[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 20 (Monday, February 2, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1237-S1243]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1, which the clerk
will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 1) making supplemental appropriations for job
preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy
efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and
State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
Amendment No. 98
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
Mr. REID. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Inouye and Baucus, I
call up amendment 98 and ask unanimous consent that once the amendment
is offered, no further amendments be in order during today's session of
the Senate.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for Mr. Inouye and Mr.
Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered 98.
(The amendment is printed in the Record of Friday, January 20, 2009,
under ``Text of Amendments.'')
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Hawaii is
recognized.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 1, the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This bill will create 4 million
American jobs, invest in the future of America by rebuilding our roads,
bridges and schools, and will give State and local governments the
resources they need to deal with surging demand for social services and
falling tax revenues.
Further, this measure will provide tax cuts to working families who
are struggling every day to cope with this terrible recession.
Today, we face the gravest economic crisis that this Nation has seen
since the Great Depression. Our fourth quarter gross domestic product
shrank by 3.8 percent, the largest drop since 1982.
A million jobs have been lost in the past 2 months, and this coming
Friday we expect to learn that during the month of January, another
600,000 jobs, at a minimum, have been lost.
The American people fully understand the depth and seriousness of our
economic problems.
U.S. foreclosures increased by more than 81 percent last year, a
record, with over 2.3 million foreclosures. Our States are struggling
terribly, facing the prospect of cutting off vital services, including
schools and police.
Forty-four States are facing budget shortfalls totaling $90 billion
for fiscal year 2009 and $145 billion for fiscal year 2010.
In 2008, U.S. stocks lost roughly $7 trillion in value. In an
instant, the life savings of millions of Americans simply disappeared.
Our banking system is in grave shape. Last year, 25 banks with $373.6
billion in total assets failed in the U.S.
All the while, the critical needs of our Nation are going unmet. The
American Society of Civil Engineers--ASCE--estimates that $2.2 trillion
is needed over a 5-year period to bring the Nation's infrastructure to
an adequate condition.
How can we grow our economy and provide opportunities for today's
working men and women if the basic physical infrastructure that
underlies every job in this country is falling apart?
We must invest in our future by making the necessary commitments to
ensure that our infrastructure will support our future economic growth.
But today, we face a much more immediate crisis. In Saturday's New
York Times, economist Allen Sinai stated:
My sense is that business is slashing hugely and across the
board. Everyone is cutting prices, people, capital spending
and all kinds of expenses. It is almost a herd instinct.
There is nothing more destructive to economic growth than deflation.
It was the defining characteristic of the Great Depression, and it is
the single most difficult economic condition to reverse. We cannot
allow a deflationary spiral to develop.
Only one institution in the United States, the Federal Government,
has the capacity to step into the breach and stop the terrible spiral
of increased layoffs leading to decreased spending, in turn leading to
more layoffs and so on.
The Federal Government must take aggressive action. We must use all
means at our disposal to address this deepening crisis.
Some argue that this is all part of the natural business cycle, that
the best course of action is to stand back and let this crisis work
itself out. I would remind those who take this position that the Great
Depression was also a part of the natural business cycle.
President Hoover refused to take aggressive action, and the results
speak for themselves.
It was not until President Roosevelt took office in 1933 and
implemented a series of drastic policy reforms that the economy slowly
began to improve, and, almost as important, gave the average American
reason to believe that there was a light at the end of the tunnel.
We must act boldly, decisively, and with all possible speed, or we
will face dire consequences. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
is the answer. This legislation will not only create jobs now, but will
also begin the process of rebuilding the physical infrastructure of
America that is the key to future prosperity.
Based on these needs, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
focuses on the following goals:
First, creating or saving at least 4 million jobs;
Second, investing in America's future by rebuilding our basic
infrastructure.
Third, providing for job retraining for those workers who need to
learn new skills in order to compete in the global economy today, while
at the same time, improving the education of our children and young
adults so Americans can remain competitive tomorrow;
Fourth, moving toward energy independence and away from burning
fossil fuels that leave us dependent on foreign oil;
Fifth, improving our healthcare system so all Americans can have
access to quality treatment;
Sixth, providing tax cuts and other means of assistance to lessen the
impact of this crisis on America's working families.
To meet these goals the Finance and Appropriations Committees
recommend a total of $888 billion in funding, including $365.6 billion
in new appropriations. This is a significant amount of money, but an
amount that we believe is wholly necessary to confront the challenges
facing our Nation.
My distinguished colleague from Montana will address the tax and
mandatory spending issues that we are recommending and I will address
the spending programs that were approved by the Appropriations
Committee by a vote of 21 to 9.
It would take far too long to describe in detail the hundreds of
programs that are included in this bill, but I would like to take a
moment to mention some of the more significant investments that we
recommend.
We will invest in our future by funding projects that will rebuild
and improve our physical and cyber infrastructure. These projects,
totaling $142 billion, will create jobs in the near-term, and will
provide an improved foundation for future growth by fixing our
crumbling roads, bridges, and schools, improving our broadband network,
and increasing our ability to conserve energy.
America's tradition of public education is second-to-none, but it has
been sadly underfunded in recent years. We all know that for the United
States
[[Page S1238]]
to compete in the 21st century, Americans must be well-educated and
capable of adapting to an ever-changing economic environment.
Accordingly, we recommend investing $125 billion in education and
training so that the next generation of American workers is ready and
able to meet the challenge of global competition. In addition,
providing job training to recently laid-off workers in new and
expanding fields will help to lower the unemployment rate and will
allow today's workers to better compete against foreign competition.
In the area of energy, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
provides $49 billion in investments in areas critical to the
development of clean, efficient, American energy, including modernizing
energy transmission, research and development of renewable energy
technologies, and modernizing and upgrading government buildings and
vehicles.
The current economic crisis has affected all Americans, but none more
so than the most vulnerable among us. The $25 billion in spending
proposed here will serve to lessen the blow of the current recession,
providing immediate relief for children, the poor, and others who may
find themselves struggling to put food on the table or a roof over
their head.
The bill provides $16 billion in investments in areas critical to
immediate and long-term healthcare for millions of Americans. Improved
information technology, research facilities, and health and wellness
programs will all provide a better foundation for providing quality
healthcare to consumers.
We face a critical period in our Nation's history. The next few years
will either see us emerge from this crisis with renewed vigor and with
an economy that remains the leading engine of global growth, or we may
face years of slow growth and an ongoing struggle just to maintain our
current standard of living.
Clearly, the goal of this package is to find ways to stimulate the
private sector through public sector spending, to jump start the
private sector with much needed projects that will create jobs as soon
as possible, and that will provide meaningful improvements for our
communities.
At the same time, we seek to ensure that the funds that are
appropriated in this legislation are spent carefully and with
unprecedented transparency. We include $110 million in the bill to
increase the resources of agency Inspectors General and the Government
Accountability Office.
In addition, this measure would establish a new oversight board
within the executive branch which will be charged with oversight of the
funding provided in this bill.
Such times as these are only overcome with courageous leadership and
a willingness to embrace change, listen to new ideas and take chances.
This bill is not perfect. But we must not let our fear of imperfection
stop us from taking the bold steps necessary to address this crisis and
move America forward.
The time for action is now. The American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 is the right policy at the right time, and I urge each and
every Member of this body to join me in support of creating jobs,
supporting our State and local governments, and investing in the future
of America.
I yield the floor.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I first want to commend my colleagues,
Senator Inouye from Hawaii, the chairman of the Appropriations
Committee, who I think has undertaken a masterful job in helping to
craft, along with his counterpart, Senator Cochran from Mississippi, an
economic recovery package that will go a long way toward getting people
back to work.
They have done half of the job; the other half was left to the
Finance Committee. I think together we have come up with a very good
beginning to get Americans back to work and to invest in many of the
projects this country needs so desperately.
In 1932, President Franklin Roosevelt said:
The country needs and . . . the country demands bold,
persistent experimentation. . . . [A]bove all, try something.
The millions who are in want will not stand idly by silently
forever . . . .
Today, the country once again demands bold action. Our country
demands bold action to help rebuild a very badly damaged American
economy.
Consider the terrible blows to our economy and the problems that we
face if we do not act.
Last Friday the Commerce Department reported that from October
through December of last year the economy shrank at its fastest pace in
a quarter century.
Last year 2.6 million people lost their jobs. If we do not act, 3 to
4 million more people will lose their jobs.
The decline in home prices and the stock market collapse have sharply
reduced the net worth of American families. Net worth declined by
roughly one-fifth between the middle of 2007 and the fourth quarter of
2008.
CBO projects that the national average home price will fall by
another 14 percent between the third quarter of 2008 and the middle of
2010.
Equity wealth has declined by $6 trillion between the end of 2007 and
the end of 2008.
The Standard and Poor's 500 stock index fell by almost 45 percent
from October 2007 to December 2008.
And the financial crisis has spread around the world.
These are not just numbers. These are families who are hurting. These
are mothers and fathers who have lost jobs. These are parents who have
seen college savings decimated. These are couples who are struggling to
keep their homes.
We need to act. This economic recovery bill will save or create 3 to
4 million jobs. It will position our economy to be more competitive.
The measure before us today provides an appropriate response to the
conditions that we face.
The Senate Finance Committee worked with the President and Members of
the Senate and the House to put together its part of the economic
recovery substitute that we are considering this week. The Senate
Appropriations Committee took the lead on its part, as well.
We think that the provisions in this substitute represent the best
ways to address spending slowdowns and rising unemployment.
And it will be effective. More than 99 percent of the Finance
Committee's provisions effects will come in the first 2 years of the
bill.
To counteract weak consumer demand and spending slowdowns, we have
included several proposals that will put more cash in the pockets of
America's taxpayers, seniors, and disabled veterans.
The making work pay tax credit cuts taxes for more than 95 percent of
American working families. It gives single taxpayers up to $500 and
married taxpayers up to $1,000 this year and next in additional cash
that they can use just now.
People will be able to receive the benefit throughout the year
through a reduction in the amount of income tax withheld from their
paychecks.
Seniors, disabled veterans, other disabled workers, and SSI
recipients would receive a one-time payment of $300.
Families with children would also benefit from these proposals. The
income threshold to receive the refundable child tax credit would be
reduced so that more people would be eligible. The earned income tax
credit would be increased for families with three or more children.
An amendment added in the Finance Committee will ensure that the
alternative minimum tax will not hit any new taxpayers for 1 more year.
Folks struggling to pay for higher education would get relief. The
proposal includes a partially-refundable new tax credit up to $2,500
for the cost of tuition and fees, including books. Section 529 plans
would be enhanced by including the cost of computers as a qualifying
expense.
This measure would help homeowners who are taking advantage of the
first-time homebuyer's credit enacted last year. Under current law,
homebuyers have to pay this credit back over 10 years. The substitute
before us today would eliminate the repayment obligation, unless the
homebuyer sells the home within 36 months of the purchase.
For small businesses, we have included expanded expensing through
section 179. This provision helps small businesses quickly recover the
cost of certain capital expenses.
[[Page S1239]]
For businesses in general, we would increase the years that they can
carry back losses and general business credits. This would put cash in
the hands of businesses right now.
Businesses would also get a tax incentive through the work
opportunity tax credit for hiring unemployed veterans and disadvantaged
youth.
The economic downturn has frozen the municipal bond market. This
recovery bill includes changes that would help to free up this market,
unlocking cash for infrastructure investment.
Banks would be able to inject more capital into projects creating
demand for municipal bonds, driving down interest rates. And increasing
the small issuer exception would increase the range of municipalities
from which banks can buy.
This substitute would also eliminate tax-exempt interest on private
activity bonds as a preference item under the alternative minimum tax.
This would draw new investors and help stabilize the market.
The legislation would also establish parity for tribal governments on
$2 billion of tax-exempt bonds. This important change would allow
tribal governments to issue debt for projects on equal footing with
other government issuers.
And this substitute would create a new tax-credit bond option. This
new bond would give State and local governments a new tool to finance
infrastructure projects.
We have also included incentives for energy in this recovery package.
These incentives would create green jobs producing the next generation
of renewable energy sources, wind, solar, geothermal.
The substitute would extend and modify the renewable energy
production tax credit for qualifying facilities.
The substitute includes additional funding for clean renewable energy
bonds to finance facilities that generate electricity from renewable
resources. And the substitute includes conservation bonds for States to
use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Energy experts often cite efficiency as the low-hanging fruit.
Efficiency is the easiest way for us to reduce our energy consumption
and greenhouse gas emissions.
So we have included incentives for energy efficiency. The substitute
would increase the value of the existing credit for energy efficient
homes. The substitute would eliminate the limitations on specific
energy-efficient property. And the substitute would extend the credits
for various types of energy efficient property, for both residential
and business.
Two new tax credits would spur our alternative energy and production.
The advanced energy research and development credit would provide an
enhanced 20 percent R&D credit for research expenditures incurred in
the fields of fuel cells, energy storage, renewable energy, energy
conservation technology, efficient transmission and distribution of
electricity, and carbon capture and sequestration.
The second energy tax credit is an advanced energy investment credit
for facilities engaged in the manufacture of advanced energy property.
This substitute would make sound investments in health information
technology, or health I.T. These investments should reduce costs,
improve quality, and help patients make better decisions about their
health care. Expanding use of health I.T. should make our health care
system more efficient, reduce errors, and help bring down costs.
Health I.T. would also provide a platform for standardizing and
collecting data to move toward paying for performance, another way to
improve efficiency and decrease costs.
Investing in health I.T. will help to put that infrastructure in
place, while creating thousands of high-tech jobs.
And reforming health care is the right way to get a handle on
entitlement spending.
The economic crisis has also created significant fiscal difficulties
for States. At least 45 States will face budget shortfalls. Economists
expect those shortfalls to total more than $350 billion over the next 2
years.
These dire circumstances have forced painful choices. Almost half the
States have already made or proposed cuts to their Medicaid Programs.
The continued rise in unemployment places a further strain on
Medicaid. Decreased revenue coming in means less money to fund
Medicaid. And experts warn that every percentage point increase in
unemployment adds 1 million people to the Medicaid and CHIP rolls.
Economists tell us that State fiscal relief is an effective means to
stimulate the economy. And they also advise that targeted relief to
those most in need, not based on circumstances of States' own making
but based on true measures of distress, is the best means of
distribution.
The substitute before us today would provide much-needed relief to
every State through a temporary increase in the Federal share of
Medicaid funding. The substitute would also provide additional aid
targeted to States facing the most precarious fiscal situations,
measured by an increase in unemployment.
These measures will keep States from having to lay off cops or
teachers. And keeping those workers on the job will help the economy.
The economic recovery package also supports those who have lost
employment and helps them to find new jobs.
While almost all workers pay into the unemployment insurance program,
only about half of them qualify for benefits. American workers deserve
better. The substitute before us would increase and extend benefits to
those currently looking for work.
The substitute before us would help States to cope with the
increasing number of families needing temporary assistance. And it
would remove the incentive for States to artificially keep their TANF
caseloads low.
In addition, the substitute would ensure that families that qualify
could continue to receive child support payments that are intended to
be spent on children. For those who receive it, child support
constitutes about 30 percent of poor families' income.
The substitute before us would also increase the incentive to become
employed by extending the transitional medical assistance program under
Medicaid for 18 months. TMA allows former TANF recipients to retain
Medicaid coverage for one year after they become employed. These
workers usually earn too little to afford private coverage.
The substitute before us would also remove barriers to getting
Medicaid and CHIP for low-income American Indians and Alaska Natives.
The funds directed toward these programs for vulnerable populations
would go into the hands of folks who need it and who will spend it
right away. These proposals will increase economic activity, create
jobs, and shorten the amount of time that we all spend in this economic
crisis.
Another key component of our economic recovery package would help
unemployed workers maintain their health coverage.
When workers lose their jobs, they lose more than their paychecks.
They often lose their health insurance coverage, as well.
To address this problem, our proposal includes help for unemployed
workers to pay for their health care premiums.
Today, most workers who lose their jobs have the right to keep their
health insurance for up to 18 months under the COBRA program. But to be
eligible for COBRA health benefits, workers must pay all of the premium
costs, plus an additional 2 percent for administrative costs. For most
folks who have just lost their job, this is simply unaffordable.
Our plan would provide a subsidy to cover up to 65 percent of health
premium costs, for up to 9 months.
This premium subsidy is shortterm. It would be available only to
unemployed workers while they look for a new job.
For those workers who lose their jobs to international trade,
President Kennedy established trade adjustment assistance, or TAA. I
have long championed TAA and worked to expand its reach and improve its
effectiveness. Today, TAA gives workers the chance to retrain for new
jobs, get access to health care, and ultimately get back to work. And
that is why the substitute before us today includes a 2-year extension
of TAA.
Yet in a time when Americans are doing everything they can to change,
adapt, and be flexible in a global economy, TAA should do the same.
We can do more to expand who can benefit from TAA, and we can improve
[[Page S1240]]
how we get them those benefits. That is why I am working with Senator
Grassley, Chairman Rangel, and Congressman Camp on a robust expansion
of TAA. We hope to include this improved TAA in the economic recovery
package before it is enacted.
The package that we are considering this week is our best effort to
reach a consensus on an economic recovery bill that can pass the Senate
and the House quickly.
The Nation demands action and action now. Let us act quickly to put
our economy back on track. Let us act to restore the Nation's financial
health. And let us act pass this important legislation this week.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, the bill now before the Senate provides
$365 billion in new spending reported by the Appropriations Committee
and $522 billion in tax and mandatory spending measures recommended by
the Finance Committee. The bill as a whole has a price tag of $887
billion. When the borrowing costs associated with this spending are
included, the cost of the package rises well over $1.2 trillion. The
President has suggested that even more measures such as this, other
requests to stimulate the financial system, may be needed to
resuscitate the housing market and reform financial regulatory
institutions. We don't know what the cost of all of these measures will
be, but it sounds as if we may be asked to enlarge these commitments
even further as time goes by.
Proponents of this bill say that the fiscal cost of inaction is also
substantial. They argue that failure to enact the bill will lead to
lower growth and diminished tax receipts. Yet there is little
documentation to back up that claim. Those suggestions have not been
described in any detail by administration officials or their economic
experts.
In size alone, this measure has few precedents. We are considering
this bill in the absence of any formal request or documentation from
the executive branch. This bill has been described as President Obama's
recovery plan. Yet we have not had an official request from the
administration for these funds. I am not one who believes Congress must
always wait for the executive branch to lead, but with regard to this
bill, we are giving the executive branch immense latitude in the
disbursement of the spending it contains. We are doing so without any
official request and without any documentation that speaks to the issue
of how this spending will stimulate the economy or what the long-term
implications of the spending will be. Normally, this kind of
information would be contained in an administration budget or
supplemental request. For items that are well understood to have a
short-term stimulative effect, most of us will feel comfortable
debating their merits as part of an emergency measure. But there is a
great deal of spending in this bill that is not immediately
stimulative.
The majority describes it as investments in our Nation's future. We
have the responsibility to be deliberate and consider these items
carefully in the context of the President's formal budget request.
The distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee, who is my
dear friend, made a sincere effort to accommodate priorities expressed
by Republican members of the committee and others who are not on the
committee and to respond to some of their concerns. He resisted efforts
to clutter the bill with controversial policy initiatives that might
detract from the focus of the legislation or slow down the progress of
the bill. He also insisted on a committee markup of the bill. All of
these actions demonstrate his unquestioned sense of fairness.
The fact remains, however, that the Senate is being asked by the
administration to take a big leap of faith that the massive spending
proposed in this bill will, in fact, stimulate growth of the economy,
even though much of the funding will not be spent in the next year or
two.
We are all searching for solutions that will help the economy in the
short term. Yet we must consider the long-term effects of any so-called
stimulative actions we take today. Will the jobs associated with these
proposals be created just as the economy is recovering, causing
inflationary pressures that may not be welcome 2 years from now? What
will be the impacts on Federal borrowing costs of this additional
deficit spending, particularly once recovery is underway and we are no
longer able to borrow money as cheaply as we are now? And perhaps of
greatest concern, is it reasonable to expect stimulus spending to cease
after 18 months or 2 years' time? The Federal Government's track record
for terminating programs is not very good.
Let me share some of the provisions of this specific legislation.
There are well over 20 new spending initiatives and programs that are
either being authorized in this bill or being funded for the first
time. These programs account for over $230 billion of the appropriated
spending in the bill.
The bill allocates $16 billion to build and repair local schools,
something which has not before been considered the responsibility of
the Federal Government. That is a State and local responsibility.
The bill provides $9 billion to construct broadband infrastructure
throughout the country, even as it requires development of a plan to
actually spend this money, and the creation of a broadband
infrastructure map that might inform development of that plan. Is this
putting the cart before the horse or at least maybe putting it
alongside the horse?
The bill appropriates $23 billion to create an improved health
information technology system, virtually from scratch. This is not a 1-
or 2-year project; it is an expensive, long-term program for which
there is barely a foundation. Yet we are putting taxpayers on the hook
for $23 billion.
The bill invests heavily in science and energy programs. Like many of
my colleagues in the Senate, I supported passage of the America
COMPETES Act during the last Congress. The goal of that legislation was
to ensure that science education in America is of a quality that will
sustain our economy in the 21st century. I also supported passage of
Energy bills in the last 5 years in the hope that they would enhance
our Nation's energy security. Yet I did not support any of these bills
with the expectation that their various elements would be immediately
funded in their entirety or that they would be funded outside the
context of our Federal budget, the regular annual process.
Like most Senators, I assumed we would evaluate the merits of the
individual programs as part of the annual budget and appropriations
process. Even if this spending may be entirely appropriate, it is
reckless to be providing it in the absence of any budgetary context and
having done very little due diligence.
Much of the spending will have little stimulative effect. Projected
spend-out rates are very slow. The Director of the Congressional Budget
Office observed in a January 28 letter to the chairman of the Senate
Budget Committee:
Throughout the federal government, spending for new
programs has frequently been slower than expected and rarely
been faster.
Is our putting it in this one bill going to change that? What will be
the cost of these programs 5 years from now? If we control the overall
level of discretionary spending in future years, what programs and
priorities will these new initiatives displace? If the spending is
entirely additive, what are the impacts of that spending on our
national debt or on future tax rates? These questions are difficult to
answer without supporting documentation and without having held any
hearings.
It seems to me there will be time enough to consider these long-term
investments in the regular order and in the context of future Federal
budgets.
As former Clinton Budget Director Alice Rivlin recently testified:
. . . a long-term investment program should not be put
together hastily and lumped with an anti-recession package.
The elements of the investment program must be carefully
planned and will not create many jobs right away.
Yet it is not just these new programs that should concern us. This
bill also greatly expands a number of programs such as Head Start, Pell
grants, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. These are
all programs with merit. I have supported them all, with supporters on
both sides of the aisle each year approving bills to extend the
authorizations and fund the programs. But the question is, Do they
[[Page S1241]]
stimulate the economy? How? Is it realistic to expect funding levels
for these programs to revert to today's levels once the economy
recovers? I think it is safe to expect just the opposite.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, cochaired by former
Congressman Bill Frenzel, my friend, and another of President Clinton's
former Budget Directors, Leon Panetta, another friend, recently warned
of this danger. Speaking of stimulus recommendations like planting
grass on the national mall, the committee said such things are ``a
distraction from the bigger risks in this bill.''
More troubling is the number of items in the stimulus plan that are
really intended to be permanent new policies rather than temporary
items to help boost the economy.
They said:
While we need deficit spending now, extending out borrowing
beyond the economic downturn will make our already-dismal
fiscal picture far, far worse.
They go on to say:
The economy simply can't handle that. There is a very real
risk that many of these items will become a permanent part of
the budget and unless Congress suddenly shows an
uncharacteristic willingness to pay for the new items, the
deficit will deteriorate even further.
The committee they chaired went on to say:
Many of these items may be worthwhile, but an emergency
measure is the wrong way to push through permanent changes to
the budget. If politicians want to enact long-term spending
or tax policies, they should be enacted through the normal
legislative process.
I think that is very well put. I think we ought to pay attention to
what people like that are saying.
The President's Chief of Staff recently said--probably in jest, maybe
in jest--
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.
Well, clearly we are seeing the efforts by some--and I am not saying
the President's Chief of Staff--to use this stimulus bill to achieve
long-term objectives that go beyond addressing our short-term economic
policies and problems.
But we agree--I think all Senators agree--the economy is under severe
pressure and Congress should take quick but sharply focused action to
do those things we are confident will have an immediate stimulative
impact on the economy and improve economic prospects. We should address
the housing problem that seems to be the central problem in this
crisis. We should not, however, rush headlong into fiscal commitments
that may haunt us for years to come.
If Federal spending on infrastructure and other programs is truly
stimulative, is it not unfortunate Congress has failed to enact 9 of
the 12 regular appropriations bills for this fiscal year? These bills
account for almost half of all discretionary spending. Yet the agencies
and programs supported by those bills have essentially been idling for
4 months under a continuing resolution. This is funding at last year's
approved levels of spending; whereas, if enactment had taken place in a
timely fashion by this Congress--this Senate and the House of
Representatives working together--we would have much of this money that
has previously been budgeted and approved by committees, approved by
the Congress.
Funding contained in those bills is for projects such as roads,
bridges, water projects, Federal buildings, and other activities that
might provide jobs now, and they have been held in abeyance under the
terms of a continuing resolution, which is continuing this fiscal year
to spend at the levels appropriated for spending during the last fiscal
year.
That is not something that can be laid at the feet of President Bush.
That is the Congress. We hear a lot of criticism of the former
President, such as he is the reason for all this. We need to look at
ourselves. Congress did not even try to enact the bills. The bicameral
leadership made a conscious decision not to engage the former President
on spending issues or Outer Continental Shelf oil-and-gas leasing--
another example of something that could be labeled ``stimulative.''
Had we enacted those appropriations bills last fall, agencies would
already be contracting, hiring, and spending their funding allocations.
This week we would be having a debate probably about the merits of
supplementing some of those allocations of Federal funds. Instead, we
are considering a bill that supplements many existing programs without
Members even knowing what the regular appropriations bills contain for
those same programs.
In closing, I express my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the
distinguished Senator from Hawaii, the chairman of our Appropriations
Committee, for his distinguished leadership and congratulate him on the
way he has undertaken to respond to these emergency requests that have
been submitted to the committee. He has handled it all in a fair and
thoughtful way. It is a pleasure working with him and the other members
of our Committee on Appropriations in the Senate.
We, I know, stand ready to continue to work to improve this bill, to
listen to suggestions of Senators for changes. It has been an open
process, an open, public markup of the bill, an effort to invite
suggestions from any member of the committee, and now it is open for
amendment. This is no effort to railroad something through here without
giving individual Senators the opportunity to carefully consider
everything in here, to ask questions of those who maybe were
responsible for the inclusion of certain provisions and the like. We
are ready to take on these suggestions and consider them carefully to
improve this bill over the coming days.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, as the Senate turns to the economic
recovery bill I believe there is a message coming to the Senate from
Oregon and every corner of our country. The message is that Americans
do not want a bailout. They do not want a handout. What they want is
legislation that provides a path out of these very difficult economic
times.
I believe that, working together this week, Democrats and Republicans
can start building that path. I want to stress that I am especially
interested in working with colleagues on the other side of the aisle on
this critical legislation.
I serve on the Senate Finance Committee, led by Chairman Baucus, and
one of the best additions to this bill has been the relief that it
provides from the crushing alternative minimum tax. This is a killer
tax for middle-class folks. It is something, in my view, that we ought
to get rid of permanently and I have proposed doing that as part of
comprehensive tax reform. Well, as a result of the bipartisan work on
this legislation in the Finance Committee, there is going to be relief
from the AMT for hard-hit, middle-class families.
There has also been important bipartisan work on the legislation's
approach to infrastructure financing. A member of the Senate Republican
leadership, Senator Thune of South Dakota, has worked with me to craft
legislation called Build America Bonds, which uses a tax credit
approach to bonds to wring more value from every dollar that's made
available for infrastructure. The economic recovery bill includes a tax
credit bond provision that is similar to our legislation, although not
quite the same, and I will continue to push to improve it.
I believe there are other ideas we are going to focus on, on the
floor of the Senate, that will bring Democrats and Republicans
together. A number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have
stressed the need to expand the legislation's support for homeowners
and home buyers, to help make sure that people who want to stay in
their homes and who are trying to buy a home can get additional relief.
I am very pleased that colleagues on both sides of the aisle have come
together to work on these kinds of ideas.
For this week, I think there are several key principles that we ought
to focus on. One that I feel especially strongly about is rewarding
success. Instead of subsidizing failure, this legislation takes an
approach that, in fact, rewards success.
A prime example is the extension, for 3 years, of the renewable
energy production tax credit. To get this tax credit, energy companies
actually have to produce energy. As a result, American taxpayers will
get something back for their hard-earned money. That is the kind of
accountability that I think
[[Page S1242]]
the American people have a right to expect.
I think the legislation rewards enterprise, and I am very pleased
about the bill's provision to provide enhanced writeoffs under section
179 for small businesses that invest in plants and equipment.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is providing relief for middle-
class folks so they can get assistance during these difficult times.
For example, there has been discussion of the bill's supports for
health information technology. One big reason that middle-class folks
cannot get ahead is that their medical costs gobble up their paychecks
and one of the reasons that medical costs have skyrocketed is that
there are so many errors in the health care system--errors and
inefficiencies, such as duplicative tests. It seems to me that by
investing in health information technology, you make a downpayment on a
long-term strategy for holding down medical costs and that is
extraordinarily important to middle-class folks. So we will be talking
about this issue more.
I note the presence of the distinguished chairman of the
Appropriations Committee. One of the reasons I am confident we can
approach this issue in a bipartisan way is because that is how the
chairman of the Appropriations Committee has always worked. That has
also been the case with Senator Cochran, Chairman Baucus, and Senator
Grassley.
We are open to the best possible ideas. That is why President Obama,
to his credit, has been reaching out. As far as I can tell, he has that
phone practically attached to his ear talking to colleagues and saying:
Bring us your best ideas. We have tried in the Senate Finance
Committee, as Chairman Inouye has done in the Appropriations Committee,
to start incorporating good ideas, whether they come from the
Republican side of the aisle or the Democratic side.
I think we can improve this bill even more. But because it rewards
success, because it rewards enterprise, because there are already good
ideas that both parties support, I would urge colleagues to use this
week, working with our chairs and with the Obama administration, to
come together--because my view is, as I articulated, that the public
does want a path out of these terrible economic times. We have a chance
to make it clear that this is not a bailout, that it is not a handout,
but rather the start of a path out of this tough economic period.
I hope our colleagues will use this week, under the leadership of the
chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Chairman Baucus of the
Finance Committee, and the ranking minority members, to make sure that
by the end of this week we have shown the American people that this
important legislation on recovery and investment is moving forward--to
deal with the critical needs of those we represent at home.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, as we begin the process of our
discussions and debate on legislation to revitalize our Nation's
economy, I want to take this opportunity to underscore the points I
made on Tuesday of last week as we undertook the markup of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.
As I indicated, it is my belief that we all support the central goals
of the legislation, which include the creation of jobs, the rebuilding
of America's infrastructure, improving our children's education, moving
toward energy independence, improving our health care system, and
lessening the burden that this crisis has brought to the most
vulnerable among us.
As you well know, beginning in 1987, I served for 19 years as the
chairman and vice chairman of the Senate's Committee on Indian
Affairs--and in that capacity I came to know a group of American
citizens who have clearly been the most vulnerable amongst us--the
indigenous, native people of the United States--American Indians,
Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians.
President Obama projects that in the near term, the nationwide
unemployment rate could reach 10 percent. But for many of our Nation's
First Americans, an unemployment rate of 10 percent in their
communities would signal a giant step forward--given average
unemployment rates in Indian country that range from 50 to 90 percent.
The infrastructure on many Indian reservations is not only in need of
rebuilding--in most parts of Indian country, infrastructure is so
sorely lacking or simply nonexistent, that it must be built for the
first time. Members of Congress have come to this realization time and
again, as we have enacted scores of settlements of Indian land and
water claims over the years, and ratified agreements between State and
tribal governments--only to find that there is none of the necessary
infrastructure that would enable the delivery of water to tribal lands,
nor the jobs associated with the establishment of businesses on tribal
lands.
In Indian country, another goal that this bill seeks to accomplish--
stimulating the private sector through public sector spending--Federal
funding has rarely been able to achieve. And that phenomenon is also
fundamentally a function of the lack of infrastructure--adequate roads,
safe water supplies, access to commercial and transportation corridors,
good schools and access to quality health care. These are the critical
components if we are ever to successfully encourage private sector
investment in Native America through public funding.
There are vast natural resources that remain untapped in Indian
country--wind energy, hydropower, solar energy, and other sources of
clean, renewable energy--undeveloped in large part because of the lack
of infrastructure and lack of access to electric transmission lines The
same is true for those things most Americans have come to take for
granted--basic connections to the outside world, such telephone
service, access to the Internet and broadband services, public health
and safety broadcast systems. A transition to digital television isn't
a challenge to those who have no electricity.
Safe and affordable housing, running water, potable water, a source
of heat--these aren't givens in Indian country as they are elsewhere in
America.
So tribal governments have taken matters into their own hands--they
have sought to restore their federally recognized status, to reacquire
the lands that were lost through the opening of Indian reservations to
homesteading and the treaty-making process, and to reconsolidate their
traditional tribal land bases, so that in turn, they can develop a
geographic base upon which to build and sustain economic growth and the
means to effectively serve--through tribal government programs and
services--all of those who reside on tribal lands--not just the
citizens of their governments.
But our Federal bureaucracies--as well intentioned and well meaning
as they may have been--have stood in the way of the tribal governments'
efforts to achieve this economic growth and development of Native
communities and those communities which surround them, and I believe
that the scope of this bill must be inclusive enough to embrace
initiatives that are designed to remedy not only centuries-old problems
but to fulfill the commitments that we have made in a host of land and
water claims settlements, in agreements involving State and tribal
governments, and most importantly in our treaties with the Indian
nations.
Accordingly I will look forward to working with my colleagues to
assure that this bill does not inadvertently place obstacles in the
paths of those who seek to become self-sufficient and self-sustaining--
those who have faithfully served our country and placed themselves in
harm's way in the defense of our country in larger proportions than any
other group of Americans--this Nation's First Americans, the Native
people of the United States of America.
Madam President, I want to inform the Senate that neither S. 336 as
reported to the Senate nor division A of the Inouye-Baucus substitute
amendment to H.R. 1, Senate amendment numbered 98, contains any
congressional directed spending items as defined in rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate. I can also inform the Senate that
division B of the amendment, prepared by the Committee on Finance,
contains no limited tax benefit, limited tariff benefits, or
congressional directed spending items as defined in rule XLIV.
Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S1243]]
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________