Michael Enzi

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, this is a very exciting day. We are here to the debate on the pensions bill. Every day hard-working Americans go to their jobs, they are confident we here in Washington are looking out for them and doing everything we can to assure that they will be able to retire some day and live the life they have always dreamed about. For our Nation's older workers and those who have already retired, there are few things more important to them than the health of their pension plan and the protection it provides. It involves younger workers, too. I am glad we are at this point. This may be one of the biggest bills that has ever been covered with as little debate as we will have today. Part of the reason for that is how detailed it is and how many moving parts there are. I congratulate all of the people who have worked on this bill and worked cooperatively, both sides of the aisle. We have even had some conversations with the other end of the building in order to be able to get it to this point at this time. I particularly have to commend Senator Kennedy and his staff and my staff. August is normally a time when we are at recess and traveling our States, as I was and Senator Kennedy was. It is normally a time our staff can catch up on things. It was not. It was a time they were heavily involved in negotiations to come up with the best possible package for protecting the retirement of the people of this country, and they worked virtually around the clock during the entire month of August. Senator Kennedy and I were on the phone several times working out some of the big issues and trying to keep the focus on the direction it needed to go. I also have to specifically congratulate Senator Isakson. He has been our coordinator with airlines on this whole thing, and had the airlines not had a crisis, I am not sure we would be here today debating pensions. It was enough of a focal point, enough of an impetus that it got us on the track of solving all of the pension issues, in all of the aspects, and I think we have a very complete reform package here. Of course, I would be remiss if I did not mention Senator Lott and Senator Coleman, who also were strong advocates on getting a solution for airlines so we would stop seeing the airlines go into bankruptcy over their pension problem. We have a team of them here today to add one more amendment that will make sure we will have airlines and to make sure that airline employees will have a solvent retirement package. I also have to thank Senator DeWine and Senator Mikulski, the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Pensions on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. They held a number of hearings that set up the data so we would actually have information on which to base this pension reform. They have done a tremendous job, not just with the committee but also representing particularly people in manufacturing across this country who also have some very special problems at this point in time. I would also mention Senators Stabenow and Senator Levin, who have a majority of those manufacturing workers. In fact, they probably represent more manufacturing workers than there are people in the whole State of Wyoming. But the team of people worked together and put together a bill for the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Senator Grassley and I, and the members of the Budget Committee, had an amendment in the budget bill that required that the HELP Committee and the Finance Committee merge a bill. I have to congratulate Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus for their tremendous work with the Finance Committee to put together a separate bill that covered all the jurisdictional areas of the Finance Committee, and then their effort with us to merge a bill, which is the bill that is here today. I have to tell you there were a lot of people betting that, first, neither committee would be able to report a bill out of committee and, secondly, that we would never be able to merge the two bills. It has a lot to do with Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley and their staffs being extremely involved and working again in this detailed, ``many moving parts'' bill. That is the reason we are here today and have a rather comprehensive bill, and it is one that people have been scrutinizing and working on through all of the months of this year. I think it is a tribute to all of the people who have worked on it that we have limited debate on S. 1783. Only two amendments are being offered, and then we will have a final vote. That is a lot of agreement for this body of 100 people who usually have a lot of disagreement. I have some other comments, but I will make them later and allow people to get on with describing the actual workings of this bill to the point where we can do a final vote. I yield to my neighbor from Montana.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Maryland, Ms. Mikulski, for her tremendous work. She showed such tremendous concern for the workers and the companies, both of which are multiple in her State, and she did a great job of brokering for both to make sure the businesses would continue and the employees would get their pensions. The Senator showed the depth of understanding that she already had and that she got from the hearings which were conducted. We appreciate the bipartisan way she has worked on this to get us to this point. I yield to the Senator from Iowa.

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

Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I yield to the Senator from Ohio.

Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his comments and the outstanding way he summarized the principles we have been working on. It is a very good job, considering that this is a 730-page bill. He got into significant details. It has been the details that have been holding it up for literally years. You notice that nobody is speaking in opposition to this bill, so that means the bipartisan effort has paid off. I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Pennsylvania.

Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania for his diligent effort, particularly in the multiemployer area. He checked with us and gave suggestions several times a month during the process when we were putting together the HELP bill. That was extremely helpful, particularly since he was also on the Finance Committee which had some jurisdiction in this area. His coordination between the two committees was invaluable. His tenaciousness and base of knowledge on that issue were particularly helpful. I thank him for his efforts.

Mr. ENZI. Reserving the right to object, we still have some time remaining on the bill, and there is a vote at 2:30. I guess I did not understand exactly the time being requested. It sounded like 35 minutes.

Mr. ENZI. Then I would ask the remainder of the time until 2:30 go to this side of the aisle.

Mr. ENZI. I was reserving in that time time for the Senator from Alaska to speak.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Texas.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I allot myself some time in opposition to the amendment. I appreciate Senator Akaka proposing the amendment, but I have to rise in opposition to it for a number of reasons. The biggest reason is the amendment changes how the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation calculates benefits for any one class of workers, which would be airline pilots. It is unfortunate that so many airlines have gone into chapter 11 bankruptcy and so many pilots have seen reductions in their pensions. Flight attendants and ground workers also deserve our attention, not just pilots. This carveout for pilots, who are some of the most highly paid professionals in our country, is unfair to other workers who also retire early but happen to have devoted their work lives to other positions in the industry. Pilots are not the only workers who have expectations of subsidized early retirements. Many machinists, steelworkers, and autoworkers have early retirement benefits which are reduced under the ERISA guarantees. A retiree from any one of these industries has the same complaint as a pilot when his or her company goes bankrupt and dumps its pension plan on the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. The steelworker or the auto parts maker has less notice that a problem could arise if the company went broke. Pilots know, when they start their careers, that they will not work past age 60 and pilots can plan accordingly. The shortfall confronting pilots of bankrupt companies is not the result of a change in law. The limit on the PBGC guarantee has been on the books for years. Commercial airline pilots who are universally unionized have negotiated over these benefits with their airlines. The fact they retire at age 60 is factored into the structure of their plans. Pilots know they will likely stop flying before reaching normal retirement age of 65. That is why they negotiate rich retirement benefits on top of their high salaries. It is too harsh to suggest that they in any way assumed the risk that their plans would fail, but it is well known that pilots are some of the most cautious and savvy investors. Risk is something they always anticipate. On the merits, therefore, the Akaka amendment is unfair to other similarly situated workers and overlooks the fact that they have been before the parties for many years. But, more important, this amendment at this time is kind of the ultimate non sequitur. This amendment on this legislation just does not follow. It does not fit. The Akaka amendment actually increases the deficit of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation on a bill designed to save the agency from insolvency. The PBGC estimates that if this provision were applied just to the United Airlines pilots plan, the unfunded guaranteed benefits in the plan would increase by more than $400 million. Additionally, if United pilots would cost $400 million, the cost to the PBGC for all pilots plans would probably exceed $1 billion. Ultimately, the cost is not borne by the PBGC, nor is it borne by the U.S. taxpayers. I hope my colleagues are well aware by now that the full faith and credit of the United States does not stand behind the PBGC. The additional $1 billion in new debt that the Akaka amendment would impose on the PBGC would be borne by all the other companies that sponsor and fund defined benefit pension plans. In this bill, we are already increasing the burden on those companies by about $4 billion through new premiums. Adding another $1 billion in debt is unfair and irresponsible, so I urge my colleagues to oppose the Akaka amendment.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the calculation of lump sum distributions has been hotly debated. Some have been worried that the bill would shortchange participants in their lump-sum distributions. That is not the case. In fact, this bill has been very careful to avoid the problems that occurred after the enactment of the pension reforms on the GATT in 1994. Under S. 1783, it is intended that plans may use different assumptions--that is, interest rates and or mortality tables--to determine lump sum distribution amounts so long as the plan provides that a participant's lump sum distribution amount is no less than the present value determined in accordance with the requirements of the bill.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. I object. We have the pension bill scheduled on a very tight time schedule.

Mr. ENZI. OK.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. 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 Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 10:30 a.m. to mark up S. 467, ``Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005,'' and an original bill entitled ``Public Transportation Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005''.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 10 a.m., on the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Reauthorization.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 16 at 11:30 a.m. The purpose of this meeting is to consider pending calendar business. Agenda Item 1: To consider the nomination of Jeffrey D. Jarrett to be Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy, Department of Energy. Agenda Item 2: To consider the nomination of Edward F. Sproat III to be Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Department of Energy. In addition, the Committee will consider noncontroversial items that have been agreed to on both sides.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to hold an oversight hearing to examine transportation fuels of the future on November 16, 2005 at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on ``The High Costs of Crude: The New Currency of Foreign Policy.''

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 10 a.m. for a hearing titled, ``Hurricane Katrina: What Can Government Learn from the Private Sector's Response?''.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Habeas Reform: The Streamlined Procedures Act'' on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. Witness List Panel I: Ronald Eisenberg, Esq., Deputy District Attorney, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office, Philadelphia, PA; The Honorable Seth Waxman, former Solicitor General of the United States, Partner, Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr, Washington, DC; The Honorable Howard D. McKibben, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Nevada, Chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Federal-State Jurisdiction, Reno, NV.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on November 16, 2005, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed briefing.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Creating New Federal Judgeships: The Systematic or Piecemeal Approach'' on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 at 2:30 p.m. in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Witness List Panel I: The Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr., District Judge for the Western District of Texas, Chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Resources, San Antonio, TX; The Honorable William H. Steele, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Alabama, Mobile, AL; Robyn J. Spalter, Esq., President, Federal Bar Association, Miami, FL.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Product Liability, and Insurance be authorized to meet on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., on Protecting the Consumer from Flooded and Salvage Vehicle Fraud.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, today, I rise in support of H.R. 797, the Native American Housing Enhancement Act of 2005. This bill is identical to a bill Senator Johnson and I introduced in February, S. 475, that will encourage home ownership and enhance housing opportunities for Native Americans across the country. H.R. 797 is an important piece of legislation and I commend my Senate colleague, Senator Tim Johnson from South Dakota, and my colleague on the House side, Congressman Rick Renzi from Arizona, for their continued leadership on Indian housing issues. Home ownership is a fundamental building block of a successful community. Simply put, ownership promotes pride and pride promotes improvement. And, when it comes to Native American housing, we have a lot of improving to do. Currently, Native Americans experience some of the worst housing conditions in the country. About 90,000 Indian families are homeless or underhoused. Nearly 33 percent of Indian homes are overcrowded, while 33 percent lack adequate solid waste management systems and 8 percent lack a safe indoor water supply. Poor housing conditions on our reservations are a symptom of laws and regulations that fail to promote a sense of ownership and personal responsibility within our tribes. Although the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 made great strides in developing an ownership society in Indian country, we still have a lot of work to do. This legislation is a step in the right direction. Our bill would give tribes more flexibility when developing housing improvement projects, and will also give tribal housing entities the opportunity to once again take advantage of a program designed to teach kids the value of hardwork and community involvement. The Youthbuild program is a vocational program designed to give low- income kids and highschool drop-outs between the ages of 16 and 24 the skills they need to survive in today's world. Youthbuild participants gain critical job skills and leadership training by constructing and rehabilitating affordable housing units in their communities. The new housing units are owned and managed by community housing authorities and then permanently designated for low-income families who need the most help finding a place to live. The program is an excellent tool for achieving two goals. The first goal is to provide vocational education and life-long learning skills for kids who live in some of the most economically-depressed areas of the country. These kids need skills in order to build a workforce that can support economic development on our reservations. The second goal is to build affordable housing units so tribal families can find homes with running water, adequate sewage systems, and heat and electricity. However, as I mentioned before, tribal housing entities and tribal youth programs were barred from the Youthbuild program when the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, NAHASDA, was enacted. Accessibility was eliminated because NAHASDA gave the tribes the authority to encompass this type of activity under their respective Indian Housing Plans. Unfortunately, when tribes are prioritizing their housing projects, many choose to fix crumbling foundations, dry-rot and sanitation systems before they invest in Youthbuild-type programs. H.R. 797 will provide an alternative resource for this type of activity. Further, it will help children in tribal communities feel a sense of accomplishment when they see their friends and neighbors move into new homes they help built. And, that builds pride. The bill will also clarify that tribes and tribal entities can access certain grant income and retain program money for successive grant years if used for affordable housing activities. This provision will ultimately provide tribes and tribal entities with more flexibility in planning and improve their ability to use their funds efficiently. H.R. 797 also amends the Housing Act of 1949 to provide consistency across tribal housing programs by treating tribes applying for housing programs within the Department of Agriculture, USDA, the same as tribes applying for housing programs within the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD. The bill will allow tribes to comply with Title II of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 rather than Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when securing federal funds for USDA housing programs. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, tribes are unable to access certain federal funds if Indian preference is a factor in using those funds. Tribes must comply with the Civil Rights Act unless Congress explicitly exempts them under an authorizing statute. Unfortunately, most Native American housing programs are tailored to benefit tribal members, which puts these programs at odds with the 1964 Act. When Congress passed the Native American Housing Assistance and Self Determination Act in 1996, we exempted tribes from the 1964 Civil Rights Act for housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, provided they comply with the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. H.R. 797 would provide a similar exemption for tribes with respect to housing projects under the Department of Agriculture. In short, it brings USDA housing programs in line with HUD housing programs. This is a good bill that will provide real and tangible benefits in Indian country. Building a community is about building pride in our kids, our neighbors and ourselves. H.R. 797 and S. 475 recognize that pride comes from working together, learning new and improved skills, earning livable wages, and owning a home, among other things.