Unemployment Compensation Extension Act Of 2009
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, a few moments ago, the Senator from Illinois was on the Senate floor essentially responding to comments that had been made by the Senator from Iowa, Mr. Grassley, regarding the health care debate and the legislation that has been reported out of the House and that is going to be voted on this week--legislation which is 1,990 pages long.
The Senator from Illinois asked: Where is the Republican bill, if they do not like the Democratic bill? Well, there are a number of Republican bills out there, but I would say to the Senator from Illinois or anybody on the Democratic side who is waiting for Republicans to produce a 2,000-page bill, it is not likely to happen. We don't believe legislating with 2,000-page bills makes a lot of sense when we are talking about one-sixth of the American economy. We believe it makes a lot more sense to approach that in a way that fixes and addresses the problems that exist with the health care economy in this country today in a step-by-step way, not with a huge, massive expansion of the Federal Government in Washington, DC.
The bill that came out of the House last week--at least according to the CBO--was a $1 trillion increase in spending. But that is before it is fully implemented. When it is fully implemented, it will be $2 trillion in additional spending--a massive expansion of the Federal Government in Washington, DC, with massive tax increases on small businesses and working families in this country, massive cuts to Medicare Programs upon which seniors across this country rely and depend. And that doesn't even include what happens if those cuts in Medicare don't happen. And we have reason to believe based on historical patterns they would not happen. Then it probably gets borrowed, and we add more trillions of dollars to the Federal debt--a debt which is already growing at $1 trillion a year every year for the next 10 years.
So we have a massive expansion of government--a $2 trillion expansion of government, massive tax increases, massive cuts to Medicare, and perhaps massive borrowing and additions to the Federal debt. That is what happens with the 2,000-page bill which is being proposed by the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives.
So if the Senator from Illinois or anybody on the other side is waiting for Republicans to produce a 2,000-page bill that expands the government by $2 trillion and raises taxes on small businesses--which are the economic engine of our economy and that will create the jobs and get us back on a path toward recovery--I would suggest they are going to be waiting a very long time.
That isn't to say for 1 minute that there aren't lots of ideas that Republicans are putting forward that will help drive the cost of health care down--contrary to the big government schemes put forward by the other side which, in addition to raising taxes, cutting Medicare, and borrowing more--if you can believe this--increases the cost of health care by raising premiums for everybody who currently has health insurance in this country.
So the 2,000-page bill isn't coming from us. We have a lot of great ideas that we will have an opportunity to debate and amendments we can offer, if and when we get on this bill. But the 2,000-page bills--the massive expansion of the Federal Government in Washington, DC--is not the way we believe we should fix and address the health care economy.
That brings me to my point because in contrast to a 1,990-page bill some are calling reform--which doesn't reform but certainly wrecks one-sixth of the American economy--I have a simple one-page amendment. It is four lines long. I would like to have the opportunity to offer it to the underlying legislation that is a matter of debate on the unemployment insurance extension, which I think most people on both sides of this aisle support. I think both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate believe it makes sense for us to extend unemployment benefits coverage to people who are losing it, and the underlying bill would do that by 14 weeks.
We also believe when a bill comes before the Senate, under the historical practices of the Senate, typically it is open to amendment. That is what makes the Senate different from the House of Representatives. Our Founders, in their infinite wisdom, conceived of two institutions--one, the House of Representatives; two, the Senate. The Senate has a more deliberative role. In doing so, it allows for open consideration and debate and votes on amendments.
What has happened today is that the majority leader has decided to fill the tree; in other words, not to allow votes on any amendments. So my one-page amendment, which is very simple and straightforward, isn't going to get voted on.
Mr. President, all my amendment does is end, on December 31 of this year, TARP. If the Congress doesn't take action, the Treasury Secretary can extend TARP. What is important to note about that is TARP
has over $200 billion that hasn't been spent, and with payments that have come back into that fund, over $300 billion in funds that are unexpended. If we don't spend those--and it doesn't become a political slush fund to be spent on other priorities the Federal Government in Washington comes up with--that goes to pay down the Federal debt.
I can't think of anything more important now than trying to pay down the Federal debt. If we are worrying about trying to help the economy recover and helping taxpayers, let's take the unobligated balance in the TARP fund, end that program at the end of the year, and use those proceeds to apply to the Federal debt so we can start making a dent in these massive deficits and this massive debt building in Washington, DC.
So that is all my amendment does. It just ends TARP at the end of the year. I think it is significant that since Congress created TARP, Congress ought to have a say in whether it gets extended. If we are going to have that say, it has to happen between now and the end of the year.
I couldn't find many opportunities between now and the end of the year to get this amendment offered, and as we had this piece of legislation moving through the Senate, the sort of natural inclination of this institution is to allow for amendments to be considered. So I offered that amendment so that Congress can be on the record as to whether we think TARP ought to be extended or whether it ought to be ended and those unobligated balances be used to pay down the Federal debt, which, as I said, is growing at $1 trillion a year for the next 10 years.
So I think it is a very straightforward, simple amendment, and simple enough that it can be put on one page. It doesn't take 1,990 pages to explain this. That is all it does. I think it is important to the taxpayers that we have this vote and that the Senate be on the record, that we be heard with respect to whether we think TARP ought to be extended or not, since Congress created TARP a year ago to bring stabilization to the financial services industry of this country.
That having been accomplished, it seems to me the next step ought to be to focus on getting the Federal debt under control and paying down the debt. We can do that by taking those unexpended balances and the unobligated balances in TARP and put those toward the Federal debt.
What is being done today is filling the tree and preventing us from having votes in the Senate. It has been done before; it is not like this is entirely new. But it is important to bear in mind what my colleagues on the other side have said in the past when it was done back when the Republicans were in charge of the Senate. I want to quote what some of the Democrats who are in leadership positions in the Senate today said back then.
This is in February of 2006.
This is a very bad practice. It runs against the basic nature of the Senate.
That was Senator HARRY REID.
This is a bad way, in my opinion, to run the Senate.
HARRY REID in March of 2006.
I have a right, under the procedures of the Senate, to offer this amendment. I should have the right to offer it at the moment, but I am not because there is--I guess the word ``obstruction'' is to be used--obstruction at the moment is the tree is filled so that no one can offer an amendment.
That was Senator BYRON DORGAN back in February 2006.
If you don't want to cast controversial votes, don't run for the Senate. That is what this is all about. You have to face the music and face the voters.
That was the Senator from Illinois, DICK DURBIN, back in May of 2006.
Those are just a few examples of what my colleagues on the other side have said about the very practice that is being employed by the leader today to prevent Republicans from offering amendments. Those are statements, as I said, made by Members of the now majority back when they were in the minority.
So we are going to have a cloture vote at 5 o'clock--in a few minutes--on whether to proceed to this substitute that is pending before us and whether we are going to allow this practice of filling the amendment tree to be used to prevent not only Members on the Republican side but Members on the Democratic side from offering amendments.
Filling the tree is, as I said, not without precedent. It has been done. But it has been used rarely, historically, up until now. This will mark the 22nd time the Democratic leader has filled the amendment tree in an attempt to prevent an open and fair debate and a vote on amendments that are offered by the Senate.
I served as a Member of the House of Representatives for three terms. There, the Rules Committee regulates what legislation comes to the floor, what amendments are made in order, how much time is allocated to each amendment, and it is an orderly process. That is the way the House was designed by our Founders.
The Senate is a very different institution. The Senate is supposed to be the place where we have open debate, where we have a fair process that allows amendments to be heard and allows amendments to be voted on. I think we have been very reasonable in seeking to offer amendments to the underlying unemployment insurance bill. But as I said, Mr. President, the majority leader has chosen to ``fill the amendment tree'' and thereby prevent those amendments from being offered, those amendments from being debated, and those amendments from being voted on.
Mr. President, I know the Senator from Nebraska is here as well. He also has an amendment he would like to offer that would offset in a different way the extension of the unemployment coverage to the people who are losing their coverage and should have their benefits extended by the additional 14 weeks. His is an amendment I also think should be voted on in the Senate.
But I would like an opportunity to have this amendment voted on. It is one page. But we will not have that opportunity because the majority leader has opted to fill the amendment tree and prevent votes on those amendments.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source