[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2027-2028]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             THE SEQUESTER

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, Rick's departure from the Senate Armed 
Services Committee comes during a trying time for our Nation's 
military, as deep across-the-board spending cuts are set to strike 
hundreds of thousands of civilian employees at the Defense Department 
who will be furloughed in the coming weeks and months. Families and 
businesses across the country are also bracing for the pain of deep 
cuts in programs that keep our food safe, our water clean, and our 
borders secure.
  But it is not too late to avert these damaging cuts, and cuts for 
which the overwhelming majority of Republicans in both the House and 
Senate voted--174 in the House, 28 here in the Senate. We believe we 
have a balanced plan to remove the threat of the sequester, fully paid 
for.
  Our proposal would reduce the deficit by making smart spending cuts, 
and it would also close wasteful tax loopholes allowing companies that 
outsource jobs to China or India to claim tax deductions for doing so.
  Our plan would stop wasteful subsidies to farmers, some of whom don't 
even farm anymore. That is right, there are some farmers who grew rice 
decades ago, who still get payments from the Federal Government for 
rice they do not grow. Chairman Stabenow has led the effort to make 
sure that won't happen anymore, and that is part of our legislation.
  Our bill would also ask the wealthiest among us--those making, for 
example, $5 million a year--to pay a minimum of 30 percent in taxes. I 
don't think that is too outrageous. It is called the Buffet rule 
because that multibillionaire said he should pay as much in taxes as 
his secretary, which he doesn't. So this legislation would make it more 
fair in that regard.
  Almost 60 percent of Republicans around the country favor this 
balanced approach, revenue from the richest of the rich and continuing 
with governmental cuts. This proposition would ask millionaires and 
billionaires and wealthy corporations to contribute a tiny fraction 
more, as I have already indicated.
  And everybody agrees--Republicans around the country and about 80 
percent of the American people agree--it is the right thing to do. 
Almost 60 percent of Republicans around the country agree it is the 
right thing to do. The only Republicans in America who don't agree are 
those who serve in Congress.
  Republicans in Congress are going after our proposal because it goes 
after their special interests. Now, after days of infighting, Senate 
Republicans have announced their plan. But instead of replacing the 
pain of sequester with something smarter and more responsible, their 
plan would embrace these devastating cuts while abandoning any of the 
responsibility that goes along with them.
  One of the Senators in our caucus we had on Tuesday said the 
Republican plan we thought was coming--and it did--would be like being 
told you have to have three fingers cut off, and their proposal is to 
send this to the President and have him decide which finger is going to 
go first.

[[Page 2028]]

  Republicans call the plan ``flexibility.'' Let's call it what it is: 
It is a punt. They are punting. As President Obama said yesterday, it 
would simply raise the question: ``Do I end funding that helps disabled 
children or poor children? Do I close this naval shipyard or that 
one?''
  The Republican plan is not a solution. And even members of the Senate 
Republican Caucus have questioned the wisdom of this proposal, and they 
have said so publicly. Why would the Republicans, part of the 
legislative branch of government, cede more power to the White House?
  The Republicans should give Congress true flexibility--the 
flexibility to cut wasteful subsidies, the flexibility to close 
unnecessary tax loopholes, and the flexibility to ask the richest of 
the rich to contribute a little bit more. Instead, they have become 
completely inflexible, insisting we risk hundreds of thousands of 
American jobs as well as programs that strengthen families and small 
businesses across the Nation.
  I am sorry to say that should come as no surprise. As usual, the 
Republicans have put the demands of special interests and protection of 
the richest of the rich--people making up to $5 million a year and not 
being asked to contribute 30 percent of what they make--over the needs 
of the American people, especially the middle class.
  Will the Chair announce the business of the day.

                          ____________________