Senate Proceeding 10-06-09 on Oct 6th, 2009 :: 1:03:10 to 1:12:00
Total video length: 5 hours 19 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

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

Views:14 Duration: 0:08:50 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

1:03:07 to 1:03:29( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: mr. president, i urge my colleagues to reject the mccain amendment. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding of business is closed under the previous order the sen resume consideration of h.r. 3326, which the clerk will report. the clerk: 3326, an wi

1:03:10 to 1:12:00( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Daniel Inouye

1:03:30 to 1:03:52( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: for the and for other purposes. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. inouye: am i correct to assume that the first 30 minutes has been equally divided? the presiding officer: the senator's correct. mr. inouye: i minutes. the presiding officer: the senator's recognized. mr. inouye: mr. president, at the beginning of the year the

1:03:53 to 1:04:14( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: chairman of the house appropriations committee and announced earmark reforms that go far beyond the transparency requirem 2007. these reforms include a requirement for members to post their earmark requests on their websites. makes substantial reductions in

1:04:15 to 1:04:37( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: the number and amount of earmarks compared appropriations bills and earlier and prompt commi announcements on which projects are funded in each of the annual appropriations bills. there has never been transparency in the earmark process as there is today.

1:04:38 to 1:04:58( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: in most cases the public has had several months to review their elective representatives request for funding. the bill on the floor today has 200 fewer earmarks and 300 -- $300 million less in funding for member projects as compa

1:04:59 to 1:05:19( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: to last year's bill. mr. president, i believe this is a considerable improvement to how congress does its business. as chairman of the appropriations committee, i welcome any constructive suggestions on how to the operations and efficiency of the i was in which the committee accomplishes its vital work.

1:05:20 to 1:05:40( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: however, those suggestions should not compromise the constitutional principle that the power of the purse is invested in the congress. we must return to checks and balances and keep the and executive as separate and

1:05:41 to 1:06:02( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: co-equal branches of the government. that is why i must oppose the amendment offered by the s from arizona. it purports to increase transparency of congressional earmarks by subjecting all of them to full and open competition. in reality it exempts congressional priorities from

1:06:03 to 1:06:25( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: the normal, lawful process of how the department of defense services and develops new technologies. for example, with we have included a number of earmarks for which the department has negotiated c place. these contracts were negotiated

1:06:26 to 1:06:46( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: in full compliance with the law. simply because congress added funds to accelerate this important program, such as the tb-33 solar, the handheld radios for and the advanced radars for the f-15 fighter and the virtual

1:06:47 to 1:07:09( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: interactive for national guard units around the country, this amendment would require a new competion to take place. and, mr. president, this disrupt important programs, delay procurement of valuable equipment, and add to the cost of taxpayers.

1:07:10 to 1:07:34( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: the disregards fact that sometimes the pentagon gets it wrong. there are many programs which are now in use on the battlefield that would not be there if the department of defense's views had preveiled years ago. for example, congress

1:07:35 to 1:08:00( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: funds to the predator unmanned aerial vehicle, the predator. lifesaving -- and the v-22 programs that would not exist if congress had not dir to those specific purposes. now these items are considered treasures by the department of

1:08:01 to 1:08:21( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: defens suppose would have happened to those programs if the pentagon's bureaucracy had put those programs through the red tape required by the mccain amendment? would the predator be attacking our enemies in afganistan and

1:08:22 to 1:08:45( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: iraq or might it still be an exquisite com remains on t drawing boards? mr. president, ultimately the mccain amendment establishes two sets of acquisition laws. one for items requested by the president, which may be subject to full and open or limited or

1:08:46 to 1:09:11( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: and another set of rules -- items added by the congress. the amendment rests on the faulty assumption that defense department is unable to cond congressionally directed spending. and that earmarks do not serve a valid military purpose

1:09:12 to 1:09:32( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: responding to that, in 2008, last year, the inspector general of the department of defense reviewed fiscal 2007 defense appropriations act. the inspector general determined, and i wish to --

1:09:33 to 1:09:53( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: quote -- "the d.o.d. personnel interviewed and the respondents said that d.o.d. performs oversight of to the oversight of other expenditures." furthermore of the 219 earmarks reviewed by the inspector general, all but four

1:09:54 to 1:10:14( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: were found to advance the primary mission and goals department of defense. and, mr. president, none of these four earmarks is contained in this year's bill. even if there were, none of them would be competed under the mccain amendment because each

1:10:15 to 1:10:36( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: of those amendments were awarded to a nonprofit mr. president, due to the shor offered, i would like to propose an ultimate amendment. my amendment ensures that each earmark added by congress to

1:10:37 to 1:10:57( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: benefit a for-profit entity shall same acqsition regulations applied to items requested by the president in his annual budget request. this proposal applies the rule of -- the equal access to the law to the president and to the

1:10:58 to 1:11:18( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: congress. the amendment i contains the standard exceptions to competion, which is by law. including small business seta sides. the mccain other hand, would eliminate the standard exemptions to compete

1:11:19 to 1:11:39( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: for earmarks that support small businesses, minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and service-connected disabled veterans owned businesses. mr. president, my amendment is a reasonable and fair approach to balancing the acquisition as they apply to congressional

1:11:40 to 1:12:00( Edit History Discussion )

Daniel Inouye: spending items and items requested by the president. it ensures that all spending items that are funded in this bill, regardless of who proposed them will be subject to the same rules for competion. and, therefore, i urge my colleagues to support my