On the recordFebruary 1, 2012
we can go back and forth 100 ways to Sunday. I thought I explained exactly why Senator Isakson and I have a narrow bill. We are trying to fix a problem we know exists. We feel very strongly that for the good of the Senate, in particular--because this is the body we serve in. We love it. We want to make it strong and appreciated and not derided. We had a scandal that touched this body and we had a thorough investigation. It took a long time to get to the bottom of it. We uncovered the fact that Countrywide had a sweetheart deal and they were aiming it at Members of Congress. We have crafted this amendment to respond to what we know is a problem. I am not in the business of coming down here and legislating on things that I might guess are a problem or, gee, maybe I can throw out a fishing net and catch everybody in it. If there is a problem elsewhere, I am happy to support my colleague if she would like to broaden this. I am not against it. I am saying for me and Senator Isakson, we have offered an amendment that cures a very simple problem; that ethics rules, as they are today, allow Senators and Members of Congress to avoid showing the mortgages they hold on personal residences. If the same thing exists in the executive branch, I don't know about that. I am dealing with an amendment here and so is Senator Isakson, that we know about.…





