tv U.S. Senate 10192017 CSPAN October 19, 2017 5:29pm-7:30pm EDT
sustained, three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to. point of order is sustained and the amendment falls. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the following amendments -- the presiding officer: can we have order. the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: i ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up en bloc and reported by number. paul 1298, lee 1430, paul 1277. i further ask consent that the senate now vote in relation to the kaine amendment number 1249 and that following disposition of the kaine amendment, the senate vote in relation to the above amendments in the order listed. finally, there be two minutes of equally -- two minutes equally
divided between the managers or their designees prior to all further votes tonight and that they be ten minutes in length. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. enzi: the next four votes will be on the kaine amendment, the paul amendment 1298, the lee amendment 1430, and the paul amendment 1277. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendments en bloc. the clerk: the senator from wyoming mr. enzi for other senators proposes en bloc eements numbered 1298, 1430, and 1277. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: mr. president, i call up amendment 1249. the presiding officer: the amendment is pending. mr. kaine: the amendment is a simple amendment, folks. it's about transparency. two years ago the senate passed a budget that included a laudatory requirement to have the congressional budget office -- the presiding officer: if the gentleman would suspend. the senate will be in order.
take your conversations from the floor. mr. kaine: the senator from virginia kaine -- the presiding officer: the senator from virginia kaine thank you. the senate passed a budget that had a laudatory requirement to have a c.b.o. score for reconciliation legislation 20 hours in advance of voting on the legislation. obvious benefits to the members who are voting, obvious benefits to the american public. the budget resolution before us from committee repeals that requirement. the majority has argued it's unnecessary because the requirement has never been triggered, but i remember just a couple of months ago the senate with us debating health care legislation that hadn't seen the light of day and didn't have a c.b.o. score. do we really believe the answer to our problem is to make it easier to pass legislation without knowing the cost? i think the 20-hour requirement is worthy. it should be continued and i think it should be extended to include amendments in the nature
of the substitute. i ask all my colleagues to support transparency and not embarrass the institution by enabling us to more easily pass important legislation without the public knowing the score. the presiding officer: the senator's time is expired. the senator from wyoming end ns mr. president, i -- mr. enzi: mr. president, i murnlg my colleagues to oppose the amendment. it empower with -- empowers the budget chair as score keeper. i'm pleased to say the budget committee has always discharged its responsibilities with scores in hand proving our important work can function without this amendment. in fact, the 28-hour rule is a recent creation and it's -- its repeal shows no deviation from senate practice. it would require 28 hours on every amendment. it is also important to note that a budget resolution is not a law because it's not a law it cannot supersede or replace any statutory provisions. the congressional budget act is a law and sets forth the rules of the congressional budget -- that the congressional budget
must follow. the proposed amendment attempts to make a significant change to section 402 of the budget act which should be accomplished through regular order legislation which the president signs. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. mr. enzi: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: there appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
change their vote? if not, the yeas are 48. the nays are 51. the amendment is not adopted. there will now be to minutes -- two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to paul amendment number 1298. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: this amendment is about the debt. we have a $20 trillion debt and it's about whether we're serious about tackling that debt. the budget before us exceeds our own spending caps by $43 billion. now, you'll be told that technically that's not so because we hide the money by sticking it in an account we call the overseas contingency operations. over the last 16 years, we've spent more than $1.7 trillion in this account, and we don't account for it. we don't budget for it. what i'm asking us to do is to
be responsible, budget for this, stay within the caps that we have self-imposed on us and actually act like we really believe in what we say that the debt is a problem. mr. enzi: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the amendment seeks to reduce discretionary appropriations this fiscal year by $43 billion. as members are aware, the resolution's discretionary figures for this fiscal year are fully consistent with the budget control act spending limits. if they weren't then the resolution would be subject to a 60-vote point of order. this year's resolution also includes overseas contingency operation funding of $77 billion. this amount is equal to the president's request and is allowable under the budget control act. the members of the budget committee worked hard to craft a resolution with levels that would put us on a better fiscal path with $5.1 trillion in
spending reductions over the next ten years. the resolution already contains ample restraint to both discretionary and mandatory spending. as the appropriations committee has reported many of its bills already, this amendment could be detrimental to the appropriations process as it stands today and the allocation this resolution will provide. so i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. a senator: mr. president? i ask consent for -- the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, i agree with these last comments. you know, there are no recommendations on where these cuts come from. do they come from the programs that support our nation's veterans? come from the national institutes of health, the cutting edge cancer research it conducts? you can't turn research on and off. scientists don't hit pauses. does it come from our trappings? our infrastructure? -- transportation, our infrastructure?
if we really want to make these cuts -- we really want to make cuts, and this of course will take us way below the budget caps which are already $3 billion. if you want to make cuts, have the courage to stand up and say this is the program i want to cut, not do something like this where you don't no whether it's education, cancer research or anything else. i oppose the amendment and ask consent my full statement be made part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the time is expired. the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:
the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 5. the nays are 95. the amendment is not agreed to. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a roll in relation to the lee amendment number 14 -- prior to a vote in relation to the lee amendment number 1430.
the senator from utah. mr. lee: mr. president, could we have order in the chamber. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: mr. president, i'm offering an amendment number 1430 to repeal obamacare regulations that are wreaking havoc on our health insurance market, health care costs are rising dramatically, us sustainably, unaffordably. countless working families are desperately treading water -- the presiding officer: would the senator suspend. the senate will be in order. senators will take their conversations off the floor. the senate will resume. the senator will resume. mr. lee: health care costs are rising as a result of obamacar obamacare's dispoddic regime of aggressive health care regulations and countless working families are treading water just to try to stay afloat. a good chunk of these costs can be pinned directly on the
burdensome obamacare regulations. according to one h.h.s. study, obamacare's regular lawtions have -- regulations have caused premiums in the individual market to spike an astounding 105%. in a study by milliman showed the guaranteed issue alone caused health insurance premiums to rise by an average of 45%. this amounts to $106 per month. that's thousands of dollars per year for working families. that's money they could be spending on groceries, on housing, on braces, or their child's education. congress mass done -- has done very little in the last few years to alleviate the burdens faced by these working class families. i urge my colleagues to act now by supporting this amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: mr. president, the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, republicans have now put forward proposal after proposal to rip protections away
from americans with preexisting conditions. this amendment is yet another example of republican efforts to increase costs for people who need health care the most. it would put insurance companies back in charge. it would allow them to deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions or discriminate against them by charging them higher premiums. this repeals the essential health benefits, rips away access to critical services like maternity care, mental health, and substance use disorder treatment, and repeals the requirement that coverage be available to dependents under the age of 26. americans have rejected this crass partisan proposal. it is long past time to focus on bipartisan proposals like the one that senator alexander and i announced today that actually protects people with preexisting conditions while bringing down premiums for patients and
families. i urge a no vote. mr. lee: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: do i have any time remaining? the presiding officer: the senator does not have any time remaining. mr. lee: i ask consent to speak for ten seconds. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:
the presiding officer: any senator wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 32, the nays are 67. the amendment is not adopted. mr. paul: mr. president. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the paul amendment 1277. the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: across the country americans promised to repeal obamacare, they promised to repeal all of obamacare, root
and branch, they promised to repeal, not block grant it. tonight i present another chance. my amendment will provide budget resolution instructions so that republican senators can fulfill their promise so that they can actually repeal obamacare root and branch as they promised. mr. wyden: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, this amendment provides reconciliation instructions to three senate committees for the purpose of repealing and replacing the affordable care act, in effect, ee running the -- rerunning the same bad movie the senate has now seen three times. by now americans understand what these partisan republican health bills have in store for the middle class, higher premiums,
worse health care, and a safety net -- the presiding officer: the anti-is not -- the senate is not in order. mr. wyden: mr. president, i'll close by saying there's now a desire on both sides of the aisle to set aside this my way or the highway approach to governing. bipartisanship is about taking each other's good ideas and i believe the senate can work together to lower people's premiums. this amendment, colleagues, is a vote to look for more partisan ideological trophies when the senate ought to be working together to find common ground. i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. mr. paul: 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: