[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 53 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4322-S4324]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     LEGISLATIVE LINE-ITEM VETO ACT

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
                 amendment no. 362 to amendment no. 347

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment by the 
junior Senator from Wisconsin. I am unhappy that I have to do so 
because I have the greatest respect for Senator Feingold and for his 
dedication to deficit reduction. And though I agree with 99 percent of 
the substance of this sense-of-the-Senate, I cannot agree with the 
final statement that ``enacting a * * * so-called middle-class tax cut 
during the 104th Congress would hinder efforts to reduce the Federal 
deficit.''
  I would like to state for the Record that I do believe that deficit 
reduction is this Congress highest priority. If proposals for tax 
breaks--such as the $200 billion in tax breaks moving through the 
House--get in the way of further progress in reducing the deficit, I 
will oppose them. However, I believe it is possible to both make the 
Tax Code fairer to low- and middle-income working families and 
significantly reduce the deficit.
  For example, Congress could engage in wholesale tax reform, lowering 
rates for middle and lower income taxpayers while eliminating wasteful 
tax loopholes that benefit the rich. Such reform could be designed to 
reduce the deficit and make the Tax Code more equitable. I do not think 
the Senate should go on record right now with a sense-of-the-Senate 
that implies such reform is out of the question.
  Though this Congress has discussed in great detail the problems with 
our Federal budget, we have yet to start the debate on the fiscal year 
1996 budget plan. At this early point in the debate, I do not believe 
it wise to start ruling out options--such as providing some tax relief 
to working families. Therefore, I will reluctantly oppose the pending 
sense-of-the-Senate.
                           amendment no. 403

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to support the amendment 
offered by my colleague from New Jersey. If adopted, the Bradley 
amendment will allow the President to eliminate tax loopholes that 
benefit special interests at the expense of the American people. And 
while the tax expenditure language in the Dole substitute is a good 
first step in the right direction, the amendment offered by Senator 
Bradley offers definitive protection against future wasteful tax 
spending.
  Mr. President, when it comes to creative spending, the Federal 
Government is second to none. And one of the most creative ways that 
Washington spends money is through special breaks and hidden 
expenditures in the Tax Code. The Tax Code contains loopholes large and 
small that benefit every type of special interest, including, among 
others, an exclusion of income for rentals of 2 weeks or less and 
deferrals of income of foreign-controlled corporations.
  Mr. President, there is not enough time this morning to go through 
the entire list of loopholes that permeates our tax laws, but you may 
be assured that there is a credit, break, or writeoff for every 
conceivable purpose. There may have been a time when our country could 
afford these expenditures, but that time is over. Today, we have the 
opportunity to begin the process of eliminating this hidden spending if 
we adopt the clear and unambiguous language offered by my colleague 
from New Jersey.
  [[Page S4323]] Mr. President, we are at a critical time in our 
Nation's history: We can act now to balance our Federal budget or we 
can pass the buck to our children and leave them a legacy of debt, 
depression, and continued economic decline. In order to regain control 
of our financial situation, we need to make tough choices, and the time 
has arrived for the special interests to pay their dues along with the 
rest of us. Mr. President, at a time when we are asking the American 
people to accept sacrifices in the areas of housing, school lunches, 
and education, I believe we in Congress need to subject tax spending to 
the same level of scrutiny. So I urge my colleagues to support the 
Bradley amendment and I yield the floor.
               vote on motion to table amendment no. 403

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 2 p.m. having arrived, under the 
previous order, the question now occurs on the motion to table 
amendment No. 403, offered by the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. 
Bradley].
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 48, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 109 Leg.]

                                YEAS--50

     Abraham
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brown
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Helms
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Pressler
     Roth
     Santorum
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner
       

                                NAYS--48

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Glenn
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Nunn
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Simon
     Simpson
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Heflin
     Shelby
       
  So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 403) was agreed 
to.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. NICKLES. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


               Vote on Motion to Table Amendment No. 362

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to table the pending amendment No. 
362 offered by Senator Feingold and ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask that the next two votes be 10-minute 
votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
table amendment No. 362 offered by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Feingold]. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 54, nays 44, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 110 Leg.]

                                YEAS--54

     Abraham
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Bradley
     Brown
     Burns
     Coats
     Cochran
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Helms
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lautenberg
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Pressler
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                                NAYS--44

     Akaka
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Glenn
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Leahy
     Levin
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Nunn
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Sarbanes
     Simon
     Specter
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Heflin
     Shelby
       
  So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 362) was agreed 
to.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
motion was agreed to, and I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


               Vote on Motion to Table Amendment No. 404

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to table the pending amendment No. 
404 offered by Senator Hollings and I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to the motion 
to table amendment No. 404 offered by the Senator from South Carolina 
[Mr. Hollings]. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The Chair will advise Senators that this is a 10-minute vote.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
who desire to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 46, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 111 Leg.]

                                YEAS--52

     Abraham
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brown
     Burns
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Faircloth
     Feinstein
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Helms
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Packwood
     Pressler
     Roth
     Santorum
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                                NAYS--46

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feingold
     Ford
     Glenn
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Simon
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Heflin
     Shelby
       
  The motion to table the amendment (No. 404) was agreed to.
  Mr. EXON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending 
amendment be temporarily set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                 Amendment No. 373 to Amendment No. 347

  (Purpose: To include in the definition of ``targeted tax benefits'' 
 provisions that worsen the deficit in periods beyond those covered by 
                         the budget resolution)

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 373, which the clerk 
has at the desk. I ask for its immediate consideration.
  [[Page S4324]] The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Exon], for himself and Mr. 
     Daschle, proposes an amendment numbered 373 to amendment No. 
     347.

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 5, strike lines 14 through 17 and insert:
       ``(A) estimated by the Joint Committee on Taxation as 
     losing revenue for any one of the three following periods--
       ``(1) the first fiscal year covered by the most recently 
     adopted concurrent resolution on the budget;
       ``(2) the period of the 5 fiscal years covered by the most 
     recently adopted concurrent resolution on the budget; or
       ``(3) the period of the 5 fiscal years following the first 
     5 years covered by the most recently adopted concurrent 
     resolution on the budget; and''.

  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, we have debated this amendment already so I 
will be very, very brief. This amendment would apply the line-item veto 
to tax loopholes that lost money in the 6th through the 10th years. I 
believe there is broad bipartisan support for this amendment and I urge 
its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
there be no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the 
amendment.
  The amendment (No. 373) was agreed to.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I wish to inquire of the distinguished 
majority manager if he is ready to proceed with the Feingold amendment 
regarding emergency spending that I understand has been cleared on both 
sides. Is that correct?
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would say to my friend, we are just 
about there. I think in about 1 or 2 more minutes. I think the Senator 
from South Carolina was waiting to make remarks and I think we will be 
ready by the time he is finished with his remarks.
  Mr. EXON. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Nebraska for his 
amendment. I think it helps the bill. I am glad we were able to agree 
on it.
  Mr. EXON. I thank my friend from Arizona. I appreciate his 
cooperation.
  Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I thank the able Senators, and the 
managers of the bill.
  Mr. President, I rise in support of the Line-Item Veto Act, which is 
presently before this body. For many years, I have been a supporter of 
giving authority to the President to disapprove specific items of 
appropriation presented to him. On the first legislative day of this 
Congress, I introduced Senate Joint Resolution 2, proposing a 
constitutional amendment to give the President line-item veto 
authority.
  Presidential authority for a line-item veto is a significant fiscal 
tool which would provide a valuable means to reduce and restrain 
excessive appropriations. This proposal will give the President the 
opportunity to approve or disapprove individual items of appropriation 
which have passed the Congress. It does not grant power to simply 
reduce the dollar amount legislated by the Congress.
  Mr. President, 43 Governors currently have constitutional authority 
to reduce or eliminate items or provisions in appropriation measures. 
My home State of South Carolina provides this authority, and I found it 
most useful during my service as Governor in the late 1940's. Surely 
the President should have authority that 43 Governors now have to check 
unbridled spending.
  It is widely recognized that Federal spending is out of control. The 
Federal budget has been balanced only once in the last 34 years. Over 
the past 20 years, Federal receipts, in current dollars, have grown 
from $279 billion to nearly $1.3 trillion, an increase of $978 billion. 
In the meantime, Federal outlays have grown from $332 billion in 1975, 
to over $1.4 trillion last year, an increase of over $1.1 trillion. The 
annual budget deficits have risen to over $200 billion each year, with 
the national debt growing to over $4.8 trillion.
  Mr. President, it is clear that neither the Congress nor the 
President are effectively dealing with the budget crisis. The President 
continues to submit budgets which contain little spending reform and 
project annual deficits of nearly $200 billion. I am hopeful that this 
year Congress will undertake serious efforts to restrain Federal 
spending by reducing or eliminating funding of ineffective programs.
  If we are to have sustained economic growth, Government spending must 
be significantly reduced. A balanced budget amendment and line-item 
veto authority would do much to bring about fiscal responsibility. I 
regret that earlier this year the Senate failed to pass the balanced 
budget amendment.
  Mr. President, it would be a mistake to fail to pass this measure. It 
is my hope that this Congress will swiftly approve the line-item veto 
and send a clear message to the American people that we are making a 
serious effort to get our Nation's fiscal house in order. Finally, Mr. 
President, we must get on with the serious business of reducing 
spending. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. EXON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Abraham). The Senator from Nebraska.

                          ____________________