Chuck Grassley

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 41, submitted earlier today by Senator Stevens.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed en bloc to the consideration of House Concurrent Resolutions 76, 79, and 87, which are at the desk. I announce that these three concurrent resolutions authorize the use of the Capitol grounds for three separate events.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to this measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Con. Res. 40, and the Senate then proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record, with no intervening action.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 93, submitted earlier today by Senators Wellstone and Dayton.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Tuesday, May 22, 2001, at 2 p.m., in SD- 226.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Foreign Commerce and Tourism of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, May 22, 2001, at 2:30 p.m., on prescription drugs.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 22, 2001, at 2 p.m., SD-419, to hold a hearing, as follows: Mr. Lorne W. Craner, of Virginia, to be Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, to be introduced by the Honorable John McCain (R-AZ); the Honorable Donald Burnham Ensenat, of Louisiana, to be Chief of Protocol, with Rank of Ambassador, to be introduced by the Honorable John B. Breaux (D-LA); Mr. Carl W. Ford, Jr., of Arkansas, to be Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, to be introduced by the Honorable John Glenn (D-OH), former Member, U.S. Senate; the Honorable Ruth A. Davis, of Georgia, to be Director General of the Foreign Service; and Mr. Paul Vincent Kelly, of Virginia, to be Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 22, at 1:30 p.m., in the President's Room, to conduct a full committee markup of the nominations of Ms. Mary Waters, Mr. J.B. Penn, Mr. Lou Gallegos, Mr. Eric Bost, and Mr. William Hawks for the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate action on Executive Calendar Nos. 79 to 82 be vitiated.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nominations: Nos. 43, 79, 80, 81, 82, 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, and 95. In addition, I ask unanimous consent that the nomination of William Hansen (PN 274) be discharged from the HELP Committee and, further, that the Senate proceed to its consideration as well. I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the nominations be printed in the Record, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the Feingold amendment goes directly against one of the key pillars of this bipartisan tax bill now before the Senate. This amendment rejects the principle that we should have rate reductions in all marginal rates and do it at all levels. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against the amendment that goes against the bipartisan agreement. In addition, we have higher marginal tax rates for businesses of the self-employed at 39 percent then for corporations at 35 percent. We believe there ought to be a closer relationship between the two. Lastly, I plead with my colleagues, how many times do we have to vote on the same amendment--time after time after time--just offered in a little different way but by different Members? We have worked hard to put together a bipartisan budget agreement, and we also wanted to bring some civility to the process. What we did last night detracts from that.

Mr. GRASSLEY. What is the number of the amendment?

Mr. GRASSLEY. I think we need a clarification. The Chair told me it was amendment No. 726. I want to know what we are voting on.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Is it still his amendment No. 726?

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I would like to have the motion read.

Mr. GRASSLEY. First of all, our bipartisan bill before us uses the entire $145 billion to fund the increases in the unified credit. We have $1 million, $2 million, $3 million, all by the year 2005, and that is where Senator Feingold's money went. We still found more for a $4 million credit by the year 2009. This action undoes a very carefully crafted bipartisan effort by Senator Lincoln, Senator Kyl, Senator Baucus, and myself. I see this as one other effort--amendment after amendment--trying to destroy particularly the most easily crafted part of this bill, one mostly agreed to, by Senator Lincoln and Senator Kyl. I hope we can get away from these efforts to destroy this bipartisan compromise.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, all who have been voting to change the estate tax provisions, listen to what is wrong with his amendment. Every one of you who wants to tax people in the estates that we believe should not be taxed will vote against his amendment. His amendment seems too good to be true. It is too good to be true. It strikes repeal and adds a $100 million unified credit. That ought to be enticing to anybody, even anybody who is a Republican. But remember, in our bill, when the estate tax is done away with, the capital gains tax is applied to gains above a very low extended-up basis for everybody. This bill before the Senate allows an extended-up basis to $100 million. There would be no capital gains applied to any of the growth. So you are ignoring a principle that we want all money to be taxed at least once, by capital gains or by income tax. I ask that Members not let $100 million of growth in an estate not be allowed to be taxed at least once.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Can we afford? Can we afford? How come we always hear the question, can we afford the tax cut? but we never hear, can you afford when it comes to spending money? Mr. President, this may be a very well-intentioned amendment. It is very appropriate to bring up these educational issues. But it is not appropriate on a bipartisan tax reduction bill that this Senate requested in the budget resolution adopted 2 weeks ago. I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. The Kennedy amendment finances the increase in Pell grants by delaying marginal rate reductions if the Secretary of Education determines that Pell grants are not fully funded. So this is not germane. I raise this point then: The amendment is not germane because it should not be on a reconciliation measure. The point of order against the amendment is under section 305(b)(2) of the Budget Act.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the Senator from Michigan described his amendment. I am not going to go back through that. We have a very good package of educational assistance, tax incentives in our bill, of which the deduction of tuition is a major portion, and that major portion was put in to make this a more bipartisan bill, particularly under the leadership of Senator Torricelli. What is wrong with this amendment is not that it does not do more but the fact that it increases billions of dollars for small business men and women. The revenue loss for the tuition deduction in our bill is $11 billion. We don't have this one scored, but this would be much higher. Once again, I plead with people. We have a bipartisan bill. How many times do we have to defeat the same amendment? It has been 37 times now.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, this amendment costs billions, and Senator Levin plans to pay for it by slashing any rate relief at the top rate. He proposes no estate tax and no capital gains tax on estates, and he pays for it with a denial of any tax break at all to the top rate. This simply is not fair. This amendment will require a tax increase of billions of dollars, according to the Joint Tax Committee. It will increase taxes tens of thousands on small businessowners, and these folks throughout the country are the ones who create the jobs. I urge everyone to vote against this amendment. Once again, I raise the point that this is probably the second, third, or fourth time we have voted on similar amendments. At some time, we ought to say enough is enough. I think now is time to say enough is enough. I ask for the yeas and nays.

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

Mr. GRASSLEY. If this is appropriate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Florida be allowed to put in his request for a waiver of the germaneness rule and have a vote on it.