[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 95 (Tuesday, June 10, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5410-S5412]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RENEWABLE ENERGY AND JOB CREATION ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Montana is
recognized.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 1
minute to explain the next vote.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this vote is about jobs, energy, and
paying our Nation's bills. There may be times when delay does not have
a significant adverse impact. Today is not one of those days.
The bill before us is a good bill. It extends tax cuts that expired
last December.
Companies across America are deciding whether to renew research
contracts. Energy companies are deciding whether to buy and build wind
turbines. These decisions support jobs.
This bill encourages the search for new and clean energy sources.
Harnessing power from ocean waves. Capturing carbon emissions.
This bill also extends expiring individual provisions, including the
teacher expense deduction and the tuition deduction.
And the bill pays for itself with provisions that are not tax
increases. With gasoline topping $4 per gallon, the American people do
not want us to delay.
Is the bill perfect? No.
Will the Senate change it? Yes.
Let's get on with making those changes. I urge my colleagues to
support the motion to begin debate on this bill.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Iowa is
recognized.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 1
minute.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues not to give consent
to cloture at this time because there are a lot of matters in this bill
that ought not be in here. We have matters in here for trial attorneys,
and we have matters in here for Davis-Bacon.
We are talking about solving a housing crisis. This is not the way to
do it. We ought to give more consideration to it, and not granting
cloture is one way of giving greater consideration to what we are going
to do.
cloture motion
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, pursuant
to rule XXII, the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 767, H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy
and Job Creation Act of 2008.
Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert
Menendez, Kent Conrad, Daniel K. Inouye, Byron L.
Dorgan, Jon Tester, Richard Durbin, Patty Murray, Max
Baucus, John D. Rockefeller, IV, Maria Cantwell, Frank
R. Lautenberg, John F. Kerry, Blanche L. Lincoln, E.
Benjamin Nelson.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent, the mandatory
quorum call is waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to Calendar No. 767, H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy
and Job Creation Act of 2008, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr.
Byrd), the Senator from New York (Mrs. Clinton), the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Obama)
are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr.
McCain).
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the
Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 44, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 147 Leg.]
YEAS--50
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Conrad
Corker
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inouye
Johnson
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCaskill
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--44
Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wicker
NOT VOTING--6
Byrd
Clinton
Graham
Kennedy
McCain
Obama
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 50, the
nays are 44. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in
voting to proceed to the tax extenders legislation on the floor. This
legislation represents a fiscally responsible and balanced approach to
ensure that necessary tax provisions for hardworking American families
and indispensable small businesses do not expire.
At a time when our economy teeters on the brink of recession--when
unemployment increased 5.5 percent last month--the biggest monthly jump
in 12 years--when gasoline at the pump is more than $4 a gallon and
climbing, when the cost of a dozen eggs has risen 38 percent in the
last year alone, when oil costs are set to reach $140 per barrel and
analysts are predicting a rise to $150 by July 4th, and when
foreclosures have hit historic levels--is there any question that the
American people expect--even demand, not just action but action leading
to results. We must forge together the results that address these
central issues facing the U.S.
[[Page S5411]]
economy and the millions of Americans who are anxiously awaiting action
from leaders. And while Congress will be forced to make difficult
choices on some of these issues in the coming months, this issue--
whether to extend critical tax incentives right now should be, frankly,
a straightforward decision.
And now before us is legislation that would extend critical energy
tax credits--including the catalyst that caused a 45-percent growth in
wind energy last year and energy efficiency tax credits that creates an
incentive to reduce energy demand. And we are really debating this
question when we saw oil rise by $11 per barrel in a single day to
$139? To be blunt, this country must wake up and recognize the
ramifications of an energy crisis that we have not addressed for 30
years--and counting. Dr. Cooper of the Consumer Federation of America
has estimated that from 2002 to 2008 annual household expenditures on
energy increased from about $2,600 to an astonishing $5,300. The impact
in Maine, where 80 percent of households use heating oil to get through
a winter, is even worse. Last year at this time, prices were at a
challenging $2.70 a gallon--for the average Mainer who goes through
1,000 gallons of oil that is $2,700. The price now is $4.70 meaning
that it will cost a Mainer $4,700 just to stay warm not even
considering gasoline costs. That is the difference between a burden and
a crisis.
Indeed, the energy efficiency tax incentives and the renewable
production tax credit--critical vehicles for moving our country to self
sufficiency--are set to expire at the end of this year and some have
already expired at the beginning of this year. This is the antithesis
of the energy policy that our nation must be employing to address
rising energy costs.
Energy efficiency is singlehandedly the most effective investment
that our country can make to address the calamity of our energy policy.
It is derelict that we would allow energy efficiency tax credits to
expire. In fact, some tax credits have already expired, and as a
result, there are currently no incentives to purchase efficient
furnaces. At a time when Americans are worried about heating bills in
June, we must provide the assistance to allow Americans to invest in
energy efficient products that will reduce our collective demand for
energy, and save Americans money.
For example, included in this package is a $300 tax credit to
purchase a high efficiency oil furnace, which would save over $180 in
annual savings for an average home--according to calculations based on
Department of Energy data and recent home heating prices. In addition,
this includes an extension of a tax credit for highly efficient natural
gas furnaces that saves an individual $100 per year. However, this tax
credit ended at the beginning of this year--right when oil prices began
their historic climb.
For businesses that are competing against countries that subsidize
oil the situation is simply untenable. Two weeks ago, Katahdin Paper
Company announced that the cost of oil used to run its boilers has
caused the company to consider closing the mill's doors. Now, talks are
under way to find alternative solutions to preserve the mill's
operations and its accompanying jobs, but make no mistake; we are at
the tipping point where our economy could well be in ruins directly as
a result of high energy costs.
With jobs being lost because of high energy costs, it is crucial that
we invest in renewable energy jobs--that will put our economy back to
work and invest in secure energy future. Indeed over one hundred
thousand Americans could be put to work in 2008 if clean energy
production tax credits were extended. However, because the incentives
are set to expire this year, renewable energy companies are already
reporting a precipitous decrease in investment due to uncertainty.
Projects currently underway may soon be mothballed. Clean energy
incentives for energy efficient buildings, appliances and other
technologies, as well as additional funding for weatherizing homes,
would similarly serve to stimulate 2008 economic consumption, lower
residential energy costs, and generate new manufacturing and
construction jobs. It is irresponsible to allow a bright spot in our
economy, the renewable energy industry and energy efficiency
industries, to falter, when the product of these industries are so
essential to the future of this country.
Failing to act on these crucial incentives could choke off promising
business investment in 2008 and miss an opportunity to address high
energy costs, a critical contributor to sinking consumer confidence and
our Nation's long-term economic challenges. Extending these expiring
clean energy tax credits will help ensure a stronger, more stable
environment for new investments and ensure continued robust growth in a
bright spot in an otherwise slowing economy. This bill presents another
opportunity to raise the bar for our future domestic energy systems and
energy efficiencies, benefitting our economy, our health, our
environment, and our national security.
Not only does the legislation address these critical energy tax
provisions, but also extends relief for lower and middle-income
Americans, as well as small businesses. In particular, there are a
number of provisions that I have championed that have been included by
the House legislation and Chairman Baucus' amendment.
Fed Chairman Bernanke testified before the House Budget Committee
earlier this year that, ``a fiscal stimulus package should be
implemented quickly and structured so that its effects on aggregate
spending are felt as much as possible within the next twelve months or
so.'' Without a doubt, one way to affect spending and help working
Americans meet the challenges ahead of us and provide for the families
is providing a tax rebate. Another measure that Senator Lincoln and I
have long championed would enable more hard-working, low-income
families to receive the refundable child credit by reducing the income
threshold for the refundable credit to $10,000 and deindexing it from
inflation just as it originally passed the Senate in 2001.
The consequences of inaction are serious for low-income Americans
living paycheck-to-paycheck, and our proposal will ensure that those
low-income, hard-working families that benefit from this credit the
most receive it. And, I am very pleased that the House included a
version of our proposal, one in which, I might add, would already be
putting money in people's pockets had it already been enacted into law
providing further economic stimulus during these challenging times.
To ensure that much needed capital investment reaches all corners of
the country, the extenders package rightly includes an extension of the
new markets tax credit. This program has proven extremely successful in
encouraging investment and spurring growth in impoverished areas all
across the country, both rural and urban. Senator Rockefeller and I
have championed extending this vital incentive with the New Markets Tax
Credit Extension Act, S. 1239, a bill that enjoys the bipartisan
support of 27 cosponsors.
To provide relief and equity to our Nation's 1.5 million retail
establishments, most of which have less than five employees, I have
introduced with Senators Lincoln, Kerry, and Hutchison. This provision
would reduce from 39 to 15 years the depreciable life of improvements
that are made to retail stores that are owned by the retailer. If the
motion to proceed passes, I believe that we will have an opportunity to
address this inequity given the support for this provision expressed by
the chairman of the Finance Committee.
In 2004, I fought for the inclusion of incentives to stop the flow of
film productions offshore into the FSC-ETI bill. Consequently, I was
very pleased to see the House include an extension of this vital
incentive for film production companies planning whether and where to
film. The House also included a critical modification to the incentive.
Specifically, it would remove the $15 million cap on film productions
eligible for the incentive and instead limiting the deduction to the
first $15 million as the provision was originally passed in the Senate
before being amended in conference. This is an issue that I have also
worked on with my good friend, the senior Senator from Arkansas, and am
so pleased with this provisions inclusion.
So as we can see, this bill provides the Senate an opportunity to
consider a number of provisions that are vital in helping our economy
weather the recent downturn it is experiencing. The provisions that I
have just outlined
[[Page S5412]]
will unleash renewable energy projects creating jobs, provided targeted
tax relief to low-income working families struggling to pay for the
high cost of food and fuel, encourage an infusion of capital into rural
and urban communities, provide tax incentives for retail businesses
looking to grow their business, and help keep the jobs associated with
film production within our borders. Not to mention, the tax extenders
bill also includes provisions such as the R&D tax credit, the tuition
deduction and the teachers classroom expenses deduction that are widely
supported on both sides of the aisle.
Clearly, this tax extenders package is critical to Congress's ongoing
efforts to reverse the economic slowdown that our Nation is facing. For
the fifth month this year, U.S. employers have cut jobs including
49,000 in the month of May alone. The number of Americans filing first-
time claims for unemployment benefits is at its highest level since
October of 2004 and the increase in the rate was the largest since
1986.
The Senate should move forward on extending expiring tax relief.
There are some aspects of the House bill that I believe should be
improved upon, such as providing an AMT patch to stop the expansion of
this mass tax. Some on the other side of the aisle believe we should at
least attempt to pay for tax relief, a position I happen to agree with.
Others on my side of the aisle believe that shouldn't continue to be a
maintenance Congress, continually passing short-term temporary tax
relief, a position that I also happen to agree with.
There are differences of opinion, but what is the Senate afraid of?
What are we afraid of? To debate and to vote on various positions? Some
of those issues and positions I would disagree with. But does that mean
to say the Senate cannot withstand the conflicting views of various
Members of the Senate? It is not unheard of, that both sides of the
political aisle will have differing views. So, I would urge my
colleagues to join me in supporting the motion to proceed. If the
motion succeeds, I am hopeful that we can do what the Senate ought to
do--that is find some common ground on an amendment process and a way
forward to finally dispose of the legislation and enact this
legislation sooner rather than later.
I came to this discussion to work on this issue, to debate, which is
consistent with the traditions and principles of this institution,
which has been its hallmark. That is why it has been considered the
greatest deliberative body in the world. Unfortunately, it is not
living up to that expectation or characterization, regrettably.
Let's have an open and unfettered debate, which is consistent with
this institution that is predicated on our Founding Fathers' vision of
an institution based on accommodation and consensus. You have to get 60
votes. So let's work it out. Let's clear this first hurdle and proceed
to the bill. My side of the aisle will still have another 60 vote
threshold to ensure that their concerns are heard.
The Senate is based on consensus. It is based on compromise. It is
based on conciliation. It is based on the fact that you have to develop
cooperation in order to get anything done. It is not unusual. If
historically we took the position: You missed your chance because there
are disparate views, so that there would be no opportunity to further
discuss or negotiate--we missed our chance? Are we talking about
scoring political points? Are we talking about what is the best tax
policy for this country?
I am concerned we are taking a political U-turn away from the message
in the last election. I was in that last election. I heard loudly and
clearly. I don't blame the people of Maine or across this country for
their deep-seated frustration. They are right. There was too much
partisanship and too much polarization.
What's required now is leadership. We need leadership for this
country. They are thirsting for a strong leadership, an honorable
leadership that leads us to a common goal. No one expected unanimity in
the Senate but we would give integrity to this process to allow it to
work and not cynically say who is winning and who is losing today
politically. We are not shedding the political past. We have made a
political U-turn. We are returning to it.
This isn't about party labels. This isn't whether it is good for
Republicans or good for Democrats. It is what is good for America. It
is not about red States and blue States. It is about the red, white,
and blue. Fact is that with every day that we delay, there are millions
of taxpayers in all 50 States who literally will pay the price for our
inaction.
I hope we can find a way. What could be of higher priority than to be
able to debate and to vote on our respective positions, to give a vote
on AMT relief and expiring tax provisions that is so important that a
majority of Senators support? Is there anyone in this Chamber who does
not think we should extend expiring tax relief?? I know we can build
the threshold for the 60. It is imperative we do it. It is inexcusable,
frankly, that on the process for debating, we cannot reach an
agreement. We are failing the American people on a colossal scale. We
are held up by arcane procedural measures that could be worked out, if
only we reached across the political aisle.
If my remarks sound familiar, then well they should because
regrettably I said much the same thing in February of last year at the
start of this Congress on another pressing issue of our time. Sadly as
we now approach the end of the first session of the 110th Congress,
things seemed to have not changed very much. I would hope when we
finally adjourn after hopefully extending this critical tax relief that
each and every one of us will return to our homes and when the clock
strikes midnight on December 31, that we all make a New Years
resolution to make the next Congress a more productive session with
Members reaching across the aisle looking for consensus. If we do not,
there is one thing that is for certain; the American public is
watching.
____________________