[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 19153-19154]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    EMERGENCY SENIOR CITIZENS RELIEF ACT OF 2010--MOTION TO PROCEED


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 4 minutes of debate equally 
divided prior to the next vote.
  The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I would like a minute and a half, and I 
will yield to Senator Whitehouse the remaining 30 seconds.
  The reality today is that millions of senior citizens and disabled 
vets are hurting. They are spending a whole lot of money on 
prescription drugs, a whole lot of money on health care. Yet for the 
last 2 years they have not gotten any COLA because, in my view, of a 
poor methodology in terms of how we determine COLAs for senior 
citizens.
  What this amendment does is provide a one-time $250 check to senior 
citizens and disabled vets. That is what it does. This amendment is 
supported by AARP, the largest senior group in America; the American 
Legion; Veterans of Foreign Wars; the National Committee to Preserve 
Social Security and Medicare, and virtually every senior group and 
every veterans organization.
  People are wondering how it could be that we could provide $1 million 
in tax breaks to the richest people in this country but we cannot come 
up with $250 for struggling seniors and disabled vets.
  I hope my colleagues will support this important piece of 
legislation.
  I yield to my colleague from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, Rhode Island seniors get an average 
Social Security benefit of $13,500 a year, which makes it tough 
sledding to live on in the cold Northeast in the wintertime.
  The COLA adjustment is misfiring for seniors. Their heating costs go 
up, their prescription costs go up, their pharmaceutical costs go up, 
and we have missed the COLA twice. We fixed it in 2008 with a one-time 
vote. We

[[Page 19154]]

fixed it in 2009 with a one-time vote. Let's please do it again for 
2010 and support Senator Sanders' amendment and not be scrooges to our 
seniors while we are being fabulously generous to megamillionaires.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on October 15, 2010, we learned that next 
year Social Security beneficiaries will not receive a cost of living 
adjustment for the second year in a row because of the economic 
deflation, rather than inflation, our economy experienced in 2010. At a 
time when the economy continues to lag and seniors in Vermont and 
around the country will struggle to afford heat, food, and other daily 
living expenses, I believe strongly that Congress needs to act to help 
seniors who depend upon Social Security benefits.
  For decades, Social Security has represented a strong commitment to 
our Nation's seniors. Ever since Ida May Fuller of Vermont received the 
first Social Security check issued, vulnerable seniors have had a 
safety net to fall back on in retirement and to supplement individual 
retirement savings or pensions. Nearly 70 percent of beneficiaries 
depend on Social Security for at least half of their income, and Social 
Security is the sole source of income for 15 percent of recipients.
  I was proud to join Senator Sanders once again in cosponsoring the 
Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act, which would provide all Social 
Security recipients, railroad retirees, SSI beneficiaries and adults 
receiving veterans' benefits with a one-time additional check for $250 
in 2010, similar to the payment beneficiaries received as a part of the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Today, we have the opportunity 
to move to debate this important emergency relief for America's 
seniors.
  This legislation would benefit 58 million Americans and over 120,000 
Vermonters, far too many of whom have seen a decline in their living 
standards as the economy worsened. The National Committee to Preserve 
Social Security and Medicare Foundation and the Economic Policy 
Institute issued a report this fall that showed similar payments 
included in the Recovery Act to seniors stimulated the economy and was 
an effective job creator. A minority of Senators, however, plan on once 
again blocking this legislation from a full debate in the Senate. The 
minority party seems content to bend over backwards to pass an 
extension of tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, which will add 
hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit, but helping seniors in 
tough economic times is just too costly a proposition. That is 
unfortunate, and I hope for enough support in the Senate to move this 
legislation forward.
  By supporting this bill, Senators have the opportunity to express our 
continued commitment to providing a safety net to our Nation's seniors 
and those with disabilities in this uncertain economy. I urge my fellow 
Senators to support the motion to invoke cloture on the Emergency 
Senior Citizens Relief Act.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we yield back the time on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.
  Pursuant to rule XXII, the clerk will report the motion to invoke 
cloture.
  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, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 655, S. 3985, the Emergency Senior 
     Citizens Relief Act of 2010.
         Harry Reid, Richard J. Durbin, Bernard Sanders, Sherrod 
           Brown, Debbie Stabenow, Sheldon Whitehouse, Patrick J. 
           Leahy, Byron L. Dorgan, John D. Rockefeller, IV, 
           Charles E. Schumer, Al Franken, Barbara A. Mikulski, 
           Jack Reed, Frank R. Lautenberg, Kirsten E. Gillibrand, 
           Mark Begich, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Tom Udall.

  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 S. 3985, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, 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. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. 
Gregg).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 53, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 267 Leg.]

                                YEAS--53

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Conrad
     Coons
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (NM)
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--45

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brown (MA)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagan
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Kirk
     Kyl
     LeMieux
     Lieberman
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Risch
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Thune
     Udall (CO)
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Brownback
     Gregg
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 53, the nays are 
45. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted 
in the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
  The majority leader.

                          ____________________