Don Nickles

Mr. NICKLES

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

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Helms) is necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Reserving the right to object--and I shall not object-- is it the assistant Democratic leader's intention to have a rollcall vote on the DOD authorization?

Mr. NICKLES. To my knowledge, that request has been withdrawn. For the information of our colleagues, it may well be possible to pass the Department of Defense authorization bill by a voice vote.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, it is a sad occasion that we see flowers on the desk of Paul Wellstone memorializing his service to this country and to the Senate. Paul Wellstone served very ably in the Senate for 12 years. I had the pleasure of working with him, and I had the pleasure of opposing him on many occasions. Many times, I would always say in the heat of the battle that Paul Wellstone had intensity, he had passion, and he had conviction. As Senator Byrd mentioned, those are qualities and traits that are very much needed in the Senate. October 25, when Paul Wellstone was killed along with his wife Sheila and his daughter Marcia, in addition to three staff members and a couple of pilots, was a real tragedy to the Senate family. Unfortunately, we have lost a lot of Senators through airplane crashes. Many of us have been in planes under questionable circumstances. It is a tragedy we hate to see. I remember receiving the phone call and the words were ``oh, no,'' when it was confirmed. As many of our colleagues, I went to Minnesota for the memorial service on October 29 to express our condolences and sympathy on the loss of a colleague. We wanted to show support to his family, friends and constituents and say that, yes, he was a valuable Member of the Senate and we hated to lose him. To lose him in such a tragic and unexpected way is really a loss for the entire country. I remember very well when Senator Wellstone made one of his last speeches. It was a tribute to Senator Helms. Philosophically, they were probably as opposed as they could be, but they were always gentlemen and they always conducted themselves as Senators. Like Senator Helms, every time we had a debate with Senator Wellstone that we disagreed on we always would shake hands, win or lose, and we did both. We won some battles, we lost some battles, but we were always friends and we were all colleagues. I remember Paul Wellstone being inducted to the National Wrestling Hall of Fame in Stillwater, OK--an outstanding American and a great tribute. This happened in the year 2000, but he was in the class of 2001, a class that is very unique. Our colleague, Senator John Chafee, also deceased, was inducted into the National Wrestling Hall of Fame, as well as the current Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert. They were a very special class of competitors who competed not only on the wrestling mat but also on the floor of the Senate and in the House of Representatives. Paul Wellstone earned our respect and our gratitude. We miss him, and we wish to communicate to his family, his friends, his associates, and his staff members, that we respected Paul Wellstone. We appreciate his service to this country, to his State, and to the Senate. Paul Wellstone will be missed by all of us who had the pleasure of calling him our colleague. I yield the floor.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I object.

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I think some people are playing political games. I understand some people are interested in passing a unanimous consent agreement on unemployment compensation. I heard the request. It was to provide a 13-week extension of unemployment compensation. That is not what this bill does. I don't know how many times I have to say it on the floor. The bill provides for a 26-week extension, not a 13- week, a 26-week extension. There is a big difference. I believe I heard the sponsors say it changes the trigger--it does change the trigger. It is not a clean extension because it changes the trigger so that more States are eligible for long-term extension. This bill has a 26-week Federal unemployment compensation extension on top of the State 26 weeks, and an additional 7 weeks for those States that have the highest unemployment compensation. That would be a total of 52 weeks--59 weeks, in some States; 52 weeks for all States, 59 weeks for some States. It also has a section that says we should not count people who might be employed. It is a crummy bill. I have stated again my willingness to try to work with colleagues to pass a clean extension which would cost about $7 billion instead of $17 billion. While we are here, there are a couple of bills I would like to pass. So I am going to be asking unanimous consent, I tell my colleagues on the Democrat side--it is my intention to propose a couple of unanimous consent requests as well. One will be to permanently eliminate the tax on Social Security. This is a tax that passed in 1993. It was part of President Clinton's tax package. It passed by one vote in the Senate, and passed by one vote in the House. It is still the law of the land. We still tax senior citizens' Social Security benefits. I have heard a lot of people say they wanted to eliminate it. The House passed a bill to eliminate it in 2000. Unfortunately, we have not been able to do that. Senator Tim Hutchinson from Arkansas has introduced legislation this Congress to do that. It has several cosponsors. So, Mr. President, I want to notify my friends and colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle that I intend to propound a unanimous consent request so they have a chance to respond as I have been responding on several requests. I am going to propound a unanimous consent request to make part of the tax bill we passed in 2001 dealing with marriage penalty relief permanent. Unfortunately, much of the tax bill that we passed in 2001 is temporary. That bill helped lessen the burden, since we found ourselves in a recession and part of that was marriage penalty relief. That provision sunsets. It stops in the year 2009 or 2010. We should make that permanent. The House has passed legislation, H.R. 4019. They passed it with an overwhelming vote, by a vote of 271 to 142. They passed it on June 13. Unfortunately, the Senate has not found time to take that legislation up. All we have to do is pass that House bill, it goes straight to the President, and he will sign it so it can become law. So I am going to propound a unanimous consent request to pass that bill. I see my friend, the assistant Democrat leader. I will now make both of these requests. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that H.R. 4019, a bill to provide that the marriage penalty relief provisions of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 shall be made permanent, be discharged from the Senate Committee on Finance and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, the bill be read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table and any statements thereupon be printed in the Record at the appropriate place.

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to immediate consideration of Calendar No. 308, H.R. 3529, that all after the enacting clause be stricken, the text of S. 237, a bill by Senator Hutchinson, a bill to repeal the 1993 income tax increase on Social Security benefits, be printed in lieu thereof, the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, any statements thereupon be printed in the Record at the appropriate place.

Mr. NICKLES. I thank my friend and colleague from Nevada. I told him that two people can play these games. I would very much like to see the marriage penalty relief package that we passed in 2001 be made permanent. I would also like to see us repeal that portion at least, if not--I would like to see us, frankly, repeal the entire--President Clinton's tax package of 1993, but certainly repeal the tax on Social Security benefits. We tried to do that. Objection was heard. The Senate has over and over again found itself, unable in the last year and a half, to pass permanent tax relief for American citizens, not for marriage penalty relief, and not even for seniors who are paying high taxes on their Social Security benefits. I find that regrettable. Maybe there will be a change in the makeup of the Senate in a couple of weeks and legislation such as the two I just requested consent to pass--maybe we can pass those under regular order. I hope that will be the case. I yield the floor.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. NICKLES. I object.

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator from Minnesota yield?

Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator from Minnesota yield for a question?

Mr. NICKLES. I almost forgot the question, but I think it is coming back to me now. I am almost amused, but not quite, on the bill that the Senator is trying to pass by unanimous consent. Correct me if I am wrong, but did it go through the Finance Committee? Has it been reported out of any committee?

Mr. NICKLES. I admonish my colleague--that is a strong word--I inform my colleague that a person could exhaust their benefits, find a job and still would be counted as being unemployed.

Mr. NICKLES. The current law is a 13-week Federal program, which is what we have done most of the time. The Senator has gone back to 1990. At one time there was a 26-week extension.

Mr. NICKLES. I ask unanimous consent to continue for 4 additional minutes.

Mr. NICKLES. We will be done in 4 minutes.

Mr. NICKLES. Just to inform my colleague from Minnesota, that current law is a 26-week State program and a 13-week Federal program, with some high unemployment States getting an additional 13 weeks. You are trying to modify the original 13 weeks and make it 26 weeks. That is very expensive. Just to inform my colleague, if you did not try to change the trigger, or use the adjusted insured unemployment rate which costs a lot of money, and just looked at a clean, straight extension which would cost about $7 billion instead of $17.1 billion, the probability of success would go up dramatically. I mention that. To draft a bill, put it directly on the calendar, and say we expect you to pass it without any modification, is not going to happen. I wanted to make that point. I thank my colleague from Connecticut.

Mr. NICKLES. I know the Senator wants to be factually correct. I believe the trigger is different from the one in the early 1990s. The fact is, if you want to help people, consider a straight extension of the program we have in current law. I yield the floor.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Allard), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Gramm), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Allard), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions), are necessarily absent.

Mr. NICKLES

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, unfortunately this bill did not go through committee. I ask the Senator if he would modify his request to refer the bill to the Finance Committee to be reported out within 48 hours. Will he be willing to modify his request?

Mr. NICKLES. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Senator is trying to pass his bill which never had a markup in the Finance Committee. I happen to be a member of the Finance Committee. I would like to offer an amendment. I know Senator Snowe has an amendment she would like to offer. Senator Sessions has an amendment he would like to offer, or myself or someone else on the committee to offer on his behalf. We would like other Members to have a chance to amend the bill. So will the Senator be willing to modify his request to request this bill be referred to the Finance Committee for 48 hours for a markup so all members on the Finance Committee would have a chance to have input on this particular bill?

Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I object.