[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 29, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1909-S1910]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REPEAL OF 1099
Mr. JOHANNS. Madam President, it feels a bit like deja vu standing
here today discussing the ongoing saga of the 1099 repeal. Two weeks
ago, I offered amendment No. 161 to the small business bill.
If we read all the press releases and the public statements, it
appears that absolutely nobody could possibly oppose repeal of the 1099
requirement in section 9006 of the health care bill. Yet once again the
other side is attempting to delay or derail the 1099 repeal by offering
a second-degree amendment. I might have been open to a second-degree
amendment when we started this process many long months ago. But now we
are approaching the 1-year anniversary since we began fighting to
repeal this unnecessary mandate. It had no place in the health care
bill in the first place.
I can't help but question why on Earth we are still swinging and
missing at this one. Is it a lack of support in my caucus? The answer
to that is no. Support amongst Republicans is absolutely unanimous.
Lack of Republican support certainly has not held this up.
I ask myself if there is a lack of bipartisan support that is holding
up the effort. The answer to that is also no. My colleague, the junior
Senator from West Virginia, has cosponsored the last several versions
of this repeal legislation in the Senate. Together, Senator Manchin and
I have secured dozens of Democrats who strongly support the repeal, and
76 Democrats voted for identical 1099 repeal in the House of
Representatives. Bipartisan support is enormously, if not unusually,
strong.
Might our problem be a lack of support from the White House? The
answer to that is also no. The President has publicly called for repeal
of this 1099 mandate on several occasions in press conferences. He even
referenced it in his State of the Union Address.
Is it possible there is still confusion about how our small
businesses feel about the mandate? That is not the case. The chorus of
job creators opposing this mandate is almost deafening: the chamber of
commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business, the American
Farm Bureau Federation. I could go on and on listing organizations
arguing for its repeal.
Has it been a controversial pay-for that has slowed down progress?
Interestingly enough, an almost identical budgetary offset passed this
Chamber unanimously only 4 months ago. Requiring someone to repay what
was given to them erroneously is, plain and simple, good government.
Even Secretary of Health and Human Services Sebelius noted that
repayment of improper subsidies is ``fair for recipients and all
taxpayers.'' So arguments about the pay-for simply are hollow excuses
to justify inaction.
Our job creators are seeing it for what it really is. It is more
nonsense. It astounds me that we can seemingly pass benchmark after
benchmark without going over the finish line. How can we make so much
important progress only to be stymied again and again by some silent
opposition?
My friends across the aisle have often complained about the slow pace
of the Senate. They have blamed the other side of the aisle for
preventing progress. Well, my side of the aisle has been ready for a
long time to repeal this job-killing mandate. I want you to know we
stand ready to vote.
Considering the high unemployment rates plaguing our country, it
seems absolutely incomprehensible that we would waste even another day
without addressing this mandate in the health care bill. Our job
creators have watched dueling amendments and proposals and
counterproposals. Well, that has gone on for 1 year.
I first circulated a Dear Colleague letter asking for cosponsors of
this 1099 repeal in June of last year. When we introduced it in July,
with 25 cosponsors, well, small businesses cheered. It gave them hope
common sense would prevail in Congress and that partisanship is
sometimes set aside to simply do the right thing.
But now they see there is yet again a delay tactic in the form of a
second-degree amendment to the 1099 repeal. They have been frustrated
time and time again--when it failed to advance in September and
November and appeared stalled well into the new year.
Today, we have a simple choice: We can pass my amendment with strong
bipartisan support and demonstrate we have the 60 votes necessary for
the House version or we can pass the second-degree amendment and push
this repeal off into limbo into Never Never Land yet again. We can
actually fix the problem in a bipartisan way or we can continue to kick
this can down the road.
[[Page S1910]]
If we pass the second-degree amendment, quite simply, what we have
voted yes to do is delay the repeal of the 1099 amendment and
eventually we are going to flirt with disaster on this and it will not
get done.
We need to focus all our energy on helping our job creators grow and
create more jobs, not force them into worrying about hiring more
accountants. Pardon my boldness but there is no reason to delay. An
identical version of my amendment passed the House with large
bipartisan support: 314 to 112. I urge my colleagues, with all I have,
to oppose the second-degree amendment my friend from New Jersey is
proposing.
Let's be clear. This latest distraction from 1099 repeal is just
that--it is a distraction. We all know it is not truly about a study to
look at health care costs. If we want to do a study, put the amendment
on some other piece of legislation. This is about derailing and
delaying the 1099 repeal because if the second-degree amendment passes,
it says: Instead of sending this to the President to become law, we
need to go back to the drawing board.
While the proponents of the second-degree amendment will claim it is
innocuous, make no mistake, it is designed to obliterate this amendment
because of a budgetary offset. Again, I remind us, a similar offset was
passed unanimously recently by the Senate. Just like a Politico article
from yesterday noted: ``Senate Democrats are working on an amendment
that could kill the [Republicans' pay-for in the future].''
If the second degree passes, then we are essentially adding nearly
$25 billion to our debt over the next 10 years. While some may preach
the virtues of pay-as-you-go rules, when it comes right down to it,
they will undermine virtually any fiscally responsible pay-for.
So here we are again crossing the same bridge we have crossed so many
times before. In fact, the Senate refused this idea when we rejected
the Baucus amendment that repealed 1099 but was not paid for. That
amendment fell 23 votes short of passage because it fiscally did not
make sense.
So why are we still here aimlessly walking around in circles when we
ought to be marching straight ahead? Why are we proposing to send this
bipartisan legislation back to the House? Because that is what will
have to happen, when it ought to go directly to the President's desk
for signature.
Our vote today can send a message that we have all the votes
necessary to get this done and get it on the President's desk and
everybody can celebrate: our job creators, Democrats, Republicans,
Independents.
The logic of the second-degree amendment is absolutely baffling. Here
we are in the ninth inning and somehow our pay-for has become magically
unacceptable, even after a similar pay-for was approved unanimously by
the Senate before. Where were all the objections? Where was the demand
for further study when we unanimously approved a similar offset for the
doc fix legislation?
Let me be very clear: A vote in favor of the second degree is a vote
against our business and job creators. My amendment has been waiting
for a vote for 14 days now, and the repeal has been pending for nearly
1 year. Isn't enough enough?
The time for delay and further study must be over. Let's pass my
amendment today by an overwhelming vote of the Senate. Let's reject the
second degree. Let's get this piece of legislation to the President for
his signature and we can all celebrate. Small businesses, our job
creators, deserve no less.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Alabama.
____________________