Kent Conrad

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2999

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, let me indicate, once again, this funding, which is absolutely meritorious, is paid for out of section 920. There is no money in 920. In fact, 920 is $500 million underwater already. What this will result in is an across-the-board cut in all discretionary accounts. So in voting for this amendment, you are voting to reduce homeland security, you are voting to reduce defense, you are voting to reduce law enforcement, you are voting to reduce all of the other domestic accounts, because there is no money in 920.

Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank again both Senator Cantwell and Senator Talent for the work on that amendment, first, for working together to come up with an amendment that is bipartisan; second, for the good manners to the rest of the Members of the Senate for agreeing to take a voice vote. That is an excellent example for others. We deeply appreciate Senators accommodating the work of the Senate on this matter. I ask unanimous consent Senator Collins be added as a cosponsor of my pay-go amendment numbered 3013.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, let me indicate that on our side Senator Cantwell had this very same amendment funded in a somewhat different way. Nonetheless, it is the identical amendment. The two Senators have agreed to make this the Talent-Cantwell amendment because that eliminates, then, one amendment that we would otherwise have voted on. I thank Senator Cantwell for her leadership. I very much thank her for her willingness to work together with Senator Talent to achieve this bipartisan amendment. I also want to say how critically important dealing with this methamphetamine threat is. I just held a Budget Committee hearing in North Dakota with the attorney general of North Dakota, the U.S. attorney from North Dakota, the State's attorney in the affected county, and with the heads of law enforcement. Without exception they told me the meth threat is the worst thing they have ever faced in terms of a drug; that it is destroying people's lives. I was recently at a meeting. The man next to me was clearly terribly upset--somebody I have known for a long time, a prominent member of our community in North Dakota. Finally, he told me his son had that day been diagnosed as a methamphetamine addict. He told me it was destroying his family, that he was on the brink of bankruptcy as a result of a long meth addiction by his son, a meth addiction that was proving extremely difficult to treat. We need more money for prosecutors. We need more money for law enforcement. We need more money for treatment. This meth epidemic, which may have started in rural areas--I know some of our colleagues in urban areas have acted as though they are not aware of this, that this is not on their agenda. Let me assure Members, it will be on their agenda because we have never seen anything worse. Nothing has affected rural communities in a more adverse way than this meth epidemic. I again thank the Senator from Washington for her leadership and for her willingness to work across the aisle to come up with a bipartisan amendment.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor to the Talent-Cantwell amendment.

Mr. CONRAD. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Feinstein be added to the Conrad-Feingold amendment on pay-go.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, it might be useful to use this time to alert our colleagues on where we are. We will have six votes at roughly 3 o'clock. At 1 o'clock Senator Burns will offer his amendment on veterans, and then Senator Akaka will offer his. I urge colleagues to be alert to what is actually occurring on the floor. It may be that we will have other circumstances in which the full time is not used. If Senators are in the queue, it would be very helpful if they can be prepared to come if all time is not used on an amendment. The other thing I want to make certain colleagues understand is right now we have over 100 amendments pending. Let me repeat that. We have over 100 amendments pending. We know we can do three amendments an hour when we are voting. If we were to vote starting now on all of these amendments, it would take 33 hours of straight voting. And we are not done debating amendments yet. Colleagues need to understand exactly where we are. If we play this out, if everybody insists on their amendment, we are going to be here probably until the wee hours of Saturday morning. We will be here all day today, on into the night, all day the next day, and all day the next day. We won't complete business until some time Saturday morning in the wee hours. That is where we are headed. The chairman and I are asking Members to take shorter time agreements. We will ask the next sponsors of amendments to take half an hour, equally divided. If Members could take less than that, please do so. Remember, the alternative is to be in vote-arama where Members get a minute per side. The only conceivable way we get done Thursday night is No. 1, Members take short time agreements; No. 2, some Members reserve their amendments and save them for another day or another vehicle. That is where we are. Colleagues should know that. I hope very much colleagues and their staff understand the posture of the Senate. If we do not find a way to get cooperation from Members on taking short time agreements, if we do not get agreement from Members on restricting the number of amendments, we will be here until some time early Saturday morning. Do the math. It is inescapable that is the case. With that, I hope Members will take this opportunity. If colleagues want to speak on the budget, we have time now until 1 o'clock. At 1 o'clock the next amendment will be offered. It will be Senator Burns on veterans. There is time now. We have half an hour. I hope colleagues will use that time so it is not lost. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CONRAD. Even though I think using section 920 is the wrong way to go. The Senator indicated he has been informed there is $11 billion in the 920 accounts. I just direct the Senator's attention to page 29 of the concurrent resolution on the budget. If the Senator would direct his attention there and go down the table to allowances, 920, I think the Senator would see there, in fact, is no money in section 920. In fact, section 920 is $500 million in the hole. There is no $11 billion there. That is the problem we have. There is no $11 billion there. Section 920 is actually $500 million underwater. This will just put it further underwater, which will require an across- the-board cut in these other areas: homeland security among them, law enforcement, veterans benefits, defense. Actually, we do not know what the appropriators will do. So I just say that for the information of my colleagues, who may have some sense that there is money in this account, that there really is not. Mr. President, is the Senator prepared to yield back his time? Because I would be willing to yield back our time in the interest of trying to get back on schedule.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, Senator Bingaman is available. How much time remains on the Talent-Cantwell amendment?

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CONRAD. I don't think that is correct. We only had an hour available on that amendment.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back time on this side as well, so we can go to Senator Kennedy's amendment and try to get back on schedule as much as we can.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, might I ask my colleague from Rhode Island if we could allow Senator Kennedy to pay respects to Maggie Inouye for 1 minute? We will extend the time of the Senator appropriately.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, for a moment, let me consult with the chairman and bill manager. Let me take one moment to consult with him and see how we might proceed. I ask if the Senator from Rhode Island would be prepared to yield back his time. The Senator has already yielded the time. I am prepared to yield back the time on our side as well. Let me say that it would be very helpful, if Senator Burns and his staff are listening, if he could come and do his amendment next--I know it is not scheduled until 1 o'clock--so we are using the time efficiently here on the floor. With that, I yield my time on the Chafee amendment.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am just going to take time off the amendment on our side, not speaking in opposition. I do want my colleagues to know what is occurring here. I entirely agree with the Senator from Rhode Island in terms of his priorities, in terms of additional funding for IDEA. I just want to rise and make the point that I made on the previous amendment that used section 920 funding. The problem is there is no 920 money available. In fact, if we look at the budget, we see that 920 is already $500 million in the hole. So the result of this amendment, which seeks to add $2 billion, is really a nullity because what it is going to do in terms of what the appropriators see is on the one hand they will get $2 billion, on the other hand $2 billion will be taken away. So what happens, what do the appropriators do? We don't know what they will do. They could add $2 billion to this account and take $2 billion from other accounts. They could. They could just wind up doing nothing. That is the reality of the budget resolution. I know it is confusing to people. But I am entirely in sympathy with the Senator from Rhode Island in what he is seeking to do in terms of adding funding. The problem we have is using 920 as the function to fund these things because there is no money there. It is an across-the-board cut, and the appropriators will see no real increase. This becomes more than anything a statement of what one wants to accomplish. But the hard reality here is there is no 920 money available. It will have to be an across-the-board cut, however the appropriators determine to make it. There is no new money here. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for working this out, as well. I thank our colleagues for their willingness to cooperate and to say to other colleagues that this sets a good example. I hope very much other colleagues and their staff are listening and that they understand if we continue on this course, we could have a much better budget debate and not wind up in that vote-arama, voting four times an hour with very little discussion or debate intervening. I hope very much colleagues are listening and that they will continue to cooperate. I am especially grateful to the six colleagues who have already agreed in this order to these time limits, at these times. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I say to colleagues on our side of the aisle, what we are attempting to do is change the way we handle the budget debate this year and to do it in a way that will have more of the votes occur before the vote-athon on Thursday night. That is what Senator Gregg and I are attempting to accomplish. It is going to take cooperation. What we are doing with our colleagues now, we have agreed on the first six amendments to be debated and the time for each. What we are asking our colleagues to do is agree to exchange time for certainty-- certainty of when their amendment would be considered, certainty for the amount of time they would have but less time than they could have under the rules. People can disagree and they can say: No, we won't agree to that. If they don't agree, we are going to be right back in the soup, and we will be here until the wee hours Thursday. We don't think that is the best way to debate this issue. We don't think that is the best way for colleagues, all of our colleagues, to have the best chance of having their amendments considered. So I am sending this message out to colleagues: If we work together, I think we can improve this budget debate process and have a whole series of votes tomorrow afternoon that we won't then have to have Thursday and do it again the next day and do it again the next day. That is what we are asking colleagues to do. Mr. President, would 20 minutes be sufficient for the Senator from North Dakota?

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield 20 minutes to the Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the Senator from North Dakota, for his comments and for his insights. I especially like his picture of the building in the Cayman Islands that is the home to more than 12,700 companies. Why is it their home? Because they are engaged in a giant tax dodge, that is why. What they are doing is acting as though they are doing business in the Cayman Islands so they can show their profits in the Cayman Islands, because the Cayman Islands do not have any taxes. What these companies are doing, many of them are operating in the United States where they earn their money, but they don't show their profits here. They have a series of subsidiaries and they show the profits of the subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands so they avoid their taxes here. That is what is going on. It is a giant scam. That is not the only scam. There are all kinds of scams going on. One of perhaps the most remarkable scams is that companies in the United States are buying sewer systems of cities in Europe and depreciating them on their books in the United States to reduce their tax burden here. Then they lease back the sewer systems to the cities in Europe that are actually using them. If that isn't an outrageous scam, I don't know what is. They are not just doing it with sewer systems, they are doing it with metro systems, they are doing it with all kinds of public infrastructure. That should not be permitted. Some say if you shut that down you are increasing taxes. I don't think so. I think you are collecting taxes that were legitimately owed in the first place and you are stopping a scam. That is what we did in the Budget Committee. When we offered additional spending--and we did, we offered $126 billion of additional spending and $104 billion of it was one amendment. Some might say, there the Democrats go again, spending money. What were we spending money on? What was that amendment about? I will tell you what it was about. It was to make the assistance for veterans in this country mandatory, not discretionary. I think people will be surprised to find out that the way our budget is devised, support for our veterans is considered discretionary. Medicare is considered mandatory, Social Security is considered mandatory, but aid to our Nation's veterans is considered to be discretionary. We thought that was not right so we proposed switching aid to veterans from discretionary accounts to mandatory accounts because we think that is what the American people intend. I don't think they think it is a discretionary matter, to provide assistance to young men and women who have been fighting for us in Afghanistan and Iraq. So we proposed putting that on the mandatory side of the budget. That shows up as a cost--$104 billion. We offset it by proposing closing tax loopholes in the tax gap. The tax gap is now running at $350 billion a year. The difference between what is owed and what is being paid is $350 billion a year, according to the testimony of the Revenue Commissioner of this administration. He said it before the Senate Budget Committee, and he said we could capture $50 billion to $100 billion a year without fundamentally changing the relationship of taxpayers to the Revenue Service. We should do that. Some say that is a tax increase. I don't think that is a tax increase; I think that is collecting taxes that are already due and owed but aren't being paid. If we are not going to start insisting that everybody pays, we are just going to run a system where some pay, then shame on us, shame on the system. That is unfair to the vast majority of people who are paying what they owe. The vast majority of people and the vast majority of companies pay what they owe, but unfortunately we have an increasing number of people and an increasing number of companies that aren't. That is unfair to all the rest of us, and it is dramatically increasing the debt of our country at the worst possible time.

Mr. CONRAD. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. CONRAD. I see the Senator from Massachusetts seeking recognition. I yield the Senator 20 minutes off the resolution.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object--I certainly will not object--this is something both sides are in complete agreement on. I ask my colleagues to understand that this is a technical matter to make certain that the resolution conforms to what was done in committee.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Akaka and Senator Lautenberg be authorized to speak on the death of Senator Inouye's wife, Maggie, and then that Senator Wyden be recognized for 12 minutes, Senator Murray for 15 minutes, and Senator Baucus for 15 minutes.