[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 126 (Thursday, August 1, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5746-S5749]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TAX RELIEF FOR AMERICAN FAMILIES AND WORKERS ACT OF 2024--Motion to
Proceed--Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Nominations
Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, today, the HELP Committee held an off-
the-floor markup to consider three Biden-Harris labor nominees,
including a new term for current National Labor Relations Board, or
NLRB, Chair Lauren McFerran. Chair Sanders directed this vote to take
place without a public hearing or an opportunity to hear from the
nominees directly.
Ms. McFerran has served as a member of the NLRB since 2014, and
President Biden picked her as Chair in 2021. It has been 10 years since
Ms. McFerran has testified before the HELP Committee.
Since the HELP majority decided to skip a hearing to prevent an
examination of Ms. McFerran's troubling record, I am speaking about her
nomination on the Senate floor.
When multiple Board seats are vacant, the Senate's longstanding
practice is to fill Democrat and Republican vacancies on important,
bipartisan Boards and Commissions in tandem, but last September,
Democrats reconfirmed Gwynne Wilcox, a Democrat nominee, without a
Republican counterpart even though there were multiple vacant seats.
The Senate should have considered Joshua Ditelberg as a pairing with
Wilcox, not with Ms. McFerran. It is bad faith that the majority would
represent these nominations as a pairing to justify this process.
As to the substance of Ms. McFerran's nomination, the NLRB is
required by Federal law to act as a neutral party in labor disputes
between employees and employers, not favoring one party over the other,
but under Ms. McFerran's leadership, the Board has weaponized its
authority on behalf of Democrats' labor union supporters at the expense
of workers.
For example, the Board has overturned 50 years of NLRB precedent by
renewing card check during union elections, which exposes workers to
intimidation tactics; condensed the time for union elections down to as
little as 3 weeks after a petition is filed, depriving employees of a
fair chance to hear from both sides and to make an informed decision
about whether to unionize; and implemented new, burdensome regulations
preventing workers from leaving their union if the union has become
ineffective or too costly. It has prevented employers from disciplining
employees on the picket line who use racist and hostile language
against other employees and managers. The NLRB deems using racist and
hostile language as ``protected concerted activity.''
The weaponization of NLRB under Ms. McFerran's leadership is deeply
troubling. Her clear bias against employers' and workers' rights
deserves accountability.
Republican members of the HELP Committee have repeatedly called on
the chair to hold a public hearing to discuss these concerns directly
with her. It is unacceptable that they will be denied this opportunity.
Nomination hearings are not just checking a box; they are a crucial
part of Congress's responsibility to review nominees. Every Senator
uses information revealed in hearings to decide how he or she will vote
on the flo or. Unfortunately, shielding Democrat nominees from scrutiny
has been the norm of the HELP Committee under Chair Sanders.
Earlier this year, the chair decided to hold a closed-door committee
vote on the renomination of Julie Su for Secretary of Labor. Since Ms.
Su's first nomination attempt failed last year, concerns over her
leadership of DOL have grown. HELP Committee members should have been
able to raise these concerns with Ms. Su directly. Unfortunately, the
chair blocked the public hearing from taking place.
Congress has a responsibility to rein in the executive branch and
hold it accountable to the people and their elected representatives.
Last month, I introduced legislation requiring each Federal nominee
to testify before the committee of jurisdiction prior to Senate
confirmation. This bill should not be controversial to anyone. Frankly,
it should be the standard.
The chair's refusal to have public hearings on important nominees is
unacceptable. It undermines the committee's constitutional duty to
advise and consent on Presidential nominees. The President and his
nominees are not above accountability.
Given the serious concerns over Ms. McFerran's leadership and lack of
accountability in the nomination process, I voted no on her nomination.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, with election politics front of mind,
doomed-to-fail show votes have become an all too frequent occurrence in
this Chamber. But there is no more obvious show vote than the one
scheduled to happen today, immediately before the August recess.
In today's attempt to score political points, the Democrats are
moving to a bill, H.R. 7024, that has been languishing for 6 months in
the hopes of fabricating a narrative that Republicans don't support
small business, children, or alleviating poverty. However, if my
Democrat colleagues were serious about delivering relief to small
businesses and working families, they would have worked out a solution
with Senate Republicans in earnest on a pathway that would gain broad
support from our Members.
While there are plenty of provisions in this bill that my colleagues
and I support, the proponents have known since before it was released
that Senate Republicans would need to change the bill in order to gain
substantial bipartisan support.
It is now August, and it has been months since any real attempt at
outreach or engagement has taken place, which suggests that my
colleagues are not actually serious about passing a bill but are
instead focused on election year messaging.
[[Page S5747]]
There is plenty of evidence that today's theatrics are clearly
posturing.
First, there are several components of the bill that are
noncontroversial and have overwhelming bipartisan support, like
disaster tax relief and double-tax relief provisions on activity
between the United States and Taiwan. That some Democrats have chosen
to block these bills, including providing needed tax relief to fire and
hurricane victims, to prove a point demonstrates true cynicism.
In the same vein, Democrats claim that Republicans are abandoning
small businesses by not passing this bill, but it is Democrats who have
held the R&D expensing hostage for years. Republicans have shown time
and again their desire to pass R&D expensing, including in an
overwhelming, 90-to-5 motion led by Senator Young back in 2022. Yet
Democrats continue to block efforts to pass it.
If Democrats were serious about helping small businesses, they would
stop using them as a political football.
Members are also aware of the recent data on fraud in the employee
retention tax credit, or ERTC, program. Senator Tillis requested
unanimous consent to pass a bill that would end the fraud-ridden
program back in February, but the bill was blocked by the Democrats. If
someone is to blame for not ending the ERTC fraud, it is not the Senate
Republicans.
Democrats knew the bill couldn't pass the Senate in time for this tax
filing season, but now they want to make changes long after tax filers
have filed their 2023 tax returns and received their refunds. This bill
would require the IRS to reprocess millions of 2023 taxpayer returns.
This is an IRS that still has backlogs in the millions, including
identity theft case delays that the National Taxpayer Advocate has
described as making ``a mockery of the right to quality service in the
Taxpayer Bill of Rights.''
If Democrats were serious about providing taxpayer relief, they would
not pile additional work on an IRS that still cannot carry out basic
taxpayer services.
For all my Democrat colleagues' past calls for regular order in the
Senate, one would think the Senate Republican request for a Finance
Committee markup on this bill would have been well received. Instead,
those requests, which began in January, have continued to go ignored.
Instead of moving through regular order and engaging my colleagues
and me, the bill's proponents have used the better part of this year on
a public pressure campaign littered with misinformation. That is
unfortunate because the bill does get a lot of things right.
However, the critical flaw with the bill is that it fails to provide
meaningful tax relief to working families and instead goes too far
toward the Democrats' goal of turning the child tax credit into a
subsidy untethered to work, which is fundamentally contrary to what the
credit was created to do.
For those who accuse Republicans of not caring about children, I
would remind my colleagues that it was the Republicans who created the
child tax credit. It was intended to provide tax relief to working
families. Yet more than $30 billion of the cost to expand the child tax
credit in this bill--about 91 percent of the money in this bill for the
child tax credit--would go to individuals who pay no income tax. That
isn't tax relief; it is a subsidy.
The bill's child tax credit provisions treat working-family taxpayers
as an afterthought. Not only do families with a Federal income tax
liability receive a mere 9 percent of the bill's child tax credit
benefits, they also would be left waiting for that tax relief until 2
years after the benefits accrue to those with zero income tax
liability.
I raised these concerns repeatedly before the bill was released.
Unfortunately, by merely questioning the ratio skewed towards subsidies
and asking whether working families should receive more tax relief, I
and other Senate Republicans have been maligned for not caring about
children and alleviating poverty.
While Senate Republicans have also been accused of playing politics,
the timing of today's vote, coupled with the lack of meaningful
engagement since January to reach a compromise, confirms that the
strategy was always a ``take it or leave it'' proposition in the
Senate.
If my Democrat colleagues want to show that they are serious about
supporting small businesses, providing disaster tax relief, alleviating
double taxation on activity between the United States and Taiwan, and
eliminating fraud in the ERTC program--all bipartisan proposals--then I
call on them to separately pass Senator Young and Senator Hassan's
bipartisan American Innovation and Jobs Act that would reinstate R&D
expensing; the bipartisan Federal Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2024; the
bipartisan and bicameral United States-Taiwan Expedited Double-Tax
Relief Act; and Senator Tillis's bill to end the ERTC program.
On the child tax credit, it bears repeating that Republicans--the
ones who I have already said created the child tax credit--doubled that
child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000 in 2017 for the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act and provided additional help to low-income families by
lowering the phase-in floor and increasing the refundability of the
credit. That doubled child tax credit is still law. It has not expired.
It is still in full force and effect. If the Democrats are serious
about helping these working families, I am ready to push for an
extension of those changes beyond 2025.
I have maintained a willingness to negotiate a bill that provides
meaningful relief to Americans now--a bill that a majority of
Republicans in this Chamber can support--but today's senseless show
vote further demonstrates that Democrats are not serious about doing
so.
For that reason, I will be voting no on cloture and urge my
colleagues to do the same.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today the Senate will have a procedural
vote on moving to a tax bill that the House passed over 6 months ago.
At the time of House passage, myself, Ranking Member Crapo, and other
Finance Republicans made it clear to Democrats that this bill would not
pass muster in the Senate absent substantive changes.
So over that past 6 months what steps have Senate Democrats taken to
earn Republican support?
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5747, August 1, 2024, in the third column, the
following appears: Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today the Senate
will have a procedural vote on moving to a tax bill that the House
passed over 7 months ago. At the time of House passage, myself,
Ranking Member CRAPO, and other Finance Republicans made it clear
to Democrats that this bill would not pass muster in the Senate
absent substantive changes. So over that past 7 months what steps
have Senate Democrats taken to earn Republican support?
The online Record has been corrected to read: Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr.
President, today the Senate will have a procedural vote on moving
to a tax bill that the House passed over 6 months ago. At the time
of House passage, myself, Ranking Member CRAPO, and other Finance
Republicans made it clear to Democrats that this bill would not
pass muster in the Senate absent substantive changes. So over that
past 6 months what steps have Senate Democrats taken to earn
Republican support?
========================= END NOTE =========================
Did they engage with Ranking Member Crapo and Finance Republicans in
good-faith negotiations to find a bipartisan path forward? Did the
Finance chairman schedule a markup to provide Republicans an
opportunity to shape the bill through the committee process? Did the
Democrat majority leader schedule floor time to allow robust debate and
amendment process to permit the Senate to work its will?The answer to
all these questions is a resounding no. Democrats couldn't be bothered
with a trivial thing like legislating. After all, they have nominees to
confirm and god forbid we work more than 3 days a week.
With respect to the tax bill, it includes an assortment of tax
provisions--some good and some bad. The good includes extensions of
pro-growth tax policies, such as allowing employers to immediately
write-off research expenses and capital investments. Both of these are
key to boosting worker productivity and wages. The bill also includes
disaster tax relief and extends to our ally Taiwan tax treaty like
benefits to strengthen our economic ties and counter China. Both have
overwhelmingly strong bipartisan support and could pass easily if
Democrats would stop holding them hostage for political gain.
As for the bad, the bill includes a multibillion-dollar expansion of
welfare under the guise of providing middle-class tax relief through an
expanded child tax credit.
The fact is this bill has very little middle-class tax relief to
speak of. For 2023 and 2024, only $3 billion out of the provision's $33
billion cost is attributed to tax relief. The remaining $30 billion, or
91 percent of the overall cost, is pure spending. These are transfer
payments to those who pay no Federal income tax. Under this bill, those
who only work sparingly and, in some cases not at all, would see
benefit increases of $1,000 or more. Meanwhile, if you are a single
parent raising two kids while working full-time earning $40,000 a year,
chances are you wouldn't see a dime this year.
Last Congress, I proposed real relief for middle-class families by
indexing the child tax credit to inflation. This proposal would have
immediately increased the credit amount to account for its loss in
value since President
[[Page S5748]]
Biden took office. I offered this proposal as an amendment to the
Democrat's Inflation Enhancement Act, but not a single Democrat voted
for it. This current bill includes a watered-down version of my
proposal. It doesn't do anything to make up for the fact that middle-
class families have seen their cost of living increase 20 percent since
Biden took office. I have long supported the child tax credit as a way
to support families and fight poverty by rewarding work. As a former
chairman of the Finance Committee, I spearheaded expansions of this
credit to better target relief to low-income families.
But provisions in this bill would depart from fundamental principles
that have always guided child tax credit expansions. This includes that
the credit be tied to work and linked to the payment of tax, whether
that is income or payroll taxes. In breaking with these principles, the
proposal in this bill would undermine the credit's traditional role as
a work incentive, favor part-time work over full-time, and worsen
marriage penalties imbedded in our social welfare system. As a result,
the changes in this bill undermine the pro-work welfare reforms adopted
on a bipartisan basis in 1996. Those reforms led to precipitous
declines in welfare caseloads and increased employment and incomes
among single mothers. Delinking assistance from work, as this bill
does, threatens those gains.
I fully support lending a hand to families in need of support. But
our policies must be focused on providing a hand-up, not just a
handout.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Tax Relief for American Workers and Families Act
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, in a few minutes, Senators will vote on the
Tax Relief for American Workers and Families Act. There has been a lot
of discussion and debate this week about it, and I will make just a few
final points.
Republicans are talking a lot these days, trying to convince
Americans that they are the ones who support children and families, not
Democrats.
The Republicans talk about supporting small businesses. They talk
about competing with China. They talk about how terrible it is that
nobody can afford a home in America. And they talk about cracking down
on fraud in government programs.
The bill that the Senate will vote on in a few minutes helps with
each and every one of these issues. Now, we are going see whether
Senate Republicans really, in fact, do want to help, whether they are
offering anything more than talk.
Over the last couple of days, I have read lots of comments from
Republican Senators who say that it is really time to wait and that, if
Republicans take control of the Senate, they will write a better bill.
So I would ask: Better for whom?
One thing I am sure of is it won't be a better bill for the 16
million kids who stand to benefit today--today--colleagues, from the
proposal we are going to vote on. And it won't come as any comfort to
families who are getting clobbered on rent or the small businesses that
are going to fail if they don't get help now.
The House of Representatives passed this bill back in January. It was
the product of work with Republican Chair Jason Smith and I, but it
also included a year's worth of negotiations with colleagues here in
the Senate. That bill got 357 votes--almost an even split between the
two parties. And as I have said before, in the House of
Representatives, at this point, it would be hard to get 357 votes if
you were just out ordering a piece of pie.
The only reason our bipartisan bill didn't become law 6 months ago
was because of the delay of Senate Republicans. I offered to make
changes. I met with a significant number of Senate Republicans
personally.
They talked about what their proposed ideas were for compromise, and
I offered them. I offered them. I said it publicly in the Senate
Finance Committee. It wasn't good enough, although they looked a little
bit like the dog that caught the car.
But in old-school basketball terms, Senate Republicans just continued
the delays. It was kind of the old four-corners offense: stall and
drain the clock.
But for the millions of people who are hurting, those folks can't
afford for the Senate to just keep waiting.
Now, the reality is, when it comes to tax policy debates, this is the
easy stuff. The difficult issues don't get agreement from 357 Members
of the House of Representatives.
The debate on taxes is sure to get a lot harder when Congress is
going to have to deal with trillions of dollars in tax changes coming
down the pike.
If Senate Republicans can't work across the aisle or work with a
House that produced 357 votes, there is going to be some very, very
heavy lifting next year.
And I will close with this. Every Senator now has a choice. The
results here are not predetermined. Republicans can choose to side with
children and families. Republicans can choose to side with people who
are walking an economic tightrope just trying to pay the rent.
Importantly, Republicans can choose to side with small businesses.
The fact is, the problems small businesses are having today, to a
great extent, are due to the singlehanded efforts of Senate
Republicans, who did nothing but derail an effort to fix research and
development expensing.
In fact, they were willing to derail research and development
expensing in the 2017 tax bill when everybody said we need this to
compete with China. Senate Republicans said: Nah, we are interested in
giving tax breaks to people at the top rather than small businesses.
So they gutted--gutted--research and development expensing for small
business. Not a single Democrat voted for it. And then they promised to
fix it in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. All those
years, Senate Republicans said they would get a break for small
businesses on the research and development issue.
Now, a lot of those small businesses have to go out and borrow to
keep their doors open. So we offered to work that and other issues out.
But Republicans said: Gee, we are just going wait around until 2025.
Well, I want to say to my colleagues and I want to say to the
country, for a lot of these small businesses, the research and
development issue is a lifeline. I have had them come to me and say:
Ron, I am not even going to be around in 2025 for somebody like the
Senate Republicans who want to wait.
I say we ought to help them now. Make no mistake about it, a Senate
that passes this legislation can allow our bill to go to the President
of the United States right away--right away--and help goes out to those
16 million families, the 4 million small businesses that depend on
research and development expensing and the families that got clobbered
with disasters. We have a chance to help those families who, after they
got clobbered with disasters, got clobbered by an outdated tax code. We
would fix it. We would fix it today.
And because of Senator Cantwell, hundreds of thousands of units of
affordable housing could get on the way today.
So Senate Republicans can do those things that I just described. And
the way I see it, you know, if you show up for work around here and you
have a chance to help 16 million kids, 4 million small businesses,
scores of businesses that have been clobbered by disasters and create
hundreds of thousands of units of housing--doing all that sounds, to
me, like one hell of a day at the office.
So Senate Republicans can choose to help that way or they can
continue with excuses, empty talk, and what are sure to be their plans
for the future: locking in even more handouts to big corporations and
the wealthy.
This is a thoroughly bipartisan bill; 357 votes in the House of
Representatives--every Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee
voted for this bill.
So I say: Let's help the kids and the families. Let's help the small
businesses. Let's help those who need housing. Let's be there for those
who face disasters.
I say to my colleagues on the Republican side: This is a chance to
help everybody in America--everybody. I hope my Republican colleagues
make the right choice. I strongly urge them to vote yes and side with
the children and families all over the country.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S5749]]
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
American Hostages Freed
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, before I speak on the tax bill, I come to
the floor with really good news.
After years of brutal and wrongful detention in Russia at the hands
of Putin's regime, Evan Gershkovich, Paul Whelan, Alsu Kurmasheva, and
Vladimir Kara-Murza are on their way home.
It is great news, and I was proud to work and stand with Leader
McConnell in a bipartisan show of unity. We spent many, many hours
working hard, sending letters, making calls to get Evan's return. I
commend President Biden for getting them all home.
For all other Americans held hostage or unjustly imprisoned around
the world, today shines as a beacon of hope that America will never
give up on you, and we will continue to do everything we can to bring
you home. You are in our thoughts and minds, including those from New
York who are still imprisoned unjustly by authoritarian regimes around
the world.
Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024
Now, Mr. President, on the tax bill, today, the Senate has a chance
to move forward on the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers
Act.
Democrats are ready to advance bipartisan--bipartisan--tax relief
today. The question is, will Senate Republicans join us to give
Americans a tax break or will they stand in the way? Will Senate
Republicans join us to give businesses a tax break; to give families
with children a tax break; to give our housing market a tax break; or
will they stand in the way?
This is bipartisan legislation if there ever was any. The bipartisan
tax bill passed the House 357 to 70. It won majorities from both
parties. It was written, along with Senator Wyden who did a great job,
by the conservative Republican chair of the Ways and Means Committee--
hardly a liberal. So we know this is not only a good bill, it is a
bipartisan bill. If the tax break was able to unite a group as divided
as House Republicans, it should certainly not be blocked by Republicans
in the Senate. It is good to talk about standing up for families and
business but not if you turn around and then vote against them here in
the Senate.
Today is a good opportunity for both sides to show we back up good
talk with strong action. So, if you care about helping families, vote
yes. If you care about taking a half a million kids out of poverty and
giving relief to 16 million other families so that they have enough
money to give their kids clothes and books and food, vote yes. If you
care about promoting business and getting an R&D tax credit, something
that has always had bipartisan support, passed so that business can
invest in new machinery and equipment and hire new workers, vote yes;
and if you care about solving the housing crisis whether it is rural--
where it has become a big problem--or urban or suburban, please vote
yes.
I want to give many thanks to my colleagues: Chairman Wyden for his
leadership, the whole Finance Committee, and, particularly, Senators
Brown and Casey and Bennet as well as Cantwell and Hassan, who worked
so long and hard on this bill.
I yield the floor.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The legislative 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,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 349, H.R. 7024, a bill to make
improvements to the child tax credit, to provide tax
incentives to promote economic growth, to provide special
rules for the taxation of certain residents of Taiwan with
income from sources within the United States, to provide tax
relief with respect to certain Federal disasters, to make
improvements to the low-income housing tax credit, and for
other purposes.
Charles E. Schumer, Ron Wyden, Tammy Baldwin, Catherine
Cortez Masto, Cory A. Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Debbie
Stabenow, Richard J. Durbin, Gary C. Peters, Tammy
Duckworth, Sheldon Whitehouse, Benjamin L. Cardin, Tina
Smith, Jack Reed, Jeanne Shaheen, Margaret Wood Hassan,
Robert P. Casey, Jr..
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to H.R. 7024, a bill to make improvements to the
child tax credit, to provide tax incentives to promote economic growth,
to provide special rules for the taxation of certain residents of
Taiwan with income from sources within the United States, to provide
tax relief with respect to certain Federal disasters, to make
improvements to the low-income housing tax credit, and for other
purposes, 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 Pennsylvania (Mr.
Fetterman), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator
from Virginia (Mr. Warner) are necessarily absent.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr.
Hoeven), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Romney), the Senator from South
Carolina (Mr. Scott), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
Further, if present and voting: the Senator from North Dakota (Mr.
Hoeven) would have voted ``nay.''
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 48, nays 44, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 230 Leg.]
YEAS--48
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Butler
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Gillibrand
Hassan
Hawley
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Mullin
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Schatz
Scott (FL)
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Van Hollen
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--44
Barrasso
Boozman
Braun
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Manchin
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Ricketts
Risch
Rounds
Rubio
Sanders
Schmitt
Schumer
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Wicker
Young
NOT VOTING--8
Blackburn
Fetterman
Hoeven
Menendez
Romney
Scott (SC)
Vance
Warner
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Butler). On this vote, the yeas are 48,
the nays are 44.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having not voted
in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
The motion was rejected.
Motion to Reconsider
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is entered.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, once again, let me just repeat quickly,
I am just really saddened by the fact that our Republican colleagues
have not voted for a bill that passed so overwhelmingly in the House,
put together by a conservative Republican chairman of the Ways and
Means Committee and that would do so much to help housing, help kids
and families, and help businesses.
It is a shame that they put politics over helping the American
people.
____________________