[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 6914-6915]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, during consideration of the Omnibus 
Appropriations Act, members of the minority party attempted to attach 
amendments in an effort to delay passage of this important bill. 
Because further delay in

[[Page 6915]]

passing this bill could have resulted in the shutdown of the Federal 
Government, I voted against all amendments to the bill.
  I believe that this omnibus bill is important for job growth and will 
help revitalize our economy. That must be our concern at this critical 
time.
  I would like to clarify my position of some of these amendments:
  Amendment 630 would have required the Secretary of State to report on 
whether additional military aid to Egypt could be used to counter the 
illegal smuggling of weapons into Gaza. The omnibus bill already 
explicitly authorizes the use of military aid provided to Egypt for 
border security programs so the amendment was completely unnecessary.
  Amendment 631 would have prohibited funds for reconstruction efforts 
in Gaza unless the administration certifies that the funds will not be 
diverted to Hamas or entities controlled by Hamas. The Omnibus bill and 
permanent law already prohibit any funds from being provided to Hamas 
or entities controlled by Hamas so this amendment was also completely 
unnecessary.
  Amendment 634 would have prevented funds in this bill from going to 
companies that assist Iran's energy sector. While I have long supported 
tough action against Iran for its illicit nuclear program, sending this 
provision back to the House of Representatives could have endangered 
final passage of the bill.
  Amendment 613 would have cut off all U.S. funding for the United 
Nations if it imposes any tax on any United States person. The U.N. has 
never imposed a tax, is not a taxing organization, and if the U.N. ever 
decided it wanted to impose a tax the U.S. would veto it. This 
amendment is unnecessary.
  Amendment 604 would have extended the E-Verify worker identification 
program for an additional five years. The omnibus bill already contains 
a 6-month extension of this program.
  Amendment 662 would prohibit the use of funds by the Federal 
Communications Commission to promulgate the fairness doctrine. On 
February 26, 2009, I voted in favor of an amendment offered by the 
junior Senator from South Carolina to prevent the FCC from promulgating 
the fairness doctrine. This amendment passed the Senate as part of S. 
160, the Washington, DC voting rights bill. Also, there are no 
provisions in the omnibus bill related to the fairness doctrine, making 
this amendment unnecessary.
  Amendment 604 repeals the provision of the Legislative Reorganization 
Act which grants Members an automatic pay adjustment each year. The 
amendment would take effect beginning December 11, 2010, and would 
require the enactment of new legislation to grant Members a pay raise. 
I believe the junior Senator from Louisiana was doing nothing more than 
playing politics with his amendment, as he objected to passing a stand-
alone bill offered by the Senate majority leader that would have 
accomplished the same goal as the Vitter amendment. I would have 
supported passing the majority leader's bill.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, earlier this week the Senate voted down 
amendment No. 668 offered by my colleague Senator Enzi by a vote of 42 
to 53. I strongly opposed this amendment and am pleased that my 
colleagues defeated this harmful amendment.
  The amendment, if passed, would have cut more than $983,000 in Ryan 
White Part A funding to the city of Hartford, CT, and more than 
$770,000 in funding to the city of New Haven, CT, in fiscal year 2009. 
The Enzi amendment would have forced these cities to absorb a combined 
cut of more than 35 percent to their Ryan White Part A grant in 1 year.
  During floor debate on the Enzi amendment, the amendment was 
represented as a proposal that would simply cut funding from San 
Francisco. That is not the case and if the Enzi amendment had become 
law, thousands of individuals living with HIV/AIDS in the State of 
Connecticut would have been denied direct medical services for the 
treatment of their disease.
  Cuts in funding as envisioned under the Enzi amendment would have 
deprived individuals living with HIV/AIDS in Connecticut access to 
medications, clinics would have to turn away patients, and programs 
would have to make drastic cuts to counseling, transportation, and 
nutrition assistance.
  In fact, 13 cities in Florida, California, New York, New Jersey, 
Puerto Rico, and Connecticut would have seen huge funding cuts under 
the Enzi amendment.
  For the information of my colleagues, the State of Connecticut was 
severely disadvantaged because of the way the last reauthorization was 
handled. Despite receiving assurances and seeing numbers that told a 
different picture, the 2006 reauthorization bill has led to more than 
$3 million in annual losses to Connecticut. The funding provided in the 
omnibus is essential to restoring these cuts.
  It is my sincere hope that we can address the problems underlying the 
cuts to Connecticut when we reauthorize this program which expires this 
year. I find it regretful that the senate had to take up this funding 
fight yesterday because reauthorizations of the Ryan White CARE Act 
program have traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support.
  I want to thank Senators Harkin and Inouye for including the largest 
increase in Part A of Ryan White in 8 years in the fiscal year 2009 
omnibus bill. With the defeat of the Enzi amendment, cities under Part 
A will receive a total increase of more than $25 million.
  I thank my colleagues for defeating this harmful amendment.

                          ____________________