Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliaton Act of 2005--Resumed
Floor Speech
DEFICIT REDUCTION OMNIBUS RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2005--RESUMED -- (Senate - November 03, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I was correct then, and that is why we put pay-go into this resolution. The budget resolution does have pay-go in it, and it is the appropriate approach to pay-go because it recognizes there is a difference between tax relief and raising spending. The other side of the aisle has always looked on people's taxes as their money. We don't look at it that way on this side of the aisle. We look at it as the people's money, and they should be able to keep it. We should not have a rule that arbitrarily takes it from them.
For that reason, I oppose the amendment.
I make a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane before the Senate, and I raise a point of order under section 305 of the Budget Act.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GREGG. The next amendment is that of Senator Lincoln.
AMENDMENT NO. 2356, AS MODIFIED
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GREGG. Madam President, this amendment is opposed by the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee has aggressively funded this account with $1.94 billion in this bill, which will cover 1.9 million victims of the hurricane. Therefore, these additional funds, if this amendment were to pass, would basically put the Finance Committee section of the bill out of compliance with the Deficit Reduction Act. Therefore, we oppose it.
I make a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane to the measure now before the Senate. I raise that as a point of order under section 305 of the Budget Act.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT NO. 2372
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we are now on to Senator Murray's amendment.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Corzine be added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, in a few short weeks some of our most vulnerable Americans, our sickest and poorest, so-called dual eligibles, are going to be shifted from Medicaid to Medicare. We have a train wreck coming. Medicare is going to randomly assign these people to a plan which they may not know about and which might not cover their lifesaving drugs. Doctors, hospitals, and pharmacists are scrambling. These prescription drug policies themselves have not defined the drugs they are going to cover. My amendment simply gives a 6-month transition for those people so they do not get lost in this switch. I support Medicare coverage for these dual eligibles, but I cannot--and I don't think we should--support turning these people away at the drugstore.
This amendment does not delay the implementation of the Medicare drug benefit. It simply assures thousands of our most vulnerable Americans that they will not be lost in the transition from Medicaid to Medicare coverage.
I thank Senator Rockefeller and my cosponsors, and I urge adoption of this amendment.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, CMS has a plan in place, and 6 months ago CMS introduced a strategy for transitioning dual eligibles from Medicaid to Medicare which lays out in great detail the steps CMS will take to ensure the continuity of coverage of this valuable group of beneficiaries. Therefore, the leadership of the Finance Committee strongly opposes this amendment.
I make a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane to the measure now before the Senate, and I raise a point of order under section 305 of the Budget Act.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT NO. 2414
(Purpose: To provide for the suspension of the debate limitation on reconciliation legislation that causes a deficit or increases the deficit)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, the practical effect of this amendment would be to essentially vitiate the reconciliation process. It would mean we would end up with an event that could be filibustered. The whole purpose of reconciliation is to have a time limit and to get to a vote. Therefore, this amendment would undermine completely the concept of reconciliation which, as is hopefully going to be proven by this bill and others, is a very constructive way to get legislation through this institution and move forward with the business of the people.
Therefore, I make a point of order that the pending amendment contains matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget, and I raise a point of order against the amendment under section 306 of the Budget Act.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
AMENDMENT NO. 2391
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I am sure this amendment is well-intentioned, as are all amendments from the Senator from New Jersey, but essentially it creates an unnecessary level of paperwork for the enrollee in the plan, and in addition, as a practical matter, it enters into a portion of the Medicare trust fund which we have not addressed in this reconciliation bill, which is the Part D section of the trust fund, that being the new drug program the theory being that program should be allowed to get rolling before it gets amended.
There are a number of regulations coming out from CMS relative to making sure the beneficiaries are adequately protected under their plan, and I believe they pick up the issues that are raised by the Senator from New Jersey.
That being said, I make a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane to the measure now before the Senate, and I raise that point of order under section 305 of the Budget Act.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, let me begin by thanking all my colleagues for their very constructive efforts today. The fact that we were able to complete the voting process today was a reflection of the willingness of people in this Chamber, especially the staff who acted in an extraordinarily professional way.
Also, of course, I want to thank Senator Conrad and his staff, Mary Naylor and her team.
Senator Conrad has been an incredibly positive, constructive, and professional individual to work with on this bill. This bill would not have been completed--even though he may not agree with the bill, which he doesn't, obviously, and he has argued his position--he has been more than fair in allowing us to proceed through the bill. And it is a reflection of his extraordinary professionalism.
I thank everyone on the staff, except his chart maker.
(Laughter)
I also especially want to thank my staff--led by the inimitable Scott Gudes--Gail Miller, Jim Hearn, Cheri Reidy, and the rest of the staff--Dave Fisher and Denzel McGuire. We have had two staff members who have had children just recently, Bill Lucia and Matt Howe. Matt's child was born just as the debate started. I am sure he called him ``deficit reduction.'' We are all very excited about that. We very much appreciate the extraordinary job the staff has done here.
I think it is important for our membership to remember that this is the first time in 8 years that this Congress has stepped forward to try to reduce spending by addressing the entitlement and mandatory accounts of our Government. This is a major step forward in the activity of fiscal responsibility.
The other side of the aisle has tried to join this bill with other bills. The simple fact is, the only vote you will cast--the only vote that will be cast in the next few minutes--will be the only vote you are going to have to significantly reduce the deficit. It will be a veto to reduce the deficit by approximately $35 billion.
If you oppose the next bill that comes down the pike--the tax relief bill--that is your choice. But that is not what you are voting on here. What you are voting on here is the opportunity to reduce the deficit, and it is the only opportunity you are going to have, and it is the first time, as I mentioned, in 8 years that we will be proceeding down this road. It is a step toward fiscal responsibility, and it is a reflection of the Republican Congress's commitment to pursue a path of fiscal responsibility.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
Source