[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 167 (Wednesday, December 21, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Page S14289]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS-CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 4297

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I have a unanimous consent request to remake.
  As my colleagues know, there is one major unfinished piece of 
business yet that we need to conclude, and it is the action on the tax 
reconciliation bill. This is a bill which has the section 179, small 
business expensing, the small savers credit for low-income families, 
those making under $25,000 a year, above-the-line deduction for college 
tuition costs, R&D, tax credit, and extension of capital gains and 
dividends.
  These are all-important matters that we need to act on.
  As a result, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of Calendar No. 325, H.R. 4297, the House 
reconciliation bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that all after the enacting clause be 
stricken and the text of S. 2020 as passed by the Senate be inserted 
thereof; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, 
the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, the Senate insist upon 
its amendment and request a conference with the House and the Chair be 
authorized to appoint conferees at a ratio of 2 to 1.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the 
majority seeks to go to conference on the House-passed tax 
reconciliation bill. The House-passed bill includes tax cuts for 
dividends and capital gains. And the House-passed bill does not include 
language to prevent 17 million middle-income Americans from getting a 
tax increase from the alternative minimum tax.
  The Constitution requires the House to go first on tax measures like 
this. In order to build momentum for their tax cuts, the majority in 
the Senate chose to proceed before the House. But now the Constitution 
requires that the Senate take up the House-passed tax reconciliation 
bill and amendment.

  That is where we are.
  There are a number of Senators on this side of the aisle who would 
like to avail themselves of the opportunity to propose amendments to 
the House-passed bill. I expect that several Senators would choose to 
substitute middle-income tax cuts as alternatives to the dividend and 
capital gains tax cuts.
  It is important to remember that under the Budget Act Senators would 
have up to 20 hours to debate amendments to the House-passed bill. I, 
for one, would seek to offer a motion to instruct conferees on this 
bill to ensure that we do not raise taxes on those 17 million Americans 
who become subject to the AMT, unless we act. Under the Budget Act, 
Senators would have an additional 10 hours to debate motions to 
instruct conferees. We are not in the position to conduct 10 hours of 
debate at this late hour. The exercise, I might say, would be 
inappropriate. So I must object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

                          ____________________