[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 18931-18934]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              SENIORS AND VETERANS EMERGENCY BENEFITS ACT

  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, the clock is ticking. Exactly 1 month from 
today, on January 1, approximately 70 million seniors, veterans, 
Americans with disabilities, and others who depend on Social Security 
and other benefits will get their first check of the new year. For 
those 70 million Americans--that is 1 in 5 Americans--January 1 is 
supposed to be a day of relief. This is the day when the Federal 
Government boosts their checks just a little bit to help with the 
rising costs of housing, food, and medical care. But unless Congress 
does something right now, for just the third time since 1975, seniors 
and veterans won't be receiving any cost-of-living increase on January 
1--not one penny more.
  Look at who gets left out in the cold. Two-thirds of seniors depend 
on Social Security for the majority of their income. For 15 million 
Americans, Social Security is all that stands between them and poverty, 
but not one of these Americans will see an extra penny next year, and 
millions of other Americans whose benefits are pegged to Social 
Security--millions who receive veterans' benefits, disability benefits, 
and other monthly payments--won't see an extra penny either.
  Times are tough, but not for everyone. Last year, the CEOs at the 
biggest 350 American companies received, on average, a 3.9-percent pay 
increase. How much money is that? Since the average CEO at one of those 
top 350 companies made a cool $16.3 million, a 3.9-percent raise landed 
them an additional half million bucks each. Everything is just great 
for America's top CEOs, who got huge raises, while 70 million seniors, 
veterans, and others who worked hard will be left with nothing. Why? It 
is not an accident. It is not inevitable. It is the result of 
deliberate policies made right here in Congress.
  Social Security is supposed to be indexed to inflation so that when 
prices go up, benefits go up. But Congress's formula looks at the 
spending patterns of only about a quarter of the country, and the 
formula isn't geared to what older Americans actually spend their money 
on. In fact, official estimates show that the cost of core goods and 
services has increased, but seniors won't be getting a raise. Costs go 
forward while Social Security falls behind all because of the way that 
Congress says to calculate COLAs.
  Skyrocketing CEO pay is also, in part, the result of policies set 
right here in Congress. Taxpayers subsidize CEOs' huge pay packages 
through billions of dollars in tax giveaways, including a crazy 
loophole that allows corporations to write off gigantic bonuses as 
business expenses. Sure, companies should make their own decisions on 
how much to pay their executives, but because of laws Congress has 
passed, American taxpayers are forced to subsidize these multimillion-
dollar pay packages.
  These two decisions--how to calculate Social Security raises and 
whether to give tax breaks for multimillion-dollar CEO bonuses--are 
made right here in Congress, and right now Senators bow and scrape for 
highly paid CEOs while they turn their backs on retirees and vets. We 
are here because it is time for Congress to make different choices.
  Representative Tammy Duckworth and I have introduced the Seniors And 
Veterans Emergency Benefits Act, or the SAVE Benefits Act, to give 
retirees, veterans, and Americans with disabilities a one-time payment 
of about $581. That is the equivalent of a 3.9-percent increase over 
the average Social Security benefit--the same percentage raise CEOs 
received just last year.
  Where would the money come from? Well, we can pay for it by closing 
the tax loophole for CEO bonuses that exceed $1 million. In fact, 
according to the Chief Actuary of the Social Security Administration, 
closing just this one loophole will create enough revenue to give a 
$581 raise to seniors and vets and still have billions of dollars left 
over to help boost the Social Security trust fund for the future.
  The SAVE Benefits Act would give seniors, vets, and the disabled an 
extra $581 a year. That $581 a year may not mean much to a CEO, but 
that money will cover almost 3 months of groceries for seniors or a 
year's worth of out-of-pocket costs on prescription drugs for someone 
on Medicare. For seniors and vets, that $581 means a lot.
  Already, 21 Democratic Senators have signed on as cosponsors. Dozens 
of organizations--Social Security Works, the AFL-CIO, MoveOn.org, the 
National Organization For Women, VoteVets, the National Council of La 
Raza, and I could go on and on with this list--have already endorsed 
the bill. Across the country, more than 400,000 people have signed 
petitions urging Congress to pass the SAVE Benefits Act.
  This is about money, but it is also about values. For too long, we 
have listened to a handful of the rich and powerful insist that we cut 
taxes for those at the top and leave everyone else behind. And now, 
across this country, people are saying: Enough. Taxpayers should not be 
forced to subsidize millionaire CEOs while seniors and vets have to 
fight for whatever scraps are left behind.
  The clock is ticking. It is time for Congress to step up. The money 
is there--either way. It can go for a payment to 70 million Americans 
who need it and who have earned it or it can go to CEOs and the 
wealthiest corporations.
  Let's vote on the SAVE Benefits Act. Let's show everyone where we 
stand--whether we stand up for tax breaks for the country's most highly 
paid CEOs or whether we work for the seniors and vets who worked their 
hearts out to build this country.
  Senator McConnell, brings this bill to the floor and let us vote.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, last month I joined Senator Warren and 
others in introducing the Seniors And Veterans Emergency Benefits Act, 
also known as the SAVE Benefits Act. This legislation is needed because 
for the first time in over 40 years, our seniors, veterans, and people 
with disabilities won't receive a cost-of-living adjustment, or a COLA, 
for 2016. We are here again to urge our colleagues to support this much 
needed legislation that would provide a 3.9-percent COLA increase next 
year. There is a reason we hit upon the 3.9-percent number as the 
appropriate increase. I will get to that.
  Many of our people who rely on Social Security and other Federal 
benefits are on fixed incomes. Every extra dollar helps them buy basic 
necessities. These Americans worked hard and earned modest benefits. 
However, based on the current benefit formula this year, they are out 
of luck. They won't see any increase in their income.
  But here is the thing. That is not the case for our Nation's top 
CEOs. According to analysis by the Economic Policy

[[Page 18932]]

Institute, CEOs of some of America's biggest, richest corporations not 
only earn an average of $16 million per year, but they received a 3.9-
percent salary bump in 2014; hence our 3.9-percent COLA increase for 
recipients of the SAVE Benefits Act.
  What does a 3.9-percent increase mean to these CEOs? About $635,000 
more a year in their pockets--far more than most workers who rely on 
Social Security saw in 1 year or 10 years or perhaps even in their 
lifetimes. By contrast, what does a 3.9-percent increase mean to most 
seniors in Hawaii? About $580 more a year. Again, focusing on Hawaii, 
that is about enough for a Hawaii senior to buy almost 3 months of 
groceries or cover the average cost of a year's worth of prescription 
drugs. So $580 is a big deal for a lot of people in Hawaii.
  This bill would help about 19 percent of Hawaii's population, or 
268,000 people. They include seniors, children, and disabled workers 
who rely on Social Security to make ends meet. It includes 24,000 
veterans and their family members, who would receive an increase to 
their well-earned benefits. That extra payment of $580 would help to 
prevent some 2,000 people in Hawaii from falling into poverty.
  We are hearing from people all across the country about what will 
happen next year without the COLA increase.
  One woman from Lanai City in Hawaii wrote:

       I feel it is deplorable that Social Security did not 
     receive a COLA increase. Many Seniors and poor people rely on 
     this money to help them make it through the month and 
     although I am not one of them I still want to speak for them 
     as I feel it is important.

  This person from Lanai said this is a deplorable situation, and I 
agree. That is why we need to pass the SAVE Benefits Act.
  This bill is paid for by closing a tax loophole that benefits the 
wealthiest CEOs. Remember that $600,000-plus salary increase they got? 
Well, some of that is paid for by taxpayers because of this tax 
loophole.
  This bipartisan idea of closing this tax loophole was even included 
in the former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's 2014 tax 
reform proposal.
  We only have a few days left for Congress to act before the end of 
the year. I urge my colleagues to join me in letting seniors in Hawaii 
and across the country know that we are on their side by cosponsoring 
the SAVE Benefits Act. Let's just think about the disparity--$600,000-
plus increases for CEOs making over $16 million a year versus the 
millions of seniors and veterans and disabled people who rely on Social 
Security and who need and deserve this COLA increase.
  I urge my colleagues to bring the SAVE Benefits Act to the floor for 
a vote, vote on it, and send it on to President Obama for his 
signature.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Ayotte). The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, today I wish to join my colleagues in 
strong support of the SAVE Benefits Act. I wish to commend the 
excellent work done by my friend and the Senator from Massachusetts, 
Ms. Warren.
  Millions of seniors and veterans deserve a little more money in their 
Social Security checks at the beginning of every year to help pay for 
the ever-increasing costs of rent and medicine and groceries. They 
earned it. The SAVE Benefits Act would provide a fair and well-deserved 
payment to our seniors receiving Social Security and veterans receiving 
Federal benefits who will not see a cost-of-living adjustment in their 
benefits next year. You see, next year there will be no official cost-
of-living adjustment or COLA chiefly because the formula that 
determines it is heavily tied to the price of gasoline, which is low, 
but all the other cost-of-living indicators are up, including rent, 
medicine, and groceries. These are the costs our seniors are juggling 
most often.
  I talk to seniors. They say: What is this? There is no inflation? My 
life costs me more each year--considerably more.
  But because there was no official COLA even as those costs are going 
up, Social Security benefits will not increase by a single dime in 
2016. And about two-thirds of seniors rely on Social Security for over 
half of their income.
  If we don't help offset the increase in costs with an increase in 
these modest benefits, many people will be left with one of these 
excruciating choices: Do I buy more groceries or pay the rent this 
month? Can I afford putting off taking my medication for another day or 
another week or even another month?
  In the past, when we had years without an official COLA, Congress 
stepped in. In 2009 there wasn't a COLA. We were in the throes of 
recession. But Congress stepped in and passed a law I strongly 
supported--the ARRA--to provide a one-time $250 payment to Social 
Security recipients and veterans to help them get through those tough 
times. Next year, we should do the same. But I hasten to add--I don't 
like to be partisan--in 2009 the House and Senate were Democratic, 
caring about Social Security. In 2015 the House and Senate are 
Republican, and we are getting no relief for seniors. Well, I hope that 
will change. The SAVE Benefits Act would change it. It would provide a 
one-time check of approximately $580 for our veterans and our seniors 
and fully pay for it by closing a loophole that benefits corporate 
compensation packages over $1 million. To boot, it would provide this 
benefit while also using some of the revenue to extend the life of 
Social Security.
  In my State, over 4 million people would benefit--nearly 1.5 million 
women over the age of 65, a quarter of a million children, and half a 
million disabled workers in New York alone.
  If we think about it in real terms, that $580 is almost 3 months of 
groceries or the average annual out-of-pocket expenses that a senior 
has for prescription drugs for Medicare.
  This is the right thing to do. Social Security and veterans' benefits 
should rise to keep pace with prices, but unless Congress acts, our 
seniors and our veterans will not see any increase in their own 
benefits next year. It is time to fix that.
  I want to ask who on the other side would say millionaires should 
continue to get to deduct their bonuses while senior citizens get no 
COLA. What percentage of Republicans in America would say that? What 
percentage of Independents?
  This should not be a partisan issue. We should just pass it and help 
the seniors as we did in 2009 when the Congress was under different 
control. This is a real test of who cares for the seniors, who 
understands their struggles, and who understands the sweat seniors 
break out in when they have to pay the bills and they don't have enough 
money to pay basic expenses. Well, those who cosponsored this bill 
understand. Those who support this bill understand. I would like to 
hear from my colleagues who don't support it what their alternative is.
  I urge my colleagues on the other side to join us in extending to our 
seniors and our veterans a fair increase in benefits that they earned.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  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.
  Mr. LEAHY. I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer, my neighbor 
in New Hampshire.
  I also want to thank Senator Warren for her leadership on a matter of 
great importance to millions of Americans. In October, Social Security 
beneficiaries received some upsetting news. I know it is upsetting to a 
lot of Vermonters, as I have talked to them in grocery stores, on 
street corners, and even coming out of church on Sunday. For the third 
time in 40 years, the Social Security Administration announced that in 
2016, Social Security payments will not include a cost-of-living 
increase. Unless Congress acts, seniors and others who receive Social 
Security benefits will not see an additional dime in payments in the 
new year.

[[Page 18933]]

  For the nearly two-thirds of beneficiaries who depend on Social 
Security for at least half of their income, and for the 24 percent of 
those where Social Security is the sole source of income, this news is 
not just distressing, it is devastating.
  I will not take the time here, but I could tell so many stories of 
what Vermonters have told me, and I share their concerns. In order to 
address this issue, I am proud to stand with thousands of Vermonters 
and millions of Americans to support Senator Warren's bill to provide 
Social Security recipients, those who receive disability benefits, and 
veterans, among others, a one-time payment next year. This payment 
would be equivalent to the average increase of 3.9 percent--
incidentally the same pay increase top CEOs in the United States saw 
last year.
  Many in Congress have turned a blind eye to the problems facing 
Social Security, arguing the idea that we as a country cannot possibly 
afford to spend resources on our seniors, but every year hard-working 
Americans subsidize billions of dollars in tax subsidies for corporate 
CEOs. By no longer allowing corporations to receive tax deductions for 
performance pay packages for their executives, we could give a one-time 
emergency payment to our Nation's seniors, and we could increase the 
solvency of the Social Security trust fund without adding a penny to 
the deficit. It is a win-win. It is a matter of priorities.
  Are we as a country going to support the millions of Americans who 
depend upon Social Security to make ends meet? Or are we going to 
continue to allow the country's top CEOs, whose average salary in 2014 
topped $16 million each, to continue to rake in billions of dollars 
thanks to the performance pay tax loophole? The choice should be clear. 
If these CEOs want to make more money, fine, but don't do it using a 
special tax loophole.
  Social Security is an immensely important program, one that has 
helped millions of Americans stay out of poverty once entering 
retirement. This program has always 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 or to supplement individual 
retirement savings or pensions. Support for this bill represents a 
continuing commitment to our Nation's seniors and also those with 
disabilities in an uncertain economy.
  I hope we can redouble our commitment to seniors, veterans, and those 
with disabilities in this country by passing this important 
legislation. It is the least we can do.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. MARKEY. Thank you, Madam President, very much.
  I am very proud to be a cosponsor of the SAVE Benefits Act. I think 
we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Senator Warren, my colleague 
from Massachusetts, for the legislation she has introduced because she 
is going to make sure the Social Security benefits for seniors, for 
veterans, and for those who are disabled will be protected, and I 
applaud her for the enormously innovative way she has framed this 
debate for our Nation.
  The Social Security Administration has recently determined that 
seniors will not receive an increase in their benefits for the next 
year. That means approximately 70 million American seniors, veterans, 
and the disabled will not receive any increase in their benefits, 
including the 1.4 million people in Massachusetts who are dependent 
upon these benefits. That is completely unacceptable. What Senator 
Warren has done is to say that for these seniors, for many of them, 
Social Security is their sole basis for having any income at all, and 
for most seniors it is the majority of their income in their 
retirement. Those seniors depend on these benefits to pay for food, 
rent, medicine, and the electricity bill. In their world, prices for 
food, clothing, and medicine are not going down, they are going up. 
These are the necessities of life, and our seniors should not have to 
choose between eating and heating.
  We have a simple question to ask ourselves: Who contributed most to 
our country over the last generation? Is it a small handful of CEOs who 
are now paid exorbitant salaries or is it every American who got up 
every morning to build us into this incredible country we now live in? 
I think it was grandma and grandpa. Those are the people who got up 
every day. Those are the people who built this great country. Right now 
we are being told that their standard of living is going to stay the 
same or go down. There will be no increase for them.
  Well, unfortunately CEOs in America make about 273 times what the 
average American worker makes. Last year America's CEOs saw their pay 
increase by about $635,000 to an average of $16 million. A family in 
the top 1 percent has a net worth 288 times higher than the typical 
family. That is unacceptable and it must change.
  Shouldn't our seniors--shouldn't grandma and grandpa who built this 
country receive an additional benefit from the economy which they 
created--this incredible wealth which they created in our country. When 
do they get their raise? They got up every morning.
  My father worked for the Hood Milk Company. He got up every morning. 
He worked as hard as a human being can work, and so have hundreds of 
millions of Americans. They built this country with their hard work. 
They deserve a Social Security raise. They deserve a wage if they now 
have disabilities. If they are veterans, they not only got up and 
worked every single day, but they also saved our country, many of them 
overseas protecting us against our enemies. So that is what Senator 
Warren's very wise piece of legislation
focuses on. We know grandma and grandpa deserve a raise. We know the 
system that has been created allows those in the upper 1 percentile to 
continue to receive per year, on average, $685,000 in raises--up to an 
average of $16 million for salary. And we are saying to people who did 
the work: You don't get a raise at all.
  I think for their sacrifice, for their hard work every single day, 
they deserve something. They built the greatest country in the history 
of the world. So let's give our seniors the 3.9-percent raise that 
Senator Warren has proposed. Let's give them the kind of comfort they 
deserve for a lifetime of hard work, and let's thank Senator Warren for 
reminding all of us of the obligation we have to those great Americans, 
so we don't forget them when it comes time at the end of the year to 
hand out bonuses. They deserve bonuses in the same way we know CEOs 
across our country, from Wall Street to Silicon Valley, are going to 
receive every year. We shouldn't turn our backs on those seniors.
  Thank you, Senator Warren, for all your great work.
  Madam President, I yield back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Madam President, we are just 1 month away from the new 
year 2016, which will bring a lot of good new things, I hope. The one 
thing it will not bring is a cost-of-living increase for seniors, 
veterans, and for people with disabilities. Despite the fact that the 
costs of health care, prescription drugs, and housing are increasing, 
the size of a Social Security check will not go up 1 cent on January 1, 
unless we act--unless Congress acts.
  That is why Senator Warren, my colleagues, and I have introduced the 
Senior And Veterans Emergency Benefits Act or SAVE Benefits Act. The 
SAVE Benefits Act is a one-time payment to seniors and veterans 
receiving their earned benefits so they can better meet their basic 
living expenses.
  The stagnant level for benefits in 2016 and its damaging effects are 
part of the bigger problem. Too many of our seniors are feeling the 
squeeze and just aren't secure enough in their retirement. Today's 
Social Security benefits are not enough to live on, and other 
retirement savings aren't filling the gap. You see, the share of 
private sector workers with pensions has fallen precipitously in recent 
years, and yet half of all Americans don't have retirement accounts or 
401(k) plans or IRAs.

[[Page 18934]]

  So without sufficient pensions or retirement accounts, many seniors 
depend on Social Security. Social Security benefits comprise over 90 
percent of income for the poorest 25 percent of retirees. Social 
Security comprises 70 percent of income for the middle 50 percent of 
retirees. With the cost of things seniors have to spend money on 
increasing, the absence of a cost-of-living increase in Social Security 
benefits is especially damaging.
  I have heard from many Minnesota seniors who are worried about the 
squeeze that no increase in Social Security will put on their budgets. 
Jeff from Minneapolis wrote: ``Food prices are up and my rent is up 4 
percent in 2015 and will be up again in 2016.'' He continues: ``I lost 
most of my IRA earnings in the 2008-2009 debacle and now I rely almost 
entirely on Social Security.''
  If we want Minnesotans like Jeff--and millions of Americans across 
the country facing similar situations--to have a secure retirement, we 
need to increase these benefits. That is what the SAVE Benefits Act 
does. Under our bill, seniors and veterans have a 3.9-percent 
increase--the same percentage increase that CEO pay went up from 2013 
to 2014. For the average beneficiary, a 3.9-percent raise would come to 
about $580 a year.
  While that $580 may not sound like a lot compared, of course, to the 
raises that CEOs are getting, $580 can make a big difference to the 
average American, especially the average senior. The $580 may cover 
several months of groceries or out-of-pocket costs for prescription 
drugs for a senior on Medicare who has gone into their doughnut hole.
  Some may ask if we can afford to give seniors and veterans a raise 
right now. Too often the ideas we have heard for ``fixing'' Social 
Security focus on cutting benefits, such as reducing cost-of-living 
increases by using chained CPI or raising the retirement age, but I 
think that is the wrong approach. We shouldn't cut our way to solvency. 
We need to strengthen our Social Security System by protecting and 
enhancing the benefits that seniors and veterans have earned, and that 
means improving Social Security's finances. A good place to start is by 
removing special provisions to the wealthiest Americans in our current 
Tax Code.
  Right now, individuals making millions of dollars a year still pay 
payroll tax only on the first $118,500 of their income. Over the long 
term, that is the sort of thing we need to address in order to 
strengthen Social Security.
  This bill proposes to pay for the one-time increase of Social 
Security benefits in the same spirit--rebalancing our Tax Code by 
ending a tax deduction for CEO pay that doesn't make sense and allows 
corporations to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. CEOs and big 
businesses will still do just fine under this bill.
  At the same time, the SAVE Benefits Act will provide critical 
assistance to Americans struggling to meet their expenses. In fact, 
this increase in benefits will lift about 8,000 Minnesotans out of 
poverty and thousands more in every State of our Union.
  Ultimately, the debate over this bill comes down to priorities. What 
is more important to us--protecting high pay for the wealthiest 
Americans or tax deductions for corporations on that high pay or 
ensuring that veterans, seniors, and people with disabilities have the 
income security they need to pay for health care, prescription drugs, 
and housing?
  As this year comes to a close, it is time to get our priorities 
straight and to stand up for our seniors and our veterans. They need a 
raise in 2016.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I am here to join the chorus for 
providing some additional help to our seniors on Social Security. What 
can I say? Here we go again. In 2010 and in 2011, America's seniors 
were told by the Social Security Administration there would be no cost-
of-living adjustment, no increase for them, and now it is happening a 
third time. We all know that the price of the things seniors actually 
buy has continued to go up, and yet no COLA.
  In 2010 and 2011 we tried to remedy that with Senator Sanders' 
Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act. We did not succeed. There was 
opposition from the other side.
  We did succeed at getting a one-time $300 payment to seniors under 
the Economic Stimulus Act in 2008, back in the depths of the great Wall 
Street recession, and another $250 under the Recovery Act. So we have 
done this before, and it has helped. I strongly encourage that we do 
it.
  There is a flaw built into the Social Security COLA, which is that 
the CPI measures things that a lot of seniors don't buy. It measures 
laptops, it measures flat screens, and it measures a lot of technology, 
but seniors in Rhode Island who make a little over $1,200 from Social 
Security on average aren't buying a lot of flat screen TVs and they are 
not buying a lot of laptops. What they are buying is fuel, medicines, 
food, and maybe something for the grandchildren at Christmastime, and 
all of that keeps going up.
  We should fix that formula. There should be a CPI-E, a CPI for 
elderly folks that tracks what they actually spend and not some 
hypothetical CPI that spreads across all age groups. That would be the 
ultimate fix, but in the meantime, we should do this. I think it is 
paid for very sensibly.
  I commend Senator Warren. We established as a country that beyond $1 
million in executive compensation, it wasn't going to be tax deductible 
any longer. If you are a big corporation and you want to pay your CEO 
more than $1 million--fine, you still do that, but you don't get to 
have the American taxpayer kick in for the more-than-$1 million salary.
  So what did corporate America do? They took it out of salary and they 
moved it over to bonuses. Now you have those big bonuses over $1 
million. They dodged that exemption, and now the American taxpayer is 
back on the hook again to kick in for a $1 million-plus compensation 
package for a corporate CEO. Come on. We ought to be able to get beyond 
that.
  So we have a way to pay for it that is fair, sensible, and consistent 
with the policy that we have already agreed on as a nation, which is 
that above $1 million in compensation, taxpayers shouldn't be kicking 
in any longer to help the company pay those exorbitant salaries. I 
think we have a very good way to spend those resources, which is 
helping seniors who now--for the third time since I have been in the 
Senate--are getting a zero COLA while everything goes up around them.
  I commend Senator Warren for taking the lead, and I am pleased to be 
a cosponsor on her bill.
  I am delighted to yield back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. Madam President, I appreciate the colleagues who came to 
the floor today to talk about the SAVE Benefits Act.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 
up to 20 minutes in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________