINK ABOUT
WE KEEP THIS OUTDATED SYSTEM,
WE'RE AT A COMPETITIVE
DISADVANTAGE WITH THOSE PEOPLE
WE'RE TRYING TO WIN OVER IN
OTHER COUNTRIES.
WE OUGHT TO BE THINKING OF WHAT
PUTS AMERICA ON A LEVEL PLAYING
FIELD INSTEAD OF HOLDING AMERICA
BACK AND GIVING THE ADVANTAGE TO
OTHER COUNTRIES.
THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO
SYSTEM.
I ASK CONSENT THAT COPIES OF
"THE WASHINGTON POST" EDITORIAL
PATENTING INNOVATION BE INCLUDED
IN THE RECORD AT THE CONCLUSION
OF MY REMARKS.
IS
THERE OBJECTION?
SO ORDERED.
I ALSO ASK,
MR. PRESIDENT, THAT LETTERS TO
THE SENATE ASSOCIATION OF
MANUFACTURERS HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION, THE SMALL BUSINESS
ENTREPRENEURSHIP COUNCIL BE
PLACED IN THE RECORD AT THE
CLOSE OF MY COMMENTS.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
I THANK THE CHAIR
AND CONCLUDE WITH THIS: WE WANT
TO MAINTAIN OUR POSITION AT THE
FOREFRONT OF THE WORLD'S
ECONOMY, AND RIGHT NOW IT IS A
REAL BATTLE TO INCLUDE OUR
POSITION THERE.
IF WE ARE TO CONTINUE TO LEAD
THE GLOBE IN INNOVATION
PRODUCTION, AND AGAIN OUR
POSITION IS THREATENED, IF WE
ARE TO WIN THE FUTURE THROUGH
AMERICAN INGENUITY, WE MUST A
PATENT SYSTEM TO STREAMLINE
EFISHES IS I.
THE FIRST INVENTOR TO FILE
SYSTEM IS PARTICULARLY CRUCIAL
TO FULFILLING THIS PROMISE.
I URGE SENATORS ON BOTH SIDES OF
THE AISLE TO OPPOSE THE
FEINSTEIN AMENDMENT AND SUPPORT
THE IMPORTANT PROVISION OF FIRST
INVENTOR TO FILE AT THE HEART OF
THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT.
AND I WOULD SUBMIT THE LIST OF
STAKEHOLDERS ACROSS THE
SPECTRUM, WHO SUPPORT THE
TRANSITION OF THE FIRST-TO-FILE
SYSTEM AND ASK CONSENT THAT THAT
LIST BE PART OF THE RECORD.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
MR. PRESIDENT, I
SEE THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR
FROM DELAWARE WHO HAS BEEN SO
HELPFUL IN THIS ON THE FLOOR,
AND SO I WILL YIELD THE FLOOR.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM DELAWARE IS
MY THANK TO THE
LEADERSHIP REGARDING S. 23.
I RISE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO
THE FEINSTEIN AMENDMENT WHICH
WOULD STRIKE THE FIRST TO FILE
PROVISION THAT I THINK IS ONE OF
THE CRITICAL COMPONENTS OF THIS
ACT THAT WILL HARMONIZE THE
AMERICAN PATENT SYSTEM WITH THE
REST OF THE WORLD.
AS YOU HEARD CHAIRMAN LEAHY
SPEAK TO, THIS IS A CRITICAL
FEATURE OF THIS REFORM BILL.
THIS IS THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE
PATENT REFORM BILL IN 60 YEARS.
IT IS A KEY PIECE OF OUR
BIPARTISAN WORK TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE UNITED STATES REMAINS A
COMPETITIVE COUNTRY WHICH CAN
ONCE AGAIN BE AT THE FOREFRONT
OF WORLD INNOVATION.
AS SOMEONE WHO, LIKE YOU,
MR. PRESIDENT, IS CONCERNED
ABOUT MANUFACTURING, IS
CONCERNED ABOUT EMPLOYMENT, IS
CONCERNED ABOUT JOBS, I THINK
ONE OF THE WAYS WE CAN
RESTRENGTHEN, REINVIGORATE,
REENERGIZE MANUFACTURING IN THIS
COUNTRY IS BY MAKING SURE THAT
OUR PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
IS AS CAPABLE, IS AS STRONG AS
IT CAN POSSIBLY BE.
AND I TAKE QUITE SERIOUSLY THAT
THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNDER THE VERY ABLE LEADERSHIP
OF DIRECTOR CAPOS IS OPPOSED TO
THIS AMENDMENT AND HAS ALSO
RAISED CONCERN, WHICH I SHARE,
THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD TEAR
APART THE VERY BROAD COALITION
THAT HAS WORKED SO HARD AND HAS
NEGOTIATED THIS PARTICULAR ACT,
THE AMERICAN INVENTS ACT, OVER
THE LAST SIX KWRAOEFRPLTS ON AN
ISSUE THAT IS AS IMPORTANT AS
THIS, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT
THAT WE IN THE SENATE NOT ALLOW
THIS BIPARTISAN BILL TO FALL
APART OVER THIS ISSUE.
THE TRANSITION OF FIRST TO FILE
IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE
CURRENT SYSTEM BECAUSE IT
PROVIDES INCREASED
PREDICTABILITY, CERTAINTY AND
TRANCE PARPB SEUFPLT PATENT
PRIORITY WILL DETERMINE THE DATE
OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURES AND
EFFECTIVE FILING DATE RATHER
THAN SECRET PERSONAL FILES WHICH
MAY OR MAY NOT BE ADMISSIBLE AND
OFTEN LEADS TO LONG, CONTENTIOUS
AND EXPENSIVE LITIGATION AS THE
COMMENTS.
THIS PREDICTABILITY, THE PREDICT
ABILITY THE FIRST TO FILE SYSTEM
WILL BRING I BELIEVE STRENGTHENS
THE HAND OF THE INVENTORS AND
THE PUBLIC ALL OF WHOM WILL KNOW
AS SOON AS AN APPLICATION IS
FILED WHETHER IT IS LIKELY TO
HAVE PRIORITY OVER OTHER PATENT
APPLICATIONS.
IN CONTRAST, THE CURRENT SYSTEM
DOES NOT PROVIDE AN EASY WAY TO
DETERMINE PRIORITY.
THAT'S WHY INTERFERENCE
PROCEEDINGS CAN BE SO
EXPENSIVE.
THERE ARE SOME INNOVATORS, SOME
INVENTORS, SOME SMALL INVENTORS
IN PARTICULAR WHO I KNOW ARE
CONCERNED THAT FIRST TO FILE
WILL BE USED BY LARGER COMPANIES
TO STEAL AWAY THEIR RIGHTFUL
INVENTIONS.
THIS BILL CONTAINS CRITICAL
PROTECTIONS FOR ALL INVENTORS SO
THAT THE ULTIMATE NEW SYSTEM,
ONCE THIS IS PASSED, WILL BE
MORE FAIR, MORE PREDICTABLE AND
TRANSPARENT FOR ALL.
FOR THOSE INVENTORS WHO PUBLICLY
DISCLOSE AN INVENTION BEFORE
ANYBODY ELSE, THEY HAVE A
ONE-YEAR GRACE PERIOD TO CLAIM
PRIORITY FOR ANY PATENT
APPLICATION BASED ON THE SUBJECT
MATTER WHICH THEY DISCLOSED.
SMALLER INVENTORS AS WELL AS
LARGE INVENTORS WOULD BE
PROTECTED AS SOON AS THEY PUBLIC
OR DISCLOSE UNDER THIS AMERICA
IN MY VIEW, THAT WILL INCREASE
THE FREE FLOW OF IDEAS WHILE
STILL PROTECTING THE I.P. RIGHTS
OF ANY INVENTOR, LARGE OR SMALL.
THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
COMMISSIONED A STUDY OF PATENT
APPLICATIONS FILED OVER THE PAST
SEVEN YEARS.
THEY FOUND ONLY ONE IN 300,000
FILINGS WOULD UNDER THE NEW
SYSTEM GRANT A PATENT TO A LARGE
COMPANY THAT OTHERWISE MIGHT
HAVE GONE TO A SMALL COMPANY OR
AN INDIVIDUAL INVENTOR.
BY AVOIDING THE COST, THE
DIFFICULTY, THE UNPREDICT
ABILITY OF LENGTHY INTERFERENCE,
THE NEW FIRST TO FILE WILL GET
AROUND THIS.
FIRST TO FILE GIVES THE HOLDER
OF A NEW PATENT INCREASED
CONFIDENCE IN THE STRENGTH AND
RELIABILITY OF THIS PATENT WHICH
I ALSO THINK WILL ACCELERATE
VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT, NEW
COMPANY FORMATION AND MOVEMENT
TOWARDS DEPLOYMENT OF CRITICAL
NEW TECHNOLOGY.
I THINK EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN IN
OTHER COUNTRIES, IN EUROPE AND
CANADA, THAT TRANSITIONING FROM
A FIRST TO INVENT TO FIRST TO
FILE SYSTEM WILL NOT LEAD TO AN
INCREASE IN SO-CALLED JUNK
APPLICATIONS AND WILL INSTEAD
MAKE PATENT APPLICATION SIMPLER,
FAIRER AND MORE PREDICTABLE.
IN SHORT, MR. PRESIDENT, MY VIEW
IS THAT IT IS CRUCIAL TO THIS
LEGISLATION FOR ITS SUCCESS.
IT IS CRUCIAL FOR THE COALITION
THAT HAS COME TOGETHER OVER MANY
YEARS TO SUPPORT IT.
IT IS CRUCIAL FOR THE PROGRESS
THAT THIS ACT WILL MAKE IN
STRENGTHENING AND STREAMLINING
THE PATENT REVIEW AND GRANTING
PROCESS HERE IN THE UNITED
STATES.
AND SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO
OPPOSE SENATE AMENDMENT 133.
WITH THAT, I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE
OF A QUORUM.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM COLORADO IS
RECOGNIZED.
QUORUM CALL?
IT IS.
I WOULD ASK THAT
THE QUORUM CALL BE VITIATED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
MR. PRESIDENT.
MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK
BRIEFLY ON THE IMPORTANCE OF
PASSING THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT.
CHAIRMAN LEAHY AND THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE HAVE WORKED HARD TO
PUT THIS PRODUCT ON THE FLOOR.
IT WILL MARK THE BIGGEST REFORM
YEARS.
THIS BILL WILL CREATE JOBS IN
COLORADO AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY
BY PROMOTING INNOVATION.
BY MAKING OUR PATENT SYSTEM MORE
EFFICIENT, WE ARE BUILDING THE
GROWTH.
IN MY STATE ALONE, NEARLY 20,000
PATENT APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN
GRANTED BETWEEN THE YEARS 2000
AND 2009.
THESE APPLICATIONS HAVE CREATED
THE FOUNDATION FOR OUR CLEAN
ENERGY ECONOMY AND EMERGING TECH
AND BIOINDUSTRIES.
HAVING THE
TRADEMARK OFFICE IS ESSENTIAL TO
MAINTAINING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP
IN INNOVATION, THE AMERICA
INVENTS ACT WILL HELP US BUILD
NEW INDUSTRIES AND HELP CURE THE
BACKLOG AND DELAY THAT HAS
STUNTED THE ABILITY OF INVENTORS
TO PATENT THEIR IDEAS.
RIGHT NOW THE AVERAGE PENDENCY
PERIOD FOR A PATENT APPLICATION
IS 36 MONTHS.
THAT IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE
IF WE ARE TO COMPETE WITH THE
REST OF THE WORLD.
THIS DOESN'T EVEN ACCOUNT FOR
THOSE PATENTS THAT HAVE BEEN
TIED UP IN YEARS OF LITIGATION
AFTER THEY ARE GRANTED.
AND WE'VE IMPROVED THE BILL ON
THE FLOOR BY HELPING SOLIDIFY
ALTERNATIVES TO LITIGATION,
PROVIDE FOR MORE EFFICIENT
RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES AND HELP
CREATE MORE CERTAINTY, WHICH IS
ESSENTIAL TO INVENTORS.
IT'S HARD TO PASS A JOBS BILL
WITHOUT SPENDING MONEY, BUT
THAT'S ABSOLUTELY WHAT WE'VE
DONE HERE.
THIS BILL DOES A GOOD JOB OF
BALANCING THE INTERESTS OF
INNOVATORS ACROSS THE MANY SEC
TEASERS OUR ECONOMY.
AND WE PASSED A NUMBER OF
BIPARTISAN AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE
IMPROVED THIS BILL.
WE ADDED AMENDMENTS PROMOTING
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
SATELLITE U.S. P.T.O. OFFICES IN
REGIONS ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
CREATING A DISCOUNT FOR SMALL
ENTITIES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
ACCELERATED PATENT EXAMINATION
PROGRAM OF THE PATENT AND
TRADEMARK OFFICE.
IT ADDRESSES CONCERNS IN VENUE
POSITIONS.
I AM PROUD TO HAVE WORKED WITH
THE CHAIRMAN AND RANK MEMBER TO
GET THESE RESOLVED.
I ALSO WANT TO COMMEND SENATOR
MENENDEZ ON HIS OFFICE TO
PROVIDE A FAST-TRACK FOR PATENT
PATENTS, WHICH I COSPONSORED.
THE SENATE HAS COME A LONG WAY
TOWARD IMPROVING OUR PATENT
SYSTEM WITH THIS LEGISLATION AND
HARMONIZING OUR SYSTEM WITH THE
REST OF THE WORLD.
THERE ARE A THE LOVE PEOPLE IN
MY STATE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN
FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS, AND I
PLEDGE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
THEM TO MAKE SURE WE CONTINUE TO
FINE-TUNE THIS LEGISLATION WHERE
WE CAN.
THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT
REPRESENTS SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS.
WE ARE MOVING OUR PATENT SYSTEM
INTO THE NEW CENTURY WHICH IS
ALREADY BEING DEFINED BY THE
NEXT WAVE OF AMERICAN
INNOVATION.
THE BREADTH OF SUPPORT FROM
LARGE AND SMALL INDUSTRIES AS WE
WILL AS OUR YIEWFTZ PROVIDED
MOMENTUM TO COMPLETE IN WORK.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE FOR
PATENT REFORM.
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, AND I
YIELD THE FLOOR.
I HAD NEAT THE ABSENCE OF A
QUORUM -- I'D NOTE THE ABSENCE
OF A IMOARM.
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
BEN BEN I HAVE SEVEN UNANIMOUS
CONSENT REQUEST FOR COMMITTEES
TO MEET DURING TODAY SESSION OF
THEY HAVE THE APRIEWL OF THE
MAJORITY AND MINORITY LEADERS.
I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT
THESE REQUESTS BE AGREED TO AND
THAT THESE REQUESTS BE PRINTED
IN THE REPORTED.
OBJECTION.
SO ORDERED.
BEN BEN MR. PRESIDENT, I NOTE
THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
THE
CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
I ASK THAT THE
QUORUM CALL BE SUSPENDED AND I
ASK CONSENT TO BE HE CANNED ARE
IN AS IF MORNING BUSINESS.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THIS MORNING THE REPUBLICAN
LEADER CAME TO THE FLOOR,
SENATOR McCONNELL, AND MADE
SOME PRETTY STRONG AND SWEEPING
STATEMENTS ABOUT THE STATE OF
THE DEFICIT AND RESPONSIBILITY,
RESPOND.
SENATOR McCONNELL SAID FOR TWO
YEARS NOW WASHINGTON DEMOCRATS
HAVE TAKEN FISCAL RECKLESSNESS
TO NEW LIGHTS.
THE AMOUNT OF RED LINK DEMOCRATS
PLAN TO EXCEED WOULD EXCEED ALL
THE DEBT RAN UP BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SINCE ITS INCEPTION
THROUGH 1984.
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NATIONAL
DEBT OF AMERICA WAS WHEN
PRESIDENT WILLIAM JEFFERSON
CLINTON LEFT OFFICE.
WE WERE RUNNING SURPLUSES.
WE HADN'T DONE THAT FOR DECADE.
SURPLUSES IN THE FEDERAL
TREASURY.
WHAT DID WE DO WITH ALL OF THIS
MONEY?
WE PUT IT IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY
TRUST FUND, WE BOUGHT MORE
LONGEVITY AND SOLVENCY FOR
SOCIAL SECURITY AND IF YOU
STRONGER.
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON LEFT
OFFICE AND AT THAT MOMENT IN
TIME, THE NATIONAL DEBT, THE
ACCUMULATED DEBT OF AMERICA FROM
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNTIL HE LEFT
OFFICE, $5 BILLION.
TRILLION.
REMEMBER THAT NUMBER.
$5 TRILLION.
FAST-FORWARD EIGHT YEARS AFTER
THE END OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W.
BUSH, EIGHT YEARS LATER WHERE
WERE WE?
THE NATIONAL DEBT WAS NOW $12
TRILLION.
FISCAL RECKLESSNESS BY
DEMOCRATS?
UNDER PRESIDENT BUSH, THE
NATIONAL DEBT MORE THAN DOUBLED.
AND I STEAD OF LEAVING A SURPLUS
FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA, HE SAID,
WELCOME TO AN ECONOMY THAT IS
HEMORRHAGE HEMORRHAGING HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF JOBS LOST EVERY
MONTH AND WE ANTICIPATE NEXT
YEAR'S DEFICIT, HE TOLD
PRESIDENT OBAMA, TO BE $1.2
TRILLION.
THAT WAS WHAT PRESIDENT BUSH
HANDED TO PRESIDENT OBAMA.
NOW, I DON'T MIND A SELECTIVE
VIEW OF HISTORY.
I GUESS WE'RE ALL GUILTY OF THAT
TO SOME EXTENT.
BUT TO IGNORE THE FISCAL MESS
CREATED THAT MORE THAN DOUBLED
THE NATIONAL DEBT IN EIGHT
YEARS, TO IGNORE THAT WE WAGED
TWO WARS WITHOUT PAYING FOR
THEM, TO IGNORE THAT WE CUT
TAXES IN THE MIDST OF A WAR
WHICH IS SOMETHING NO PRESIDENT
IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED
STATES HAS EVER, EVER DONE IS TO
IGNORE REALITY.
THE REALITY IS WE ARE HERE TODAY
IN THE MIDST OF THIS TITANIC
STRUGGLE ABOUT WHETHER WE ARE
GOING TO CONTINUE TO KEEP THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONING.
WE ARE REALLY BEING ASKED
WHETHER OR NOT TWO WEEKS FROM
NOW WE WANT TO HAVE SECURITY AT
OUR AIRPORTS.
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS, WHETHER
OR NOT WE WANT TO HAVE SOCIAL
SECURITY CHECKS SENT OUT, PEOPLE
ACTUALLY SENDING THE CHECKS,
ANSWERING QUESTIONS AT THE
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
WHETHER WE WANT THE SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION STILL
WORKING ON WALL STREET TWO WEEKS
FROM NOW.
WE CANNOT LUMP TWO WEEKS AT A
TIME FORWARD WITHOUT DOING A
GREAT DISSERVICE TO THE
TAXPAYERS OF THIS COUNTRY AS WE
WILL AS TO THE PEOPLE, THE MEN
AND WOMEN WHO WORK HARD FOR OUR
GOVERNMENT EVERY SINGLE DAY.
NOW, WHAT IS THE ANSWER IN THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES?
WELL, THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES SAYS, WE NEED TO
CUT $100 BILLION IN.
THEY STARTED AT $60 OBAMA,
INCIDENTALLY, THEN DECIDED THAT
WASN'T ENOUGH FOR BRAGGING
THIS YEAR.
YOU SAY, OUT OF A BUDGET OF $3.7
WHOA!
THEY DIDN'T LIKE AT THE BUDGET
OF $3.7 TRILLION.
THEY LOOKED AT ONE 14% SLICE OF
THE PIE.
DOMESTIC DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.
THAT'S IT.
NOTHING TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, NOTHING
TO BE TAKEN AWAY IN TERMS OF TAX
BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHIEST
CORPORATIONS, THE MOST
SUCCESSFUL CORPORATIONS.
NOTHING OUT OF THE OIL AND GAS
ROYALTIES AND THE LIKE.
WE'LL TAKE IT ALL OUT OF
SO WHAT DID THEY TAKE AWAY?
I'LL TELL YOU WHAT THEY TOOK
I LOOKED IN MY STATE LAST
WEEFNLG I WENT UP TO WOOD STOCK,
ILLINOIS, AND WE HAVE AN OFFICE
OPEN THERE WITH COUNSEL LORES
WHO ARE BRINGING IN UNEMPLOYED
PEOPLE, SITTING THEM DOWN IN
FRONT OF COMPUTERS WITH FAX
MACHINES AND COPY MACHINES AND
PHONES AND COUNSELORS.
THEY'RE PREPARING THEIR RESUMES
AND TRYING TO GET BACK TO WORK.
THEY ARE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO
WORK.
AND THEY NEED A HELPING HAND.
SUCCESSFUL.
IT PLACES PEOPLE IN THESE JOBS.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THAT OFFICE
UNDER THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN
IT WOULD CLOSE ITS DOORS.
UNEMPLOYMENT CHECKS.
IS THAT THE ANSWER TO PUTTING
AMERICA'S ECONOMY BACK ON ITS
FEET?
THAT HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET 15
MILLION AMERICANS BACK TO WORK?
HOW ABOUT THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS'
PROPOSAL TO ELIMINATE $850 A
YEAR IN PELL GRANTS?
SENATOR LEAHY, YOU KNOW WHAT
THAT'S ALL ABOUT.
THESE ARE KIDS FROM THE POOREST
FAMILIES IN AMERICA, MANY OF
THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THEIR
FAMILY HAVE A CHANCE TO GRADUATE
IT.
THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY.
WE GIVE THEM
A HELPING HAND AND THE
REPUBLICANS TAKE IT AWAY.
WHAT WILL IT DO?
THE PRESIDENT OF AUGUSTANA
COLLEGE IN ROCK ISLAND,
ILLINOIS, TOLD ME WHAT IT MEANT
T. MEANT THAT 5% OF, ONE OUT OF
EVERY 20 STUDENTS, WOULD GO
THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS.
TO CUT JOB TRAINING, TO CUT
WHEN WE HAVE 15 MILLION PEOPLE
OUT OF WORK, WHAT ARE THEY
THINKING?
I WENT TO A MEDICAL SCHOOL IN MY
HOMETOWN OF SPRINGFIELD,
SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE -- WE'RE SO
RESEARCHERS.
THEY GET A FEW MILLION DOLLARS
EACH YEAR TO DO MEDICAL RESEARCH
IN FIELDS OF CANCER THERAPY,
DEALING WITH HEART ISSUES,
DEALING WITH THE COMPLAINTS OF
VETERANS WHO ARE RETURNING.
WHAT DO THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS
DO?
THEY VIRTUALLY CLOSE DOWN THE
RESEARCH FOR THE REMAINDER OF
THE YEAR.
CLOSE DOWN MEDICAL RESEARCH.
IS THAT RIGHT?
IS THAT WHAT WE WANT IN AMERICA?
HAVE YOU EVER HAD A SICK PERSON
IN YOUR FAMILY AND YOU WENT TO
THE DOCTOR AND YOU SAID, DOCTOR,
IS THERE ANYTHING, IS THERE A
DRUG, IS THERE SOMETHING
THERE ANYTHING?
QUESTION?
IF YOU DID, THEN YOU'D KNOW THAT
THIS CUT BY THE HOUSE
REPUBLICANS IS MINDLESS.
TO CUT MEDICAL RESEARCH AT THIS
MOMENT IN HISTORY?
AND THEN I WENT TO THE NATIONAL
LABORATORY, ARGONNE NATIONAL
LABORATORY ON MONDAY.
WHAT DO THEY DO THERE?
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE
COULDN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
WELL, I LEARNED SPECIFICALLY.
ARE YOU AWARE THE CHEVY VOLT,
THIS NEW BREAKTHROUGH AUTOMOBILE
AUTOMOBILE, ALL-ELECTRIC
AUTOMOBILE?
WHERE DID THAT BATTERY COME FROM
IN THIS AUTOMOBILE?
THE ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY.
HOW ABOUT THE LATEST
PHARMACEUTICAL BREAKTHROUGHS?
VIRTUALLY EVERY ONE OF THEM USES
THE ADVANCED PHOTON SOURCE AT
THE ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY.
I MET A FLAN ELI LILLY WHO WAS
THERE EXPERIMENTING WITH A NEW
DRUG THAT CAN SAVE LIVES AT THIS
LABORATORY.
AND HOW ABOUT COMPUTERS?
WHERE'S THE FASTEST COMPUTER IN
THE WORLD TODAY?
STATES.
IT'S IN CHINA.
WE ARE NOW WORKING ON THE NEXT
FASTEST COMPUTER SO WE DON'T
LOSE THAT EDGE WHERE.
AT THE ARGONNE NATIONAL
LABORATORY.
SO WHAT WOULD THE HOUSE
REPUBLICAN BUDGET DO TO THAT
LABORATORY?
AND MOST EVERY OTHER LABORATORY?
IS WOULD ELIMINATE ONE-THIRD OF
THE SCIENTISTS AND SUPPORT STAFF
WORKING THERE AND CUT THEIR
RESEARCH BY 50% FOR THE REST OF
THE YEAR.
SO WHAT?
SO, IF WE DON'T MOVE THESE
PHARMACEUTICALS FORWARD TO
MARKET STOORN SAVE LIVES --
SOONER TO SAVE LIVES, IF WE
DON'T COMPETE WITH THE CHINESE
ON THIS COMPUTER, IN WE DON'T
DEAL WITH BATTERY TECHNOLOGY SO
THAT WE DON'T LOSE THAT
NEGLIGENT THE WORLD?
WHAT WILL IT MEAN?
LOST JOBS.
THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS WEREN'T
THINKING CLEARLY.
THEY WERE PERFORMING BRAIN
SURGERY WITH A HACKSAW.
AND AS A RESULT, THEY'VE CUT
THINGS THAT ARE ESSENTIAL FOR
THE FUTURE OF AMERICA.
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS,
EDUCATION, RESEARCH.
AND NOW TO HAVE THE REPUBLICAN
LEADER COME AND TELL US WE'VE
GOT TO ACCEPT THAT, THAT'S THE
FUTURE OF AMERICA.
NO, IT'S NOT.
TIME AND AGAIN WHEN WE SIT DOWN
TO DEAL WITH THE BUDGET
CHALLENGES, WHETHER IT'S IN THE
DEFICIT COMMISSION, WHICH I WAS
HONEST SERVICESSERED TO SERVE ON
ON -- WHICH I WAS HONORED TO
SERVE ON, OR WHETHER IT'S IN
PAST NEGOTIATIONS, WE OPEN THIS
TABLE UP TO ALL FEDERAL
SPENDING, NOT JUST TO 14%, THAT
TINY SLICE OF A PIE.
SENATOR McCONNELL CAN REMEMBER
REMEMBER, AND I CAN TOO, UNDER
PRESIDENT HERBERT WALKER BUSH
AND UNDER PRESIDENT CLINTON, WE
PUT ON THE TABLE THESE TAX
BREAKS FOR SOME OF THESE OIL
COMPANIES AND CORPORATIONS AND
SAID, IS IT REALLY WORTH
AMERICA'S FUTURE FOR US TO GIVE
THEM A TAX BREAK OR TO USE THE
MONEY TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT?
THAT'S AN HONEST QUESTION.
MANDATORY SPENDING.
ALL OF THESE THINGS NEED TO BE
BROUGHT TO THE TABLE FOR
CONVERSATION.
THE REPUBLICANS.
THEY WOULD RATHER SEE US SHUT
DOWN THE GOVERNMENT THAN TO OPEN
THIS CONVERSATION TO THE ENTIRE
FEDERAL BUDGET.
THEY WOULD RATHER SEE US SHUT
DOWN THE GOVERNMENT THAN FIGHT
TO MAKE SURE THAT EDUCATION AND
TRAINING, RESEARCH AND
INNOVATION, AND INFRASTRUCTURE
ARE THERE TO BUILD A STRONG
AMERICAN ECONOMY FOR THE FUTURE.
I WOULD STY MY FRIEND, SENATOR
McCONNELL FROM KEN -- SAY TO
MY FRIEND, SENATOR McCONNELL
FROM KENTUCKY, WE DON'T NEED ANY
SPEECHES FROM THAT SIDE OF THE
AISLE ABOUT A NATIONAL DEBT THAT
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT.
WE'VE GOT TO WORK TOGETHER IN A
BIPARTISAN WAY, ACKNOWLEDGING
THE REALITY OF HISTORY, THAT WE
ALL HAVE HAD A HAND IN REACHING
THE POINT WE ARE TODAY, BOTH
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POINTS
WHERE WE ARE TODAY, AND WE ALL
NEED TO TAKE A RESPONSIBLE
POSITION TO MOVE US FORWARD.
MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD THE
FLOOR.
MR. PRESIDENT?
THE
SENIOR SENATOR FROM VERMONT IS
MR. PRESIDENT, I
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF THE
SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS.
I -- I RECALL THE GREAT
DISCUSSIONS DURING -- WHEN I --
I HAPPENED TO HAVE LIKED
PRESIDENT REAGAN, WE GOT ALONG
VERY WELL, BUT I REMEMBER HIS
DISCUSSIONS ON A BALANCED BUDGET
AND ALL THAT AS HIS BUDGET
TRIPLED THE NATIONAL DEBT.
I DO RECALL HE DID -- HE DID
VETO ONE SPENDING BILL BECAUSE
IT DIDN'T SPEND AS MUCH AS HE
WANTED.
SO, YOU KNOW, RHETORIC IS ONE
THING, AS THE SENATOR FROM
OFTEN DIFFERENT.
SO I THANK HIM.
MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT AT 12:30 P.M., THE
SENATE PROCEED TO A VOTE IN
RELATION TO THE FEINSTEIN
AMENDMENT NUMBER 133, AS
MODIFIED, WITH NO INTERVENING
ACTION OR DEBATE, THE TIME UNTIL
THEN BE DIVIDED EQUALLY BETWEEN
THE PROPONENTS AND THE OPPONENTS
AND NO AMENDMENTS BE IN ORDER TO
THE FEINSTEIN AMENDMENT PRIOR TO
THE VOTE.
OBJECTION?
SO ORDERED.
AND, MR. PRESIDENT, I
SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM,
THE TIME EQUALLY DIVIDED.
WITHOUT
OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
QUORUM CALL:
QUORUM CALL:
A SENATOR: MADAM PRESIDENT?
THE
SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON.
MADAM PRESIDENT, I
ASK THAT THE QUORUM CALL BE
DISPENSED WITH.
WITHOUT