Judd Gregg

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, first off, my admiration for the Senator from Alaska is immense and is extremely deep on the issue of defense policy and how we should fund our Defense Department. If the Senator from Alaska says we need something, the odds are I am going to say we need to fund it. People, such as the Senator from Alaska who have the expertise around here and have had it for a long time--the Senator from Virginia, for example, who chairs the Armed Services Committee and members of that committee--are not getting much of a window of opportunity to be players in how these budgets are evolved. We are just getting them presented to us and claimed they are an emergency and basically they have gone outside the budget process. We have to set up some process that allows the Senator from Alaska, as chairman of the subcommittee that appropriates, and which allows Senator Warner as chairman of the full Armed Services Committee to intersect this activity a little earlier in the process so they can have their input in it, much as they would the core budget. The Senator from Alaska spent a lot of time putting together this base budget of $434 billion. I know he did. That emergency money comes in here with a bang--here it is today and the Senator has to appropriate it tomorrow--a situation from the administration. Granted, it is a war and there is going to be some need for that type of activity, but there is also a way to anticipate some fairly significant percentage of that, I would think. I think a little more openness and cooperation from downtown on that might be helpful. I don't have the answer. I am just raising the red flag of concern. I would rely greatly on the Senator's expertise and the expertise of others around here who have the history and knowledge of the Defense Department to figure out how we as a Congress can engage more effectively and not have this second budget moving along which is really sort of shadowing. I thank the Senator.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, will the majority leader yield for a question?

Mr. GREGG. Just to clarify the numbers, because I do think the assistant Democratic leader has thrown a bit of a straw dog out there in his numbers, as to the death tax, as it is presently structured under today's law, the exemption is about $2 million. If we do not put in place this change in the death tax, the exemption will go back to $1 million. The tax rate on dollars over the $2 million today goes up to about 46 percent, I believe. If we do not put in place this change, the tax rate would go up to 60 percent on everything over $1 million, potentially. What the proposal before us will be is to raise the $2 million limit up to $3.5 million, or an increase of $1.5 million, which is basically a small family restaurant or a small family farm or a small family business. It is not to repeal the tax; it simply is to say to people who have small businesses: You will not be wiped out. Your family won't be wiped out by estate taxes which would be 60 percent of the value of that business over $1 million, potentially. Is that not true?

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, if the majority leader would yield further, there is no total repeal; is that not correct? What is happening is the tax is being reformed to reflect the fact there has been an increase in value in assets for especially small businesspeople, especially small farmers, and we are trying to protect those families from having their businesses wiped out. So the first $3.5 million, no, there would not be a tax, but over that there would be a tax?

Mr. GREGG. If the majority leader will yield for one or two more questions. I would also ask, on this minimum wage issue, which the Democratic leader has dismissed as irrelevant or ineffective, by my calculation, a $2.15 increase--I believe that is what it is; maybe it is 10 cents--on a $5 basis is about a 40-percent increase. That is not an insignificant increase in the minimum wage, to raise it by 40 percent, is it?

Mr. GREGG. If the majority leader will yield for one more question relative to the budget issues here. We have heard from the other side, almost interminably, about the need for pay-go and to live by pay-go. Is it not true that these tax cuts within this proposal meet the pay-go scorecard?

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I wanted to correct the Record. I spoke inaccurately in that on the issue of pay-go, there is available under pay-go approximately $300 billion to cover the cost of this tax bill. In one 5-year period, it may be out of compliance, but over the entire 10-year period, it is clearly within compliance. I did want to make that clarification.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, as Chairman of the Budget Committee, I regularly comment on Appropriations bills that are brought to this Senate for consideration and present the financial comparisons and budgetary data. Today I am reporting on compliance with the Budget Act in the case of the pending measure, H.R. 5631, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007. As reported by the Senate Committee on Appropriations, H.R. 5631 provides $456.805 billion in budget authority and $496.082 billion in outlays in fiscal year 2007 for the Department of Defense and related agencies. Of these totals, $251 million in budget authority and $251 million in outlays are for mandatory programs in fiscal year 2007. I will note here that this bill is in compliance with the 2007 302(b) allocations, but there are other budgetary matters worthy of Senators' attention. The bill provides discretionary budget authority in fiscal year 2007 of $414.500 billion for DOD's regular appropriation. But it also includes $50.0 billion for projected contingency operations overseas. Of that, $42.054 billion is designated as an emergency. The rest-- $7.946 billion--is funds remaining in Defense's fiscal year 2006 allocation. We should be very clear on this point: putting those funds in the Defense Appropriations bill has the effect of reversing the across-the-board cut Congress passed at the end of last year. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a table displaying the Budget Committee estimate of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Yesterday we had a full day of debate in relation to the Energy Security bill. We anticipate a number of Senators coming to the floor today in order to speak on the substance of the measure. The majority leader has indicated that the Senate could turn to other legislative items today if we are able to reach time agreements on those bills. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. GREGG. On behalf of the leader, I will read the following statement: This morning the Senate begins consideration of S. 3711, the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security bill. I now ask unanimous consent that when the bill is reported, it be subject to debate only until 10:45 this morning, with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, and that at 10:45 the majority leader be recognized.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I take a moment to recognize someone who has provided invaluable assistance to the Budget Committee for many years. After 25 years of service at the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, as we call it, Kathy A. Ruffing will be retiring at the end of this month. During her tenure at CBO, Ms. Ruffing earned a well-deserved reputation for tirelessly producing high-quality analyses on a wide range of topics including interest costs and the Federal debt, Federal pay, immigration, and Social Security. In particular, Members and their staffs came to depend on Kathy's thorough knowledge of the Social Security Program as they developed proposals for addressing the program's financial status and benefit structure. She also made major contributions to CBO's reports on the economic and budget outlook and the reestimates of the President's budget. Her analyses always displayed those characteristics of CBO's reports that we in the Congress most value--impartiality, clarity, and comprehensiveness. In fact, Kathy was a principal architect of the formats of many tables on which the Budget Committee has come to rely so heavily. The Congress will feel the loss of a dedicated public servant who selflessly worked extraordinary hours in helping us advance the legislative process. We will miss Kathy's expertise and counsel. I know that I speak for all of the Members who have served on the Budget Committees of the House and Senate during the past 25 years and all of our staff when I express our gratitude to Kathy for all of her contributions to the legislative process.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I have a series of amendments that have been cleared on both sides that I will call up en bloc. I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 4657, Senator Stabenow; amendment No. 4573, Senator Obama, as modified; amendment No. 4626, Senator Dodd, as modified; amendment No. 4636, Senator Cantwell; and amendment No. 4653, Senator Lautenberg, be called up, deemed read, and agreed to by unanimous consent.

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

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the votes that should have been set for 2:30 now be set to begin at 2:45.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from South Dakota.

Mr. GREGG. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GREGG. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. GREGG. I send to the desk two amendments that have been agreed to that may have already been filed: Biden No. 4608 and Senator Coleman No. 4574. I ask unanimous consent they be considered as reported and read and they be agreed to.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent the only remaining amendments to be considered prior to final passage will be the amendments of Senator Clinton, Senator Chambliss, and Senator Domenici.

Mr. GREGG. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask that Senator Domenici's amendment numbered 4598, as modified, be considered pending and it be agreed to by unanimous consent.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.