Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. This amendment deals with the stop-and-go tax cuts known as extenders. Last December, the Senate approved a package of tax extenders for the 2014 year. That law expired before the ink could dry. By New Year's Day, taxpayers were thrown back in the dark about what they will owe in the future. Let's not repeat that mistake. A grab bag of tax breaks is nobody's idea of perfect tax policy. My amendment will definitely move the ball forward on tax policy. It will send a clear signal that the Senate is ready to put these tax incentives in place through the year 2016. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. The first of the three amendments I call up would expand and simplify the tax credits to help students afford the sky-high costs of a college education. Students and their families today spend hours wading through a Byzantine web of tax incentives for college and too often miss out on opportunities in the Tax Code to pay for their education. Students are taking on loan debt that weighs them down for years. Amendment No. 791 Second, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside in order to call up the Wyden, Murray, Stabenow amendment No. 791.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. WYDEN. This amendment would delete the reconciliation instructions in Section 201 of the budget resolution. When it comes to tackling the big economic challenges in this country, the best legislation is bipartisan legislation. Using the procedural tactic called budget reconciliation is a guaranteed path to partisanship and gridlock. It would be particularly damaging in the cause of tax reform, where Democrats and Republicans understand, just as in 1986, there is an opportunity for common ground. I also think it would be very unfortunate to use reconciliation to appeal the Affordable Care Act. If it is repealed, America goes back to the dark days when health care was reserved for the healthy and the wealthy. Amendment No. 870 Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside in order to call up amendment No. 870.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment to call up my amendment No. 708.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, first of all, I wish to thank Chairman Enzi for his courtesy in allowing me to take a few minutes to discuss a bipartisan amendment I will be offering on this bill. It deals with what I think is going to be an enormous challenge this summer for the West, and that is dealing with this wildfire challenge and the prospect that we could literally have enormous fires--what could be virtually infernos--throughout the West this summer. I make that judgment because recently when I was home, I got a briefing. For example, in Medford, OR, they told me it was the driest it had been for 25 years. In Medford, when you get an update on the fires--and, colleagues, it is worth noting that nobody used to have a fire briefing in March. That is just unheard of. We have fire briefings well into the summer. But fires are getting to be a year-round occurrence. I was there in March, and the fire experts said it is going to be very dry. When you look southward to California, all you see is dry, dry, dry. The fact is that as it gets drier and as it gets hotter on the forest floor, should lightning strike, which is very common in rural America, all of a sudden you can have an inferno on your hands and one that really knows no boundaries and can affect private property owners, State lands, and Federal lands. We had an important hearing in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee the other day on the sportsmen's bill. It looked as if there were a lot of good ideas in the bipartisan bill, but it will be pretty hard to go hunting and fishing in the forests this summer if the forests are burning up. So what a bipartisan group of us from the West want to do--and I particularly commend our colleague Senator Crapo of Idaho. He and I have teamed up on this effort. We have a large bipartisan coalition of Senators who have joined us. We want to fix the broken system of fighting wildfire in America. What happens today, colleagues, is that the accounts for prevention get short shrift. In effect, the work that needs to be done with the smaller trees and thinning out the underbrush doesn't get the funding that is needed, so what happens is, as a result of the lack of prevention, you have these bigger fires and you have to put them out. The accounts for dealing with fire suppression are also short of money, so what happens at that point is the agencies borrow from the prevention fund to put the fire out, and the problem just gets worse and worse. So what Senator Crapo and I, with, as I have indicated, a large bipartisan coalition of Senators, are seeking to do is to end that kind of fire borrowing. What we are proposing is that the biggest fires-- perhaps the 1 percent of the fires that really turn into infernos--you would fight those from the disaster fund because they are, in fact, disasters. We have received an analysis from the budget officials indicating that this would really be a wash from a budgeting standpoint because, in effect, while you do spend a bit of money from the disaster fund putting out these infernos, you also generate some real savings from the prevention fund by not having as many fires in the first place. What our bipartisan amendment will do is give the Departments of Agriculture and Interior the opportunity to access the disaster fund for that 1 percent of the fires that can really break a community apart. It seems to me that Americans across the country who live in communities where there are these fires deserve to know their homes and lives are not going to be threatened needlessly. That is what we will be able to prevent with this bipartisan amendment. Freeing up the Forest Service funds that our proposal will do will ensure that the natural resources agencies have the resources they need to improve forest health and fund the very preventive work that is needed to reduce the size and severity of future fires. We are going to be joined in this amendment. As I have indicated, Senator Crapo and I base it on our bipartisan bill. Senators Stabenow and Baldwin will be cosponsors, and I believe others will as well. It is an important amendment and it is an urgent amendment because we need to have this in place quickly so as to give the natural resources agencies and our communities the tools they need this summer. It is a real wake-up call when you get a fire briefing in March. That is an indication that we have a very, very difficult fire season coming up. This bipartisan amendment ensures that in a cost-effective way we give our natural resources agencies the tools they need to fight these infernos and protect our communities. Once again, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee, Senator Enzi, for giving me this time. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to Rob Jones, Virginia Lenahan, Karen Matthews, Baxter Matthews, David Mitchell, Jennifer Phillips, Jacob Puhl, Chris Shim, Polly Webster, and Austin Williams for the remainder of the 114th Congress.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, the Senate is going to spend much of this week debating the contours and the details of the Federal budget. Our colleagues are going to offer a variety of amendments, and we will undoubtedly cast a lot of votes. Those watching are going to hear speeches that are peppered with numbers and statistics. So I would like to start out the debate by setting aside, to the extent we can, this flood of numbers and statistics, and focus on what this means to working families in my home State of Oregon and across the country. My view is the great economic challenge of our time is expanding opportunity for these families. It is about strengthening the middle class and adding sturdier rungs to America's economic ladder so everybody has the chance to climb upward. Seven years after a crippling economic collapse, we have seen our unemployment rate go down, home foreclosures have gone down, gas prices have gone down. We are finally starting to see wages beginning to grow, and manufacturing is picking up steam. The American economy is now performing better than at any recent time in memory. But the fact is there are still millions of Americans who feel stuck. They listen to all of the positive economic news that ricochets across the news media and wonder when things are actually going to get better for them and their families. I hear it firsthand in every townhall meeting I hold in our State, including several this month. These are young parents who are overwhelmed by the cost of childcare. There are students practically in shock over the sticker price of a college education. We have workers who are nearing retirement age, confirmed by the Finance Committee, who have hardly been able to save at all. What the Senate budget is all about is not just facts and figures but about the hopes and aspirations of those people I have described who want things to change. In my view, the budget the Congress sets should take on those middle-class challenges directly. It ought to help working-class families and give more Americans a chance to get ahead in life. This week, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are putting forward a different kind of budget--a budget that would poke some new holes in the safety net and, in my view, would worsen inequality. We would see millions of Americans face cuts in programs that are a lifeline for them. I have to ask, How will cutting a Pell grant and education tax credits help a disadvantaged student in La Grande, OR, who wants to work hard, play by the rules, and get ahead? How is cutting food stamps going to help a single mother in Ashland who is walking on an economic tightrope every month? How is it going to help her keep food on the table? How will slashing Medicaid help a struggling family in Roseburg, OR, stay healthy and out of the emergency room? And, finally, how would repealing the Affordable Care Act help a cancer survivor in Corvallis who has finally been able to get health insurance for the first time in years? So my bottom line is pretty direct: Our middle class declines with every rung that is pulled from the ladder of opportunity. So what we all ought to say is the budget is about trying to help Americans climb upward with a budget that is designed to give all Americans the opportunity to get ahead. To me, we start by investing in America's infrastructure. We simply cannot have big league economic growth with a little league infrastructure. The roads and highways in Oregon and across our country are now pocked by ruts and potholes, making it harder to do business and harder to travel. Dozens of people have been killed or injured in bridge collapses. Without adequate roads, bridges, and transit, drivers spend far too much time sitting in traffic choking on exhaust. This also has taken a big toll on America's ability to compete internationally. We have to have big league infrastructure to draw jobs and investment to our country, and that depends on the quality of our roads and ports and airports and railways. We know investing in infrastructure creates thousands of jobs in America right away and supports millions more over the long term. In my view, effective, targeted investments in infrastructure ought to be a no-brainer on both sides of the aisle. Second, the Congress ought to strengthen programs that assist rural communities and brighten their economic futures. For example, homes in Oregon and across the West are being threatened by fires that are growing bigger and hotter and more damaging each year. Chairman Enzi's budget took several steps in the right direction to improve the way governments budget for fires, but with a growing threat, more resources are needed to fight and prevent fires. Having just visited Medford, OR, they told me it was going to be the driest in 25 years, and we take out a map and California just looks dry, dry, dry. Passing the bipartisan legislation that Senator Crapo and I have authored is urgent. I also feel funding for agricultural research is another vital tool for giving rural communities a chance to get ahead. Each dollar that goes into agricultural research will be far outstripped by the value created in crops and croplands. I was told just recently by wheat farmers in Eastern Oregon that investing in agricultural research is going to give them and people all through Eastern Oregon a better chance to get ahead and be more successful with their farms. I want to make mention of the important low-income and middle-class tax challenge. We ought to make the tax cuts for middle-class and low- income Americans permanent. There is a very big tax looming in 2018, unless the Congress moves to prevent it. Millions of families in Oregon and across the Nation depend on the expansion of the earned-income tax credit, the child tax credit, and the American opportunity tax credit. These are all set to expire, and the longer families sit in the dark wondering what their tax obligations will be, the harder it is for these families--already struggling to get ahead--for them to predict how to budget. In my view, it would be legislative malpractice to leave these low-income and middle-class tax cuts teetering on a cliff while others are permanently enshrined into the law. Furthermore, taking that uncertainty off the table is going to make comprehensive tax reform easier to accomplish. My colleagues and I on the Finance Committee are working hard to bring our broken Tax Code into the 21st century. I have worked for more than a decade, first with our former colleague Senator Gregg and most recently with our current colleague Senator Coats, to produce the first bipartisan Federal income tax reform plan in more than a quarter century. So I know it is possible to make the Tax Code simpler and fairer. It ought to give everybody the chance to climb the economic ladder, and making the critical low-income and middle-class tax cuts permanent is a big step in that direction. Next, I think the question of college affordability and doing more to help students get to graduation day ought to be a focus of this budget. The skyrocketing price of tuition keeps far too many young people from enrolling in college, and it keeps too many others from completing it. In effect, the price of college can reinforce inequality. Millions of students are buried up to their eyeballs in debt before they ever put on that cap and gown. It is time to come at this challenge from every angle. For one, it is important to make student debt more manageable so graduates don't spend decades weighed down by loan payments. It is absolutely essential to help students take on less debt from the start. That will get more students in the door to challenge and free graduates from a lifetime of debt. That is why, in my view, cutting the Pell grant is the wrong way to go, and the Byzantine web of tax incentives for higher education needs to be cleaned up as well. It should not take dozens of calculations and hours of time for students to navigate the Byzantine tax rules. It should be simpler and easier so more students see a more meaningful benefit. Some student loan debt may be unavoidable, but leaving students with less debt is possible. My next concern with respect to the budget is making sure needless cuts are made in essential health care programs. The cuts to Medicaid, in my view, that have been proposed by the other side are a guaranteed formula to make life harder for struggling families. Just contemplate--and having been to Iowa, I know of the many seniors in Iowa--seniors who rely on Medicaid to cover the cost of nursing home care. That is, to a great extent, what the Medicaid budget is all about. Medicaid for those frail seniors--whether it is Oregon or Vermont or Iowa, Medicaid is what keeps a lot of those frail seniors from falling into absolute destitution. In another era, impoverished seniors might have been thrown into almshouses or poor farms. Today, Medicaid is a lifeline for tens of millions. But the budget proposal we have seen from the other side, in my view, would inflict substantial cuts on Medicaid, endanger our future. I don't believe that is the right course for frail seniors who rely on Medicaid for nursing home care. The last point I would make deals with the effects of repealing the Affordable Care Act. If we repeal the Affordable Care Act, make no mistake about it, America goes back to the days when health care is for the healthy and the wealthy because no longer will we have protections for people with preexisting conditions. It is fine if you are healthy and it is fine if you are wealthy, but that is not most Americans. There are plenty of ways to improve the Affordable Care Act in a bipartisan fashion. That is not what the budget from the other side does. I hope we will not go back to the days in America when health care is for the healthy and wealthy, which is the bottom-line consequence of full repeal. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I will be very brief. My colleague has expressed his thoughts on this issue well, and we have had a number of discussions on infrastructure with the distinguished chairman of the committee. I come back to the fact that all Americans have a stake in this amendment--whether you are a commuter, whether you are an exporter, whether you are someone who lives in rural Wyoming or rural Oregon.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I will be very brief. I thank my colleagues for their courtesy. This amendment is about more than bumpy roads, popped tires, and broken axles. It is about jobs and economic growth in every nook and cranny in our country, and the key to that growth is infrastructure. Attracting investment depends on the condition of our infrastructure. Suffice it to say that our competitors in a tough global marketplace are increasing their investments in infrastructure. It is time to adopt this amendment and for us to do the same. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive all applicable sections of the act for purposes of this pending amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, colleagues, Social Security is a promise between workers and seniors that should never be broken, and Social Security benefits ought to be protected and should not be cut. The Congress needs to take steps to ensure that Social Security can pay full benefits for future generations and must avoid creating artificial roadblocks to the proper use of Social Security trust funds. The House of Representatives has refused to do that even though Social Security trust funds today have a balance of $2.8 trillion, and should be able to pay all earned benefits until 2033. Support this amendment. Don't privatize Social Security.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Geothermal Production Expansion Act of 2015 with my colleagues Senators Risch, Merkley, Murkowski, and Crapo. This bipartisan bill will allow for the rapid expansion of already identified geothermal resources without the additional delays of competitive leasing and without opening up those adjacent properties to speculative bidders who have no interest in developing the resource. At the same time that the bill streamlines the leasing process, it also protects the taxpayer by requiring that developers pay fair market value for the new lease, and limiting the amount of adjacent Federal land that can be leased to 640 acres. The Bureau of Land Management, which manages geothermal projects on federal land under lease agreements, estimates about 250 million acres of federal land contains geothermal power potential. Geothermal energy projects that are producing geothermal power under the BLM's management make up about half of the total geothermal generating capacity in the United States. This legislation takes an important step to speed the development of this tremendous clean energy potential on public lands, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce five unique Oregon tribal bills S. 814, S. 815, S. 816, S. 817, and S. 818, that each deliver on promises made to the tribes long ago. By introducing these bills today I am renewing my commitment to the five Oregon tribes who will benefit greatly from passage of these bills--the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Coquille Indian Tribe, the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. For the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, their bills put land into trust, the last two remaining federally-recognized Indian tribes in Oregon without a land base. The third bill amends the Restoration Act of the Coquille Indian Tribe to make forest management activities on tribal lands uniform with the management of other tribal forests. The final two bills streamline the Bureau of Indian Affairs process for putting land into trust for the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. These five unique bills honor and respect tribal sovereignty and support each tribe's right to be self-sufficient, build their economies, and support and provide for their communities. I am pleased to be joined on these bills by my colleague Senator Merkley and look forward to working with our Senate and House colleagues to advance the bills and to finally send them to the President's desk. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Geothermal Production Expansion Act of 2015 with my colleagues Senators Risch, Merkley, Murkowski, and Crapo. This bipartisan bill will allow for the rapid expansion of already identified geothermal resources without the additional delays of competitive leasing and without opening up those adjacent properties to speculative bidders who have no interest in developing the resource. At the same time that the bill streamlines the leasing process, it also protects the taxpayer by requiring that developers pay fair market value for the new lease, and limiting the amount of adjacent Federal land that can be leased to 640 acres. The Bureau of Land Management, which manages geothermal projects on federal land under lease agreements, estimates about 250 million acres of federal land contains geothermal power potential. Geothermal energy projects that are producing geothermal power under the BLM's management make up about half of the total geothermal generating capacity in the United States. This legislation takes an important step to speed the development of this tremendous clean energy potential on public lands, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce five unique Oregon tribal bills S. 814, S. 815, S. 816, S. 817, and S. 818, that each deliver on promises made to the tribes long ago. By introducing these bills today I am renewing my commitment to the five Oregon tribes who will benefit greatly from passage of these bills--the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Coquille Indian Tribe, the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. For the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, their bills put land into trust, the last two remaining federally-recognized Indian tribes in Oregon without a land base. The third bill amends the Restoration Act of the Coquille Indian Tribe to make forest management activities on tribal lands uniform with the management of other tribal forests. The final two bills streamline the Bureau of Indian Affairs process for putting land into trust for the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. These five unique bills honor and respect tribal sovereignty and support each tribe's right to be self-sufficient, build their economies, and support and provide for their communities. I am pleased to be joined on these bills by my colleague Senator Merkley and look forward to working with our Senate and House colleagues to advance the bills and to finally send them to the President's desk. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.