[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 31 (Thursday, March 11, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2644-S2650]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             CHANGE OF VOTE

  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, on rollcall vote 45, I voted ``nay.'' It 
was my intention to vote ``yea.'' Therefore I ask unanimous consent 
that I be able to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)


                           Amendment No. 2799

  Mr. NICKLES. I believe the amendment of the Senator from Iowa, 
Senator Harkin, amendment No. 2799, would be next?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. Who yields time? The Senator 
from Iowa.

[[Page S2645]]

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, this amendment does what 400 public health 
organizations around the country say is vitally needed. It increases 
function 550 health spending by 12 percent. That is $6 billion in the 
next fiscal year and $30 billion over 5 years. It also provides for $9 
billion in deficit reduction over the same 5 years.
  The amendment pays for this needed investment with a revenue measure 
that delivers more public health benefits. We raise the current Federal 
tax on cigarettes by 61 cents a pack, from 39 cents to $1 a pack. This 
would provide $30 billion for public health over 5 years, and $9 
billion of deficit reduction.
  I showed this chart earlier. If you think $1 a pack is a lot of 
money, I point out in much of the history of the Federal excise tax on 
cigarettes we were as high as 49 percent of the average wholesale price 
on a pack of cigarettes. We are now down to 14 percent. This amendment 
would only raise it to 30 percent of the average wholesale price.
  I ask unanimous consent a letter supporting this amendment be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                                 January 29, 2004.

      It's Time To Make Public Health Funding a National Priority

       Dear President Bush and Members of Congress: The health of 
     all Americans is at risk from an unprecedented range of 
     threats, including: chronic diseases and disabilities, 
     infectious and food borne illnesses, biological and chemical 
     terrorism, mental disorders and substance abuse, catastrophic 
     injuries, and a shortage of healthcare providers and trained 
     public health workers.
       Our nation's public health system will not be able to 
     respond adequately to these threats without additional 
     resources for the continuum of medical research, prevention, 
     treatment and training programs. We urge you to increase 
     discretionary funding for public health through the Function 
     550 budget allocation in Fiscal Year 2005 by 12 percent. This 
     investment is critical to improving the health, safety and 
     security of our nation.
           Sincerely,

     AAHP-HIAA, and others.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, this amendment would do one thing. It 
would increase taxes by $39 billion over 5 years. That is really half 
of what we are assuming we are going to do to help American families. 
So this is going to cut the tax cut. That will mean, to preserve 
present law, it is going to cost about $80 billion. This is going to 
take half of that away. My colleague might hope it is going to be used 
to raise tobacco taxes, and so on, but that doesn't mean that would 
happen. This tells the Finance Committee to raise $39 billion.
  I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2799.
  Mr. NICKLES. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Edwards), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson), and the Senator 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 32, nays 64, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 46 Leg.]

                                YEAS--32

     Akaka
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Corzine
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Wyden

                                NAYS--64

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (FL)
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Edwards
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
  The amendment (No. 2799) was rejected.
  Mr. HAGEL. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. ENSIGN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 2803

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. We now move to the amendment of the Senator 
from Arkansas. There will be 2 minutes equally divided. The Senator 
from Arkansas is recognized for 1 minute.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I draw my colleagues' attention to the 
amendment offered earlier today by myself and many others. I cannot 
think of anything that could help us in this Nation redirect our 
economy, rebuild the fabric of our country, help our families, our 
working families, our military families, our children across this 
Nation, than looking at what we can do for the uninsured in this 
country. The number of uninsured in our country is alarming. It should 
be a priority in this budget debate.
  As we look at the budget debate we are dealing with, we should think 
about priorities and the choices we have to make and the consequences 
down the road if we do not make the right priorities and the right 
choices.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to take a look at what we are doing. 
We are providing for the uninsured. We are making sure it is not paid 
for by increasing taxes, but cutting loopholes, cutting corporate 
loopholes that have existed, which we have all agreed are wrong. We 
need to do something about it. Redirecting those resources to the 
uninsured is the correct thing to do.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. HAGEL. The Lincoln amendment increases taxes by $60 billion over 
the next 5 years while purporting to help the uninsured. The budget 
resolution already contains a reserve fund for the uninsured. The 
resolution reserve fund is budget neutral and allows the chairman to 
change allocations for both the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
Committee and the Finance Committee.
  I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 2803.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Edwards), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson), and the Senator 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 47 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign

[[Page S2646]]


     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Edwards
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
  The amendment (No. 2803) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, for the information of our colleagues, we 
have four additional rollcalls in this sequence. The next amendment, I 
believe, is from the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.


                           Amendment No. 2804

  Mr. President, the Senate should ensure that delinquent taxpayers pay 
their fair share of taxes before we cut vital domestic investments for 
citizens who actually pay their taxes.
  With that savings, we can restore the spending for our schools, 
veterans, and homeland security that is cut by this budget resolution.
  The Senate should adopt a budget resolution that will permit the 
enactment of the 13 fiscally disciplined appropriations bills without 
forcing the Congress to use gimmicks to meet unrealistic spending 
targets.
  This amendment sets responsible limits on discretionary spending for 
fiscal years 2005 and 2006, just enough to fund the levels, adjusted 
for inflation, that were approved by the Congress earlier this year.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I compliment my colleague from West 
Virginia. This amendment increases taxes by $24.5 billion over the next 
2 years. That basically is going to wipe out the continuation of 
present law that we have scheduled for low-income, middle-income 
families. I hope our colleagues will not support the amendment.
  It also spends most of the money, or it purports to spend the money, 
maybe, if the appropriators get it and it is reallocated, and so on. It 
basically is an amendment that would greatly increase taxes by $24 
billion. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment.
  I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 2804. The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Johnson) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily 
absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). Are there any other Senators 
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 48 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Crapo
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
  The amendment (No. 2804) was rejected.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, if we can have order, I believe Senator 
Bingaman has the next amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. There are 2 minutes equally 
divided. Who seeks time?
  The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this amendment is straightforward. It 
would create a 60-vote point of order against tax legislation that 
would have the effect of forcing more taxpayers into having to pay the 
alternative minimum tax. The point of order would not lie against tax 
legislation that extends the expiring marriage penalty relief, the 10-
percent tax bracket, or the child tax credit, but it would lie against 
other tax legislation.
  We have about 3 million people who paid the alternative minimum tax 
last year. It is expected to go up over $30 million by 2010. This 
amendment doesn't fix that, but this amendment would keep the situation 
from getting worse by us passing legislation that adds more taxpayers 
to that group.
  I think this is a very meritorious amendment and I urge support for 
it.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, Senator Bingaman's amendment creates a 
new point of order against specific policies that might be reported to 
the Finance Committee. It is not at all related to the budgetary 
effects of such legislation and is not appropriate for inclusion in the 
budget resolution. It is not germane.
  I raise a point of order against the amendment pursuant to section 
305 of the Budget Act because the amendment is not germane.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Budget 
Act, I move to waive the applicable section of the act for the purpose 
of the pending amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Voinovich) 
is necessarily absent.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Johnson), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are 
necessarily absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 49 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
     Voinovich
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 
53.

[[Page S2647]]

Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is rejected. The point of order is 
sustained and the amendment falls.
  The Senator from Oklahoma.


                           Amendment No. 2807

  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President I believe the next amendment to be voted 
on was offered by Senator Lieberman.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. There are 2 minutes equally 
divided. Who seeks time?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, we are a Nation at 
war. It is a war against terrorism. It is a war that is being fought 
abroad and at home. A day or two ago, this Senate overwhelmingly 
restored $7 billion to the Department of Defense budget, in part to 
assist our military in fighting the war against terrorism overseas. At 
home, we have not adequately funded the homeland side of the war 
against terrorism. We have not adequately funded the Department of 
Homeland Security. This amendment would do that: $6.8 billion, $4.4 
billion of which would go to first responders.
  It is outrageous that at this time of conflict, there are police and 
fire departments all over America that are letting firefighters and 
police officers go, just when we need those first responders. That is 
about as foolish as an army laying off soldiers in the middle of the 
war.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks time?
  The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Just to inform our colleagues, we are going to have a 
vote on the Lieberman amendment and then on the Kennedy amendment. Then 
we are going to try to organize a bunch of other votes. So we are 
making progress.
  I thank the minority leader and also my colleague Senator Conrad. We 
are making good progress. We have amendments on both sides. I know a 
lot of people want to get some of these considered. We are going to 
move as quickly as possible. Let's get through these next two votes and 
then we will see where we go. I urge our colleagues to expect a late 
night tonight. We have a lot of work today. It is possible we could 
even finish tonight if we all cooperate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Very briefly, if we could ask all colleagues who have 
amendments that they still want considered, it would be enormously 
helpful to us if we could get copies of those amendments. We are trying 
to work out as many amendments as we can. We need to have the actual 
amendment to be able to do that.
  One other thing we should say, we have been asked if there is going 
to be a window. We do not intend to have a window. We intend to keep 
pressing ahead and those who are next in line should expect that they 
would only have 2 minutes a side to do their amendments. So when they 
are preparing their presentations, if they would understand they would 
have no more than 2 minutes, so we are not going back after we finish 
this round to some longer explanations of amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The 
Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I will comment on the amendment of my 
good friend Senator Lieberman. This amendment would increase taxes by 
$13.7 billion over the next 5 years. It spends $6.8 billion, or 
presumes to spend $6.8 billion on homeland security. That would be a 
40-percent increase over this year. We have already provided in the 
budget a 15-percent increase over last year.
  My colleague mentioned defense. We just increased defense spending 7 
percent over last year. Homeland security is 15 percent. I don't think, 
frankly, we can afford 40 percent. I urge my colleagues to vote no on 
the Lieberman amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2807. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Johnson), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are 
necessarily absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 40, nays 57, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 50 Leg.]

                                YEAS--40

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--57

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
  The amendment (No. 2807) was rejected.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I inform our colleagues that we are 
making great progress. I thank Senator Conrad and Senator Daschle for 
their assistance. The next and last amendment we have in the original 
list of amendments is offered by Senator Kennedy.
  I also want to repeat what Senator Conrad said a moment ago. It is 
our intention to keep plowing ahead. We are making good progress. We 
are accepting some amendments. We may have to have a few more rollcall 
votes but I hope not too many.
  Senator Kennedy will be the next in the order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 2 minutes of debate equally divided. 
The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 2725

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, in higher education, with children from 
families earning $15,000, 4.8 million children receive Pell grants. 
That makes up one-quarter of all the children attending higher 
education in this country. What we have seen in the last 3 years is the 
cost of public education has increased 26 percent. This amendment takes 
the Pell grants from $4,050 to $5,100; average increase, $600; average 
increase, 27 percent, just for the increase on the tuition for public 
colleges.
  I refer to the statement made by President Bush in New Hampshire 
where he said:

       It is a known fact that Pell grant aid significantly 
     affects the ability of children to attend college. I am going 
     to ask Congress to bolster the Pell grants to $5,100.

  That is what this amendment does. It is a $5 billion cost offset in 
terms of the deficit reduction paid for by the highest taxpayers in the 
country.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. I yield to my colleague from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I certainly appreciate the Senator from 
Massachusetts repeating what was said in New Hampshire. One thing I 
said in New Hampshire was I don't believe we should be increasing taxes 
on the American public disproportionately. This amendment increases 
taxes by $9.8 billion. It does not necessarily fund the Pell grant 
program, but in this bill, under the leadership of Senator Nickles, we 
have funded the Pell grant. We have increased it by almost $1 billion, 
and we continue a large commitment to this program, which is very 
appropriate and which is being undertaken in an aggressive way in the 
budget as

[[Page S2648]]

presented. So I would vote against this tax increase, and mention to 
the people in New Hampshire that I continue to oppose taxes.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second. The question is on agreeing to 
amendment No. 2725. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Johnson) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily 
absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid) is absent 
attending a funeral.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 51 Leg.]

                                YEAS--44

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Johnson
     Kerry
     Reid
  The amendment (No. 2725) was rejected.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. SANTORUM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, we now have two or three sense-of-the-
Senates. I will just tell everybody, Senator Conrad and I have decided 
we are not going to have any rollcalls on sense-of-the-senates, at 
least that is not our intention. We are willing to agree to a couple as 
long as they will keep debate to the sense-of-the-Senates very brief, 
like 1 minute.
  I believe Senator Feinstein or Senator Mikulski has one. Senator 
Mikulski has one, I believe, and we would be happy to consider it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I say to the chairman, mine is not a 
sense of the Senate. Mine is a regular amendment.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I apologize to my colleague. Yours is a 
regular amendment, but we made it deficit-neutral, so we are willing to 
accept your amendment. So if you send it to the desk, we will accept 
it.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you very much. Why don't I just get busy to do 
that?


                           Amendment No. 2820

  Mr. President, it is with enthusiasm that I send my amendment to the 
desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Maryland [Ms. Mikulski], for herself, Mr. 
     Levin, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dodd, Mr. 
     Lautenberg, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Biden, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2820.

  Ms. MIKULSKI. 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:

(Purpose: To provide a deficit neutral reserve fund to provide a $4,000 
                          tuition tax credit)

       On page 28, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:

     SEC. 304. RESERVE FOR FUNDING OF HOPE CREDIT.

       If the Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill or 
     joint resolution, or an amendment thereto is offered or a 
     conference report thereon is submitted, that increases the 
     Hope credit to $4,000, makes the credit available for 4 
     years, and makes the credit refundable, the chairman of the 
     Committee on the Budget may revise committee allocations for 
     the Committee on Finance and other appropriate budgetary 
     aggregates and allocations of new budget authority and 
     outlays by the amount provided by that measure for that 
     purpose, if it would not increase the deficit for fiscal year 
     2005 or for the total of fiscal years 2005 though 2009.

  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, my amendment is very straightforward. It 
helps middle-class families continue to pursue the American dream. My 
amendment provides for a tuition tax credit of up to $4,000 to help pay 
for college.
  Our colleagues know our middle-class families are stressed and 
stretched. They do not know how they can afford to send their kids to 
college. College tuition is on the rise, but financial aid is not 
keeping up. Our students are graduating with so much debt that it is 
like their first mortgage.
  We believe the benefits of education accrue to the individual. We 
believe that college is important to families. But it is also important 
to our economy.
  If our country is going to be safer, if we are going to have a 
stronger economy, we need to be smarter. This means public investments 
in giving families the opportunity to go to college will also accrue to 
our society.
  We need to invest in human capital. My amendment will make college 
affordable to middle-class families. It will give help to those who 
practice self-help.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to accept my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I compliment my colleague from Maryland. 
There is no objection to the amendment on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2820.
  The amendment (No. 2820) was agreed to.
  Mr. NICKLES. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I believe the Senator from Minnesota, Mr. 
Coleman, has an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 2821

  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I have an amendment I send to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. COLEMAN], for himself and 
     Ms. Collins, proposes an amendment numbered 2821.

  Mr. COLEMAN. 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:

 (Purpose: To provide $1.9 billion to increase the maximum Pell Grant 
from $4,050 to $4,500 by reducing spending in other Federal government 
     programs, except education programs, by a commensurate amount)

         On page 15, line 16, increase the amount by 
     $1,884,000,000.
         On page 15, line 17, increase the amount by $452,000,000.
         On page 15, line 21, increase the amount by 
     $1,394,000,000.
         On page 15, line 25, increase the amount by $38,000,000.
         On page 23, line 5, decrease the amount by 
     $1,884,000,000.
         On page 23, line 6, decrease the amount by $452,000,000.
         On page 23, line 10, decrease the amount by 
     $1,394,000,000.
         On page 23, line 14, decrease the amount by $38,000,000.

  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I want to associate myself with the 
comments of my colleague from Maryland regarding higher education, and 
my colleague from Massachusetts in regard to Pell grants.

[[Page S2649]]

  We need to support our students. Pell grants are now at $4,050. This 
amendment will move the maximum grant to $4,500.
  The cost of this amendment is $1.9 billion. It is paid for by 
reducing spending in other Federal programs, except education, by a 
commensurate amount.
  This is the kind of investment we have to make. This is good for our 
country. It is good for our young people. It is good for our future. I 
urge my colleagues to accept the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we are going to accept this amendment on 
this side, but I do want to indicate, there is no new money here. This 
is cutting other programs across the board to fund this priority. It is 
important to understand there is no new money here. But with that, we 
accept the amendment on our side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 2821.
  The amendment (No. 2821) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I believe the Senator from California, 
Mrs. Feinstein, has a sense-of-the-Senate resolution.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from 
California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized for 
2 minutes.


                           Amendment No. 2753

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, this is amendment No. 2753, on behalf 
of Senators Hollings, Breaux, Dodd, Corzine, Schumer, Biden, Mikulski, 
Murray, Graham of Florida, and Collins.
  This amendment does not cost. It is a sense of the Senate, and it 
essentially would allow large ports that need to produce security to do 
this through multiyear contracting or letters of intent. There is a 
real problem in going year by year with budget funds for port security. 
The port of Los Angeles-Long Beach is 15 miles long. They are the 
second and third largest ports in the Nation. It simply cannot do what 
is necessary to be done to secure the port unless there is some form of 
multiyear funding agreement. This amendment would allow that to take 
place, at least in terms of voicing the Senate's view.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we think this is an excellent amendment 
that will enhance port security. We know we have a problem with port 
security. The Senator has come up with a creative contribution. We urge 
our colleagues on both sides to accept this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from California [Mrs. Feinstein], for herself, 
     Mr. Hollings, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Dodd, 
     Mr. Biden, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Graham of Florida, 
     and Ms. Collins, proposes an amendment numbered 2753.

  Mr. CONRAD. 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:

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate regarding funding for port 
                               security)

       On page 54, after line 22, insert the following new 
     section:

     SEC. 510. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING FUNDING FOR PORT 
                   SECURITY.

       (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
       (1) In the United States, the system of maritime commerce, 
     including seaports and other ports, is a critical element of 
     the United States economic, social, and environmental 
     infrastructure.
       (2) In 2001, ports in the United States handled 
     approximately 5,400 ships, the majority of which were owned 
     by foreign persons and crewed by nationals of foreign 
     countries, that made a total of more than 60,000 calls at 
     such ports.
       (3) In a typical year, more than 17,000,000 cargo 
     containers are handled at ports in the United States.
       (4) Maritime commerce is the primary mode of transportation 
     for international trade, with ships carrying more than 80 
     percent of such trade, by volume.
       (5) Disruption of trade flowing through United States ports 
     could have a catastrophic impact on both the United States 
     and the world economies.
       (6) In addition to the economic importance of United States 
     ports, such ports form a critical link in the United States 
     national security structure, and are necessary to ensure that 
     United States military material can be effectively and 
     quickly shipped to any location where such material is 
     needed.
       (7) Terrorist groups, including extremist groups such as al 
     Qaeda, are likely to consider, formulate, and execute plans 
     to conduct a terrorist strike against one or more of the 
     ports in the United States.
       (8) Terrorists have conducted attacks against maritime 
     commerce in the past, including the October 2002 attack on 
     the French oil tanker LIMBERG and the October 2000 attack on 
     the USS COLE in Yemen.
       (9) It is critical that port security be enhanced and 
     improved through the adoption of better formulated security 
     procedures, the adoption of new regulations and law, and 
     investment in long-term capital improvements to the structure 
     of the United States most critical ports.
       (10) Effective funding to provide adequate security at 
     United States ports requires a commitment to provide Federal 
     funds over multiple years to fund long-term capital 
     improvement projects.
       (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate 
     that--
       (1) the budget of the United States should provide adequate 
     funding for port security projects and not less than the 
     amount of such funding that is adequate to implement an 
     effective port security plan;
       (2) the implementation of the budget of the United States 
     should permit the provision of Federal funds over multiple 
     years to fund long-term security improvement projects at 
     ports in the United States; and
       (3) the Secretary of Homeland Security should, as soon as 
     practicable, develop a funding plan for port security that 
     permits funding over multiple years for such projects.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? The 
question is on agreeing to amendment No. 2753.
  The amendment (No. 2753) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the next amendment is an amendment by 
Senator Daschle on the Indian Health Service.


                           Amendment No. 2774

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I have an amendment No. 2774.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Daschle], for himself, 
     Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Johnson, Mr. 
     Wyden, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Inouye, and 
     Mr. Reid, proposes an amendment numbered 2774.

  Mr. DASCHLE. 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:

 (Purpose: To create a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Indian 
    Health Service Clinical Services by $3.44 billion and lower the 
  national debt by eliminating abusive tax loopholes or reducing tax 
 breaks for individuals with incomes in excess of $1 million per year)

       On page 3, line 9, increase the amount by $6,123,000,000.
       On page 3, line 10, increase the amount by $688,000,000.
       On page 3, line 11, increase the amount by $69,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $6,123,000,000.
       On page 3, line 18, increase the amount by $688,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $69,000,000.
       On page 4, line 20, increase the amount by $6,123,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $688,000,000.
       On page 4, line 22, increase the amount by $69,000,000.
       On page 5, line 3, decrease the amount by $6,123,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, decrease the amount by $6,811,000,000.
       On page 5, line 5, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       On page 5, line 7, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       On page 5, line 11, decrease the amount by $6,123,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $6,811,000,000.
       On page 5, line 13, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       On page 5, line 14, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       On page 5, line 15, decrease the amount by $6,880,000,000.
       At the end of Title III, insert the following:

     SEC.   . RESERVE FUND FOR INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE CLINICAL 
                   SERVICES.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     shall revise the aggregates, functional totals, allocations 
     to the

[[Page S2650]]

     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, discretionary 
     spending limits, and other appropriate levels and limits in 
     this resolution by up to $3,440,000,000 in budget authority 
     for fiscal year 2005, and by the amount of outlays flowing 
     therefrom in 2005 and subsequent years, for a bill, joint 
     resolution, motion, amendment, or conference report that 
     provides additional fiscal year 2005 discretionary 
     appropriations, in excess of levels provided in this 
     resolution, for Indian Health Service clinical services, 
     included in this resolution for the Department of Health and 
     Human Services.

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, last week's Congress Daily included a 
story that still troubles me deeply and gets at the heart of why I am 
offering this amendment.
  HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson, in response to a question about why the 
Bush administration is providing funding for universal health care in 
Iraq, but not in America, replied:

       Even if you don't have health insurance in America, you get 
     taken care of. That could be defined as universal health 
     care.

  I don't think Secretary Thompson is callous, so he must be 
desperately out of touch. Either way, it's shocking to hear the 
nation's top health care official claim that America has universal 
health care.
  More than 43 million Americans are uninsured. According to the 
National Institute of Medicine, uninsured Americans who access 
emergency rooms or free clinics get about half the medical care of 
those with health insurance--they live sicker and die sooner than those 
with insurance. Approximately 18,000 Americans die unnecessarily each 
year because of lack of health care. And the problem isn't just 
uninsured Americans. Millions more Americans are under-insured.
  There are 2.5 million Native Americans in this country who--
theoretically--have insurance. All too often, they get abysmal health 
care--or none at all. America is obligated--by law and by treaty--to 
provide free health care for American Indians--a commitment we made to 
Indian people when the U.S. Government took their lands. America is not 
honoring that commitment. Native Americans suffer higher rates of many 
serious illnesses--including diabetes, heart disease, and Sudden Infant 
Death Syndrome--than the rest of the population. Yet Indian Health 
Service funding is wholly inadequate.
  The Indian Health Service makes up only one-half of one percent of 
the HHS budget. Its budget has consistently grown at a far slower rate 
than the rest of the HHS budget. That means that the health system with 
the sickest people and the greatest need gets the smallest increases. 
That just doesn't add up.
  In per capita terms, the United States spends about $5000 per year on 
health care for the general U.S. population. Contrast that with what 
the Indian Health Service spends per capita on health services for 
Native American men, women, and children: about $1900 per year. To put 
that in further perspective, you should know that's one-half of what 
the Government spends per capita on Federal prisoners' health care--
$3800. The U.S. Government spends twice as much on Federal prisoners' 
health care as it spends on Native Americans' health care.
  The result: American Indians live sicker and die younger than every 
other ethnic group. This has created what the U.S. Commission on Civil 
Rights calls a ``quiet crisis.'' Care is rationed in Indian Country 
through the use of a literal ``life or limb'' test. In many cases, you 
are denied care, or care is delayed, unless you are at risk of 
immediate loss of your life or a limb.
  Secretary Thompson should come to Indian Country to hear some of the 
stories I hear when I talk to people on the Cheyenne River Indian 
Reservation or in Pine Ridge or at the Sioux San Hospital in Rapid 
City. Secretary Thompson, there is no universal health care in Indian 
Country. Just ask anyone who lives there. Secretary Thompson should 
apologize to Native Americans for his comments. More than that, he 
should make a commitment to fight for the funds the Indian Health 
Service needs to meet its obligations.
  Democrats tried repeatedly last year to persuade our colleagues to 
fully fund at least one part of the Indian Health Service budget: 
clinical services. They refused, repeatedly. Last year, several of my 
Republican colleagues came to the floor to say: ``You're right--the 
health care situation in Indian country is abysmal, and it's unfair. 
Indian people do deserve better, but we just can't afford it. We can 
afford tax cuts for the wealthy elite, and we can afford billions on 
Iraq, but we can't afford to give Native Americans the health care 
we've promised them.''
  Mr. President, that is just not acceptable. My friends on the other 
side may be willing to offer that excuse, but I am not. And they can no 
longer claim that they ``didn't know'' how bad Indian Country's health 
care crisis truly is. So we are trying again this year. We are offering 
the Senate a chance to finally right this indefensible wrong.
  Our amendment would create a reserve fund to allow a $3.44 billion 
increase in IHS clinical services. This is not enough to provide health 
care services to every eligible American Indian and Alaska Native. It 
would, however, provide sufficient funds to serve the current IHS user 
population--the people who currently depend on the Indian Health 
Service for their care.
  The cost of this amendment, along with additional deficit reduction, 
is fully offset by eliminating abusive tax loopholes or reducing tax 
breaks for individuals with incomes over $1 million per year. And don't 
be fooled by promises made in a competing amendment to make unspecified 
cuts in domestic discretionary spending.
  That amendment does nothing to raise the Appropriations Committee's 
budget allocation, and does nothing to put additional money in the IHS 
clinical services account. That funding isn't real, and those promises 
are empty. At best, it would rob Peter to pay Paul.
  If America can afford to spend billions of dollars building hospitals 
and providing health care in Iraq, we can afford to honor our treaty 
obligation to provide health care for American Indians.
  I realize we have obligations around the world. But we also have 
obligations here at home. Millions of Americans want to know, when is 
it their turn? When do we start paying attention to their needs? When 
do we take care of our own? We don't have universal health care in 
America, despite what Secretary Thompson thinks. And we certainly don't 
have universal health care in Indian Country. This amendment gives us 
the chance to offer Indian people the bare minimum of services that 
most of us take for granted and would consider essential. I hope we 
don't waste it.
  I yield the floor.