[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 149 (Thursday, October 28, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Page S13489]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE TAX EXTENDER BILL

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I have exercised the prerogative, which is 
each Senator's, to place a hold, which means legislation cannot be 
brought up without at least referring to and discussing it with the 
Senator who has placed the hold. In this case, I did so on the 
legislation which is commonly referred to as the tax extender bill. 
This is legislation which extends the life of a number of current tax 
provisions. As a member of the Finance Committee, I support this 
legislation and I will vote for this legislation. I am going to 
announce publicly that I am withdrawing the hold I had on that 
legislation. I will give a brief explanation.

  First, I am doing so because I think, in the spirit of comity and the 
effort to get important work accomplished during what I hope will be 
the relatively few days remaining in this first session of the 106th 
Congress, it is appropriate to allow the Senate to take up this 
legislation without further delay insofar as it is the product of my 
action.
  Second, an explanation of why I imposed the hold in the first 
instance: I supported this legislation. I supported it in large part 
because it meets what I think is a fundamental test--it is paid for. 
This legislation contains increases in certain taxes sufficient to 
cover the cost of the tax relief which will be made available through 
the extenders. Not to do that would have had the effect of dipping into 
the surplus. Now that means dipping into the Social Security surplus, 
since we have already spent the non-Social Security surplus. This bill 
meets the test of being fiscally prudent.
  However, I alert the Senate that there was another bill, which in 
many ways was a companion of the tax extender legislation, voted out of 
the Finance Committee almost simultaneously with the tax extender 
legislation. That is legislation which will provide for increases in 
the reimbursement level to providers of various health care services 
under the Medicare program. Again, I support the concept that there is 
a justifiable case for increasing those reimbursements. We have done 
so, in this legislation that the Senate will possibly soon be 
considering, in the amount of approximately $1 billion in fiscal year 
2000, $5 billion in fiscal year 2001, and an additional $9 billion over 
the next 8 years, for a total of $15 billion.
  My criticism of that legislation is, unlike the tax extender bill, it 
is not paid for. Therefore, we will be asked to vote for $15 billion of 
additional spending, which will have to come directly out of the Social 
Security surplus. It had been my intention, by holding the tax extender 
bill, to propose an amendment to the tax extender bill which would have 
been the additional reimbursement for Medicare providers but with an 
appropriate offset so that there would be $15 billion either of reduced 
spending elsewhere or additional taxes to pay for the additional 
reimbursement for Medicare providers. It had been my thought that by 
merging these two bills together and using this as an opportunity to 
provide the offsets for the Medicare reimbursement increases, we would 
be able to send to the House of Representatives legislation which it 
might both consider and favorably vote upon.
  It now appears that, in fact, we are not going to take up the 
increased reimbursement to Medicare providers, at least not take it up 
as separate legislation. Rather, it will be either delayed to some 
future date or taken up as part of the likely end-of-session major 
financial compromise.
  It appears as if there is no purpose to be gained by holding the tax 
extender bill for purposes of offering an amendment to a bill which is 
not going to be taken up anyway. For those somewhat convoluted reasons, 
but reasons which I hope will be satisfactory to the Members of the 
body, my colleagues, I am announcing that I am lifting the hold on the 
tax extender bill. It is my hope that we will soon pass it and that it 
will serve as a model for other legislation when we decide that it is 
important enough to extend a tax benefit to a certain class of 
taxpayers, or important enough to increase spending in the form of 
additional appropriations to certain citizens of this country, that we 
will have the fortitude to make the judgment as to how we are going to 
pay for either those reductions in revenue from one source or increase 
in appropriations to another.
  (The remarks of Mr. Graham pertaining to the introduction of S. 1827 
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I be allowed to 
proceed as in morning business for 4 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair because I know it is extending beyond 
the time which the Senate was to be in session, and as always I 
appreciate his courtesy.

                          ____________________