Every change in every investment we have, we file every year. We already do that. We are already under rule 37 of the rules of Senate Ethics, which forbids any conflict of interest action that would benefit ourselves. That would include…

Well, I have plenty of those. In fact, I will do better-- I will give you a Zantac.

Through the Chair, would the chairman accept that modification to my amendment, that we would, in fact, establish positively that Members of Congress are under rule 10b of the Securities and Exchange Commission? Would that give the Senator…

I would make a couple points. One, we already file all our stock trades--correct?--every year.

This is a bipartisan amendment. This amendment is sponsored by Senator McCain, Senator McCaskill, Senator Udall from Colorado, Senator Burr, and Senator Paul, as well as myself. This is a straightforward amendment. We have asked for this…

The point is you got to still make the choice with your privacy, and I think there is a legitimate concern...

But if privacy is so important and if everybody at the table supports that, what is wrong with having the reminder that you are sharing your privacy?

I really do not see a big difference from granting permission one click at a time to a blanket consent.

I believe the decision is between protecting privacy and promoting commerce, and I think we ought to be able to figure out how to do both.

But the point is I have to, under the ethics law, fill out forms at the end of every year, and I have to get that.

I am going to give you consent, Netflix, to share my movies.

I submit the following notice in writing: In accordance with rule V of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby give notice in writing that it is my intention to offer an amendment to the Standing Rules of the Senate, by proposing…

I am just saying in terms of effectuating the protection of privacy, how are we going to do that?

So what is the difference of having an opt-in or an opt-out? It defeats your whole argument.

I know it is our role to be concerned about the ultimate privacy protection that individuals deserve.

I believe the Video Privacy Protection Act has become antiquated given all the new technology that is out there.

The question is: Should we err on the side of privacy, or should we err on the side of commerce?

what is the pending business before the Senate? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to proceed to H.J. Res. 98.

I understand that, but what is the total amount of time that has been allocated to H.J. Res. 98? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time until noon is equally divided.

So the total amount of time is less than 2 hours today that we are going to discuss this resolution; is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Slightly more than 2 hours.

I am asking for unanimous consent to speak on this issue, a $1.2 trillion raise in the debt limit, for 20 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

I come to the floor aghast that we have entered into a unanimous consent agreement to spend less than 2\1/2\ hours talking about raising the debt ceiling another $1.2 trillion-- $1.2 trillion. We passed the Budget Control Act that raised…

And the amount of time that has been allocated by the majority leader and under the unanimous consent agreement? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republicans have 8 minutes remaining.

Thank you. I ask unanimous consent to speak on the resolution for 20 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Florida.

Well, actually, that was my whole point. We are going to spend a little more than 2 hours to raise the debt limit by $1.2 trillion, and we can't give a Senator 20 minutes to talk about it?