GRASSLEY: The Finance Committee markup of health care reform continues today. The committee worked until 11:00 last night. And the plan is to work through the amendments through the week and possibly the weekend, or longer.
I know Senator Baucus wants to get it done this weekend. I don't know for sure if that's possible. But I presume if he pushes hard enough and we put in long enough days and work into the weekend, it will get done.
But I do have a different opinion of whether or not it's going to come up right away, like Reid seemed to indicate or maybe Baucus indicated it, that it would be up on the floor the following two weeks, which would be the next two weeks.
But it's my understanding that the defense bill is going to be up on the floor next week, and that tends to take at least one week. So I don't think that this is going to get done too early in October, unless Reid cancels the -- what we call the Columbus Day and Columbus week recess. And that's still up in the air.
But everybody says that -- that Reid is scheduling things for his own reelection. So if that would be the case, you know, and he sticks to it, he could always cancel his own schedule. We've been told to be very flexible on our schedule from the standpoint of what McConnell has told us.
In other words, if you schedule something for that week -- and I have some things scheduled for that week -- be ready to cancel them. So I don't know exactly what we're doing that week, but I don't think that we're going to -- we'd have to be in session that week to get health care done.
So I'm ready for questions on any subject. And I'll start with Kerry.
QUESTION: Thank you. Senator, do you think that by the end of the year, there will be a bill sent to the president? And do you think if there is one, it will be something that you'll basically be able to support? You may not like all the provisions, but in general be in agreement with?
GRASSLEY: Well, if we'd had a bipartisan agreement, it would have been bipartisan to the extent that everybody gives a little bit. You can't have something as big as health care reform and get 100 percent the way you want it. Or it wouldn't -- it wouldn't be a bipartisan agreement.
Or, let's put it this way: A partisan agreement that Baucus put out, that -- he had to modify that a lot between the time he put it out and Tuesday when we started, because there were a lot of Democrats disagreed with it, and probably still do disagree with it.
And so, it's got some things in you like and some things you don't.
I would say if -- if it goes through under what we call regular order, as opposed to reconciliation, there's still a chance that it could be supported by a broad range of Republicans. But it would have to be a broad range of Republicans, because you've heard me say that this is such a big issue that not just one or two Republicans make it bipartisan.
And on the other hand, if it -- if it's a reconciliation project that the Democrats decide to use, then I would say for sure it's going to be partisan and probably wouldn't have any Republican support.
WHO-Radio? Courtney Blanchard? Christinia Crippes?
QUESTION: Hi, Senator. Actually I was hoping to talk a little bit about TARP. You sent out a couple e-mails on it this week. And I was just wondering, I guess, with all the problems that seem to be coming out, what you think should have happened in the first place or what needs to happen now to ensure, I guess, basically that taxpayers aren't taken advantage of.
GRASSLEY: Well, let's go back to my vote on what you call the first tranche, which I voted yes. And then I voted against the second tranche, and my explanation of my vote on the second tranche is the reason -- the opposite -- well, maybe I better start over here again. I'm getting tongue tied.
I voted for the first tranche but should not have voted that way, as it turned out, because we were lied to by the secretary of treasury. You remember, he was going to use the money for...
QUESTION: Right.
GRASSLEY: ... he was going to use the money for taking toxic paper out, which mostly connected with foreclosures on homes and securitized mortgages, things of that nature. And then within a couple weeks after we passed it, he turned the money into bailout of banks and to the partial nationalization of banks.
So then when we became aware of being lied to, then, you know, that's why I voted against the second tranche. And so right now there's several issues that I have with TARP, and some of these I talked about in press releases and then some I want to add to it.
But my goal, even in the first TARP bill, was some things that I promoted, was greater oversight, transparency and accountability, to make sure that the Government Accountability Office had access to information so they could stay on top of was the money being used for the purpose it was used.
So that's part of my interest.
The other part is not related to my initiative so much, but initiatives that I'm going to support, that when TARP money comes back in, it ought to be used to reduce the national debt and not be what they say they have legislative authority to do, that when a bank pays back money, that they can take that money and reallocate it someplace else, like kind of a slush fund or a revolving fund.
And I think two things. One, I don't think we need that anymore, with it looks like the economy turning -- turning around. And then, secondly, you know, it ought to be subject to some legislative control and that.
And then also I sent a letter on Friday with Senator Thune to the secretary of treasury that TARP not be extended past January 1st, and then you get back to what I just previously said before I mentioned this letter, that we -- that they see it as a special fund that they can continue to use as a revolving fund.
And then we've had also another problem with TARP money, and that is the special inspector general. We've run into resistance although this has been overcome a little bit but resistance to the administration providing information to the special inspector general so that he can do his job.
OK, I've gone through the entire list. Does anybody else want to jump in?
QUESTION: Mike Myers, please.
GRASSLEY: Yes, go ahead, Mike?
QUESTION: Senator, it appears, while Max Baucus has a majority of the votes in the Finance Committee, and so far it doesn't look like the Republicans are faring well on amendments, go ahead with what would be -- do you expect, if you're going to get the so-called bipartisan bill, or some of the amendments, you need to have this on the floor, where you can attract some Democrats such as Ben Nelson or some others?
I mean, basically, is Finance a waste -- a waste of time?
GRASSLEY: I think your question is very insightful. I've had discussions with senators that aren't on the floor of what can -- I should say senators that are not on the committee -- that could possibly work with us to get back into a bipartisan mold -- but, again, a bipartisan position, where you've got broad bipartisan support, and not just one or two Republicans.
And I think people are thinking along those lines.
I think, though, that it would be very helpful if people who aren't on the Finance Committee or even the HELP Committee, the other committee in the Senate, that people aren't on either but very much interested in this issue would, kind of, take the bull by the horns themselves and try to coalesce around something that could eventually become more bipartisan.
I think one necessary thing that has to happen, though, for that to happen, or to at least get encouragement from Reid and McConnell, is for Democrats themselves -- it wouldn't do any good for Republicans to do this -- but Democrats themselves to realize that they may not have 60 votes and that they also do not want to go the reconciliation route.
QUESTION: You say they do not, or to consider -- what was that last part again, about do they do or do not have 60 votes?
I guess...
(CROSSTALK)
GRASSLEY: No, that they would not have 60 votes and that the Democrats would not want to use the reconciliation route.
QUESTION: To your knowledge, without speaking out of school, is Senator McConnell looking for that type of support, working with...
GRASSLEY: I have not had any conversations along this line with -- with anybody that you call leadership in the Senate.
QUESTION: OK, but, not to denigrate what you're doing over in Finance, sir, but is that all together appearing it's just going to be a wash; I mean, Max Baucus will get the bill that Senator Reid wants on the floor?
GRASSLEY: Well, I think it looks like he's going to get his bill out of committee. But then that's a far cry from getting it through the United States Senate.
QUESTION: Right. Thank you.
GRASSLEY: OK, anybody else?
OK, thank you all very much.