[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 165 (Monday, December 3, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12303-S12304]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          RAILROAD RETIREMENT

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am proud to come to the floor today as a 
cosponsor of S. 697, the Railroad Retirement and Survivors Improvement 
Act. Senator Baucus and Senator Hatch have worked hard on this bill 
with railroad management and labor and have created a final product of 
which they should be proud. This bill will fundamentally improve the 
economic situation for more than 400,000 American railroad employees 
and their survivors, while reducing the tax burden on rail employees 
and railroads.

[[Page S12304]]

 After three long years of hard work, rail labor and management have 
come together to create a new system to provide for rail retirees and 
their survivors. The Senate should ratify this proposal by adopting the 
amendment today.
  Let me recap quickly what this amendment does: Most importantly, we 
allow survivors of railroaders to receive 100 percent of the benefits 
earned by their spouse, or, in some cases, parent. In most cases, that 
means an immediate doubling of income for employees' survivors. We also 
reduce the time needed for a worker to become vested in the Railroad 
Retirement system from 10 years to five years. That's consistent with 
401(k) plans and similar retirement packages in other industries. 
Finally, we lower the tax burden on railroads and employees, while 
increasing the return on funds invested in the system. That's good for 
workers, and it's good for business. When income tax is factored in, 
some of these railroad companies have a combined tax burden of 50 
percent. That's unforgivably high for any company, especially for 
smaller railroads, such as short lines, which are already struggling 
with huge capital needs.
  Unfortunately, some will allege that this legislation is only needed 
because the Railroad Retirement System needed an economic ``bailout,'' 
but that is a false claim. Tier One benefits are funded by the same 
mechanism that we use to fund Social Security, employers and employees 
each pay a 15.3 percent payroll tax into a trust fund which is used to 
pay current benefits. Since 1950, assets in the Tier One fund and 
Social Security Trust Fund have been moved to ensure that railroaders 
were not disadvantaged by changes in Social Security benefits and also 
to unify benefits for workers eligible for both Social Security and 
Railroad Retirement benefits. Unfortunately, between 1950 and 1974, 
more than $3.5 billion flowed out of the Railroad Retirement Trust fund 
and into the Social Security Trust Fund. That money was finally repaid 
last year, and I think it's important that everyone understands that 
this bill does not in any way change Tier One benefits, which Railroad 
Retirement's equivalent of Social Security.
  When this bill is enacted, more than 400,000 former employees, 
spouses and children will see an increase in benefits. More than 500 
companies will see their overwhelming payroll tax burden decrease. That 
is a good deal for everyone, and there's no reason not to move forward 
on this legislation today. I urge my colleagues to support cloture.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The next 5 minutes is reserved for the 
Republican leader or his designee.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will call the 
roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: I believe there are 5 
minutes reserved for the Republican leadership and then there are 5 
minutes reserved for Senator Daschle and the Democratic leadership, and 
then we will be ready for a vote; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader was to have from 5:05 
p.m. to 5:10 p.m. Roughly half of that has been used. Without 
objection----
  Mr. LOTT. I am not asking for additional time. I am trying to clarify 
how much time I have and the approximate time we will have a vote. I 
presume we will try to vote by 5:15 p.m.; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. The Senator has 2 minutes 10 
seconds.
  Mr. LOTT. I will use a portion of the time I have reserved.
  Mr. President, it is unfortunate we are on the underlying bill at 
this point, the railroad retirement bill. While obviously there can be 
some arguments made for it and with some amendments it probably could 
pass by an overwhelming vote because the concept does have a large 
number of supporters on both sides of the aisle, I wish the Finance 
Committee had been able to bring this up in regular order, have 
hearings, have a markup, and report a bill. I believe the problems with 
the bill could have been addressed. There have been other issues, 
obviously, that have distracted our attention this year, but I still 
regret it has come up in this particular way.


                             Energy Policy

  As to the pending issues, I believe there are fewer issues more 
important facing our Nation today than the fact we do not have a 
national energy policy. We need to do it now, not later this month, not 
next month, and not February or March. It needs to be done as soon as 
possible, and it needs to be broad based.
  It needs to provide for additional production. It needs to provide 
for alternative fuels and conservation. We need incentives for more 
production. We need to look at the transmission systems. We need to 
look at nuclear power.
  All of it should be done. For that reason, I offered this amendment 
to the substitute that would allow us to have a full debate and 
hopefully a direct vote on this issue of a national energy policy.


                                Cloning

  In addition, of course, we have coupled with this amendment the 6-
month moratorium on the issue of cloning. We have heard from Senator 
Murkowski and Senator Brownback about the importance of both of these 
issues. Whether one thinks we should have some sort of research in this 
area of cloning, there is no question there is a lot of uncertainty 
about what this really means and how it would affect this whole 
question of human cloning. So Senator Brownback--responsibly, I 
believe, in view of recent developments--has proposed a 6-month 
moratorium to give us time to sort this out, to talk among ourselves, 
and to hear from experts, and in the meantime not to have this steady 
march toward this question of human cloning. That is why these two 
issues are before us.
  I recommend and urge my colleagues to vote against cloture on the 
energy bill and the cloning issue because we should not cut off debate. 
We should have full debate. We should have amendments to these issues. 
I believe with proper debate and with some amendments being offered, we 
could come up with an energy bill that would pass this Senate 
overwhelmingly, probably nearly unanimously. Would it be exactly the 
way I would write it or any Senator on either side of the aisle would 
write it? Probably not. Would it be a major step forward? Yes, it 
would. Should we get a direct vote on the cloning issue? We should, in 
my opinion.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote no on cloture, continue this debate, 
and then vote no on the substitute, because if my colleagues vote yes 
on the substitute, invoke cloture, then they wipe this issue off the 
table and they will not have an opportunity to have a full debate and 
direct votes on the amendments.
  Regardless of what happens, at some point we are going to get to the 
underlying substance. The energy and cloning language does not replace 
the railroad bill. It is on top of that. We are going to get to the 
substance, and there are going to be substantial amendments that will 
be offered to correct some of the concerns or at least address some of 
the concerns in this legislation. With some participation on both 
sides, I believe we could reach an agreement to pass this bill, with 
the energy and cloning parts added, by the middle or the latter part of 
this week.
  The other side of it is, these issues are not going to go away. These 
are very important issues. In the case of energy, national security is 
involved. The economy of our country is involved. Supply is involved 
for the energy needs and for the economy of our country. In the case of 
the cloning issue, this is certainly a very important, very emotional 
issue. Both issues need to be addressed, and they will be addressed 
repeatedly on other bills when the opportunity presents itself if we do 
not do it. Let us do it on this bill. I believe we could facilitate 
getting an early completion of these issues and complete our work for 
the year.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.




                          ____________________