Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. BAUCUS. I yield 5 minutes 45 seconds to the Senator from Iowa.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I was necessarily absent from the Senate on Monday, September 13, 2010, because I was holding the Montana Economic Development Summit in Butte, MT. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on the nomination of Jane Stranch, of Tennessee, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, this is a stunt. It is a gimmick. It is not serious, and it is very sad. We are in very difficult times. The economy is in recession, going out of recession. We are facing the prospect of what to do about the so-called Bush tax cuts of 2001, 2003. Those are massive tax cuts that were put in place in 2001 and 2003. They expire at the end of this year. It is a big question: What should the Congress do, what should the country do about those tax cuts? At the same time, we are facing terrific, unfortunately high deficits, very high deficits, almost as high as they were at the end of World War II--not quite but almost. The national debt now is approaching, as a percent of GDP, the levels that it was near the end of World War II--not quite. In fact, they were much higher at the end of World War II than they are today. But the main point is, these are very serious questions. They require deliberate thought. They require Senators to work together to find solutions that help our country, help us decide: To what degree should these tax cuts be extended? Which ones make sense? Which ones do not? We have several goals here. Clearly, people do not like paying taxes. But, clearly, Americans who are responsible know they must pay some taxes in order for our country to function. There are two extremes here. One is anarchy and the other States' outright total socialism. There is some balance in the middle for a civil society to function. These questions are very big: How are we, as a society, going to properly function? To what degree should we begin and to what rate reduce the deficits and the debt? That is a very serious question. Other countries worldwide are facing these same questions, and we are interrelated, the United States, with other countries. That is a very serious question. In addition, how much should the Bush tax cuts be extended? At what rate, what amount, et cetera? Should all rates be extended? Should some? Clearly, most Members of this body feel at least the so-called middle-income tax cuts should be extended permanently; that is, those whose incomes are $200,000 or lower or families with $250,000--at least. Then, there are other questions about what to do with the rest. The motion offered by the junior Senator from South Carolina has this effect: He says all the tax cuts should be extended. First of all, we do not know what that means. Is that just individual rates? If it is, that is about $1.1 trillion it is going to cost over 10 years. Does he also want to include the alternative minimum tax for 10 years or does he also want to include dividend cap gains extended? I don't know. He doesn't say. But I assume he does. That is going to be about a $3 trillion cost--a $3 trillion cost--over 10 years. He wants that all replaced with spending cuts. I ask you, is that serious? That is not serious. I ask, is that a stunt? Yes, that is a stunt. Is it a gimmick? Yes, it is a gimmick. Is it serious? No, it is not serious. These are serious times--very serious times--and we should not be engaged or even give comment to this kind of a stunt. I hate saying that. I don't like saying that. But I have to be candid. I have to be honest. If I am faulted for anything--and I am faulted for a lot--it is for being honest and candid. This is a stunt. I urge my colleagues not to fall for this. Now, the $3 trillion--I asked: Where are we going to cut $3 trillion? Our total receipts, Federal receipts for the year, are about $2 trillion, a little over $2 trillion. That is pretty good. Well, OK, he wants to cut $3 trillion over 10. Now, where in the world? It can't be done. It cannot be done. Impossible. He knows that, but still he stands on the floor making this grand political statement. Does he say anything about small business? He doesn't say anything about small business. What is small business? I have no idea. It is kind of veiled a little bit under the cover of the top rates. He doesn't define it. We don't know what it is. I mean, it is just sad. We don't have much time left to deal with these tax cuts. We don't have many legislative days left. We have to just do what Senators are supposed to do, do what most people in our States want us to do--be reasonable, be thoughtful, take on the hard issues. And they will give us a lot of slack if they think we are basically doing the right thing, if we are doing our best--it may not be perfect but doing our best, and that is what we should do. This amendment is not our best. It should be resoundingly defeated. Madam President, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. BAUCUS. I yield my 4 minutes to the Senator from Louisiana.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I ask for 1 minute.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I do not know anybody who can responsibly vote for this amendment because we do not know what it is. What is the definition of ``small business''? It could be anything. I think it is a thinly veiled attempt to address the top rates. We are only talking about the top rates in effect. The other amendment was totally irresponsible. It required a $3 trillion cut in spending over 10 years; $3 trillion--not a ``b,'' a ``t.'' This one is in the same vein. Also, I think it is irresponsible because these are problems we must address seriously when we come back, not take this lightly with message amendments but seriously address when we come back in September what we do with the tax cuts and what we do on the deficits. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this motion.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I would just like to correct the statement made by the Senator from South Carolina. He is saying this side has not wanted to extend tax cuts. That is totally inaccurate. This side does want to extend tax cuts, and we will. Come September, the Senator from South Carolina is going to see that this side of the aisle very definitely wants to extend those Bush tax cuts, including the 2001 cuts, the 2003 cuts. The only question is how much to do on AMT and how much to do on Federal estate tax. But we do want to extend them. I see he is walking off the floor because I think he knows I am right and he doesn't want to have to hear it, but the fact is, we are going to extend. We will do our level best. The real question is whether we will have 60 votes to get that passed. That remains to be seen. I hope that happens. I don't see any Senators on that side of the aisle right now, but I hope there are a few--at least one--so hopefully we will get 60 votes in September. But we will make very strong recommendations to extend these tax cuts--maybe not all, entirely, but the vast bulk of them--in an effort to help the American people.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Obama Administration Manufacturing Agenda.''

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, immediately following the 11:20 a.m. vote on the Senate floor, in the President's Room, S-216 of the Capitol.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10:30 a.m.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a business meeting on August 5, 2010 at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a markup on pending legislation. The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building beginning at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I celebrate and honor the venerable life, not of a person, but of the most important and successful domestic program in our Nation's history. On August 14, Social Security will turn 75. In a special Message to Congress in June 1934, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt stated the promise of Social Security, saying: If, as our Constitution tells us, our Federal Government was established among other things, to promote the general welfare,' it is our plain duty to provide for that security upon which welfare depends. President Roosevelt outlined his intention to ``undertake the great task of furthering the security of the citizen and his family through social insurance.'' Executive Order 6757 created the committee on Economic Security, putting his plan into action. The committee included 5 Cabinet-level officials and 21 government experts from several Federal agencies. At the committee's 25th birthday celebration, Francis Perkins, who was Secretary of Labor and member of the Committee on Economic Security, recounted the work of that committee. And she remembered an embarrassing oversight in the rush to create it--the committee had not been funded. But that was not going to stop its members. Relying on a small personal loan from one committee member, the committee hired unemployed stenographers and typists and recruited professionals and experts to help out. They sent a telegram that stated: We have no money. We can pay your railroad fare and your expenses if you really need expenses while you are in Washington, but there is no salary. The response was huge. A team of great minds converged on Washington, DC, in the heat of August, long before air conditioning. They worked tirelessly. And about 6 months later, in early January 1935, they presented their committee report to the President. He, in turn, brought it to Congress. Congress heard the call. Or perhaps Congress heard the voices of its constituents. Or perhaps Members of Congress carried with them the pictures of closed factories, desolate farms, and breadlines that weaved around city blocks. Unemployment topped 20 percent, and the homeless population was growing. In a 1962 speech, Francis Perkins described the backdrop of the creation of Social Security: People were so alarmed the specter of unemployment--of starvation, of hunger, of the wandering boys, of the broken homes, of the families separated while somebody went out to look for work--stalked everywhere. The unpaid rent, the eviction notices, the furniture and bedding on the sidewalk, the old lady weeping over it, the children crying, the father out looking for a truck to move their belongings himself to his sister's flat or some relative's already overcrowded tenement, or just sitting there bewilderedly waiting for some charity officer to come and move him somewhere. I saw goods stay on the sidewalk in front of the same house with the same children weeping on top of the blankets for 3 days before anybody came to relieve the situation! Congress went to work. Committees held hearings, and a long list of individuals and groups, charities, hospitals, industries, actuaries, historians, and interested citizens testified. There were debates and arguments, compromises and drafts, more drafts and then more meetings and compromises. And then, 7 months later, on Wednesday, August 14, 1935, at about 3:30 in the afternoon, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law. Upon the law's enactment, the President appointed a three-person Social Security Board to run the new program. One of the Board's first daunting tasks was to register employers and workers by January 1, 1937, when workers would begin earning credits toward old-age insurance benefits. The Board contracted with the Post Office to distribute applications, and numbers were assigned in local post offices. Long before computers, typists created each card in typing centers and delivered it to Social Security's headquarters in Baltimore. Between November 1936 and June 1937, Social Security issued more than 30 million Social Security numbers through this manual process. By June 30, 1937, Social Security had established 151 field offices, and these field offices took over the task of assigning Social Security numbers. Over the course of the next several decades, Social Security expanded to help more people secure themselves, as President Roosevelt said, ``against the hazards and vicissitudes of life.'' In 1939, Congress broadened the program to include payments to dependents and survivors of retirees. In 1956, Congress created the disability program and later expanded the program to include benefits for dependents of disabled workers. The Social Security Act of 1965 created a new social insurance program called Medicare that extended health coverage to almost all Americans aged 65 or older or receiving disability benefits. In 1969, under the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act, Social Security began processing claims for disabled coal miners suffering from black lung disease and to their dependents or survivors. Legislation passed in 1972 provided for automatic annual cost-of- living allowances and created the Supplemental Security Income program. SSI, funded from general revenues, provides a small benefit to people with limited income who have reached age 65 or are blind or disabled. The Social Security Amendments of 1980 made many changes in the disability program. Most focused on various work incentive provisions for disability beneficiaries. In the early 1980s, the Social Security program faced a financial crisis. President Ronald Reagan appointed the Greenspan Commission to study the issues and make recommendations on how to sustain Social Security. In 1983, Congress enacted comprehensive changes in Social Security coverage, financing, and benefit structure. On December 17, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed the ``Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act,'' which placed greater emphasis on assisting beneficiaries in efforts to return to work. In 2003, Congress enacted the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act to give seniors extra help in paying for prescription medications. Throughout the years, Congress passed amendments, added programs, and addressed issues with Social Security. Presidents from both parties repeatedly acknowledged Social Security's importance. President Richard Nixon said, ``This Nation must not break faith with those Americans who have a right to expect that Social Security payments will protect them and their families.'' A few years later, President Jimmy Carter said, ``The Social Security program represents our commitment as a society to the belief that workers should not live in dread that a disability, death or old age could leave them or their families destitute.'' Today, Social Security benefits are essential to the economic security of millions of Americans. An estimated 159 million workers, or about 94 percent of all workers, are covered under Social Security. Social Security is critical, as 52 percent of the workforce has no private pension coverage, and 31 percent has no savings set aside for retirement. In 2009, nearly 51 million Americans received a total of $672 billion in Social Security benefits. In Montana, 181,000 of our 975,000 residents or about 19 percent of all Montanans receive Social Security benefits. The payments were modest, with the average retiree receiving about $14,000 annually. The average monthly benefit for a disabled beneficiary was about $1,060. Virginia Reno, vice president for Income Security from the National Academy of Social Insurance testified before the Subcommittee on Social Security: ``If seniors had to count on only their income other than Social Security, almost one out of two would be living in poverty.'' Social Security is anchored by a promise between generations. But its success has been due in large part to the vision and sincerity of its creators and the ongoing commitment of its stewards, the public trustees, Advisory Board members, Members of Congress and the approximately 70,000 employees who work for Social Security. As well, we owe a debt to the thousands of dedicated employees who have worked for Social Security since its inception. For those that have embodied the agency's mission, ``to promote the economic security of the nation's people through compassionate and vigilant leadership in shaping and managing America's Social Security programs,'' we owe a big thank you. Social Security's success was not built with the stroke of a pen. Social Security did not simply survive for 75 years. Rather, Social Security was built by embracing the promise of assisting people through life's hazards. In a campaign speech in 1944, President Roosevelt said, ``The future of America, like its past, must be made by deeds--not words.'' Social Security is the embodiment of many good deeds. In times of crisis, over and over again, Social Security has risen to the challenge. Fifteen years ago, a bomb in Oklahoma City took the life of fifteen Social Security employees, one office volunteer, and 21 office visitors. Social Security employees across the country responded to help survivors and the families of victims. Employees from around the country converged on Oklahoma to assist taking claims, answering questions, and providing comfort to the hundreds of victims and their families. Following the devastation of September 11, 2001, employees in the New York region immediately came to the assistance of families of those killed in the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, and at the plane crash site in Pennsylvania, so that claims could be taken and paid as quickly as possible. Social Security allowed payment of survivors' claims with airline manifests or employer records rather than death certificates. Within days, Social Security launched a full-scale outreach effort to find families of victims and help them apply for benefits. A special Web page was set up. Public information spots aired on television. And Social Security contacted about 60 consulates to ensure that foreign survivors who might be eligible for benefits were reached. By December 2001, Social Security had taken more than 5,000 disaster- related claims. Social Security set up Family Assistance Centers at Pier 94 in Manhattan and Liberty State Park in New Jersey. The New York Regional Commissioner continued to work with the Bureau of Vital Statistics to post death certificates for the survivors of victims whose bodies had not been recovered. Social Security was also one of the first agencies at the Pentagon Family Assistance Center in Virginia offering assistance to victims and their families. In Pennsylvania, Social Security staff assisted family members of victims on applying for benefits. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Social Security moved quickly to ensure that monthly payments to beneficiaries continued uninterrupted. Immediate payment procedures allowed for on-the-spot payments if beneficiaries could not get their benefit check. Social Security opened a temporary office in the Houston Astrodome, and provided service 7 days a week. Social Security employees were on site at FEMA's Family Assistance Centers, and many offices offered extended hours of service through Labor Day weekend to help evacuees. Just recently, in my home State of Montana, in the old city hall building next to the Libby Police Department in Lincoln County, eight employees from Social Security arrived. They quickly set up a processing center to assist the victims of the Environmental Protection Agency's first-ever public health emergency. The Social Security employees tirelessly answered questions and handled a steady stream of claims from applicants diagnosed with asbestos-related disease. Social Security's work helping the good people in and around Libby Montana was deeply important to me. Social Security has been described as the bedrock of our industrial society. It has been called the beacon of light for those on life's stormy seas. It has been called a pillar of our democracy. Social Security offers Americans peace of mind. Social Security has lived up to its message. It has stood as a silent partner to those in need. It has done all this by sending about 99 percent of its annual budget back to the people as benefit payments. Only about 1 percent of Social Security's budget goes toward administrative expenses. The rest fulfills the promise of its mission. Social Security can and should work for the next 75 years, and for generations beyond that. Now that Social Security is here, now that Social Security has proven itself, it is up to all of us to protect and maintain it. It is up to us to assure the millions of Americans that currently rely on Social Security and the millions more who pay into it that Social Security is a promise that we can and will keep. In the words of Carl Sandburg, ``In these times you have to be an optimist to open your eyes when you awake in the morning.'' Our optimism can be found in the accomplishments of Social Security. I celebrate its 75th birthday.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today, the Children's Health Insurance Program turns 13. But instead of facing the difficulties of adolescence, CHIP is enjoying the advantages that come with being one of the most popular programs in the country. I would like to take this moment to reflect on the history of CHIP and to think about the role that CHIP will play in the future. Prior to 1997, kids of the working poor had nowhere to go to get health insurance. Their parents' employers didn't offer health insurance benefits, and the individual market offered only low-quality insurance options at unaffordable prices. Without health insurance, kids couldn't see the doctor for a checkup, couldn't get a prescription for an earache, and couldn't get treatment for common chronic conditions like asthma. Unhealthy kids can't run and play, can't do well in school, and can't grow into healthy and productive adults. In 1997, Congress took action to address this problem by establishing the Children's Health Insurance Program. And today, we celebrate 13 years of success--expanding high quality coverage to kids all across the country. I would like to remind my colleagues of CHIP's history--its bipartisan roots and its tremendous success in achieving what we created the program to do: cover low-income, uninsured kids. Congress enacted the Children's Health Insurance Program as a bipartisan compromise back in 1997, with leadership from Senator Rockefeller, Senator Hatch, and the late Senators Kennedy and Chafee. At that time, Members of Congress wanted to address the rising number of children without health insurance. The Finance Committee reached a compromise that allowed States to set up Children's Health Insurance Programs that would meet their unique needs. CHIP is optional for States, but within just 2 years of its creation, all States decided to participate to address the health care needs of our country's most vulnerable children. I am proud to have helped write and pass CHIP 13 years ago. It has been a tremendous success. In its first decade, CHIP cut the number of uninsured children by more than a third. Today, more than 7\1/2\ million children get the doctor's visits and medicines they need to have a healthy childhood, enabling them to become healthy and productive adults. After 10 years of success, CHIP came up for reauthorization in 2007. In the summer and fall of that year, Congress worked hard to pass a bipartisan reauthorization package. But President Bush vetoed it twice. Ultimately, we had to settle for an extension. In January of 2009, with two of our former colleagues in the White House, I was thrilled to get started on a CHIP reauthorization bill as soon as possible. Finally, the stars had aligned--President Obama was looking forward to signing the CHIP reauthorization bill, and the Congress was prepared to act. We were finally able to deliver what Americans had asked for--reestablishing kids' coverage as a national priority. President Obama signed the bill on February 4, 2009. The new law maintained coverage for all children in the program at that time and started on a path to reach more than 4 million additional uninsured, low-income kids. We had a couple of goals in mind as we drafted the CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2009. We kept CHIP focused on low-income kids. We prioritized coverage of the lowest-income kids, but without limiting State flexibility in designing CHIP programs. We set up parameters to transition adults out of CHIP and into Medicaid or other appropriate coverage. And we also encouraged States to improve their outreach practices and streamline their enrollment procedures in order to reach all eligible kids. We maintained State flexibility. We gave States the option to cover legal immigrant children and pregnant women during their first 5 years in America and receive the corresponding Federal match. We also created a State option that allows States to designate CHIP funds to offer premium assistance, helping families afford private coverage offered by employers or other sources. And we improved the quality of care. The CHIP Reauthorization Act launched a substantial new initiative to improve children's health quality. This initiative invested $45 million a year for 5 years to develop national core measures for children's health quality, improve data collection in CHIP and Medicaid, and promote the use of electronic health records. The CHIP Reauthorization Act I helped to craft allowed us to cover as many uninsured low-income kids as possible. I made sure that we respected our budgetary limits, and made compromises in good faith with my Republican colleagues. In committee, further compromises were made which I hope strengthened the act even more. The only disappointment that came out of the 2009 CHIP Reauthorization Act was that we weren't able to come to agreement with Senators Grassley and Hatch, two colleagues that worked tirelessly to reauthorize CHIP in 2007. But I'm proud to say that CHIP's bipartisan reputation has not been marred. Senators on both sides of the aisle continue to support CHIP and have even used it as a model for other programs. And I have continued to work with Senator Grassley and all Senators on the Finance Committee overseeing the implementation of the CHIP Reauthorization Act. A year and a half after enactment, more than half the States have taken advantage of the new coverage options in the CHIP Reauthorization Act, including 15 States that expanded income eligibility levels for CHIP or Medicaid to cover more kids. States have also taken advantage of the enrollment simplification options--making it easier for kids to get enrolled and stay covered. In health reform, we extended CHIP for an additional 2 years, ensuring that kids will have a stable source of coverage as we expand coverage to other groups. In 2015, Congress will revisit CHIP in a new context. CHIP has been instrumental in providing children with access to care where none existed before, but it may need to take on a different role as health reform is implemented. Whatever happens in 2015, I am confident that CHIP will continue to be an important part of our health system. CHIP is tried and true, and things just keep getting better and better in the program. As we celebrate CHIP's 13th birthday, we can be proud of everything Congress has done to provide low-income kids with high quality, affordable coverage.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a great Montanan who led a remarkable life. Joe Reber was deeply involved in public service and the communities he called home in Montana; he passed away on July 23 at the age of 91. Joe lived life to the fullest and I feel lucky to have had him as a dear friend for so long. Joe was born in Butte in 1919. He grew up in a working class family and is a great symbol of the Montana spirit of hard work and overcoming adversity. His first job as a youngster was selling newspapers on the street in Butte to help support his family. Although Joe never finished high school or went to college, he was a successful businessman and community leader whose experiences gave him many stories to tell over his 91 colorful years. Joe served his country honorably during World War II. He volunteered in the Merchant Marine and the Coast Guard, serving as a staff officer in the Pacific theater. Despite his humble upbringing in the Mining City, Joe became a successful entrepreneur. He started his own plumbing company in Helena, which he later expanded into electrical and general construction. He then went on to form the Reber Realty and Development Company and the Capitol Wholesale Plumbing Supply Company, among other businesses he owned. Even with all this success Joe never forgot his working class roots, growing up the son of a miner in Butte. Joe was very active in public service on a local and national level. He served as treasurer for the Montana Democratic Party, was a State senator, was chairman of the Montana Board of Natural Resources, served on the State Board of Investments, and was a delegate to a United Nations World Food Program conference. One of his proudest accomplishments was passing legislation in the State legislature that created a vocational education program. Joe recognized the importance of education and knew how vital the program would be for economic development and to provide meaningful opportunities for young people across Montana. Over the years Joe got to know and befriend some very important folks. He hosted John F. Kennedy at his Helena home during the 1960 Presidential campaign. He also accompanied Ted Kennedy at the Eastern Montana Fair in Miles City in 1960 where Ted took his famous ride on a bronc. He met many other Presidents, dignitaries, and celebrities along the way. These and many other stories are recounted in Joe's autobiography, ``The Paperboy,'' which he published in 2007. Joe shared his experiences with his wife of 37 years, Rosalyn, who passed away in May. Today I send my heartfelt condolences to Joe's children--Joe, Bobbie, Dianna, Bryant, and Susie--and the entire Reber family for their loss. They can truly be proud of the life their father lived and take comfort in knowing that he helped so many others along the way. I have always enjoyed visiting with Joe over the years and working with him on issues important to Montana. I will miss his friendship as will folks all across Big Sky country.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I object unless--it is off his time. Fine. I do not object.

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I know other Senators have risen before me, so I will be very brief. I will take a minute. The Senator from Washington is next. I thank her for her indulgence in letting me take 1 minute. This is very clear: The American people want us in Congress to do their work. They want us to do something that is reasonable and makes sense. Most Americans are not way off on the left side, and they are not way off on the right side. They are basically in the middle and do a good job. Most Americans would want us to help small businesses in a good way, in a solid way--maybe not in the exact way each American would want but in a good, solid way. This bill clearly does that. It does what the American people want. Small businesses generate jobs. They are the small engine of growth. We need to help small businesses. This bill does that. It cuts taxes for small businesses. It gives lending authority for small businesses. There are many other provisions I do not have time to explain that help small businesses. This is not some small Band-Aid bill. This is a bill that makes sense for small businesses. It provides certainty to small businesses. It helps them. We cannot solve all the world's problems in one bill, but we can certainly help small businesses in this bill. I can say--and I am pleading, frankly, with a few Republican Senators who have not quite decided how they are going to vote on this cloture vote--this is a good bill, a solid bill, a start in the right direction. Let's pass it. Let's not get hung up on who said what to whom, caught up on debating points, and come across like kids in a sandbox. Let's pass this bill. It is a good bill. It is good for America. We can deal with other issues, such as the expiring tax cuts, another time in the future. But right now this is small business. It is solid. It is getting done. It is going to help people. That is what people want us to do. They want us to do the right job. I urge us to pass this bill. I yield 5 minutes to my good friend from Washington.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask the time be yielded back so we can proceed.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I ask unanimous consent Senator Landrieu be recognized to speak for up to 1 hour at 12:30 p.m. today and that the Republican leader or his designee then be recognized following Senator Landrieu.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the Senate once again has before it the small business jobs bill. We have created this bill to help move the economy toward recovery. We have crafted this bill to create jobs. We have crafted this bill to strengthen capital investment. Over the course of the great recession, small business capital investment has fallen dramatically. Since 2005, the percentage of small businesses that made a capital outlay in the previous 6 months fell by nearly 30 percent. Capital investments are an integral part of getting the economy back on track. We need to make sure that businesses, and especially small businesses, have the opportunity to make these investments so they can improve and expand. Our small business jobs bill includes two accelerated cost recovery provisions. These incentives would lower the cost of capital and they would help businesses to make capital investments. One accelerated cost recovery provision in this bill would increase the amount of capital investment that a business could expense under section 179 of the Tax Code. Section 179 is one of the most widely used tax benefits available to small businesses. We all hear of this constantly from our small business constituents in our home States. This year business owners may purchase and write off up to $250,000 in equipment for use in their trade or business. This tax benefit phases out for expenditures between $250,000 and $800,000, but in 2011, under current law, the $250,000 threshold will decrease sharply to $25,000, and the $800,000 ceiling on the benefit will decrease to $200,000. The bill before us today would increase the thresholds to $500,000 and $2 million in 2010 and 2011. Expensing is an important tool for small businesses because it is the most accelerated type of depreciation. With expensing, a business can deduct the complete cost of an asset such as equipment or software in the same year the business buys the asset. With expensing, businesses do not have to wait for years to recover these costs as they do through traditional forms of depreciation. In this weak and uncertain economy, the ability to deduct the cost of assets in the same year provides an immediate benefit for businesses. These immediate benefits strengthen the investment practices of a business, and that strengthens the economy as a whole. An increase in the thresholds for section 179 expensing effectively decreases the cost of newly purchased equipment, and that makes it more economical for a business to invest. These investments can help a business grow with relatively simple acquisitions. For example, a business could boost productivity by updating office technology. This provision will also increase cashflow for businesses, and businesses that invest in new equipment put money back into the larger economy with their purchases. Take, for example, Brown's Automotive in Billings, MT. Brown's Automotive specializes in transmission repairs. Those repairs require significant equipment investments, such as lifts and scanners. Business has been down lately as few people are able to afford expensive transmission repairs these days. When business is slow, purchases of heavy equipment can put a major strain on cashflow. But section 179 expensing and the 50 percent bonus depreciation extension in this bill make a huge difference for Brown's Automotive. Brown's can now write off a portion of the cost of new equipment, and that helps them maintain their cashflow and encourages them to make further capital investments. Because of provisions like 179 expensing, Brown's has retained all 43 of its employees despite the recession. This bill also allows taxpayers to expense up to $250,000 of certain real property within the newly expanded thresholds in 2010 and 2011. Currently, taxpayers can expense only tangible personal property. Tangible personal property includes things such as machines or equipment. Expanding section 179 expensing to include some real property greatly increases the value of this provision to small businesses. This provision means a business could expense the improvements to the property itself. For example, a small business owner with a retail clothing store may expense improvements that were made inside the store, such as built-in cabinets to better stock clothing or lights to brighten the fitting rooms. Allowing a retail owner to expense these improvements immediately lowers the owner's costs, and ultimately this will help the retail store owner to run a better business. This expansion also applies to qualified restaurant property and qualified leasehold improvement property. A second accelerated cost recovery provision in this bill is bonus depreciation. Bonus depreciation also helps Brown's Automotive and many other small businesses. This bill would extend bonus depreciation through the end of this year. This important provision would quickly spark investment, increase cashflow, and help to create jobs. Bonus depreciation especially helps businesses that need to make large capital expenditures but that may not be able to take advantage of accelerated depreciation under section 179. Currently, businesses are allowed to recover the cost of capital expenditures over time. As a result of the great recession, Congress temporarily allowed businesses to recover the cost of certain capital expenditures more quickly by increasing the writeoff to 50 percent of the cost of property placed in service in 2008 and 2009. This bill would extend the additional depreciation to property placed in service in 2010. This additional depreciation makes property more affordable. The business can use the savings it receives to reinvest in the business and to hire new employees. This provision benefits immediate investments that can strengthen the economy now. We do not have to wait to see the benefits of this important provision. Bonus depreciation also helps the business that sells the equipment. It helps manufacturers and suppliers retain and hire employees as their businesses rebound. The more purchases that are made, the more other businesses are helped. This double benefit makes bonus depreciation a cost-effective way to strengthen business investment. Section 179 expensing and bonus depreciation encourage investment and creates jobs. There is no doubt about it, and very significantly, I might add, with this bill, we can help put the American economy back on track. This bill would provide continued support to our small businesses on the path to economic recovery. The bill increases access to much needed capital, encourages entrepreneurship, and promotes equity. The small business jobs bill includes incentives to strengthen capital investment. I urge my colleagues to support the small business jobs bill. I might add that today we are working to reach an agreement on consideration of amendments to this legislation. We hope we will have more to announce later as we reach that agreement. I very much hope that can be done very expeditiously so we get this bill passed and get the needed assistance to our small businesses. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this afternoon, the Senate returns once again to the small business jobs bill. This bill would help steer our economy toward recovery. It would create jobs. It would do so by fostering creativity and ambition of the American entrepreneur. Some of America's greatest firms were born in the midst of an economic crisis. In 1976, the U.S. economy was reeling from recession. America's unemployment hovered around 8 percent. That year, two guys named Steve started selling computer kits out of a garage in Palo Alto, CA. They founded a small business. An angel investor helped them with $250,000 in seed money. Today, we know that business as Apple. Last month, Apple became the largest technology company in the world. It is not an unusual story. It is a story told again and again in America. Of the 30 companies that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average, 16 were started during a recession or depression. Procter & Gamble, Disney, McDonald's, Microsoft, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, and Costco all first opened their doors during economic downturns. To foster entrepreneurship and create this recession's success stories we need to create the right conditions. This small business jobs bill will help do just that. American entrepreneurs of all kinds are a key driver of job creation. Take, for example, Tiffany Lach. Eighteen months ago, Tiffany opened Sola Cafe in downtown Bozeman, MT, with the help of a Small Business Administration loan. When she opened her doors, she had 19 employees. Today she has 42 employees and loads of loyal customers. We need to support entrepreneurs so that small businesses, such as Tiffany's, can continue to grow and create more jobs. According to a recent report, nearly all net job creation in America from 1980 to 2005 occurred in firms fewer than 5 years old. In fact, without startups, net job creation would have been negative almost every year for the past three decades. In 2007, more than two-thirds of the jobs created were firms between 1 and 5 years old. As our economy emerges from the great recession, we need to ensure that American entrepreneurs have the resources, the financing, and the opportunities they need to create jobs and realize their dreams. This small business jobs bill will help American entrepreneurs gain access to the capital they need, especially by increasing the incentives for investors to purchase and hold equity in startups. Under this bill, for the rest of 2010, any investor who invested in a small business and held that investment for at least 5 years would pay no income tax on the gains from the sale of that small business stock. The bill would also reward entrepreneurship by doubling the amount of startup expenses that an entrepreneur could immediately deduct this year. The bill would increase the amount from $5,000 to $10,000. This would free up capital that could be used to invest in other aspects of the business. This bill will devote more than $5 million to the U.S. Trade Representative to expand opportunities for U.S. small businesses in foreign markets. This would help American goods and services to reach new customers around the world. This would create jobs right here in America. This would help the USTR to enforce our trade agreements to ensure that American startups can compete on a level playing field. So I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Let's work hard to work out agreements so we can take it up and pass it. Let's do so to help America's entrepreneurs. Let's pass this bill to encourage the development of new American small businesses. Let's pass this bill to create jobs right here in America. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman.) The Senator from Wyoming.