[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2317-2324]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1, which the clerk 
will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 1) making supplemental appropriations for job 
     preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy 
     efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and 
     State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.


                            Amendment No. 98

                (Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Inouye and Baucus, I 
call up amendment 98 and ask unanimous consent that once the amendment 
is offered, no further amendments be in

[[Page 2318]]

order during today's session of the Senate.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for Mr. Inouye and Mr. 
     Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered 98.

  (The amendment is printed in the Record of Friday, January 20, 2009, 
under ``Text of Amendments.'')
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Hawaii is 
recognized.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 1, the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This bill will create 4 million 
American jobs, invest in the future of America by rebuilding our roads, 
bridges and schools, and will give State and local governments the 
resources they need to deal with surging demand for social services and 
falling tax revenues.
  Further, this measure will provide tax cuts to working families who 
are struggling every day to cope with this terrible recession.
  Today, we face the gravest economic crisis that this Nation has seen 
since the Great Depression. Our fourth quarter gross domestic product 
shrank by 3.8 percent, the largest drop since 1982.
  A million jobs have been lost in the past 2 months, and this coming 
Friday we expect to learn that during the month of January, another 
600,000 jobs, at a minimum, have been lost.
  The American people fully understand the depth and seriousness of our 
economic problems.
  U.S. foreclosures increased by more than 81 percent last year, a 
record, with over 2.3 million foreclosures. Our States are struggling 
terribly, facing the prospect of cutting off vital services, including 
schools and police.
  Forty-four States are facing budget shortfalls totaling $90 billion 
for fiscal year 2009 and $145 billion for fiscal year 2010.
  In 2008, U.S. stocks lost roughly $7 trillion in value. In an 
instant, the life savings of millions of Americans simply disappeared. 
Our banking system is in grave shape. Last year, 25 banks with $373.6 
billion in total assets failed in the U.S.
  All the while, the critical needs of our Nation are going unmet. The 
American Society of Civil Engineers--ASCE--estimates that $2.2 trillion 
is needed over a 5-year period to bring the Nation's infrastructure to 
an adequate condition.
  How can we grow our economy and provide opportunities for today's 
working men and women if the basic physical infrastructure that 
underlies every job in this country is falling apart?
  We must invest in our future by making the necessary commitments to 
ensure that our infrastructure will support our future economic growth.
  But today, we face a much more immediate crisis. In Saturday's New 
York Times, economist Allen Sinai stated:

       My sense is that business is slashing hugely and across the 
     board. Everyone is cutting prices, people, capital spending 
     and all kinds of expenses. It is almost a herd instinct.

  There is nothing more destructive to economic growth than deflation. 
It was the defining characteristic of the Great Depression, and it is 
the single most difficult economic condition to reverse. We cannot 
allow a deflationary spiral to develop.
  Only one institution in the United States, the Federal Government, 
has the capacity to step into the breach and stop the terrible spiral 
of increased layoffs leading to decreased spending, in turn leading to 
more layoffs and so on.
  The Federal Government must take aggressive action. We must use all 
means at our disposal to address this deepening crisis.
  Some argue that this is all part of the natural business cycle, that 
the best course of action is to stand back and let this crisis work 
itself out. I would remind those who take this position that the Great 
Depression was also a part of the natural business cycle.
  President Hoover refused to take aggressive action, and the results 
speak for themselves.
  It was not until President Roosevelt took office in 1933 and 
implemented a series of drastic policy reforms that the economy slowly 
began to improve, and, almost as important, gave the average American 
reason to believe that there was a light at the end of the tunnel.
  We must act boldly, decisively, and with all possible speed, or we 
will face dire consequences. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
is the answer. This legislation will not only create jobs now, but will 
also begin the process of rebuilding the physical infrastructure of 
America that is the key to future prosperity.
  Based on these needs, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
focuses on the following goals:
  First, creating or saving at least 4 million jobs;
  Second, investing in America's future by rebuilding our basic 
infrastructure.
  Third, providing for job retraining for those workers who need to 
learn new skills in order to compete in the global economy today, while 
at the same time, improving the education of our children and young 
adults so Americans can remain competitive tomorrow;
  Fourth, moving toward energy independence and away from burning 
fossil fuels that leave us dependent on foreign oil;
  Fifth, improving our healthcare system so all Americans can have 
access to quality treatment;
  Sixth, providing tax cuts and other means of assistance to lessen the 
impact of this crisis on America's working families.
  To meet these goals the Finance and Appropriations Committees 
recommend a total of $888 billion in funding, including $365.6 billion 
in new appropriations. This is a significant amount of money, but an 
amount that we believe is wholly necessary to confront the challenges 
facing our Nation.
  My distinguished colleague from Montana will address the tax and 
mandatory spending issues that we are recommending and I will address 
the spending programs that were approved by the Appropriations 
Committee by a vote of 21 to 9.
  It would take far too long to describe in detail the hundreds of 
programs that are included in this bill, but I would like to take a 
moment to mention some of the more significant investments that we 
recommend.
  We will invest in our future by funding projects that will rebuild 
and improve our physical and cyber infrastructure. These projects, 
totaling $142 billion, will create jobs in the near-term, and will 
provide an improved foundation for future growth by fixing our 
crumbling roads, bridges, and schools, improving our broadband network, 
and increasing our ability to conserve energy.
  America's tradition of public education is second-to-none, but it has 
been sadly underfunded in recent years. We all know that for the United 
States to compete in the 21st century, Americans must be well-educated 
and capable of adapting to an ever-changing economic environment.
  Accordingly, we recommend investing $125 billion in education and 
training so that the next generation of American workers is ready and 
able to meet the challenge of global competition. In addition, 
providing job training to recently laid-off workers in new and 
expanding fields will help to lower the unemployment rate and will 
allow today's workers to better compete against foreign competition.
  In the area of energy, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
provides $49 billion in investments in areas critical to the 
development of clean, efficient, American energy, including modernizing 
energy transmission, research and development of renewable energy 
technologies, and modernizing and upgrading government buildings and 
vehicles.
  The current economic crisis has affected all Americans, but none more 
so than the most vulnerable among us. The $25 billion in spending 
proposed here will serve to lessen the blow of the current recession, 
providing immediate relief for children, the poor, and others who may 
find themselves struggling to put food on the table or a roof over 
their head.

[[Page 2319]]

  The bill provides $16 billion in investments in areas critical to 
immediate and long-term healthcare for millions of Americans. Improved 
information technology, research facilities, and health and wellness 
programs will all provide a better foundation for providing quality 
healthcare to consumers.
  We face a critical period in our Nation's history. The next few years 
will either see us emerge from this crisis with renewed vigor and with 
an economy that remains the leading engine of global growth, or we may 
face years of slow growth and an ongoing struggle just to maintain our 
current standard of living.
  Clearly, the goal of this package is to find ways to stimulate the 
private sector through public sector spending, to jump start the 
private sector with much needed projects that will create jobs as soon 
as possible, and that will provide meaningful improvements for our 
communities.
  At the same time, we seek to ensure that the funds that are 
appropriated in this legislation are spent carefully and with 
unprecedented transparency. We include $110 million in the bill to 
increase the resources of agency Inspectors General and the Government 
Accountability Office.
  In addition, this measure would establish a new oversight board 
within the executive branch which will be charged with oversight of the 
funding provided in this bill.
  Such times as these are only overcome with courageous leadership and 
a willingness to embrace change, listen to new ideas and take chances. 
This bill is not perfect. But we must not let our fear of imperfection 
stop us from taking the bold steps necessary to address this crisis and 
move America forward.
  The time for action is now. The American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act of 2009 is the right policy at the right time, and I urge each and 
every Member of this body to join me in support of creating jobs, 
supporting our State and local governments, and investing in the future 
of America.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I first want to commend my colleagues, 
Senator Inouye from Hawaii, the chairman of the Appropriations 
Committee, who I think has undertaken a masterful job in helping to 
craft, along with his counterpart, Senator Cochran from Mississippi, an 
economic recovery package that will go a long way toward getting people 
back to work.
  They have done half of the job; the other half was left to the 
Finance Committee. I think together we have come up with a very good 
beginning to get Americans back to work and to invest in many of the 
projects this country needs so desperately.
  In 1932, President Franklin Roosevelt said:

       The country needs and . . . the country demands bold, 
     persistent experimentation. . . . [A]bove all, try something. 
     The millions who are in want will not stand idly by silently 
     forever . . . .

  Today, the country once again demands bold action. Our country 
demands bold action to help rebuild a very badly damaged American 
economy.
  Consider the terrible blows to our economy and the problems that we 
face if we do not act.
  Last Friday the Commerce Department reported that from October 
through December of last year the economy shrank at its fastest pace in 
a quarter century.
  Last year 2.6 million people lost their jobs. If we do not act, 3 to 
4 million more people will lose their jobs.
  The decline in home prices and the stock market collapse have sharply 
reduced the net worth of American families. Net worth declined by 
roughly one-fifth between the middle of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 
2008.
  CBO projects that the national average home price will fall by 
another 14 percent between the third quarter of 2008 and the middle of 
2010.
  Equity wealth has declined by $6 trillion between the end of 2007 and 
the end of 2008.
  The Standard and Poor's 500 stock index fell by almost 45 percent 
from October 2007 to December 2008.
  And the financial crisis has spread around the world.
  These are not just numbers. These are families who are hurting. These 
are mothers and fathers who have lost jobs. These are parents who have 
seen college savings decimated. These are couples who are struggling to 
keep their homes.
  We need to act. This economic recovery bill will save or create 3 to 
4 million jobs. It will position our economy to be more competitive. 
The measure before us today provides an appropriate response to the 
conditions that we face.
  The Senate Finance Committee worked with the President and Members of 
the Senate and the House to put together its part of the economic 
recovery substitute that we are considering this week. The Senate 
Appropriations Committee took the lead on its part, as well.
  We think that the provisions in this substitute represent the best 
ways to address spending slowdowns and rising unemployment.
  And it will be effective. More than 99 percent of the Finance 
Committee's provisions effects will come in the first 2 years of the 
bill.
  To counteract weak consumer demand and spending slowdowns, we have 
included several proposals that will put more cash in the pockets of 
America's taxpayers, seniors, and disabled veterans.
  The making work pay tax credit cuts taxes for more than 95 percent of 
American working families. It gives single taxpayers up to $500 and 
married taxpayers up to $1,000 this year and next in additional cash 
that they can use just now.
  People will be able to receive the benefit throughout the year 
through a reduction in the amount of income tax withheld from their 
paychecks.
  Seniors, disabled veterans, other disabled workers, and SSI 
recipients would receive a one-time payment of $300.
  Families with children would also benefit from these proposals. The 
income threshold to receive the refundable child tax credit would be 
reduced so that more people would be eligible. The earned income tax 
credit would be increased for families with three or more children.
  An amendment added in the Finance Committee will ensure that the 
alternative minimum tax will not hit any new taxpayers for 1 more year.
  Folks struggling to pay for higher education would get relief. The 
proposal includes a partially-refundable new tax credit up to $2,500 
for the cost of tuition and fees, including books. Section 529 plans 
would be enhanced by including the cost of computers as a qualifying 
expense.
  This measure would help homeowners who are taking advantage of the 
first-time homebuyer's credit enacted last year. Under current law, 
homebuyers have to pay this credit back over 10 years. The substitute 
before us today would eliminate the repayment obligation, unless the 
homebuyer sells the home within 36 months of the purchase.
  For small businesses, we have included expanded expensing through 
section 179. This provision helps small businesses quickly recover the 
cost of certain capital expenses.
  For businesses in general, we would increase the years that they can 
carry back losses and general business credits. This would put cash in 
the hands of businesses right now.
  Businesses would also get a tax incentive through the work 
opportunity tax credit for hiring unemployed veterans and disadvantaged 
youth.
  The economic downturn has frozen the municipal bond market. This 
recovery bill includes changes that would help to free up this market, 
unlocking cash for infrastructure investment.
  Banks would be able to inject more capital into projects creating 
demand for municipal bonds, driving down interest rates. And increasing 
the small issuer exception would increase the range of municipalities 
from which banks can buy.
  This substitute would also eliminate tax-exempt interest on private 
activity bonds as a preference item under the alternative minimum tax. 
This would

[[Page 2320]]

draw new investors and help stabilize the market.
  The legislation would also establish parity for tribal governments on 
$2 billion of tax-exempt bonds. This important change would allow 
tribal governments to issue debt for projects on equal footing with 
other government issuers.
  And this substitute would create a new tax-credit bond option. This 
new bond would give State and local governments a new tool to finance 
infrastructure projects.
  We have also included incentives for energy in this recovery package. 
These incentives would create green jobs producing the next generation 
of renewable energy sources, wind, solar, geothermal.
  The substitute would extend and modify the renewable energy 
production tax credit for qualifying facilities.
  The substitute includes additional funding for clean renewable energy 
bonds to finance facilities that generate electricity from renewable 
resources. And the substitute includes conservation bonds for States to 
use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
  Energy experts often cite efficiency as the low-hanging fruit. 
Efficiency is the easiest way for us to reduce our energy consumption 
and greenhouse gas emissions.
  So we have included incentives for energy efficiency. The substitute 
would increase the value of the existing credit for energy efficient 
homes. The substitute would eliminate the limitations on specific 
energy-efficient property. And the substitute would extend the credits 
for various types of energy efficient property, for both residential 
and business.
  Two new tax credits would spur our alternative energy and production.
  The advanced energy research and development credit would provide an 
enhanced 20 percent R&D credit for research expenditures incurred in 
the fields of fuel cells, energy storage, renewable energy, energy 
conservation technology, efficient transmission and distribution of 
electricity, and carbon capture and sequestration.
  The second energy tax credit is an advanced energy investment credit 
for facilities engaged in the manufacture of advanced energy property.
  This substitute would make sound investments in health information 
technology, or health I.T. These investments should reduce costs, 
improve quality, and help patients make better decisions about their 
health care. Expanding use of health I.T. should make our health care 
system more efficient, reduce errors, and help bring down costs.
  Health I.T. would also provide a platform for standardizing and 
collecting data to move toward paying for performance, another way to 
improve efficiency and decrease costs.
  Investing in health I.T. will help to put that infrastructure in 
place, while creating thousands of high-tech jobs.
  And reforming health care is the right way to get a handle on 
entitlement spending.
  The economic crisis has also created significant fiscal difficulties 
for States. At least 45 States will face budget shortfalls. Economists 
expect those shortfalls to total more than $350 billion over the next 2 
years.
  These dire circumstances have forced painful choices. Almost half the 
States have already made or proposed cuts to their Medicaid Programs.
  The continued rise in unemployment places a further strain on 
Medicaid. Decreased revenue coming in means less money to fund 
Medicaid. And experts warn that every percentage point increase in 
unemployment adds 1 million people to the Medicaid and CHIP rolls.
  Economists tell us that State fiscal relief is an effective means to 
stimulate the economy. And they also advise that targeted relief to 
those most in need, not based on circumstances of States' own making 
but based on true measures of distress, is the best means of 
distribution.
  The substitute before us today would provide much-needed relief to 
every State through a temporary increase in the Federal share of 
Medicaid funding. The substitute would also provide additional aid 
targeted to States facing the most precarious fiscal situations, 
measured by an increase in unemployment.
  These measures will keep States from having to lay off cops or 
teachers. And keeping those workers on the job will help the economy.
  The economic recovery package also supports those who have lost 
employment and helps them to find new jobs.
  While almost all workers pay into the unemployment insurance program, 
only about half of them qualify for benefits. American workers deserve 
better. The substitute before us would increase and extend benefits to 
those currently looking for work.
  The substitute before us would help States to cope with the 
increasing number of families needing temporary assistance. And it 
would remove the incentive for States to artificially keep their TANF 
caseloads low.
  In addition, the substitute would ensure that families that qualify 
could continue to receive child support payments that are intended to 
be spent on children. For those who receive it, child support 
constitutes about 30 percent of poor families' income.
  The substitute before us would also increase the incentive to become 
employed by extending the transitional medical assistance program under 
Medicaid for 18 months. TMA allows former TANF recipients to retain 
Medicaid coverage for one year after they become employed. These 
workers usually earn too little to afford private coverage.
  The substitute before us would also remove barriers to getting 
Medicaid and CHIP for low-income American Indians and Alaska Natives.
  The funds directed toward these programs for vulnerable populations 
would go into the hands of folks who need it and who will spend it 
right away. These proposals will increase economic activity, create 
jobs, and shorten the amount of time that we all spend in this economic 
crisis.
  Another key component of our economic recovery package would help 
unemployed workers maintain their health coverage.
  When workers lose their jobs, they lose more than their paychecks. 
They often lose their health insurance coverage, as well.
  To address this problem, our proposal includes help for unemployed 
workers to pay for their health care premiums.
  Today, most workers who lose their jobs have the right to keep their 
health insurance for up to 18 months under the COBRA program. But to be 
eligible for COBRA health benefits, workers must pay all of the premium 
costs, plus an additional 2 percent for administrative costs. For most 
folks who have just lost their job, this is simply unaffordable.
  Our plan would provide a subsidy to cover up to 65 percent of health 
premium costs, for up to 9 months.
  This premium subsidy is shortterm. It would be available only to 
unemployed workers while they look for a new job.
  For those workers who lose their jobs to international trade, 
President Kennedy established trade adjustment assistance, or TAA. I 
have long championed TAA and worked to expand its reach and improve its 
effectiveness. Today, TAA gives workers the chance to retrain for new 
jobs, get access to health care, and ultimately get back to work. And 
that is why the substitute before us today includes a 2-year extension 
of TAA.
  Yet in a time when Americans are doing everything they can to change, 
adapt, and be flexible in a global economy, TAA should do the same.
  We can do more to expand who can benefit from TAA, and we can improve 
how we get them those benefits. That is why I am working with Senator 
Grassley, Chairman Rangel, and Congressman Camp on a robust expansion 
of TAA. We hope to include this improved TAA in the economic recovery 
package before it is enacted.
  The package that we are considering this week is our best effort to 
reach a consensus on an economic recovery bill that can pass the Senate 
and the House quickly.
  The Nation demands action and action now. Let us act quickly to put 
our economy back on track. Let us act to

[[Page 2321]]

restore the Nation's financial health. And let us act pass this 
important legislation this week.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, the bill now before the Senate provides 
$365 billion in new spending reported by the Appropriations Committee 
and $522 billion in tax and mandatory spending measures recommended by 
the Finance Committee. The bill as a whole has a price tag of $887 
billion. When the borrowing costs associated with this spending are 
included, the cost of the package rises well over $1.2 trillion. The 
President has suggested that even more measures such as this, other 
requests to stimulate the financial system, may be needed to 
resuscitate the housing market and reform financial regulatory 
institutions. We don't know what the cost of all of these measures will 
be, but it sounds as if we may be asked to enlarge these commitments 
even further as time goes by.
  Proponents of this bill say that the fiscal cost of inaction is also 
substantial. They argue that failure to enact the bill will lead to 
lower growth and diminished tax receipts. Yet there is little 
documentation to back up that claim. Those suggestions have not been 
described in any detail by administration officials or their economic 
experts.
  In size alone, this measure has few precedents. We are considering 
this bill in the absence of any formal request or documentation from 
the executive branch. This bill has been described as President Obama's 
recovery plan. Yet we have not had an official request from the 
administration for these funds. I am not one who believes Congress must 
always wait for the executive branch to lead, but with regard to this 
bill, we are giving the executive branch immense latitude in the 
disbursement of the spending it contains. We are doing so without any 
official request and without any documentation that speaks to the issue 
of how this spending will stimulate the economy or what the long-term 
implications of the spending will be. Normally, this kind of 
information would be contained in an administration budget or 
supplemental request. For items that are well understood to have a 
short-term stimulative effect, most of us will feel comfortable 
debating their merits as part of an emergency measure. But there is a 
great deal of spending in this bill that is not immediately 
stimulative.
  The majority describes it as investments in our Nation's future. We 
have the responsibility to be deliberate and consider these items 
carefully in the context of the President's formal budget request.
  The distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee, who is my 
dear friend, made a sincere effort to accommodate priorities expressed 
by Republican members of the committee and others who are not on the 
committee and to respond to some of their concerns. He resisted efforts 
to clutter the bill with controversial policy initiatives that might 
detract from the focus of the legislation or slow down the progress of 
the bill. He also insisted on a committee markup of the bill. All of 
these actions demonstrate his unquestioned sense of fairness.
  The fact remains, however, that the Senate is being asked by the 
administration to take a big leap of faith that the massive spending 
proposed in this bill will, in fact, stimulate growth of the economy, 
even though much of the funding will not be spent in the next year or 
two.
  We are all searching for solutions that will help the economy in the 
short term. Yet we must consider the long-term effects of any so-called 
stimulative actions we take today. Will the jobs associated with these 
proposals be created just as the economy is recovering, causing 
inflationary pressures that may not be welcome 2 years from now? What 
will be the impacts on Federal borrowing costs of this additional 
deficit spending, particularly once recovery is underway and we are no 
longer able to borrow money as cheaply as we are now? And perhaps of 
greatest concern, is it reasonable to expect stimulus spending to cease 
after 18 months or 2 years' time? The Federal Government's track record 
for terminating programs is not very good.
  Let me share some of the provisions of this specific legislation. 
There are well over 20 new spending initiatives and programs that are 
either being authorized in this bill or being funded for the first 
time. These programs account for over $230 billion of the appropriated 
spending in the bill.
  The bill allocates $16 billion to build and repair local schools, 
something which has not before been considered the responsibility of 
the Federal Government. That is a State and local responsibility.
  The bill provides $9 billion to construct broadband infrastructure 
throughout the country, even as it requires development of a plan to 
actually spend this money, and the creation of a broadband 
infrastructure map that might inform development of that plan. Is this 
putting the cart before the horse or at least maybe putting it 
alongside the horse?
  The bill appropriates $23 billion to create an improved health 
information technology system, virtually from scratch. This is not a 1- 
or 2-year project; it is an expensive, long-term program for which 
there is barely a foundation. Yet we are putting taxpayers on the hook 
for $23 billion.
  The bill invests heavily in science and energy programs. Like many of 
my colleagues in the Senate, I supported passage of the America 
COMPETES Act during the last Congress. The goal of that legislation was 
to ensure that science education in America is of a quality that will 
sustain our economy in the 21st century. I also supported passage of 
Energy bills in the last 5 years in the hope that they would enhance 
our Nation's energy security. Yet I did not support any of these bills 
with the expectation that their various elements would be immediately 
funded in their entirety or that they would be funded outside the 
context of our Federal budget, the regular annual process.
  Like most Senators, I assumed we would evaluate the merits of the 
individual programs as part of the annual budget and appropriations 
process. Even if this spending may be entirely appropriate, it is 
reckless to be providing it in the absence of any budgetary context and 
having done very little due diligence.
  Much of the spending will have little stimulative effect. Projected 
spend-out rates are very slow. The Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office observed in a January 28 letter to the chairman of the Senate 
Budget Committee:

       Throughout the federal government, spending for new 
     programs has frequently been slower than expected and rarely 
     been faster.

  Is our putting it in this one bill going to change that? What will be 
the cost of these programs 5 years from now? If we control the overall 
level of discretionary spending in future years, what programs and 
priorities will these new initiatives displace? If the spending is 
entirely additive, what are the impacts of that spending on our 
national debt or on future tax rates? These questions are difficult to 
answer without supporting documentation and without having held any 
hearings.
  It seems to me there will be time enough to consider these long-term 
investments in the regular order and in the context of future Federal 
budgets.
  As former Clinton Budget Director Alice Rivlin recently testified:

       . . . a long-term investment program should not be put 
     together hastily and lumped with an anti-recession package. 
     The elements of the investment program must be carefully 
     planned and will not create many jobs right away.

  Yet it is not just these new programs that should concern us. This 
bill also greatly expands a number of programs such as Head Start, Pell 
grants, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. These are 
all programs with merit. I have supported them all, with supporters on 
both sides of the aisle each year approving bills to extend the 
authorizations and fund the programs. But the question is, Do they 
stimulate the economy? How? Is it realistic to expect funding levels 
for these programs to revert to today's levels once the economy 
recovers? I think it is safe to expect just the opposite.

[[Page 2322]]

  The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, cochaired by former 
Congressman Bill Frenzel, my friend, and another of President Clinton's 
former Budget Directors, Leon Panetta, another friend, recently warned 
of this danger. Speaking of stimulus recommendations like planting 
grass on the national mall, the committee said such things are ``a 
distraction from the bigger risks in this bill.''
  More troubling is the number of items in the stimulus plan that are 
really intended to be permanent new policies rather than temporary 
items to help boost the economy.
  They said:

       While we need deficit spending now, extending out borrowing 
     beyond the economic downturn will make our already-dismal 
     fiscal picture far, far worse.

  They go on to say:

       The economy simply can't handle that. There is a very real 
     risk that many of these items will become a permanent part of 
     the budget and unless Congress suddenly shows an 
     uncharacteristic willingness to pay for the new items, the 
     deficit will deteriorate even further.

  The committee they chaired went on to say:

       Many of these items may be worthwhile, but an emergency 
     measure is the wrong way to push through permanent changes to 
     the budget. If politicians want to enact long-term spending 
     or tax policies, they should be enacted through the normal 
     legislative process.

  I think that is very well put. I think we ought to pay attention to 
what people like that are saying.
  The President's Chief of Staff recently said--probably in jest, maybe 
in jest--

       You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.

  Well, clearly we are seeing the efforts by some--and I am not saying 
the President's Chief of Staff--to use this stimulus bill to achieve 
long-term objectives that go beyond addressing our short-term economic 
policies and problems.
  But we agree--I think all Senators agree--the economy is under severe 
pressure and Congress should take quick but sharply focused action to 
do those things we are confident will have an immediate stimulative 
impact on the economy and improve economic prospects. We should address 
the housing problem that seems to be the central problem in this 
crisis. We should not, however, rush headlong into fiscal commitments 
that may haunt us for years to come.
  If Federal spending on infrastructure and other programs is truly 
stimulative, is it not unfortunate Congress has failed to enact 9 of 
the 12 regular appropriations bills for this fiscal year? These bills 
account for almost half of all discretionary spending. Yet the agencies 
and programs supported by those bills have essentially been idling for 
4 months under a continuing resolution. This is funding at last year's 
approved levels of spending; whereas, if enactment had taken place in a 
timely fashion by this Congress--this Senate and the House of 
Representatives working together--we would have much of this money that 
has previously been budgeted and approved by committees, approved by 
the Congress.
  Funding contained in those bills is for projects such as roads, 
bridges, water projects, Federal buildings, and other activities that 
might provide jobs now, and they have been held in abeyance under the 
terms of a continuing resolution, which is continuing this fiscal year 
to spend at the levels appropriated for spending during the last fiscal 
year.
  That is not something that can be laid at the feet of President Bush. 
That is the Congress. We hear a lot of criticism of the former 
President, such as he is the reason for all this. We need to look at 
ourselves. Congress did not even try to enact the bills. The bicameral 
leadership made a conscious decision not to engage the former President 
on spending issues or Outer Continental Shelf oil-and-gas leasing--
another example of something that could be labeled ``stimulative.''
  Had we enacted those appropriations bills last fall, agencies would 
already be contracting, hiring, and spending their funding allocations. 
This week we would be having a debate probably about the merits of 
supplementing some of those allocations of Federal funds. Instead, we 
are considering a bill that supplements many existing programs without 
Members even knowing what the regular appropriations bills contain for 
those same programs.
  In closing, I express my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the 
distinguished Senator from Hawaii, the chairman of our Appropriations 
Committee, for his distinguished leadership and congratulate him on the 
way he has undertaken to respond to these emergency requests that have 
been submitted to the committee. He has handled it all in a fair and 
thoughtful way. It is a pleasure working with him and the other members 
of our Committee on Appropriations in the Senate.
  We, I know, stand ready to continue to work to improve this bill, to 
listen to suggestions of Senators for changes. It has been an open 
process, an open, public markup of the bill, an effort to invite 
suggestions from any member of the committee, and now it is open for 
amendment. This is no effort to railroad something through here without 
giving individual Senators the opportunity to carefully consider 
everything in here, to ask questions of those who maybe were 
responsible for the inclusion of certain provisions and the like. We 
are ready to take on these suggestions and consider them carefully to 
improve this bill over the coming days.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, as the Senate turns to the economic 
recovery bill I believe there is a message coming to the Senate from 
Oregon and every corner of our country. The message is that Americans 
do not want a bailout. They do not want a handout. What they want is 
legislation that provides a path out of these very difficult economic 
times.
  I believe that, working together this week, Democrats and Republicans 
can start building that path. I want to stress that I am especially 
interested in working with colleagues on the other side of the aisle on 
this critical legislation.
  I serve on the Senate Finance Committee, led by Chairman Baucus, and 
one of the best additions to this bill has been the relief that it 
provides from the crushing alternative minimum tax. This is a killer 
tax for middle-class folks. It is something, in my view, that we ought 
to get rid of permanently and I have proposed doing that as part of 
comprehensive tax reform. Well, as a result of the bipartisan work on 
this legislation in the Finance Committee, there is going to be relief 
from the AMT for hard-hit, middle-class families.
  There has also been important bipartisan work on the legislation's 
approach to infrastructure financing. A member of the Senate Republican 
leadership, Senator Thune of South Dakota, has worked with me to craft 
legislation called Build America Bonds, which uses a tax credit 
approach to bonds to wring more value from every dollar that's made 
available for infrastructure. The economic recovery bill includes a tax 
credit bond provision that is similar to our legislation, although not 
quite the same, and I will continue to push to improve it.
  I believe there are other ideas we are going to focus on, on the 
floor of the Senate, that will bring Democrats and Republicans 
together. A number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have 
stressed the need to expand the legislation's support for homeowners 
and home buyers, to help make sure that people who want to stay in 
their homes and who are trying to buy a home can get additional relief. 
I am very pleased that colleagues on both sides of the aisle have come 
together to work on these kinds of ideas.
  For this week, I think there are several key principles that we ought 
to focus on. One that I feel especially strongly about is rewarding 
success. Instead of subsidizing failure, this legislation takes an 
approach that, in fact, rewards success.
  A prime example is the extension, for 3 years, of the renewable 
energy production tax credit. To get this tax credit, energy companies 
actually have to produce energy. As a result, American taxpayers will 
get something back

[[Page 2323]]

for their hard-earned money. That is the kind of accountability that I 
think the American people have a right to expect.
  I think the legislation rewards enterprise, and I am very pleased 
about the bill's provision to provide enhanced writeoffs under section 
179 for small businesses that invest in plants and equipment.
  Ultimately, what it comes down to is providing relief for middle-
class folks so they can get assistance during these difficult times.
  For example, there has been discussion of the bill's supports for 
health information technology. One big reason that middle-class folks 
cannot get ahead is that their medical costs gobble up their paychecks 
and one of the reasons that medical costs have skyrocketed is that 
there are so many errors in the health care system--errors and 
inefficiencies, such as duplicative tests. It seems to me that by 
investing in health information technology, you make a downpayment on a 
long-term strategy for holding down medical costs and that is 
extraordinarily important to middle-class folks. So we will be talking 
about this issue more.
  I note the presence of the distinguished chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee. One of the reasons I am confident we can 
approach this issue in a bipartisan way is because that is how the 
chairman of the Appropriations Committee has always worked. That has 
also been the case with Senator Cochran, Chairman Baucus, and Senator 
Grassley.
  We are open to the best possible ideas. That is why President Obama, 
to his credit, has been reaching out. As far as I can tell, he has that 
phone practically attached to his ear talking to colleagues and saying: 
Bring us your best ideas. We have tried in the Senate Finance 
Committee, as Chairman Inouye has done in the Appropriations Committee, 
to start incorporating good ideas, whether they come from the 
Republican side of the aisle or the Democratic side.
  I think we can improve this bill even more. But because it rewards 
success, because it rewards enterprise, because there are already good 
ideas that both parties support, I would urge colleagues to use this 
week, working with our chairs and with the Obama administration, to 
come together--because my view is, as I articulated, that the public 
does want a path out of these terrible economic times. We have a chance 
to make it clear that this is not a bailout, that it is not a handout, 
but rather the start of a path out of this tough economic period.
  I hope our colleagues will use this week, under the leadership of the 
chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Chairman Baucus of the 
Finance Committee, and the ranking minority members, to make sure that 
by the end of this week we have shown the American people that this 
important legislation on recovery and investment is moving forward--to 
deal with the critical needs of those we represent at home.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, as we begin the process of our 
discussions and debate on legislation to revitalize our Nation's 
economy, I want to take this opportunity to underscore the points I 
made on Tuesday of last week as we undertook the markup of the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.
  As I indicated, it is my belief that we all support the central goals 
of the legislation, which include the creation of jobs, the rebuilding 
of America's infrastructure, improving our children's education, moving 
toward energy independence, improving our health care system, and 
lessening the burden that this crisis has brought to the most 
vulnerable among us.
  As you well know, beginning in 1987, I served for 19 years as the 
chairman and vice chairman of the Senate's Committee on Indian 
Affairs--and in that capacity I came to know a group of American 
citizens who have clearly been the most vulnerable amongst us--the 
indigenous, native people of the United States--American Indians, 
Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians.
  President Obama projects that in the near term, the nationwide 
unemployment rate could reach 10 percent. But for many of our Nation's 
First Americans, an unemployment rate of 10 percent in their 
communities would signal a giant step forward--given average 
unemployment rates in Indian country that range from 50 to 90 percent.
  The infrastructure on many Indian reservations is not only in need of 
rebuilding--in most parts of Indian country, infrastructure is so 
sorely lacking or simply nonexistent, that it must be built for the 
first time. Members of Congress have come to this realization time and 
again, as we have enacted scores of settlements of Indian land and 
water claims over the years, and ratified agreements between State and 
tribal governments--only to find that there is none of the necessary 
infrastructure that would enable the delivery of water to tribal lands, 
nor the jobs associated with the establishment of businesses on tribal 
lands.
  In Indian country, another goal that this bill seeks to accomplish--
stimulating the private sector through public sector spending--Federal 
funding has rarely been able to achieve. And that phenomenon is also 
fundamentally a function of the lack of infrastructure--adequate roads, 
safe water supplies, access to commercial and transportation corridors, 
good schools and access to quality health care. These are the critical 
components if we are ever to successfully encourage private sector 
investment in Native America through public funding.
  There are vast natural resources that remain untapped in Indian 
country--wind energy, hydropower, solar energy, and other sources of 
clean, renewable energy--undeveloped in large part because of the lack 
of infrastructure and lack of access to electric transmission lines. 
The same is true for those things most Americans have come to take for 
granted--basic connections to the outside world, such telephone 
service, access to the Internet and broadband services, public health 
and safety broadcast systems. A transition to digital television isn't 
a challenge to those who have no electricity.
  Safe and affordable housing, running water, potable water, a source 
of heat--these aren't givens in Indian country as they are elsewhere in 
America.
  So tribal governments have taken matters into their own hands--they 
have sought to restore their federally recognized status, to reacquire 
the lands that were lost through the opening of Indian reservations to 
homesteading and the treaty-making process, and to reconsolidate their 
traditional tribal land bases, so that in turn, they can develop a 
geographic base upon which to build and sustain economic growth and the 
means to effectively serve--through tribal government programs and 
services--all of those who reside on tribal lands--not just the 
citizens of their governments.
  But our Federal bureaucracies--as well intentioned and well meaning 
as they may have been--have stood in the way of the tribal governments' 
efforts to achieve this economic growth and development of Native 
communities and those communities which surround them, and I believe 
that the scope of this bill must be inclusive enough to embrace 
initiatives that are designed to remedy not only centuries-old problems 
but to fulfill the commitments that we have made in a host of land and 
water claims settlements, in agreements involving State and tribal 
governments, and most importantly in our treaties with the Indian 
nations.
  Accordingly I will look forward to working with my colleagues to 
assure that this bill does not inadvertently place obstacles in the 
paths of those who seek to become self-sufficient and self-sustaining--
those who have faithfully served our country and placed themselves in 
harm's way in the defense of our country in larger proportions than any 
other group of Americans--this Nation's First Americans, the Native 
people of the United States of America.
  Madam President, I want to inform the Senate that neither S. 336 as 
reported to the Senate nor division A of the Inouye-Baucus substitute 
amendment to H.R. 1, Senate amendment numbered 98, contains any 
congressional directed spending items as defined in rule XLIV of the 
Standing

[[Page 2324]]

Rules of the Senate. I can also inform the Senate that division B of 
the amendment, prepared by the Committee on Finance, contains no 
limited tax benefit, limited tariff benefits, or congressional directed 
spending items as defined in rule XLIV.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________