[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 29, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S220-S221]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          STIMULUS LEGISLATION

  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise today to express 
support for the Daschle consensus stimulus package, and I applaud the 
action of the Senate in passing the Baucus amendment to provide for 
accelerated depreciation over 2 years and 30 percent additional 
depreciation, as well as assisting and holding the States harmless for 
any lost revenue they might otherwise receive based on the support of 
the Medicaid Program at the State level.
  I think it is clear to most everyone that we need to have some 
economic stimulus. What does not seem to be clear to everyone is of 
what that consists. What seems to be further unclear at times is 
whether we need to do it a certain way for a certain period of time.
  I thank Senator Daschle for his efforts on this issue, not just for 
bringing forth the economic stimulus package but doing so in such a 
constructive way, trying to find that which was common among most of 
the proposals that have been offered and to bring together consensus 
where consensus can be achieved.
  This legislation is, at the very least, a building block for a 
package with which most would be hard pressed to disagree. If each of 
us were to come up with what we thought was the best economic stimulus 
for the country and put together our own package, we would have had at 
least 100 different bills.
  In fact, if I had my way, I would probably do some of this 
differently, but I think when a package is put together and we take a 
close look, as we are, at individual ideas that might differ with the 
package, that might be supplemental, we are certainly seeing what the 
Senate is all about, and that is diverse opinions being fully debated 
to try to help this country out of its economic doldrums. In fact, if I 
had my way, I would include a provision addressing the net operating 
losses, or the NOLs, for a longer period of time because I think by 
extending the period of time it would help business shoulder the burden 
of the current economic downturn. So I think it is important we 
consider an NOL extender as well.
  Over the past few months, we have heard so much talk from both sides 
about the need for an economic stimulus. Recently, we had the Chairman 
of the Fed say perhaps it was not as necessary as it might have been 
before, and we have heard others say we should have done it last year.
  As anyone knows, there were a handful of us--maybe more than a 
handful--who wanted to do it last year, but that is not a reason not to 
do something this year in the context of where we are.

[[Page S221]]

  I think that is what Senator Daschle has offered us, an opportunity 
to revisit, to rethink, and to package together a stimulus package that 
would work for the future to help us, if not come out of the deepest of 
a recession, from falling further into a recession or, if we are 
already on the way out of the recession, to expedite the return to 
economic prosperity.
  There will be those who will say this package is not perfect. There 
is not anyone who says that it is. Legislation is never perfect, but it 
is as close to an agreement that has presented itself.
  I certainly hope to thank Senator Daschle for taking this action 
because I think it will, in fact, help us enter a threshold of 
progress.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Pennsylvania.

                          ____________________