William Roth

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROTH. Again, I make a point of order that this amendment is in violation of the Byrd rule of the Budget Act.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I yield back my time.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, on amendment No. 3865, I yield back the time and I will make a point of order that it is in violation of the Byrd rule.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, this amendment is the same one we considered in the Finance Committee. Supporters of this amendment claim it is preferable because it is more targeted, that it only benefits certain married families, and that it provides more comprehensive marriage penalty relief. I do not shy away from the fact that our bill benefits virtually every American family. I welcome it. The Joint Committee on Taxation tells us that our bill will help over 45 million families. They also tell us the Democratic alternative will assist only 24 million. Our bill also addresses the marriage penalty without creating a new penalty--a so-called homemaker penalty. With our approach, all married couples with the same income will be treated alike. This cannot be said of the alternative. Finally, the Democratic alternative includes that income cap. If we are serious about addressing the inequity of this tax, we should not make this an issue of rich versus poor. Our bill is fair, it is comprehensive, and it is the right thing to do. I urge my colleagues to oppose this Democratic substitute.

Mr. ROTH. Have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Mr. ROTH. I so request.

Mr. ROTH. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, this amendment would strike the increase in the rate brackets of the underlying bill. As my colleagues may know, in dollar terms, the greatest source of marriage penalty for American families is the rate brackets. Under current law, for instance, the 15 percent rate bracket ends for singles at $26,250; it ends for couples at $43,850. Our bill has remedied that unfairness by phasing in a doubling of the married couples' rate bracket so that it ends at twice the ending point of the single's bracket. While I agree that a further increase in the standard deduction is a good idea, I do not believe we should do it at the expense of the increase in the rate brackets. Accordingly, I must oppose this amendment.

Mr. ROTH. I yield such time as the Senator from Nevada may use.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I yield my time to the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, the FamilyCare initiative prematurely doubles the size and scope of the new State Children's Health Insurance Program. S-CHIP has been enrolling children for less than 3 years--and it has not reached its goals in terms of covering eligible children. Let us make sure the S-CHIP model works before we expand it so dramatically. In fact, Mr. President, it is worth noting that if the states want to extend coverage to parents, they may do so now under Medicaid waivers, or even under S-CHIP, if that coverage is ``cost-effective''. In addition to program concerns, FamilyCare raises a fundamental question. Should parenthood be the driving factor in terms of eligibility for health insurance coverage? FamilyCare rewards parenthood and disadvantages working poor individuals who decide to postpone having families until they are better able to afford to raise a child. Finally, this new initiative is extremely costly. We are talking about creating a new program with a cost of $50 billion over ten years--all without holding hearings on the bill and without any discussion of priorities. Mr. President, I make a point of order that the Kennedy amendment is neither germane nor relevant to the reconciliation bill, it is in violation of 305(b)(2) of the Budget Act.

Mr. ROTH. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Yes, that is correct.

Mr. ROTH. Yes.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, this is an amendment that undermines, not advances, progress on two important issues. Its only effect will be to stop tax cuts for families while not advancing by a day Medicare reform that should include a prescription drug benefit. If anything, it slows down Medicare reform by politicizing the issue. Prescription drugs should not be pitted against family tax cuts. We can and should be for both. The budget surplus allows for both. The budget passed by Congress allows for both and both are necessary policies, but they must first each be correctly thought through. Now is the time to pass marriage tax relief, an issue on which we have been working for years. Now is the time to be working together on Medicare reform, as we are in the Finance Committee. Working together we can succeed on both policies. Seeking division we will fail on each. Notwithstanding any policy objections, the pending amendment offered by the Senator from Virginia is not germane to the underlying bill and would, therefore, result in a section 305(b)(2) point of order under the Budget Act. Therefore, I raise a point of order against the amendment pursuant to section 305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be agreed to en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the amendments be printed in the Record. The amendments are the following: Nos. 3854, 3855, 3859, 3860, 3877, and 3888.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that votes occur in relation to the following amendments in the following sequence, beginning immediately after the adoption of the Interior appropriations bill, with 2 minutes prior to each vote for explanation: Burns No. 3872, Hollings No. 3875, Lott No. 3881, final passage.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be withdrawn: Nos. 3856, 3857, 3861, 3862, 3866, 3867, 3876, 3879, 3880, and 3882.

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 337, submitted earlier by Senator Lott and Senator Daschle.

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to the Interior appropriations bill and I be recognized to call up the managers' package of amendments which is at the desk, the amendments be reported and agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and the Senate then turn to H.R. 4516, the legislative appropriations bill, for Senator Boxer to offer her amendment.

Mr. ROTH

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