[Pages S4322-S4324]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE LINE-ITEM VETO ACT

The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
amendment no. 362 to amendment no. 347

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment by the
junior Senator from Wisconsin. I am unhappy that I have to do so
because I have the greatest respect for Senator Feingold and for his
dedication to deficit reduction. And though I agree with 99 percent of
the substance of this sense-of-the-Senate, I cannot agree with the
final statement that ``enacting a * * * so-called middle-class tax cut
during the 104th Congress would hinder efforts to reduce the Federal
deficit.''
I would like to state for the Record that I do believe that deficit
reduction is this Congress highest priority. If proposals for tax
breaks--such as the $200 billion in tax breaks moving through the
House--get in the way of further progress in reducing the deficit, I
will oppose them. However, I believe it is possible to both make the
Tax Code fairer to low- and middle-income working families and
significantly reduce the deficit.
For example, Congress could engage in wholesale tax reform, lowering
rates for middle and lower income taxpayers while eliminating wasteful
tax loopholes that benefit the rich. Such reform could be designed to
reduce the deficit and make the Tax Code more equitable. I do not think
the Senate should go on record right now with a sense-of-the-Senate
that implies such reform is out of the question.
Though this Congress has discussed in great detail the problems with
our Federal budget, we have yet to start the debate on the fiscal year
1996 budget plan. At this early point in the debate, I do not believe
it wise to start ruling out options--such as providing some tax relief
to working families. Therefore, I will reluctantly oppose the pending
sense-of-the-Senate.
amendment no. 403

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to support the amendment
offered by my colleague from New Jersey. If adopted, the Bradley
amendment will allow the President to eliminate tax loopholes that
benefit special interests at the expense of the American people. And
while the tax expenditure language in the Dole substitute is a good
first step in the right direction, the amendment offered by Senator
Bradley offers definitive protection against future wasteful tax
spending.
Mr. President, when it comes to creative spending, the Federal
Government is second to none. And one of the most creative ways that
Washington spends money is through special breaks and hidden
expenditures in the Tax Code. The Tax Code contains loopholes large and
small that benefit every type of special interest, including, among
others, an exclusion of income for rentals of 2 weeks or less and
deferrals of income of foreign-controlled corporations.
Mr. President, there is not enough time this morning to go through
the entire list of loopholes that permeates our tax laws, but you may
be assured that there is a credit, break, or writeoff for every
conceivable purpose. There may have been a time when our country could
afford these expenditures, but that time is over. Today, we have the
opportunity to begin the process of eliminating this hidden spending if
we adopt the clear and unambiguous language offered by my colleague
from New Jersey.
[[Page S4323]] Mr. President, we are at a critical time in our
Nation's history: We can act now to balance our Federal budget or we
can pass the buck to our children and leave them a legacy of debt,
depression, and continued economic decline. In order to regain control
of our financial situation, we need to make tough choices, and the time
has arrived for the special interests to pay their dues along with the
rest of us. Mr. President, at a time when we are asking the American
people to accept sacrifices in the areas of housing, school lunches,
and education, I believe we in Congress need to subject tax spending to
the same level of scrutiny. So I urge my colleagues to support the
Bradley amendment and I yield the floor.
vote on motion to table amendment no. 403

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 2 p.m. having arrived, under the
previous order, the question now occurs on the motion to table
amendment No. 403, offered by the Senator from New Jersey [Mr.
Bradley].
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is
necessarily absent.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 48, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 109 Leg.]

YEAS--50

Abraham
Ashcroft
Bennett
Bond
Brown
Burns
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Faircloth
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Hatfield
Helms
Hutchison
Inhofe
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nickles
Pressler
Roth
Santorum
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner

NAYS--48

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Bradley
Breaux
Bryan
Bumpers
Byrd
Conrad
Daschle
Dodd
Dorgan
Exon
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Hollings
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murray
Nunn
Packwood
Pell
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Simon
Simpson
Wellstone

NOT VOTING--2

Heflin
Shelby

So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 403) was agreed
to.
Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. NICKLES. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Vote on Motion to Table Amendment No. 362

Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to table the pending amendment No.
362 offered by Senator Feingold and ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask that the next two votes be 10-minute
votes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
table amendment No. 362 offered by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr.
Feingold]. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is
necessarily absent.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 54, nays 44, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 110 Leg.]

YEAS--54

Abraham
Ashcroft
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bond
Bradley
Brown
Burns
Coats
Cochran
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Faircloth
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Hatfield
Helms
Hutchison
Inhofe
Kempthorne
Kennedy
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nickles
Pressler
Rockefeller
Roth
Santorum
Simpson
Smith
Snowe
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner

NAYS--44

Akaka
Bingaman
Boxer
Breaux
Bryan
Bumpers
Byrd
Campbell
Chafee
Cohen
Conrad
Daschle
Dodd
Dorgan
Exon
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Hollings
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kerrey
Kerry
Leahy
Levin
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murray
Nunn
Packwood
Pell
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Sarbanes
Simon
Specter
Wellstone

NOT VOTING--2

Heflin
Shelby

So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 362) was agreed
to.
Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the
motion was agreed to, and I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Vote on Motion to Table Amendment No. 404

Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I move to table the pending amendment No.
404 offered by Senator Hollings and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to the motion
to table amendment No. 404 offered by the Senator from South Carolina
[Mr. Hollings]. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The Chair will advise Senators that this is a 10-minute vote.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is
necessarily absent.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Heflin] is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
who desire to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 46, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 111 Leg.]

YEAS--52

Abraham
Ashcroft
Bennett
Bond
Brown
Burns
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Faircloth
Feinstein
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Hatfield
Helms
Hutchison
Inhofe
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nickles
Packwood
Pressler
Roth
Santorum
Simpson
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner

NAYS--46

Akaka
Baucus
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Bradley
Breaux
Bryan
Bumpers
Byrd
Campbell
Conrad
Daschle
Dodd
Dorgan
Exon
Feingold
Ford
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Hollings
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murray
Nunn
Pell
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Simon
Wellstone

NOT VOTING--2

Heflin
Shelby

The motion to table the amendment (No. 404) was agreed to.
Mr. EXON addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending
amendment be temporarily set aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 373 to Amendment No. 347

(Purpose: To include in the definition of ``targeted tax benefits''
provisions that worsen the deficit in periods beyond those covered by
the budget resolution)

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 373, which the clerk
has at the desk. I ask for its immediate consideration.
[[Page S4324]] The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Exon], for himself and Mr.
Daschle, proposes an amendment numbered 373 to amendment No.
347.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

On page 5, strike lines 14 through 17 and insert:
``(A) estimated by the Joint Committee on Taxation as
losing revenue for any one of the three following periods--
``(1) the first fiscal year covered by the most recently
adopted concurrent resolution on the budget;
``(2) the period of the 5 fiscal years covered by the most
recently adopted concurrent resolution on the budget; or
``(3) the period of the 5 fiscal years following the first
5 years covered by the most recently adopted concurrent
resolution on the budget; and''.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, we have debated this amendment already so I
will be very, very brief. This amendment would apply the line-item veto
to tax loopholes that lost money in the 6th through the 10th years. I
believe there is broad bipartisan support for this amendment and I urge
its adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If
there be no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the
amendment.
The amendment (No. 373) was agreed to.
Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I wish to inquire of the distinguished
majority manager if he is ready to proceed with the Feingold amendment
regarding emergency spending that I understand has been cleared on both
sides. Is that correct?
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would say to my friend, we are just
about there. I think in about 1 or 2 more minutes. I think the Senator
from South Carolina was waiting to make remarks and I think we will be
ready by the time he is finished with his remarks.
Mr. EXON. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Nebraska for his
amendment. I think it helps the bill. I am glad we were able to agree
on it.
Mr. EXON. I thank my friend from Arizona. I appreciate his
cooperation.
Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I thank the able Senators, and the
managers of the bill.
Mr. President, I rise in support of the Line-Item Veto Act, which is
presently before this body. For many years, I have been a supporter of
giving authority to the President to disapprove specific items of
appropriation presented to him. On the first legislative day of this
Congress, I introduced Senate Joint Resolution 2, proposing a
constitutional amendment to give the President line-item veto
authority.
Presidential authority for a line-item veto is a significant fiscal
tool which would provide a valuable means to reduce and restrain
excessive appropriations. This proposal will give the President the
opportunity to approve or disapprove individual items of appropriation
which have passed the Congress. It does not grant power to simply
reduce the dollar amount legislated by the Congress.
Mr. President, 43 Governors currently have constitutional authority
to reduce or eliminate items or provisions in appropriation measures.
My home State of South Carolina provides this authority, and I found it
most useful during my service as Governor in the late 1940's. Surely
the President should have authority that 43 Governors now have to check
unbridled spending.
It is widely recognized that Federal spending is out of control. The
Federal budget has been balanced only once in the last 34 years. Over
the past 20 years, Federal receipts, in current dollars, have grown
from $279 billion to nearly $1.3 trillion, an increase of $978 billion.
In the meantime, Federal outlays have grown from $332 billion in 1975,
to over $1.4 trillion last year, an increase of over $1.1 trillion. The
annual budget deficits have risen to over $200 billion each year, with
the national debt growing to over $4.8 trillion.
Mr. President, it is clear that neither the Congress nor the
President are effectively dealing with the budget crisis. The President
continues to submit budgets which contain little spending reform and
project annual deficits of nearly $200 billion. I am hopeful that this
year Congress will undertake serious efforts to restrain Federal
spending by reducing or eliminating funding of ineffective programs.
If we are to have sustained economic growth, Government spending must
be significantly reduced. A balanced budget amendment and line-item
veto authority would do much to bring about fiscal responsibility. I
regret that earlier this year the Senate failed to pass the balanced
budget amendment.
Mr. President, it would be a mistake to fail to pass this measure. It
is my hope that this Congress will swiftly approve the line-item veto
and send a clear message to the American people that we are making a
serious effort to get our Nation's fiscal house in order. Finally, Mr.
President, we must get on with the serious business of reducing
spending. I thank the Chair.
Mr. EXON addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Abraham). The Senator from Nebraska.

____________________