[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11917-11920]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    RENEWABLE ENERGY AND JOB CREATION ACT OF 2008--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Montana is 
recognized.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 1 
minute to explain the next vote.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this vote is about jobs, energy, and 
paying our Nation's bills. There may be times when delay does not have 
a significant adverse impact. Today is not one of those days.
  The bill before us is a good bill. It extends tax cuts that expired 
last December.
  Companies across America are deciding whether to renew research 
contracts. Energy companies are deciding whether to buy and build wind 
turbines. These decisions support jobs.
  This bill encourages the search for new and clean energy sources. 
Harnessing power from ocean waves. Capturing carbon emissions.
  This bill also extends expiring individual provisions, including the 
teacher expense deduction and the tuition deduction.
  And the bill pays for itself with provisions that are not tax 
increases. With gasoline topping $4 per gallon, the American people do 
not want us to delay.
  Is the bill perfect? No.
  Will the Senate change it? Yes.
  Let's get on with making those changes. I urge my colleagues to 
support the motion to begin debate on this bill.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Iowa is 
recognized.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 1 
minute.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues not to give consent 
to cloture at this time because there are a lot of matters in this bill 
that ought not be in here. We have matters in here for trial attorneys, 
and we have matters in here for Davis-Bacon.
  We are talking about solving a housing crisis. This is not the way to 
do it. We ought to give more consideration to it, and not granting 
cloture is one way of giving greater consideration to what we are going 
to do.


                             cloture motion

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, pursuant 
to rule XXII, the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture.
  The bill 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, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 767, H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy 
     and Job Creation Act of 2008.
         Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Sherrod Brown, Robert 
           Menendez, Kent Conrad, Daniel K. Inouye, Byron L. 
           Dorgan, Jon Tester, Richard Durbin, Patty Murray, Max 
           Baucus, John D. Rockefeller, IV, Maria Cantwell, Frank 
           R. Lautenberg, John F. Kerry, Blanche L. Lincoln, E. 
           Benjamin Nelson.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent, the mandatory 
quorum call is waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to proceed to Calendar No. 767, H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy 
and Job Creation Act of 2008, 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 West Virginia (Mr. 
Byrd), the Senator from New York (Mrs. Clinton), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Obama) 
are necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. 
McCain).
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the 
Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 44, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 147 Leg.]

                                YEAS--50

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin

[[Page 11918]]


     Carper
     Casey
     Conrad
     Corker
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--44

     Alexander
     Allard
     Barrasso
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Byrd
     Clinton
     Graham
     Kennedy
     McCain
     Obama
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote, the yeas are 50, the 
nays are 44. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not 
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in 
voting to proceed to the tax extenders legislation on the floor. This 
legislation represents a fiscally responsible and balanced approach to 
ensure that necessary tax provisions for hardworking American families 
and indispensable small businesses do not expire.
  At a time when our economy teeters on the brink of recession--when 
unemployment increased 5.5 percent last month--the biggest monthly jump 
in 12 years--when gasoline at the pump is more than $4 a gallon and 
climbing, when the cost of a dozen eggs has risen 38 percent in the 
last year alone, when oil costs are set to reach $140 per barrel and 
analysts are predicting a rise to $150 by July 4th, and when 
foreclosures have hit historic levels--is there any question that the 
American people expect--even demand, not just action but action leading 
to results. We must forge together the results that address these 
central issues facing the U.S. economy and the millions of Americans 
who are anxiously awaiting action from leaders. And while Congress will 
be forced to make difficult choices on some of these issues in the 
coming months, this issue--whether to extend critical tax incentives 
right now should be, frankly, a straightforward decision.
  And now before us is legislation that would extend critical energy 
tax credits--including the catalyst that caused a 45-percent growth in 
wind energy last year and energy efficiency tax credits that creates an 
incentive to reduce energy demand. And we are really debating this 
question when we saw oil rise by $11 per barrel in a single day to 
$139? To be blunt, this country must wake up and recognize the 
ramifications of an energy crisis that we have not addressed for 30 
years--and counting. Dr. Cooper of the Consumer Federation of America 
has estimated that from 2002 to 2008 annual household expenditures on 
energy increased from about $2,600 to an astonishing $5,300. The impact 
in Maine, where 80 percent of households use heating oil to get through 
a winter, is even worse. Last year at this time, prices were at a 
challenging $2.70 a gallon--for the average Mainer who goes through 
1,000 gallons of oil that is $2,700. The price now is $4.70 meaning 
that it will cost a Mainer $4,700 just to stay warm not even 
considering gasoline costs. That is the difference between a burden and 
a crisis.
  Indeed, the energy efficiency tax incentives and the renewable 
production tax credit--critical vehicles for moving our country to self 
sufficiency--are set to expire at the end of this year and some have 
already expired at the beginning of this year. This is the antithesis 
of the energy policy that our nation must be employing to address 
rising energy costs.
  Energy efficiency is singlehandedly the most effective investment 
that our country can make to address the calamity of our energy policy. 
It is derelict that we would allow energy efficiency tax credits to 
expire. In fact, some tax credits have already expired, and as a 
result, there are currently no incentives to purchase efficient 
furnaces. At a time when Americans are worried about heating bills in 
June, we must provide the assistance to allow Americans to invest in 
energy efficient products that will reduce our collective demand for 
energy, and save Americans money.
  For example, included in this package is a $300 tax credit to 
purchase a high efficiency oil furnace, which would save over $180 in 
annual savings for an average home--according to calculations based on 
Department of Energy data and recent home heating prices. In addition, 
this includes an extension of a tax credit for highly efficient natural 
gas furnaces that saves an individual $100 per year. However, this tax 
credit ended at the beginning of this year--right when oil prices began 
their historic climb.
  For businesses that are competing against countries that subsidize 
oil the situation is simply untenable. Two weeks ago, Katahdin Paper 
Company announced that the cost of oil used to run its boilers has 
caused the company to consider closing the mill's doors. Now, talks are 
under way to find alternative solutions to preserve the mill's 
operations and its accompanying jobs, but make no mistake; we are at 
the tipping point where our economy could well be in ruins directly as 
a result of high energy costs.
  With jobs being lost because of high energy costs, it is crucial that 
we invest in renewable energy jobs--that will put our economy back to 
work and invest in secure energy future. Indeed over one hundred 
thousand Americans could be put to work in 2008 if clean energy 
production tax credits were extended. However, because the incentives 
are set to expire this year, renewable energy companies are already 
reporting a precipitous decrease in investment due to uncertainty. 
Projects currently underway may soon be mothballed. Clean energy 
incentives for energy efficient buildings, appliances and other 
technologies, as well as additional funding for weatherizing homes, 
would similarly serve to stimulate 2008 economic consumption, lower 
residential energy costs, and generate new manufacturing and 
construction jobs. It is irresponsible to allow a bright spot in our 
economy, the renewable energy industry and energy efficiency 
industries, to falter, when the product of these industries are so 
essential to the future of this country.
  Failing to act on these crucial incentives could choke off promising 
business investment in 2008 and miss an opportunity to address high 
energy costs, a critical contributor to sinking consumer confidence and 
our Nation's long-term economic challenges. Extending these expiring 
clean energy tax credits will help ensure a stronger, more stable 
environment for new investments and ensure continued robust growth in a 
bright spot in an otherwise slowing economy. This bill presents another 
opportunity to raise the bar for our future domestic energy systems and 
energy efficiencies, benefitting our economy, our health, our 
environment, and our national security.
  Not only does the legislation address these critical energy tax 
provisions, but also extends relief for lower and middle-income 
Americans, as well as small businesses. In particular, there are a 
number of provisions that I have championed that have been included by 
the House legislation and Chairman Baucus' amendment.
  Fed Chairman Bernanke testified before the House Budget Committee 
earlier this year that, ``a fiscal stimulus package should be 
implemented quickly and structured so that its effects on aggregate 
spending are felt as much as possible within the next twelve months or 
so.'' Without a doubt, one way to affect spending and help working 
Americans meet the challenges ahead of us and provide for the families 
is providing a tax rebate. Another measure that Senator Lincoln and I 
have long championed would enable more hard-

[[Page 11919]]

working, low-income families to receive the refundable child credit by 
reducing the income threshold for the refundable credit to $10,000 and 
deindexing it from inflation just as it originally passed the Senate in 
2001.
  The consequences of inaction are serious for low-income Americans 
living paycheck-to-paycheck, and our proposal will ensure that those 
low-income, hard-working families that benefit from this credit the 
most receive it. And, I am very pleased that the House included a 
version of our proposal, one in which, I might add, would already be 
putting money in people's pockets had it already been enacted into law 
providing further economic stimulus during these challenging times.
  To ensure that much needed capital investment reaches all corners of 
the country, the extenders package rightly includes an extension of the 
new markets tax credit. This program has proven extremely successful in 
encouraging investment and spurring growth in impoverished areas all 
across the country, both rural and urban. Senator Rockefeller and I 
have championed extending this vital incentive with the New Markets Tax 
Credit Extension Act, S. 1239, a bill that enjoys the bipartisan 
support of 27 cosponsors.
  To provide relief and equity to our Nation's 1.5 million retail 
establishments, most of which have less than five employees, I have 
introduced with Senators Lincoln, Kerry, and Hutchison. This provision 
would reduce from 39 to 15 years the depreciable life of improvements 
that are made to retail stores that are owned by the retailer. If the 
motion to proceed passes, I believe that we will have an opportunity to 
address this inequity given the support for this provision expressed by 
the chairman of the Finance Committee.
  In 2004, I fought for the inclusion of incentives to stop the flow of 
film productions offshore into the FSC-ETI bill. Consequently, I was 
very pleased to see the House include an extension of this vital 
incentive for film production companies planning whether and where to 
film. The House also included a critical modification to the incentive. 
Specifically, it would remove the $15 million cap on film productions 
eligible for the incentive and instead limiting the deduction to the 
first $15 million as the provision was originally passed in the Senate 
before being amended in conference. This is an issue that I have also 
worked on with my good friend, the senior Senator from Arkansas, and am 
so pleased with this provisions inclusion.
  So as we can see, this bill provides the Senate an opportunity to 
consider a number of provisions that are vital in helping our economy 
weather the recent downturn it is experiencing. The provisions that I 
have just outlined will unleash renewable energy projects creating 
jobs, provided targeted tax relief to low-income working families 
struggling to pay for the high cost of food and fuel, encourage an 
infusion of capital into rural and urban communities, provide tax 
incentives for retail businesses looking to grow their business, and 
help keep the jobs associated with film production within our borders. 
Not to mention, the tax extenders bill also includes provisions such as 
the R&D tax credit, the tuition deduction and the teachers classroom 
expenses deduction that are widely supported on both sides of the 
aisle.
  Clearly, this tax extenders package is critical to Congress's ongoing 
efforts to reverse the economic slowdown that our Nation is facing. For 
the fifth month this year, U.S. employers have cut jobs including 
49,000 in the month of May alone. The number of Americans filing first-
time claims for unemployment benefits is at its highest level since 
October of 2004 and the increase in the rate was the largest since 
1986.
  The Senate should move forward on extending expiring tax relief. 
There are some aspects of the House bill that I believe should be 
improved upon, such as providing an AMT patch to stop the expansion of 
this mass tax. Some on the other side of the aisle believe we should at 
least attempt to pay for tax relief, a position I happen to agree with. 
Others on my side of the aisle believe that shouldn't continue to be a 
maintenance Congress, continually passing short-term temporary tax 
relief, a position that I also happen to agree with.
  There are differences of opinion, but what is the Senate afraid of? 
What are we afraid of? To debate and to vote on various positions? Some 
of those issues and positions I would disagree with. But does that mean 
to say the Senate cannot withstand the conflicting views of various 
Members of the Senate? It is not unheard of, that both sides of the 
political aisle will have differing views. So, I would urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting the motion to proceed. If the 
motion succeeds, I am hopeful that we can do what the Senate ought to 
do--that is find some common ground on an amendment process and a way 
forward to finally dispose of the legislation and enact this 
legislation sooner rather than later.
  I came to this discussion to work on this issue, to debate, which is 
consistent with the traditions and principles of this institution, 
which has been its hallmark. That is why it has been considered the 
greatest deliberative body in the world. Unfortunately, it is not 
living up to that expectation or characterization, regrettably.
  Let's have an open and unfettered debate, which is consistent with 
this institution that is predicated on our Founding Fathers' vision of 
an institution based on accommodation and consensus. You have to get 60 
votes. So let's work it out. Let's clear this first hurdle and proceed 
to the bill. My side of the aisle will still have another 60 vote 
threshold to ensure that their concerns are heard.
  The Senate is based on consensus. It is based on compromise. It is 
based on conciliation. It is based on the fact that you have to develop 
cooperation in order to get anything done. It is not unusual. If 
historically we took the position: You missed your chance because there 
are disparate views, so that there would be no opportunity to further 
discuss or negotiate--we missed our chance? Are we talking about 
scoring political points? Are we talking about what is the best tax 
policy for this country?
  I am concerned we are taking a political U-turn away from the message 
in the last election. I was in that last election. I heard loudly and 
clearly. I don't blame the people of Maine or across this country for 
their deep-seated frustration. They are right. There was too much 
partisanship and too much polarization.
  What's required now is leadership. We need leadership for this 
country. They are thirsting for a strong leadership, an honorable 
leadership that leads us to a common goal. No one expected unanimity in 
the Senate but we would give integrity to this process to allow it to 
work and not cynically say who is winning and who is losing today 
politically. We are not shedding the political past. We have made a 
political U-turn. We are returning to it.
  This isn't about party labels. This isn't whether it is good for 
Republicans or good for Democrats. It is what is good for America. It 
is not about red States and blue States. It is about the red, white, 
and blue. Fact is that with every day that we delay, there are millions 
of taxpayers in all 50 States who literally will pay the price for our 
inaction.
  I hope we can find a way. What could be of higher priority than to be 
able to debate and to vote on our respective positions, to give a vote 
on AMT relief and expiring tax provisions that is so important that a 
majority of Senators support? Is there anyone in this Chamber who does 
not think we should extend expiring tax relief?? I know we can build 
the threshold for the 60. It is imperative we do it. It is inexcusable, 
frankly, that on the process for debating, we cannot reach an 
agreement. We are failing the American people on a colossal scale. We 
are held up by arcane procedural measures that could be worked out, if 
only we reached across the political aisle.
  If my remarks sound familiar, then well they should because 
regrettably I said much the same thing in February of last year at the 
start of this Congress on another pressing issue of our

[[Page 11920]]

time. Sadly as we now approach the end of the first session of the 
110th Congress, things seemed to have not changed very much. I would 
hope when we finally adjourn after hopefully extending this critical 
tax relief that each and every one of us will return to our homes and 
when the clock strikes midnight on December 31, that we all make a New 
Years resolution to make the next Congress a more productive session 
with Members reaching across the aisle looking for consensus. If we do 
not, there is one thing that is for certain; the American public is 
watching.

                          ____________________