[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 161 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Page S8628]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 REJECTION OF COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT

  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I stand here simply amazed at what 
happened in the Senate, although I probably shouldn't be. I stand here 
amazed because in these economic times, senior citizens from Gallipolis 
to Ashtabula, to Middletown, to Toledo, in my State, and from the Iron 
Range to Rochester, MN, the State of the Presiding Officer, and all 
across this country, who didn't get a cost-of-living adjustment this 
year; who are victims of inflation--medical inflation especially--and 
the inflation rate is not very high in our society, so they didn't get 
a cost-of-living adjustment, even though their cost of living has gone 
up--every single Republican in this institution--every single 
Republican--voted no on a $250 one-time check to go to senior citizens. 
It would have meant the equivalent of about 1\1/2\ percent or less than 
that cost-of-living adjustment.
  If they are so interested in balancing the budget that they do not 
want to do that, maybe that is one argument--although not a very good 
one in these economic times--but when, in the same week, they sign a 
letter saying we are not going to do anything--every single Republican 
signed a letter saying we are not going to do anything in the Senate--
we are not voting yes on anything until we get the tax cut for 
millionaires and billionaires, that is pretty outrageous.
  In the tax cut they are asking for, someone who makes $10 million a 
year gets a $40,000 tax cut--I am sorry, somebody making $10 million a 
year gets a $100,000 tax cut, I believe; somebody making $1 million 
gets a $40,000 tax cut. And they are saying they are willing to vote 
for that, but they are not willing to vote for $250 for every senior 
citizen in this country.
  The cost of that, if you want to get in the weeds and talk about 
budget issues, the cost of that $250 that Senator Sanders sponsored 
would be about $13 billion. The cost of these tax cuts for the wealthy 
is about $700 billion over the next 10 years.
  Basically, what they are doing, what we are doing for their tax cuts 
for the wealthy is in essence borrowing $700 billion from China and 
putting it on our children's and grandchildren's credit card to pay off 
later--let them worry about it--and giving that money to millionaires 
and billionaires. They are willing to do that, but they will not vote 
$250, a total of $13 billion one time. They are not willing, for this 
year, to help those seniors in Youngstown and Lima and Zanesville and 
Chillicothe and Tipp City, OH. I just don't get it.
  I know it is the Christmas season. That is not a reason to do it, but 
you would think there would be a little more generosity in their hearts 
during this most difficult time for seniors who are barely making it. 
The average senior citizen in this country gets about $14,000 Social 
Security a year. Many seniors in my State, in places such as Columbus 
and Dayton and Portsmouth, live on not much more than their Social 
Security check, and a $250 payment would have made a difference--maybe 
not having to split their medicine in two and taking half a dosage each 
time or maybe actually being able to heat their homes as it gets colder 
and colder as the winter comes upon us, that they would have a little 
opportunity to at least do that and live a little more comfortably.
  Instead this place again said yes to tax cuts for the rich, no to the 
senior citizens. A majority of Senators voted for this, but every 
single Republican voted against it. I don't get it. I don't mean to 
sound partisan, but when it is like that it is unbelievable. When 
Senators--most of us are going to go home and enjoy our holidays--that 
we would put our Nation's seniors through something like that.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COBURN. I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business for 
the time I may consume, probably not longer than 20 or 25 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________