[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 51 (Thursday, March 26, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2009-S2011]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page S2009]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 2016--Continued
Amendment No. 919
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate prior to a
vote on the Reed amendment No. 919.
The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, this amendment is based on legislation
Senator Blumenthal and I introduced last Congress to close a major
loophole in the current corporate tax law by putting an end to
unlimited tax write-offs for performance-based executive pay. In 1993,
Congress limited the deductibility of executive pay to $1 million, with
an exception for performance-based compensation. But over the last two
decades, corporations have made the exception the rule, and we have
seen more pay designated as performance based even in some cases where
the company is not doing very well for the shareholders.
It has been estimated that between 2007 and 2010, $121.5 billion in
executive pay was deductible, and roughly 55 percent of that was for
performance-based compensation. Businesses and shareholders should
establish the pay of their officers and employees, but the taxpayers
should not be subsidizing excessive pay at corporations. I urge a
``yes'' vote. It will save more than $50 billion over 10 years.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, again I ask my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Tax reform must be handled by the tax committee. Putting it in the
budget does not help move the process forward. There are a number of
questions the committee needs to address: What does it mean, corporate
compensation in excess of $1 million? Does that include or exclude
health care? Does this include baseball players and actors and
actresses as well? What are we talking about with limiting
compensation? Can you limit compensation for people by a Federal law?
If they have earned more than that, what about people who are operating
under contract?
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. It will be
handled in the tax committee when we consider tax reform.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs.
Feinstein) and the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily
absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 54, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 127 Leg.]
YEAS--44
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Donnelly
Durbin
Franken
Gillibrand
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Hirono
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Manchin
Markey
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Peters
Reed
Reid
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Udall
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--54
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Coats
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Flake
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Heller
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kirk
Lankford
Lee
McCain
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott
Sessions
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Vitter
Wicker
NOT VOTING--2
Feinstein
Mikulski
The amendment (No. 919) was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes of debate equally divided
prior to a vote on Cotton amendment No. 659.
The minority leader.
Quorum Call
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll and the following
Senators entered the Chamber and answered to their names:
[Quorum No. 5 Leg.]
Alexander
Ayotte
Baldwin
Blunt
Booker
Boozman
Boxer
Brown
Capito
Cardin
Casey
Cassidy
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Cotton
Crapo
Daines
Donnelly
Durbin
Enzi
Ernst
Gardner
Hirono
Inhofe
Isakson
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Leahy
Manchin
McConnell
Menendez
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Perdue
Peters
Portman
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Stabenow
Thune
Tillis
Vitter
Wicker
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER. A quorum is present.
Amendment No. 659
There is 2 minutes of debate prior to the vote on the Cotton
amendment No. 659.
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, this amendment establishes a reserve fund
to ensure the Fish and Wildlife Service considers the cumulative
economic impact of a critical habitat designation
[[Page S2010]]
and not just the incremental impact when listing a previously
designated critical habitat.
A critical habitat designation provides additional protections for
endangered species, but States like Arkansas have seen critical habitat
designations that do not take into account the full economic impact on
farmers, ranchers, and landowners.
Previously, the full economic impact of a designation was considered,
but that has been modified recently so only the marginal impact between
the endangered species listing and the critical habitat designation is
considered.
Any reforms should not change the listing process, and I would not
suggest we should change the listing process in this measure. I simply
want to account for the full economic impact of such designations, and
I urge my colleagues to cast a ``yes'' vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, there are two ways to repeal landmark
environmental law. One is through the front door, and the amendment
would say we abandon the Endangered Species Act. It is gone. And one
way is through the back door. This is through the back door.
If radical amendments like this one were in place, we would not have
saved the great American Bald Eagle, the symbol of our Nation.
If you believe that God's creations should be preserved, vote no on
the Cotton amendment.
I urge a ``no'' vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Cotton
amendment.
Mrs. BOXER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr.
Shelby).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs.
Feinstein), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from
Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Udall) are
necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 42, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 128 Leg.]
YEAS--52
Alexander
Barrasso
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Coats
Cochran
Corker
Cornyn
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Flake
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Heitkamp
Heller
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Lankford
Lee
Manchin
McCain
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott
Sessions
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Vitter
Wicker
NAYS--42
Ayotte
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Collins
Coons
Donnelly
Durbin
Franken
Gillibrand
Heinrich
Hirono
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Markey
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Peters
Reed
Reid
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--6
Feinstein
Kirk
Mikulski
Schatz
Shelby
Udall
The amendment (No. 659) was agreed to.
Amendment No. 993
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes of debate prior to a vote
on Menendez amendment No. 993.
The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, the Congress came together to create the
do-not-call list, and it is time for Congress to come together again to
update this important consumer protection legislation and protect
Americans as we intended to do. We all know of many of our constituents
and our families who are bothered by unwanted phone calls at dinner, at
night when we are home with our families.
It makes sense, as we decided then when we passed the law, to decide
whether you want to receive soliciting phone calls, and that right
should be respected under the law. Unfortunately, a few unscrupulous
companies have ignored Americans' wishes and continued to pester
people, and they see the penalties as the cost of doing business. That
has to stop. We have to stop it, and we can do so by giving the
appropriate flexibility to the entities that are supposed to enforce
the law to be able to do so.
I think this is a noncontroversial amendment. If it is, I am happy to
accept a voice vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, there is no objection on our side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Menendez
amendment No. 993.
The amendment (No. 993) was agreed to.
Amendment No. 664
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes of debate on the Cotton
amendment No. 664.
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I know Guantanamo Bay operations are a
controversial matter in this Chamber. This amendment does not address
that.
I took a group of Senators to Guantanamo Bay a couple of weeks ago.
Soldiers are living in substandard barracks. Communication facilities
are not adequate. Even if you oppose detention operations at Guantanamo
Bay, you should know that, in barely 20 years, there have been five
different humanitarian operations at Guantanamo Bay, to include post-
Haiti earthquake operations.
This amendment would allow for construction to ensure that Guantanamo
Bay Naval Base, regardless of detainee operations, treats our troops to
the highest standards they deserve, and preserves it for humanitarian
contingency operations in the future.
I urge a ``yes'' vote.
I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendment with the
modifications at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. SANDERS. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I raise a point of order that the pending
amendment is not germane to the underlying resolution and would violate
section 305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I move to waive the applicable provision
of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, is there still time?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no time available.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs.
Feinstein) and the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily
absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 49, nays 48, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 129 Leg.]
YEAS--49
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Coats
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Donnelly
Ernst
Fischer
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Heller
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
King
Lankford
Lee
McCain
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rubio
Sasse
Scott
Sessions
Shelby
Thune
Toomey
Vitter
Wicker
[[Page S2011]]
NAYS--48
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cornyn
Durbin
Enzi
Flake
Franken
Gillibrand
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Hirono
Kaine
Klobuchar
Leahy
Manchin
Markey
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Peters
Reed
Reid
Rounds
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Sullivan
Tester
Tillis
Udall
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Feinstein
Kirk
Mikulski
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 49, the nays are
48.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted
in the affirmative, the motion is rejected. The point of order is
sustained and the amendment falls.
The majority leader.
____________________