Skip to main content

tv   U.S. Senate 10192017  CSPAN  October 19, 2017 3:29pm-5:30pm EDT

3:29 pm
3:30 pm
vote:
3:31 pm
3:32 pm
the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber who wishing to stroat or wish to change their vote? seeing none, there are 98 yeas and zero nays. the amendment is agreed to. there will now be two minutes in debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the baldwin amendment number 1139. members will please take their conversations off the floor to allow the debate. ms. baldwin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the
3:33 pm
senator from wisconsin. ms. baldwin: mr. president, i rise to speak to the baldwin amendment number 1139. wisconsin families need a tax break, and that's what i'm working for. but this budget will fast-track enormous tax breaks for the wealthiest few. it increases the deficits and puts medicare and medicaid on the chopping block to pay for it. i just don't think it's right to ask the middle class to pay for tax breaks for the top 1% with cuts to medicare and medicaid and rising deficits, deficits that will surely be used by my republican colleagues to continue to justify an unwillingness to invest in the essential pillars of economic security for families. mr. president, the entire reason reconciliation was created was for deficit reduction, which the majority claims to care so much about. my amendment is very simple.
3:34 pm
it would reinstate a point of order known as the conrad rule against reconciliation legislation that increases the deficit. let's not use reconciliation to add to our deficit, and i urge my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment that has been cosponsored by senators warner, whitehouse, king --. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment which would create an uneven playing field for the upcoming reconciliation work. if adopted, this amendment would reinstate a point of order from the fiscal year 2008 budget resolution which congress repealed two years ago. it was repealed to ensure equal treatment of all reconciliation bills by restoring the level lel playing field that had existed prior to the adoption of the point of order in 2008.
3:35 pm
under the byrd rule, the byrd rule specifically does not require such budget neutrality inside the budget window. why? because reconciliation was designed to be neutral in its orientation. the budget act states that reconciliation instructions must enumerate changes in spending and revenue amounts. it does not stipulate those changes must be increases or decreases. the fiscal year 2016 budget resolution restored long-standing neutrality principle of the byrd rule. it was the right thing to do then and we should reaffirm that position today. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the presiding officer: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
3:36 pm
3:37 pm
3:38 pm
3:39 pm
3:40 pm
3:41 pm
3:42 pm
3:43 pm
3:44 pm
3:45 pm
vote:
3:46 pm
3:47 pm
3:48 pm
3:49 pm
3:50 pm
3:51 pm
3:52 pm
the presiding officer: is there any senator in the chamber
3:53 pm
who wishes to vote or change his or her vote? seeing none, the yays are 47. and the nays are 51. the amendment is not agreed to. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the rubio amendment number 1205. will the members not involved in the debate please take their conversations off the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: mr. president, this amendment relates to the child tax credit, what is bun dantszly clear is perhaps one of the most effective ways to deliver tax relief, tax cuts to working families is through the expansion of this credit as is our hope to achieve during tax reform. i would just say and i think this is important to point out. the department of agriculture compiles data, how much it costs to raise children in the 21st century. it's expected that a middle-income family is going to
3:54 pm
spend $230,000 over the course of the children's childhood to raise them. that, by the way, does not include the cost of going to college. so being able to deliver relief to hardworking families through the expangs of a child -- expansion of a child tax credit is perhaps the single most effective way to do that given the framework that we'll be working on. so that is what this amendment intends to do. a senator: i rise not in opposition to the amendment but to compment the senator for bringing this issue forward. mr. king: i intend to support the amendment. i want to make the point this is a broader issue we'll have to address, child and dependent tax credit. one of the issues is making it refundable so the tax credit is available and useful to lower-income families who are the hardest hit by high child care costs. and also making it available to those families who use this -- these funds to care for perhaps
3:55 pm
an aged relative or an injured relative. so i agree with the amendment. i support it but i think we need to make the point that there's more work to be done. i've introduced a bill with senator heller, senator brrr and senator cool us -- senator burr and senator collins and look forward to bringing it at an appropriate moment. mr. lee: mr. president? i ask unanimous consent to extend the debate by 30 seconds. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. lee: mr. president, i rise in support of this amendment. this would correct a grave defect in our tax code. the parent tax penalty. we have been punishing parents for decades because of the way our federal income tax system and our senior entitlement programs, social security and medicare interact. we've got to end this tyranny and end it now. this amendment does that. i urge my colleagues to support it. the presiding officer: is have any further debate on -- is there any further debate on the
3:56 pm
amendment? hearing none, all in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion passes. the amendment is agreed to. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the heitkamp amendment number 1228. i do ask those not involved in the debate to take their discussions off the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. ms. heitkamp: as we move forward on tax reform, i think the one great potential for absolute agreement is that we should lower the burden for middle-income taxpayers. and as we move forward, one thing we absolutely should not do is in any way increase the tax burden for middle-income taxpayers. and so this amendment is about guaranteeing that no one making under $250,000 sees their taxes
3:57 pm
increase in any kind of legislation, including any tax reform proposal. i've heard from teachers, nurses, veterans. they all want to know what this means for them to guarantee people an absolute bright line that their taxes will not go up is absolutely essential as we move forward. i urge a yes vote on this amendment. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: this again is another attempt to do the finance committee's work as part of the budget. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the amendment would inappropriately bind the finance committee's work on any tax legislation it writes. this point of order is meant to be a poison pill in the process and it would set a 60-vote threshold on tax reform effectively killing its efforts through reconciliation. this resolution's instructions to finance do not specify the policy or the provisions that are being reported out of the
3:58 pm
committee, but the framework as stated, it will be just as progressive as the current tax code. the chairman of the finance committee and members can ensure you of that result. this amendment is unnecessary, and i urge my colleagues to oppose it. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from -- mr. enzi: i raise the point of order against this amendment under the budget act section 301-b-2. ms. heitkamp: mr. president? the presiding officer: the short from north dakota. ms. heitkamp: pursuant to 904 of the congressional budget act of 1974, i move to waive section 305-b-2 of that act for purposes of the pending amendment and i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.
3:59 pm
vote:
4:00 pm
vote:
4:01 pm
4:02 pm
4:03 pm
4:04 pm
4:05 pm
4:06 pm
4:07 pm
4:08 pm
4:09 pm
4:10 pm
4:11 pm
4:12 pm
4:13 pm
4:14 pm
4:15 pm
vote:
4:16 pm
4:17 pm
4:18 pm
4:19 pm
4:20 pm
4:21 pm
4:22 pm
4:23 pm
4:24 pm
4:25 pm
the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber who wish to vote or change their vote? seeing none, on this vote the yeas are 47. nays 51. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted affirmatively, the motion is not agreed to. the point of order is sustained. the amendment fails. the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i ask consent that the donnellly amendment be modified with the text of his amendment 1423, which is at the desk. i further ask that the pending kaine amendment be temporarily laid aside and that the brown amendment 1378 be pending and be the next vote in the series with two minutes of debate prior to the vote. the presiding officer: is there objection?
4:26 pm
without objection. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the portman amendment number 1422. mr. portman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: i rise to speak on that amendment which is a commonsense and up to now bipartisan approach to international tax reform. it simply says under this budget we would do international tax reform that would create incentives to have more jobs here in this country. that's incentives both with u.s. companies and with foreign companies to create jobs here in america. this is not a partisan issue. it's been bipartisan. in fact it was part of the simpson-bowls provisions with regard to tax reform. only a couple of years ago i cochaired a working group on this issue with the now minority leader, senator schumer where we came up with a proposal that said the international system is broken.
4:27 pm
we need to move to one like the one we're talking about in this amendment and it brings back jobs. one of the problems is the current tax code actually encourages companies to keep their money offshore. we think we can bring back a lot of that money. there's probably $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion locked out off shore. it's worse than that. it leads to american companies being taken over by foreign companies and these inversions we've heard so much about. we had another major inversion the last 24 hours. companies that have household names are picking up and leaving our country and taking our jobs and investment with them. this amendment is common sense. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. a senator: i rise in support of the portman amendment. we can all agree that tax reform should help create more good jobs and protect the good jobs we already have. mr. rounds: i support the portman amendment and i look forward -- mcdonald's i support the port -- mr. donnelly: i support the portman amendment. i want to work with my colleagues to make sure that any
4:28 pm
tax reform package is good for american workers. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: is there any further debate on the amendment? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to donnellly amendment number 1234 and i do ask members to take their conversations off the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. donnelly: i rise in support of the amendment to address the outsourcing of american jobs. american jobs that ship jobs to foreign countries can still claim massive tax breaks. that's wrong and we should draw back and -- claw back incentives and prohibit companies from receiving tax breaks for outsourcing jobs. my amendment is common sense for taxpayers. supporting companies that invest in american workers, not those
4:29 pm
shipping jobs to foreign countries. i urge all of our colleagues to support this amendment. mr. president, i yield back. the presiding officer: who yields time? the presiding officer: if no one yields time, the question is on the amendment. all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment as modified is agreed to. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the brown amendment number 1378. again, if members would please take their conversations off the floor. please take your conversations off the floor.
4:30 pm
the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from ohio, mr. brown, proposes an amendment numbered 1378 to amendment number 1116. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent to --. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. mr. president, i ask for support of the patriot corporation act amendment. it's all pretty simple. we've seen over the years companies shut down production in mansfield, ohio or dayton, ohio and move to tijuana, mexico or china and sell their production back in the united states. under this simple idea the patriot corporation act, companies that do the right thing, companies that pay their workers decent wages, companies that do the right thing by their workers in terms of benefits, health care and pensions, companies that make their production, keep their production in the united states will get a tax break, will pay a lower tax rate. yesterday at the white house, a dozen or about 15 senators met
4:31 pm
with president trump. i talked to him about the patriot corporation act. he said he likes the idea. it's about time that u.s. companies that do the right thing should be rewarded instead of those companies that shut down production and move oafers and sell -- overseas and sell their production back. it's the right thing to do. it's a simple idea. it's time has come, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the budget resolution's reconciliation instruction to the finance committee does not and should not specify the policies or provisions that are to be reported out of the budget committee resolution. the finance framework includes international tax reform that will incentivize companies to invest domestically and create jobs in the united states. but this amendment defines
4:32 pm
patriot employers with a long list of criteria and pinpoints tax breaks for these companies. patriot employers should not be defined by the budget process or by politics but by those that allow the constituents to join or remain in the workforce so as to participate in the american dream. american companies will be able to create additional jobs based on tax relief envisioned by the finance committee. and as such, we should pass the resolution and reconciliation in a timely manner and we should oppose this amendment. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
4:33 pm
4:34 pm
4:35 pm
4:36 pm
4:37 pm
4:38 pm
4:39 pm
4:40 pm
4:41 pm
4:42 pm
4:43 pm
4:44 pm
vote:
4:45 pm
4:46 pm
4:47 pm
4:48 pm
4:49 pm
4:50 pm
4:51 pm
4:52 pm
4:53 pm
the presiding officer: is there any senator who wishes to change or change his or her vote? seeing none, the yeas are 47, the nays are 51. the amendment is not agreed to. the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the
4:54 pm
following amendments be called up en bloc and reported by number. paul # 296, cardin 1375. i further is ask -- the presiding officer: the senator will suspend. will the senators please take their conversations off the floor. mr. enzi: i ask unanimous consent that the senate vote in relation to these amendments in the order listed, that this be no second-degree amendments prior to the votes, that there be two minutes equally divided for the managers or designees and all votes in this series be ten minutes in length. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report the amendments by number. the clerk: the senator from wyoming proposes amendments 1296 and 1375. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to
4:55 pm
a vote in relation to the paul amendment number 1296. the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: this amendment is about whether or not we're serious about the debt. in the current budget there are instructions to reduce the debt in mandatory spending, i applaud that but we need budget reconciliation instruction it's to allow that to happen. this amendment will allow instructions so we will do what we say we are going to do which is cut spending. i think in light of the fact that we are for tax cuts, we ought to be for reducing spending so we don't explode the debt. i recommend a "yes" vote on reconciliation instructions to allow for mandatory savings and spending. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: i rise in opposition to the paul amendment. this amendment includes reconciliation instructions to cut nearly $100 billion in programs that are vital to
4:56 pm
working families in this country, including education, health care, nutrition, affordable housing and many other programs. this amendment paves the way to make it easier to cut medicare by over $400 billion and medicaid by over $1 trillion in the next decade in order to provide almost $2 trillion in tax cuts to the top 1%. this amendment should be defeated. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
4:57 pm
4:58 pm
4:59 pm
5:00 pm
vote:
5:01 pm
5:02 pm
5:03 pm
5:04 pm
5:05 pm
5:06 pm
5:07 pm
5:08 pm
5:09 pm
5:10 pm
5:11 pm
5:12 pm
5:13 pm
5:14 pm
vote:
5:15 pm
5:16 pm
5:17 pm
the presiding officer: anyone wishing to vote or change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are four, the nays are 94, the amendment is not agreed to. there will now be two -- a two-minute debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to cardin amendment 1375. the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: can we have order? the presiding officer: order in the chamber. take your conversations off the floor. order in the chamber. the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, this amendment is very simple. it allows a point of order to to
5:18 pm
be -- to be raised if the tax reform reported back from the committee increases the deficit. do you believe you agree with increasing the deficit? if you believe we should not increase the deficit with the tax reform that is reported back from the committee, then vote for this amendment. i urge my colleagues, if you're serious about the deficit, you shouldn't be passing legislation that increases it. i reserve the balance of my time. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. budget rules don't accommodate current tax policy. at least $46 billion revenue loss can be attributed to current law and current policy baseline. many of the -- the presiding officer: the senator from suspend. the senate will be in order.
5:19 pm
the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: any of the tax extenders covered by that amount are popular and are supported on a bipartisan basis. this amendment is corrosive to the budget resolution's privilege. it falls outside the scope of what's appropriate for inclusion. adoption of corrosive amendments to be fatal to the privilege and that could affect our ability to pass tax reform and to enforce the budget spending limits. further, this amendment is also nongermane. the congressional budget act requires that it be germane, a statutory regulation that we can't ignore. so i raise a point of order against this amendment under the budget act section 305-b-2. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: the senator is saying that the process will be used in order to add to the
5:20 pm
deficit. according to the congressional budget act of 1974, i move to waive section 305-b-2 to that act. i ask gor the yeas and nays. -- i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
5:21 pm
5:22 pm
5:23 pm
5:24 pm
5:25 pm
5:26 pm
5:27 pm
5:28 pm
5:29 pm

3 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on