Floor Statements

Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading.

In order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to further proceedings.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 476, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statement relating to the bill be printed in the Record as if read, without intervening action our debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: Nos. 576, 577, 578, 579, 619, 620, and 623.

I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 2 p.m. on Monday, May 15. I further ask that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate proceed to S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, as under the previous order.

Mr. President, on Monday, we will return to the immigration reform bill. Members wishing to offer amendments to this bill and wishing to debate the bill are encouraged to do so starting on Monday.

The first rollcall vote next week will be on Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock. That particular vote will be on the confirmation of a circuit court judicial nomination. In all likelihood, we will have several other votes stacked on immigration shortly thereafter.

We will have a full week next week. The Democratic leader and I outlined yesterday morning what the plans would be, expecting a full debate on what we know is a contentious issue, in large part because of the complexity of the issue.

We all know we need to address the insecurity that exists on our borders today. It has to be first and foremost, up front. That is where illegal people, millions of illegal people, come through every year.

There is a real distrust of Government being able to accomplish that among the American people today. We hear it by direct conversation, and we see it by e-mail. We have to do our absolute best to secure those borders. It takes money, it takes planning, it takes Federal involvement, State involvement, and that has to be accomplished.

I feel very good about the progress that has been made to date. It is still totally inadequate, but last year we put about $10 billion on our borders, increasing the number of border security guards, and adding 1,400 detention beds inside this country. It does take time when we put the money there to train people and to get them on board. I am not making any excuses, but that was the end of last year.

Last week in this body, we said we need to spend another $1.9 billion on the border in terms of providing the technology, the surveillance, the infrared cameras, the unmanned aerial vehicles, the capital expenditures that are required.

Now it is important for us to put together a comprehensive plan which stresses border security. We have to tighten it, but we also recognize this country is a magnet for people coming in from other countries. If we have employers hiring people illegally, who break the law, people are going to climb over the fence no matter how high we make it, or dig under that fence, and that is why we have to extend it to comprehensive reform.

From a workforce standpoint, we in this Nation welcome legal immigrants to come and work. That will be addressed as well.

It is going to require lots of debate, lots of amendments, and agreement. Again, the Democratic leader and I agree 100 percent on our approach, coming together in this body to address an issue which I hope will be in a dignified and civil way that reflects the very best of this institution. We will complete this bill before the Memorial Day recess.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. President, in a moment, we will begin consideration of the conference report to accompany the Tax Relief Act. Our order from last night provides for up to 8 hours of debate from the statutory limit. The chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee will be on the floor throughout the day to yield some of that time to Senators to speak. I hope we will not need the entire 8 hours and that we could yield back some of that time and vote a little earlier today. We will see how we are progressing in the early afternoon and alert Members if that is possible and, indeed, I hope that it will be.

Following the vote on the adoption of the Tax Relief conference report, we will have up to 1 hour of debate before the vote on invoking cloture on the small business health plans bill. If cloture is invoked on the small business health plans bill, then we would stay on that bill until we complete it. I hope the Senate will invoke cloture on the bill and will not miss the opportunity to help our small businesses provide more affordable health care benefits to their employees and families.

We have two important votes this afternoon. We will alert Senators as to the timing when we get a better idea of the amount of debate that is needed.

unanimous consent agreement--S. 2611

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that unless cloture is invoked on the pending substitute to S. 1955, on Monday, May 15, at a time to be determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. 2611, the immigration bill. I further ask that when the Senate agrees to a request for a conference or the Senate requests a conference on this bill and the Chair is authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, the ratio of conferees be 14 to 12; provided further that from that ratio, the first 7 Republican Senators from the Judiciary Committee and the first 5 Democratic Senators from the Judiciary Committee be conferees; finally, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader select the final 7 from the majority side and the Democratic leader select the final 7 for the minority side.

Before the Chair rules, I wish to be clear that the two leaders anticipate full session days on this bill, with a considerable number of amendments debated and voted on each day. We intend to allow amendments to come forward and to be voted on in an efficient way. This is a comprehensive immigration bill, and therefore it is important for Senators to have adequate time to have their amendments considered.

Mr. President, what the Democratic leader and I have laid out is a way to get onto this bill, and as you can tell, both of us have been working in good faith on various issues that have been raised on the floor. We both appreciate our colleagues' patience in arriving at this point. We both anticipate a lot of challenging times over the period which will begin, in all likelihood, on Monday on what we all know is a very difficult bill.

The process that has been laid out is one that we both feel is very fair and will give the opportunity for the will of the Senate to express itself on a difficult issue to which there are not very many clear-cut answers. So I look forward to beginning that debate in the very near future, and I look forward to having dignified debate, debate that under the leadership of the two managers will need to be efficient, effective, and fair, but we will need to keep moving through that debate in order to allow the Senate's will, through amendment and voting on those amendments, to be reflected.

modification to unanimous consent agreement--s. 2611

Mr. President, I modify the unanimous consent request so that it is clear that it is applicable to S. 2611 or a House bill in which we conference using the language of S. 2611.

Mr. President, I will close by saying it is important we finish this bill before the Memorial Day recess. I have said that several times in my statements over the last couple of weeks, and I think in my discussions with the Democratic leader, we both agree that once we start this bill, we will stay on the bill until we complete it.

Mr. President, I will be brief, and we will be voting shortly. We know that keeping taxes low spurs economic growth and that results in the creation of jobs. Twice in the last 4 years, this Congress passed major tax relief bills. Together these laws have cut taxes for nearly 100 million Americans, spurred a period of energetic economic growth, improved our overall budgetary climate, and it has encouraged businesses to invest in their future. When you put all that together, it has created jobs.

Indeed, since the 2003 tax relief progrowth package, our economy has added 5.3 million new jobs. We have seen unemployment rates fall down to record lows, where today it is remarkable that it is lower than the average of the 1970s and the 1980s and the average of the 1990s, at 4.7 percent. We have enjoyed 18 consecutive quarters of robust growth.

You know, those are the statistics, and that is what we see, what is reported. What really results is that individual lives and families are leading more productive lives, with a higher quality of life. The creation of jobs affects families.

The centerpiece of that 2003 bill was the reduced tax rate on capital gains and dividends. It did other things, but that was the heart of the bill. As we argued then, and what history as clearly shown, is that keeping taxes low promotes tax revenue, what comes into our Government.

In January, the Congressional Budget Office found that the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends resulted in the Government collecting an additional $26 billion in revenue in 2004 and 2005. This year, revenues will be 29 percent higher than they were in 2003. In fact, the Treasury Department just reported yesterday that this year's tax revenues were the second highest in American history, giving the country a sizable surplus for the month.

Mr. President, we hear about who is advantaged by this particular piece of legislation. A majority of households now own stock. A lot of people may question that. The matter is that the majority of households in this country own stock. Almost half of all income tax returns that report capital gains on dividends--the returns that were reported--came from households that have an adjusted gross income of less than $50,000. Of all of the tax returns that report capital gains on dividends, over half of those are reported from households making less than $50,000. It is hard to argue that cutting capital gains taxes benefits only the rich.

Chairman Grassley, Senator Kyl, Congressman Thomas, and all who have participated in this bill, have delivered for the American people and have participated in a progrowth policy legislative agenda that will create jobs. The provisions will continue to strengthen our economy, which is growing, and help provide a stable and inviting environment for small businesses to continue to grow and invest and create jobs.

Keeping these taxes low helps Americans find and create those jobs that we know improve the quality of life for all Americans. Keeping taxes low helps Americans support families and makes America a great place to do business. We will keep taxes low so that we can keep this great country of ours strong and growing.

Last night, the House voted to pass the tax reconciliation conference report and send it to the Senate for action.

I want to applaud the House and Senate conferees for working hard to maintain the 2003 tax cuts that have boosted the economy and grown jobs.

Here on the Senate floor, the Republican majority will work hard to keep up the momentum and resist efforts to raise America's taxes.

I expect that some on the other side will continue to oppose low taxes. They've supported billions of dollars of new taxes since they lost control of the Senate in 2002. Rarely have they met a tax hike they don't like. But we can't let their anti-growth plans win the day.

If they get their way, nearly 7.5 million families and individuals will see their capital gains taxes go up. Twenty million will see taxes on their stock dividends rise, as well.

In my home State of Tennessee nearly 150,000 families and individuals will see their taxes increase if the current alternative minimum tax relief expires this year.

More than 425,000 families and individuals will see their dividend tax rates rise from as little as 0 percent to as much as 35 percent after 2008. Of these taxpayers, roughly 135,000 low-income taxpayers, many of them senior citizens, reported dividend income in 2003.

When it comes to capital gains, nearly 325,000 families and individuals will see their capital-gains tax rates increase from as little as 0 percent to 20 percent after 2008. Of these taxpayers, more than 100,000 low-income individuals, including retirees, reported capital gains in 2003.

The other side says only the rich benefit from tax cuts. But as the taxpayers in my home State demonstrate, the 2003 tax cuts benefited hard working families across the income scale.

Opposing the 2003 tax cuts will hurt these families and hurts America's economic strength.

I urge the minority leader to reject obstructionism and allow swift passage of this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I yield back all time on our side.

Mr. President, we have a lot going on on the floor, and we are going to have one more vote today, and it will be up to an hour from now. But what we would like to clarify is who needs to speak from our side. Chairman Enzi is right here. Do we have anybody on our side? I know Chairman Enzi will be speaking. Is there anybody else from our side?

I ask the Democratic leader through the Chair who will be speaking on their side.

Mr. President, I ask our chairman approximately how much time we would need. What we want to do is try to get the time down as far as we can. We have a number of people who have plans that they need to make, and we would like to vote as quickly as we can, but we want adequate time to speak.

Mr. President, through the Chair, I ask the Democratic leader, would it be agreeable that we have a unanimous consent request propounded that we vote at 10 minutes after 6, the time equally divided between now and then?

So to restate, I ask unanimous consent for 17 minutes on either side, so the vote will be at approximately 14 minutes after 6 o'clock.

I thank the Senator from Oregon for his dedication to his State and all States that have been affected by the downturn in Federal timber receipts. He has been in close contact with me, the assistant majority leader and the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee communicating the significance and urgency of his cause. I commit to him to address the needs of rural counties and schools in Oregon and elsewhere. Working with the committees of jurisdiction, I commit to a thorough search for funding offsets so that these critical rural education programs can continue to serve the youth of those communities.

Mr. President, this morning we have set aside the first hour for a period of morning business to allow Senators to speak. Following that time, we will begin consideration of the small business health plans bill. Yesterday we invoked cloture on the motion to proceed and last night we reached the agreement to begin the bill this morning.

Chairman Enzi will be here to speak with Members about their amendments. We hope we can consider amendments related to the bill throughout today's session, and therefore I expect votes today. I ask Senators who have relevant amendments to come to the floor to speak to the two managers to see if they can reach an agreement to debate those amendments.

In addition, we have the Tax Relief Act conference report that was filed in the House yesterday. We will consider that conference report this week once it arrives from the House.

Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to paint the larger picture of why the small business health plans are so important to our Nation, to everyday Americans, and to the 46 million people who do not have health insurance today, and how it affects the cost of health care and thus the quality and access to health care.

Much of the discussion that has gone on and that will go on as we proceed with this bill centers on the fact that America is facing a health insurance crisis. It centers on the fact that health care premiums are growing. They are growing faster than individuals' wages or income, and this growing cost--skyrocketing cost--of premiums translates into a significant portion of the 46 million people who don't have insurance today--solely because of the price of the premiums of health insurance. I do think--in fact, I know--that is unacceptable in a country that is as prosperous as ours.

The medical impact and the impact on quality of life and life itself is embodied in the statistic that the Institute of Medicine reported in the fact that 18,000 Americans die prematurely each year because they don't have health insurance. A lot of people say why, because you eventually can get into a hospital, but it boils down to the fact that if you have some health insurance--just some health insurance--you do better than if you don't have health insurance. People can still go to emergency rooms whether they have health insurance, but entry into our system is much easier if you have health insurance.

So this is a big problem that troubles me as a Senator and as a physician, and it troubles and should trouble every American. That is why we are on this issue today.

About 60 percent of uninsured employees today work for small businesses. Unfortunately, these skyrocketing health insurance costs, coupled with very complicated State regulations, are pricing small businesses out of the health insurance market. They simply can't afford to buy insurance and to offer that insurance to their employees.

We hear a lot of statistics on the floor, we have already heard a lot, and you will hear them continually over the next couple of days as we address this issue. In the past 5 years, the cost of health insurance to companies has nearly doubled from roughly $4,200 per family--almost double--to $8,100. In 2005 alone, health care costs rose three times faster than inflation, and even faster for many small businesses. Consequently, the small firms, the small

businesses are the ones that are hit the hardest.

Many of them are operating on a very narrow margin already. They have had to cut benefits and, in many cases, eliminate coverage altogether for their employees. Some of them have been forced to lay off workers because of the cost of health care. They simply can't sustain it; it eats into their profits and they can't stay in business. So it is no wonder that small businesses across America have said to us and have made it known that access to affordable health care is their No. 1 concern: access to affordable health care.

That is what this small business health insurance debate is all about. It is the guts, the thrust of the bill on the floor today. Small business owners want to take care of their employees and their families. They want to do everything they possibly can. Most small businesses are family affiliated, many of them family run, but it is becoming impossible to do in the face of increases that are so far greater than any margins they have, these double-digit increases in health insurance every year.

One survey reports that only 41 percent of firms with 9 employees or less can afford to offer health benefits, compared to 99 percent of large firms. That hurts the ability of small businesses to attract capable workers, to stay in business, to stay competitive in the larger marketplace. Unfortunately, the system is broken and small businesses are caught. They are stuck.

Eighteen hundred State mandates are choking the ability of the private sector to offer affordable choices, reasonable choices. We have to cut out the redtape. We have to streamline the process itself. We have to get rid of the waste and abuse in the system.

We all know that small businesses are the engine of economic growth in our economy. These small businesses are where innovation occurs and these innovators create 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs nationwide. They generate more than 50 percent of the gross domestic product. In my home State of Tennessee, 97 percent of all businesses are small businesses. This aspect of affordable health care is their No. 1 concern.

It makes sense that if we want to expand health care coverage, if we want to diminish the number of uninsured, we need to start to at least make a major advance in an area where we know we can make a difference, and that is where the jobs are. That is why the Enzi-Nelson-Burns small business health insurance bill that we bring to the floor and will formally open debate on here in about an hour is so important.

I want to applaud Chairman Enzi for his tremendous work to pull people together on both sides of the aisle to address these issues. This bill represents the first real, major, solid step to end the small business health plan stalemate that has characterized this body in over a decade. Its purpose is to deliver meaningful reform for millions of Americans employed in the small business sector.

Under this plan, small business firms would be able to combine their negotiating power and to group that negotiating power in a way that purchasing clout can be used to purchase more affordable plans. By allowing that to happen, they could reduce the cost of health insurance by as much as $1,000 per employee, while reducing the number of uninsured, people who are uninsured today, by more than 1 million. The CBO recently estimated the Enzi-Nelson-Burns plan would increase Federal revenue by $3.3 billion between 2007 and 2016, while saving States an estimated $600 million in Medicaid spending during the same period.

I know this is a very important bill. I am delighted that we will begin on this bill in an hour, or a little over an hour from now. It will be a substantive debate and will go right to the heart of a major problem facing this country, and that is the uninsured. It will address the issues of cost, access, and quality. I encourage Members on both sides of the aisle to participate in this debate, to stay on the issues--we are talking about small business health reform--to not bring in extraneous issues, and with that pass a very important and substantive bill for the American people.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

With the authorization of the majority of the HELP Committee members, I ask that the committee substitute be modified with the changes that are at the desk.

I send a first-degree amendment to the desk and ask for its consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be with dispensed with.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I send a second-degree amendment to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Was that the second-degree amendment?

I now move to recommit the bill to the HELP Committee, and I send that motion to the desk.

I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion.

I send a first-degree amendment to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

I now send a second-degree amendment to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that reading of amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, let me summarize or attempt to summarize where we are in terms of what we just did and where we have been. After a 96-to-2 vote on invoking cloture on the motion to proceed, we have now finally proceeded to the small business health plans bill. We are now at a point that we can begin debating the substance of this bill.

Chairman Enzi is here and is ready for relevant amendments to come forward and be debated. He will have more to say on that shortly.

What is clear is that there have been attempts or suggestions that we use this bill as a Christmas tree for all sorts of amendments, as well intended as they might be, but amendments that don't relate to the underlying bill.

Earlier this week, we began to address and tried to address issues surrounding medical liability. We were unable to do so. We have now proceeded to the small business bill, and it is my intention to stay on that bill, with amendments related to the bill. This bill should have strong, bipartisan support. As it plays out, we will see how strong that bipartisan support may be.

Yes.

Mr. President, the issue of stem cells is a very important issue. As my colleague knows, I am very committed to addressing that particular issue.

What is very clear to me, as we started discussing health care on Friday of last week--and it is now Wednesday--is that we need to systematically take an issue, one by one, that is important to the American people, that I have clearly laid out, starting with medical liability, and then proceed to another medical liability bill and proceed to small business, without jumping to other important issues. There is a whole range of issues that affect cost, quality, research, and affect people's lives and affect access to health care. But the only way we are going to be able to address those in an intelligent, effective, step-wise way is to take them one at a time, like medical liability. We were unsuccessful there. We are now moving to small business and focusing on that. There will be amendments, and we welcome them. The chairman is here and ready to talk substance on those amendments. Let's dispose of those and stay on small business. Then we will go and look at a whole range of other issues on health care at an appropriate time.

My intention is to go step-wise through this, with relevant amendments. The chairman is willing to address that and address the issue of small business health plans. We have 46 million people out there who are uninsured today. This doesn't solve the problem, but it fits very nicely with allowing the people out there who don't have access to health care today, who work in small businesses, to have for the first time the opportunity to get the reasonable, affordable health care they simply don't have today. There are a million people--if we pass this bill and it is signed by the President--who are uninsured who will have the opportunity to have insurance.

Let me yield to our chairman because I do encourage our Members on both sides of the aisle to come forward so that we can have substantive debate on the small business health insurance issues out there, without trying--because I know the other side wants to address many other issues, as has been expressed over the last several days, which are their priorities that they want to put before small business health reform plans. But we are simply not going to do that.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, May 11, immediately after the time for the two leaders, the Senate begin consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4297, the Tax Relief Extension Reconciliation Act; provided further that 8 hours remain out of the statutory time limit and that it be equally divided. I further ask consent that following the vote on the adoption of the conference report, and notwithstanding rule XXII, there be 60 minutes of debate, equally divided, between the chairman and ranking member of the HELP Committee or their designees prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the modified substitute to S. 1955, the small business health plans bill, with no intervening action or debate, and the live quorum waived.

Mr. President, through the Chair, on the small business reform bill, we will have 1 hour prior to the cloture vote. And during the day tomorrow, I expect people will be coming to the floor talking, as well, on small business health plans.

That is correct. Someone could offer an amendment tomorrow prior to the cloture vote, if they so desire.

Mr. President, through the Chair, the interest in stem cells will be debated in the future, at a time that is mutually set by the Democratic leadership working with the Republican leadership. Stem cells can be discussed but will not be voted upon before this cloture motion.