Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I yield the floor and thank my friends from Texas and Idaho for their indulgence.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to support permanent repeal of the estate tax. Permanent repeal of the estate tax will help boost Montana's economy and will help boost America's economy, create jobs, and protect the heritage of our farmers and ranchers. As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I was proud to help write last year's tax cut, which included a number of good changes to the estate tax, including increasing the unified tax credit and restructuring the rates. Now it is time to go further. As the law currently stands, the estate tax will be fully repealed in 2010. It will return to 2001 levels the next year, 2011. Let us use some common sense. Estate tax is a prime example of a tax that dampens efforts to create more jobs in Montana and across the country, and that is what this is all about, creating more jobs. My State is a small business State, an agricultural State, a State of family-owned farms and ranches, a place where main street businesses are still family owned. It is important to Montanans to be able to pass on their businesses, their farms, their ranches, to their sons and to their daughters. I support the Gramm-Kyl amendment to eliminate the sunset of the estate tax, to permanently repeal the estate tax, to free up money to help families, family-owned businesses, farms, and ranches. Permanent repeal of the estate tax will allow families to better plan particularly for the continuity of their estates. Our family-owned businesses, farms, and ranches are the backbone of my State. I do not know another State that is a more small business State than mine. It is also the backbone of America, I might add--small business. Family-owned businesses are our country's heritage, and it is up to us to protect that heritage. Full, permanent repeal is the right thing to do for our farmers, for our ranchers, for hard-working small business owners. It is the right thing to do for the Nation, and most certainly permanent repeal is the right thing to do for Montana. I urge the Senate to support permanent repeal of the estate tax for this generation and generations to come. I yield the floor.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Not to mention that these reclassifications are unfair to other hospitals. Reclassifications from rural to urban counties are budget neutral. That means that every change we make will decrease payments to all other hospitals. My Montana hospitals are not enthusiastic about shouldering the burden of financial gains for hospitals across the country.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I have just looked over a list of amendments to the supplemental appropriations bill and noticed that several fall within the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. I am most concerned about several hospital reclassification amendments that were filed. The House bill included reclassifications for hospitals in New York and Pennsylvania counties, and that has only fueled the fire of other members to get their ``rifle shot'' fixes in the bill too. I oppose these provisions, and I believe that Ranking Member Grassley shares my policy concerns.

Mr. BAUCUS. That is not a bad idea, and something that maybe the Finance Committee ought to look into. Let me close by adding that the Finance Committee, and not the Appropriations Committee or any other Committee, should be making these policy decisions. The Finance Committee has worked to safeguard and improve the programs under its jurisdiction. Any requests for additional changes to these programs, including further increases in provider payments or changes in payment for individual hospitals or counties, need to be examined with great care. Our committee intends to address Medicare payment policy issues this year. Given that there is an opportunity to consider legislation to change Medicare provider payment policies in the coming months, we do not believe there is any reason to take action on any legislation that is not of a time-sensitive nature at this time. Therefore, we will object to the consideration by the Senate until the material in question is removed. As I have said in the past, I look forward to working together in a bipartisan fashion on all of the other Medicare, Medicaid, and health issues that the Congress will be working on this summer and fall. metropolitan statistical areas

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today in commemoration of the 58th anniversary of the largest air, land, and sea invasion ever undertaken: D-Day. This monumental task involved over 150,000 American, British, Canadian, Free French, and Polish troops. Each of these individuals took great risks, sacrificing themselves for the sake of freedom and democracy. For many of the Americans storming the Utah and Omaha beach, D-Day offered their first glimpse of the enemy and death. Although, there had been extensive training and planning of the invasion, this was a challenge unlike any other. Facing incredible odds, natural obstacles and man-made fortifications, the allied troops secured a beachhead in Nazi occupied Europe from which to begin a western frontal attack. D- Day was a colossal moment where freedom and democracy regained a foothold in Europe at the cost of many brave individuals. There are many heroes of D-Day; many we honored and remembered just a little over a week ago during Memorial Day weekend and others who are passing each day. I know it is my wish, as it must be for the other members of this body, that the valor and sacrifices of our Nation's fighting men and women are not forgotten. Each generation deserves to understand the important events that shaped the world we live in. I'm happy to see construction underway with the World War II monument on the National Mall. This will serve as another reminder to those of today and tomorrow of those who came before us and made, ``For God and Country,'' the ultimate sacrifice. On the anniversary of possibly the most difficult military invasion, I tip my hat in solemn remembrance to those who fought so bravely to protect freedom and liberty here and abroad. I also ask that all Americans take a moment to remember their sacrifices, which allowed the world to enjoy a greater freedom. In conclusion, it is evident that following the savage attacks of September 11, new sacrifices lay ahead of us. As America rises to meet these challenges we can take solace in the model of courage and determination of those who gave their lives on the beaches of Normandy to protect our freedom.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Durbin amendment No. 3458 be modified with the text of amendment No. 3505, and that the amendment be considered and agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, what is the regular order?

Mr. BAUCUS. I am sorry, amendment number?

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I make a point of order that the amendment is not germane.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, once again, will the Chair please state the regular order?

Mr. BAUCUS. I thank the Chair. Under the agreement, there is 1 minute equally divided?

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Hollings, I withdraw amendments Nos. 3463, 3464, 3465.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I do not see Senator Jeffords. On behalf of Senator Jeffords, I offer amendment No. 3521.

Mr. BAUCUS. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. BAUCUS. This is an important issue. As a Senator Edwards has spoken about many times, the textile industry has been adversely affected by increased imports and by companies shifting production overseas. And the steel industry, as Senator Bayh has emphasized, suffers from a flood of unfairly trade imports. Indeed, many steel products are covered by the President's recent decision to impose restrictions under our safeguard laws. So in this case, the ITC has already made a finding of trade-related injury. I would encourage the Secretary of Labor to expeditiously implement procedures regarding industry-wide certification.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, it is my understanding the next amendment is No. 3467 by Senator Wellstone.

Mr. BAUCUS. I inform the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the answer is no, there is not.

Mr. BAUCUS. If I might further respond to my good friend from West Virginia, I have just been informed we don't believe there are any such provisions, but we are scrubbing it right now to make sure. We don't believe, at this point.

Mr. BAUCUS. Yes.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, some of the provisions in the bioterrorism bill have not received much attention. These provisions affect Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP. What we have done here is to give the HHS Secretary the ability to waive certain requirements in the face of a bioterror event or other public health emergency. For example, the bill would give the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services the ability to pay providers for services rendered in good faith during an emergency, even if certain paperwork or other regulations are not followed. In short, the bill gives our federal health programs the flexibility they need to operate in times of emergency, while ensuring accountability if the waiver authority is ever used. The administration asked Congress for these provisions, and Senator Grassley and I both agreed that they are needed. I also want to add that the Medicare and Medicaid provisions in this legislation were hammered out together in a bipartisan and bicameral fashion. Although Senator Grassley and I were not conferees, our staffs worked extensively with the conference staffs to negotiate these provisions. In fact, all of the authorizing Committees, both sides of the aisle and both House and Senate, worked together on these provisions.

Mr. BAUCUS. The Senator is right. And briefly, in addition to the waiver provisions that affect Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP, this legislation includes a provision that will suspend the Medicare+Choice ``lock-in'' requirement for three years. Current law requires Medicare beneficiaries to remain in their managed care plan for the full year. HMOs and beneficiary advocacy groups have both urged Congress to suspend this requirement as a way to stabilize this program. While I appreciate the argument that a plan and a beneficiary should be required to make a full one-year commitment, I don't believe that this is the time to implement the lock-in requirement. Plans are pulling out of the Medicare program every year. Thousands of beneficiaries have lost the plans in their area. Because of the current instability in the program, it is my view that Congress should wait until the program is more stable before we implement the lock-in.

Mr. BAUCUS. Let me summarize by saying that I agree with my good friend Senator Grassley, that every so often there are circumstances that warrant an exception to our jurisdictional concerns, and this is one of them.

Mr. BAUCUS. Yes, indeed. I look forward to working together in a bipartisan and bicameral fashion on all the other Medicare, Medicaid, and health issues that the Congress will be working on this summer and fall.