tv U.S. Senate CSPAN July 24, 2012 5:00pm-8:00pm EDT
5:00 pm
almost half of all native american women have been victims of domestic violence. and yet among the 33 million left out of the house violence against women act, you see the exclusion of the native american community. despite the epidemic of sexual assault and dating violence on our college campuses, the house bill leaves out improved protections for more than 11 million college women. the house bill would deny vital protections to women like an immigrant woman who is my constituent who had been stabbed by her boyfriend 19 times while she was three months pregnant, mr. president. during her ordeal, her boyfriend drove her from one part of town to the other, refusing to take her to the emergency room even though she was losing consciousness, mr. president, and bleeding profusely.
5:01 pm
thankfully the woman received medical attention. the baby was not lost and she made a full recovery. this brave woman, despite her physical and emotional scars, fully cooperated with the police and the prosecutor to eventually bring her abuser to justice. a woman's shelter helped her get a u visa and she and her child were able to move on with a new life. now, mr. president, if you look at some of the most vulnerable people living in america today, in addition to our children -- and i know what you're dealing with in pennsylvania with an unbelievable, horrific violent crime that took place in a college campus over a period of years. we know that our children are vulnerable. our immigrant women are extremely vulnerable too because they're scared that they're going to be kicked out of the country. and, therefore, their abuser
5:02 pm
knows that and puts them in a horrific situation where if they go to the police to report the abuse on themselves and their kids, they may be kicked out of the country. that's why we have the u-visas and they say if you cooperate with law enforcement, you won't be kicked out. so we have to include immigrant women. and by extension, their children, in the 30 million that are left out. we have to add them back in. the house bill fails to ensure that people like jonathan, a gay man who was abused by his partner of 13 years, receive full protection under the law and cannot be discriminated against. when jonathan did seek shelter from his abuser, he was refused by three l.a.-ary domestic violence shelters, none of which could give him a reason for
5:03 pm
excluding him. but he was left out because this community was not mentioned in the violence against women act. it is not mentioned in the house act. and jonathan falls among the 30 million that are left out of the house act. the house bill also leaves out students like mica, who was physically assault bid her boyfriend while she was in college in san francisco. her ex-boyfriend broke her phone, broke into her home, stole her belongings, stalked her at school and severely beat her. she got a restraining order against him but struggled to get her school to enforce that restraining order. she shouldn't have had to struggle. she should have had the school on her side. sadly, only this senate bill would help her. not the house bill. the house bill does not protect these women. only the senate bill ensures that all women and lgbt
5:04 pm
individuals and college students are protected equally under the law as well as native american women. the consequences of denying anyone the critical protections in the violence against women act are just too great. when someone is bleeding on the floor, we need to help them in this great country. you don't want to start asking them questions. are you gay? are you straight? are you an immigrant? are you a college student? are you a native american? if someone is bleeding on the floor, we help them in this country. that's what america is about. we see the compassion and the love every day in our country, and we saw it pour out in aurora, colorado, for an unspeakable situation. when there is violence, we have to help the victims. and only the senate bill, the senate violence against women
5:05 pm
act, the leahy-crapo bipartisan senate bill affords protection to all of our people. and so what we're saying to speaker boehner is please, hear our plea. this isn't about the senate saying it's any better than the house. what we are saying is on a bipartisan way, we figured out a bill that will protect everybody. and we are asking you to pick up that bill and pass it. there's some technical issues, a blue-slip question. we've studied that and what did we find out? those technical problems can be overcome in five seconds. so there's no reason why the house cannot pick up and pass the senate bill. the safety of women across the country, the safety of all of our communities is at stake. and it's time we pass it. in closing, i would say this.
5:06 pm
vice president biden is a wonderful human being, and he could not sit back when he was in the senate and see violence against women go on and on and on without any way to ensure that women could get into shelters, that women could get counseling, that law enforcement could be trained, that doctors could be trained, that nurses could be trained, and that we enhance the penalties for those who would harm another in a domestic violence situation. he was -- he had tremendous foresight. and in this bill, senator leahy and senator crapo have amazing foresight because they have strengthened this. we have cut back domestic violence by 53%, but we have a long way to go when three women a day are killed, mr. president, killed by their abuser. so, again, we have a very clear
5:07 pm
message for the house. please join hands with us. please, with all of the politics and all the fighting and all of the problems, there are certain times when we should just reach out to one another and protect the american people. and this is one of those times. we have the bill. it's bipartisan. it works. please accept it and let's get on with our work. thank you very, very much, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. blumenthal: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. let me begin by thanking my colleague from california for her leadership over many, many years, and her steadfast courage and vision on this issue. likewise, my colleague from the state of washington who spoke before her, senator murray, for her leadership as well, and
5:08 pm
others in this body which passed vawa, the senate's version of that measure, s. 1925, by an overwhelming bipartisan margin. in fact 68-31 back in april. this measure truly is bipartisan, and it commands overwhelming support in in body. and, more importantly, across the american public. in connecticut, i hear again and again and again from men and women, members of all communities that the violence against women act is an idea whose time came 18 years ago but continues to demand the kind of respect and support that the united states senate has given it. and so now is the time for the house to adopt the senate bill,
5:09 pm
because it is more inclusive and more effective. for a bill that works as this measure truly does, to include more potential victims, to provide more tools of enforcement is absolutely appropriate and necessary at this point in our history. and of course i hear from connecticut constituents like hillary from fair field who tells me one in four women worldwide and in the united states is at risk for violence at some point in her life. men are at risk too, and vawa supports provisions for men to be safe and healthy in their relationships as well. vawa supports programs for both men and women perpetrators of abuse to get the help they need to stop the violence. and it ensures that women and their children have a safe place to go when in danger.
5:10 pm
susan from new haven -- and i'm quoting -- "reauthorize vawa sends the message that survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking must have the tools to heal and reclaim their lives, that women and girls, communities in -- and our families must be safe, that the next generation must be engaged in this effort and the evolution on thinking on how to break the cycle of violence is a national priority. to send any other message is unconscionable. congress must act quickly. renew vawa now." renew vawa is the message we carry today. to the house, renew vawa with the improvements and reforms that we have wisely adopted in this body and continue a measure that has benefited 54,000 -- let
5:11 pm
me repeat that. 54,000 domestic violence victims in connecticut alone. millions across the country and has provided organizations in connecticut, nearly $5 million in just the last fiscal year from vawa programs. these measures make a difference in people's lives. so often we can speak and think in this chamber without the kind of connection to individual lives where we see legislation, our acts here making a difference. this measure offers us the opportunity to make a difference by broadening and making more inclusive this measure. it makes it more effective, and i'm proud that it makes it more effective with an amendment that i offer to prevent criminals who
5:12 pm
use the internet to intimidate, threaten, harass and incite violence against women and children. the use of the internet is increasingly prevalent for these kinds of crimes. the legislation that i introduced, included in the senate's bill, enhances current law for the internet age. that section of the bill is not in the house version. it should be. that is the reason why i am urging the house to adopt the senate version. but it is also more inclusive in including the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender constituents that all of us have in these protections. the lgbt americans experience domestic violence at the same rate as the general population, but they often face discrimination in accessing services. in fact, a survey found 45% of
5:13 pm
lgbt victims were turned away when they sought help from a domestic violence shelter. there is a real need, an unquestionable and immediate need to improve the access and availability of services for lgbt victims, and our measure does it. the house version does not. over 800 constituents -- and i welcome them in contacting me -- have written me to urge that we preserve the tkpwhr-gt -- lgbt provisions of the senate bill. it also improves protections for native americans that are absolutely vital. one of the invisible, unknown, unrealized facts about this community is that nearly three out of five native american women are assaulted by their spouses or intimate partners.
5:14 pm
one-third of all american indian women will be raped during their lifetime. those numbers alone should dictate the result. and the members of the tribal council, the pequot tribal nation and others across the country, the pequot happen to be from connecticut, have appealed to me to protect the tribal provisions in the senate measure. not to waiver, not to relent to the house version. and so again i urge the house to adopt our measure. and protecting immigrant populations ought to be a given for the united states senate. the house version of vawa would endanger the safety of noncitizens and society as a whole. that is a quote from the international institute of connecticut, which has urged me to hold firm, to support the
5:15 pm
provisions of the into the bill and not surrender to the house and rye lent on protecting -- relent on protecting immigrants who need this help. again i quote the house version would endanger -- quote -- "endanger the safety of noncitizen victims and society as a whole." vawa symbolizes for our country what makes america great. we protect everyone who needs it. we enforce the laws equally. without discriminating against people as to their national heritage or origin or ethnicity or race or other background. equal protection of the laws is one of the unique constitution principles of the american democracy and the american constitution, and our landmark measure enhances and enforces
5:16 pm
equal protection of the laws. i hope this body stands firm. i hope that the house understands that it's not about one body being better than another. we're way beyond that kind of comparison at this point. it's one version of the same legislation, one set of provisions seeking a common goal: doing it better, more inclusively, and more effectively in the great tradition of the legislative process. i urge the house of representatives to put partisa partisanship aside, to put aside any kind of cameral, personal differences and take action to protect all victims in america who are victims of domestic violence and sexual abuse. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a
5:23 pm
represent -- you one plan introduced by majority leader reid and supported by senate democrats and the president proposes higher taxes on american entrepreneurs, investors, and small business owners the democratic plan represents the philosophy that if only the government could raise enough money that congress could somehow spend our way to prosperity. it is a viewpoint that holds that the federal government can spend hardworking american tax dollars better than they can. rather than leaving the money in the private economy where it can be invested or spent by private citizens, this view holds that the government should instead bring these dollars here to washington, d.c., to redistribute them through the federal bureaucracy. this philosophy was probably best articulated by the president recently when he said, and i quote, "if you got a business, you didn't build that;
5:24 pm
someone else made that happen." end quote. in other words, nobody is extraordinary bring by virtue of their hard work and accomplishments. when someone works hard and succeeds, we shouldn't celebrate that person as an example. we should instead take from him or her in order, as the president said, to spread the wealth -- to quote another of his lines. i am hopeful that the tax-and-spend philosophy of the reid tax plan willot be our only oftentimes i hope that we'll have the opportunity to vote on legislation introduced by senator hatch and minority leader mcconnell. this plan takes a very different approach by following the view that now is not the time to raise anyone's taxes. this view holds that our american freeent price system works best when government gets out of the way, leaving americans free to pursue their hopes and dreams. one way that we can leave americans free to pursue their
5:25 pm
dreams is by not raising their taxes next year, and we especially shouldn't raise taxes when americans are struggling to get by. ironically, the view that we should extend current tax policy at a time when the economy is weak was articulated interestingly enough by the president just two years ago when he signed and extension of all the tax rates. at that time, president obama said that raising taxes would have been a blow to our economy just as we're climbing out after recession. well, interestingly enough, at that time real g.d.p. growth when he made that statement, when that tax rate extension was signed into law, was around 3.1%. that was the average when the president made the statement that if we raise taxes it would be a blow to our economy. well, real g.d.p. growth this year is on a pace to average around 2% and possibly less. those numbers consistently are being revised and being revised downward.
5:26 pm
if it didn't make sense to raise taxes when our economy was recovering, why does it make sense now to raise taxes as our economy is slowing? how does it make sense to raise taxes in an environment where over 23 million americans are out of work or underemployed when the unemployment rate has been stuck over 8% now for 41 consecutive months? the votes tomorrow are incredibly important. not because either plan is likely to become law immediately but because americans deserve to know where their senators stand when they go to vote this november. do you stand for stable tax rates that encourage work and investment? or do you stand for increasing taxes on the very businesses we rely on for job creation? do you stand for a free enterprise system that rewards hard work and innovation? or do you stand for making it more difficult for small
5:27 pm
businesses to grow and succeed? mr. president, these are the important choices that they will have -- that will have real impact on hardwor hardworking as and on our economy at large. consider the reid tax plan. according to the committee -- joint committee on taxation, this plan will close a tax increase on nearly a million business owners. nearly a million business owners. now, proponents of this increase are going to argue that it will only affect a small segment of our economy. and yet the joint tax committee estimates that the tax increases in the reid plan will hit more than 50% of all income earned by businesses that pay their taxes at individual rates. these are called pass-thru businesses and they apply to "s" corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships and l.l.c.'s. they are the ones that will see their cost business go up next year for no other reason that
5:28 pm
are to tax the rich. small businesses which accounted for two-thirds of all the taxes over the last decade will be particularly impacted. according to a survey of small businesses by the national federation of independent business, 75% beaver of small businesses are organized as pass-thru businesses. nfib also found that the businesses most likely to be hit are those businesses employing between 020 and 250 employees. according to the u.s. census, the data that they collect, these businesses employ more than 25% of the workforce. and so the million small businesses that according to the joint committee on taxation will see their taxes go up under this proposal employ 25% of the american workforce and account for over 50% of all pass-thru income. and so you're going to see taxes go up -- taxes go up dramatically on over 50% of
5:29 pm
pass-thru income and on small businesses that employ 25% of the american workforce. now, does that make sense in this economy? it should be no wonder that the political party advocating this kind of tax policy has also presided over the weakest economic recovery literally since the end of world war ii. the impact of the reid tax increases on small businesses will be bad enough, but unfortunately these tax increases will have significant ramifications for our entire economy. according to a study released earlier this month by ernst & young be, the reid tax plan would hurt our economy in the long term. according to ernst & young, the tax increases in the reid plan would reduce economic output by 1.3%. this would mean $200 billion less in economic activity if translated into today's economy. the ernst & young study
5:30 pm
indicates that the tax policy in the reid plan would reduce employment by half a percent. meaning roughly 710,000 fewer jobs. the study estimates that the senate democrat approach will reduce the nation's capital stock by 1.4% and ivestment by 2.4% and that this approach will reduce after-tax wages by 1.8%.e investment, you're going to cost the economy over 700,000 jobs, you're going to reduce after-tax wages for hardworking americans in this country and yet here we are talking about a tax increase that would do dangerous, dangerous damage and harm to our economy. and i would say, mr. president, these aren't partisan statistics compiled by senate republicans. these are the estimates by a respected accounting firm as to what will happen if we follow the tax policies proposed by senate democrats and the president. we'll have less economic growth, fewer jobs, and a lower standard of living in the long run.
5:31 pm
these numbers simply confirm common sense. if we want individuals and businesses to spend and invest more, we shouldn't raise the amount of their income -- the amount of their income that they have to pay to the federal government. and that's what this does. we have major tax policy decisions to make, decisions reflected in the votes that we're going to take tomorrow. do we want to encourage capital formation in this country? in other words, do we want to encourage investors to put their capital at risk so that businesses will have money to make new investments? well, by raising the capital gains tax rate from 15% to 20% for some investors, the reid bill will make it less attractive to invest in our economy. according to an ernst and young study from february of this year, the top rate of capital gains will rise to 56.7% on january 1 of next year after taking into account corporate, investor and state taxes. this will be the second highest
5:32 pm
combined capital gains tax rate in the world among oecd and brick nations. america already has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. it appears as if the senate democrats are going for number one when it comes to capital gains taxes as well. if there is anything i can say that's positive about the democrats' tax increase plan, it is at least that they rejected the president's proposal to nearly triple the tax on dividends paid by upper-income americans. even senate democrats are not shy about raising taxes, understand that the president's proposal to impose a top rate of over 40% on dividend income will be terrible for millions of seniors who rely on dividends -- for dividend paying stocks and for those american companies that rely on dividends to raise capital. instead, the reid bill would increase the top rate on dividends from 15% to 20%. now, i believe this tax increase is bad policy but it won't be nearly as harmful as the
5:33 pm
president's approach would have been. on another issue of critical importance, however, the senate democrats have decided to run to the left of this liberal administration and this is on the issue of the estate tax, better known as the death tax. the reid plan would impose a huge new death tax on family farms and businesses next year. under current law, businesses and farms are exempted from the death tax on the first $5 million of the value of an estate. values above this amount are taxed a top rate of 35%. well, i believe we ought to completely eliminate the death tax and i've introduced legislation with 37 of my colleagues to do so. but the current death tax treatment exempts the large majority of family farms and businesses from the tax. the reid plan, however, would allow the death tax to revert to the provisions in effect before 2001. this means that under the reid plan, family farms and
5:34 pm
businesses will face a top death tax rate of 55% on estates above $1 million in value. this is a massive death tax increase on tens of thousands of small businesses and family farms across america. in fact, according to the joint committee on taxation, the reid plan will increase the number of estates subject to the death tax in 2013 from 3,600 estates under current law to 50,300 estates under reid's proposal. according to the joint committee on taxation, the reid plan will subject 20 times more farming estates to the death tax in 20 2013, a 2,000% increase. the reid plan will subject nine times more small businesses to the death tax, a 900% increase. if the death tax policy in the reid plan were made permanent, over the next ten years, a number of small businesses subject to the death tax would increase from 1,800 to 23,00 and
5:35 pm
the number of family farms subject to the death tax would increase from 900 to 25,200. those are all -- that's all data put together and -- and roortd out by joint committee -- reported out by the joint cotaxation. the reason for this massive expansion of the death tax is the $1 million exemption amount is much too low given the value of successful farms and small businesses today. i'll use my state of south dakota as a good example. if you take family farms in south dakota, according to the department of agriculture, the average size of a farm in my state is 1,374 acres. and according to the usda, the average value per acre of cropland in south dakota is about $1,800. this means that the average value of a farm in my state is nearly $2.5 million. and so if you have a -- a death tax law that only exempts a million dollars and has a 55%
5:36 pm
top rate on everything above that, imagine what that's going to do to the average farm in a state like south dakota. and south dakota's not unique in that regard. we've seen land values rise across america's heartland, from nebraska to missouri to montana. let's be clear, the reid bill will subject many more families to a punitive double tax, the death tax, when a loved one passes away. it will make it much more difficult to pass family farms and businesses from one generation to the next. and we should never forget that most family farms are land rich and cash poor. lots of assets, land values, those sorts of things. what you don't want to see happen, mr. president, is to see a family farm that could be passed on to the next generation have to be liquidated to pay the i.r.s. because of a punitive death tax. it and that is precisely what -- and that is precisely what this policy as proposed by the democrat plan would do. the usda estimates that 84% of farm assets are comprised of
5:37 pm
farm real estate. that's where most farm and ranch families have their assets. that means that family farms don't have extra cash on hand to pay the death tax. instead, they'll have to sell off land or take on additional debt in order pay these higher taxes. mr. president, that is exactly what we don't want to see happen in this country. i don't believe that the president's proposal, which is a $3.5 million exemption and a 45% top rate, is adequate but it is much better than what the senate democrats and the reid plan have proposed. and so let me just summarize, if i might. tomorrow we're going to vote on the reid proposal to raise taxes at a time when americans are hurting and our economy is fragile. the reid proposal's going to impose higher taxes of more than $50 billion on successful small businesses owned -- small business owners and families. it will hurt our economy, reducing economic growth and job creation at the same time it lowers wages for hardworking american families. and it will impose a new death
5:38 pm
tax of $31 billion on 43,100 family farmers, ranchers and small businesses. we will also vote, i hope -- i hope, mr. president -- on the hatch-mcconnell alternative plan to keep tax rates where they are to prevent a tax increase on any american next year. in addition to keeping tax rates where they are, the hatch-mcconnell proposal provides instructions to the finance committee to report out fundamental tax reform legislation by 12 months from the date of enactment of the bill. the hatch-mcconnell approach is the correct approach. prevent a tax increase now and move to fundamental tax reform next year. of course, extending current tax law temporarily is only a short-term fix. what is really needed is comprehensive tax reform, much like the tax reform act of 1986. real tax reform will drive economic growth higher, will lead to robust job creation, and will result in more revenue to
5:39 pm
the federal government. but real tax reform is going to require presidential leadership, something that has unfortunately been lacking over the past 3 1/2 years. perhaps next year we'll have a president truly willing to commit to tax reform, a president who is not content is wimplely releasing a 23-page framework for corporate tax reform. but until we get to comprehensive tax reform, mr. president, the least we can do now is to ensure americans do not face a massive, new tax hike during the week -- during the weak economy. i hope we will get that vote tomorrow. i hope that -- you know, that the senate democrats will find their way to -- to give us a vote on extending the tax rates for all americans so that small businesses aren't whacked with a big tax increase next year, so that our economy doesn't get plunged perhaps into a recession. we don't see that. unemployment race particular even higher. those are the results. those are the outcomes, those are the types of things that are going to happen, according to all the independent analysis of
5:40 pm
the tax proposal that is before us today. and, remember, there's always this idea that somehow if we raise more taxes, that we'll have -- we'll be able to pay down more of the debt. and i got to say, mr. president, i've not been my experience around here that when there's money around washington, d.c., it gets sucked up and it gets spent. and i think a lot of americans would be -- we8 come the idea of seeing their taxes going to -- welcome the idea of seeing their taxes going to pay down the debt. but we're going to see a massive increase on americans that is going to be used to grow government near washington, d.c. and that is not what the american people want and that is not what we in the united states senate should be for. mr. president, i yield the flo floor. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, i ask consent that the following staff of the finance committee be allowed senate floor during consideration of s. 3412: kirk porter, andreas verhaley, solita james, allison alpers and eric
5:41 pm
hageman. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. baucus: mr. president, abraham lincoln is quoted as saying -- quote -- "i'm a firm believer in the people. if given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis:the great point is to bring them the real facts." mr. president, there have been a number of inaccurate claims over the past several weeks accusing democrats of proposing tax hik hikes. nothing could be further from the truth. so let me set the record straight. as lincoln said -- bring them the facts. democrats are proposing to extendexextend a tax cut for 10- to extend a tax cut for 100% of taxpayers. urn the democratic proposal, all taxpayers get a tax cut. those lower income, those middle income, and those upper income all get a tax cut. everyone does. millionaires get tax cut under the democratic proposal.
5:42 pm
billionaires get a tax cut under the democratic proposal. all taxpayers who pay ordinary income tax are going to get a tax cut. why is that? it's very simple. because even if your income is above $200,000 for an individual or $250,000 for a family, you're still getting a tax cut for your first $200,000 of income or first $250,000 of income. so you're getting a tax cut. everybody gets a tax cut. so i'll make that clear, all americans get a tax cut under the democratic proposal. the other side of the aisle is just saying, well, even though the most wealthy are also getting a tax cut under the democratic proposal, they on the other side want to give an even greater tax cut to those earning above $200,000 as individuals or $250,000 as a couple. so let me repeat, everyone gets
5:43 pm
a tax cut under the reid bill. the other side of the aisle says, okay, maybe that's so but they want to give an even greater tax cut to those earning over $250,000. that's the fact. an awful lot of people think the democratic bill does not raise -- does not cut taxes for those above $200,000, $250,000. it does. it z. the facts are clear. the numbers -- it does. the facts are clear. the numbers don't lie. it does. everyone gets a tax cut. so there should be no question about that. as i said, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are threatening to oppose middle-income tax cut -- which actually is a tax cut for everybody -- they say, no, no, don't do that. they say go ahead and do that, but then just add a greater tax cut for the top 2%, the wealthiest americans. let's go back and ask ourselves: why are we here, in part?
5:44 pm
these tax reductions were instituted in 2001 at a time when our country had record surpluses. i think the total tax cut in 2001 was projected to be about -- i may be off a little bit here -- $1.5 trillion or $1.6 trillion over ten years at a time when our nation had projected surplus maybe about $3 trillion -- maybe close to $5 trillion -- i've forgotten the exact number -- it was way above the cost of the 2001 tax cut. that's why in large part in 2001, congress decide, well, we have these big projected surpluses. let's give some of it back to the people. i voted for it, and that's why i voted for it. it made sense to me. with great projected surplus, let's take a portion of that, a little less than half of that, and give it back to people in terms of tax cuts. but times have changed. in the wake of two wars -- what do you think the war in iraq's cost us altogether? and add afghanistan to it?
5:45 pm
it's over a trillion dollars. unpaid for. so here we are since 2001, we've got iraq, we've got afghanistan. so in the wake of two wars and also the 2008 financial collap collapse -- that very much hurt our economy. that's changed since 2001. as a consequence, our nation now is faced with record deficits and record debt and we cannot continue to spend money that we don't have. we've got to put our nation back on solid fiscal ground. so a lot has happened since 2001. in addition, something else has happened, regrettably. today, the average household income index for inflation is actually lower than it was when the tax cuts for the wealthy were put into effect. it's lower now than it was then. that means more people are making less money now than they were when these cuts were signed into law. today american families have less money to spend on their mortgages and gasoline and groceries, for example. they have less after tax.
5:46 pm
actually even include benefits, americans are not as well off as they were about 10 or 15 years ago. these cuts were enacted in 2001 for all americans those top two rates for the wealthiest 2%, the cost to future generations nearly a trillion dollars. so i think it's just bad economics to continue these highest income tax cuts without the evidence they actually solve americans' economic woes. they really don't. it's especially bad economics when our nation's debt has increased by $10 trillion since they were first enacted. hard choices need to be made as we work to get our debt back to sustainable levels. we are all going to be asked to contribute, all of us. we need to be sure the most fortunate pay their fair share of deficit reduction as well. the top 2% are already getting that tax break under the democratic proposal.
5:47 pm
everyone gets a tax cut under the democratic proposal. it's wrong to go further and say that those above $250,000 should be getting rid of a tax cut. so i say a greater contribution from them, that is they get the same cut all the rest of us would get, then we could more easily work to get our nation's debt down to manageable levels. now, some have imiewd that we -- argued that we cannot let the tax break expire for the wealthiest americans as the top 2% because they are -- quote -- "small business owners. let me address that and marshall the facts as abraham lincoln would ask us to do. being wealthy is not the same thing as being a small business owner. you can be very wealthy in america, very wealthy but not be a small business owner. now, some would have you believe that there are one million small business owners earning over $200,000 a year. how did they get to that number?
5:48 pm
they get that from the estimate prepared by the joint committee on tax. that's the bipartisan group that gives us accurate data, both republicans and democrats, senators and house members. the joint committee predicts that in 2013, there will be about 940,000 taxpayers with some business income in the upper two rates, about 940,000 taxpayers with some business income in the upper two tax rates. that's not all the joint committee has said. they also estimate -- but that direct committee estimate isn't the number of small businesses. that's a different number. instead, it is the number of all individuals in the top two rates to receive any amount of income from past-due business or rental of real estate royalties and estates and trusts. that number of 940,000 taxpayers does not tell us whether the taxpayer spent any amount of time actually working in the business, or was that person,
5:49 pm
that taxpayer merely an investor sitting on the sidelines. in addition, that number does not tell us whether the income is from a large business or from a small business. it can be a large business pass-through. so that number of 940,000 doesn't tell us. is it large or is it small? it does not tell us if the business actually even employs anybody. we don't know that. there are a lot of taxpayers in that bracket who don't employ anybody. they're not small business people. so the one million number is being thrown around includes taxpayers who invest, for example, in publicly traded partnerships which can be purchased on the new york stock exchange like any other stock. they are not small businesses, not as ordinary americans would think them to be. the one million number also includes celebrities, sports stars who receive income from speaking engagements. they're not small business people but yet they are lumped into that same number. but americans wouldn't record a
5:50 pm
sports celebrity as a small business person. that's -- that's not right. and the one million number also includes best-selling authors receiving royalties for book sales. that one million number includes partners in law firms, hedge funds receive their income as a share of a partnership distribution. they are not a small business. and that one million number also includes wealthy individuals who rent out their vacation homes for just a few weeks a year. both president obama and governor romney would be considered small business owners in 2011 under this definition. i wouldn't think they're small business people, americans don't think they are small business people, but they would be included in the definition, as the other side bandies about. so in reality, only a very small fraction of the top earners actually own or control or manage a business that is small, a very, very small number.
5:51 pm
i have forgotten the exact number. maybe my staff has it, but it's a small number. it isn't sound fiscal policy to extend tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of americans just because a small portion of them have income from business and a tiny portion of them manage a small business, but that's what some would have you believe. i don't have the number with me, mr. president, but it is very small, the number of persons in the 940,000-person category that actually are small business. there aren't very many really at all. finally, the argument that hired taxes on the wealthiest for job creation is tenuous at best. why do i say that? i say that because even the nonpartisan congressional budget office found that extending the high income tax cuts of those in the top two rates was the least effective way of creating jobs among the list of alternatives commented on by the
5:52 pm
congressional budget office. as i recall, the top of the list were items like payroll tax. you cut the payroll tax, boy, that's a big job for you. if you extend unemployment insurance benefits, that's a big job creator. at the bottom of the list as a job creator on a dollar-for-dollar basis is extending the top two tax rates. that does not create jobs. very few jobs according to the congressional budget office. and actually, it hurts job creation, according to the congressional budget office. why? it found that extending the high-income tax cuts actually reduce gross domestic product and a number of jobs over ten years. why? because doing so increases the deficit. the c.b.o. said it actually extended the top two rates is a job reducer, not a job creator, a job reducer because it would add to the deficit, and doing so would -- all things being equal would lose jobs.
5:53 pm
so despite efforts to hide behind small businesses, the fundamental question is what's best for our country? drive up deficits further, reducing growth as a result by extending the tax cuts from the top 2%. don't forget, we are already reducing the taxes under the reid bill. should we tame our deficits by ending medicare as we know it and cutting important social programs to the bone? the more those top two rates are extended, the more we have to cut someplace else. it's just mathematics, it's arithmetic. it's a choice we have to make in our country. there is no free lunch. we know that. we can't have our cake and eat it. life is choices. our fiscal situation needs choices. we have to decide what makes the most sense here. or should we control our deficits through a balanced approach that thoughtfully cuts
5:54 pm
spending and ask the wealthiest 2% to contribute no more than they did 11 years ago. clearly, as we reduce our debt, we have to cut spending. there is no question about that. there is no question about that. there is also no question that there has to be some income, combined income increase, income tax increase along with the spending cuts if we're going to be able to reduce our budget deficit. so the answer's clear. we should vote, i believe, anyway, for leader reid's bill and continue down the path toward responsible deficit reduction. and i want to make the point again if it wasn't clear, the reid bill reduces tax cuts, reduces tax rates for all americans. middle income, upper income, all americans, because we have a marginal rate system. the most wealthy, they have got to pay that 10% bracket. then they pay the 25%, 15%
5:55 pm
bracket, then they pay the 25% bracket, then they pay the 28% bracket. they are already up to the top bracket today which is 35%. they pay all brackets. and so what we're saying, you get -- we're going to reduce your taxes. we're going to make sure you stay at those low rates for the next year so you therefore can pay less in income taxes than you otherwise would have to, even if you're a billionaire. you still pay less. so let's just go with the reid bill. it's fair, and i hope the senate adopts it and that we get enough votes to -- to get -- so we don't -- so we -- 60 votes to get this thing passed. thank you. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: mr. president, i rise for a moment to express my sympathy and condolences to the people of ghana and to the
5:56 pm
family of her president, john adam mills. president mills died in a military hospital today in ghana of throat cancer. for hours after his death, the vice president was sworn in as the new president of ghana. a testimony to the democratization of that country and its leadership on the continent of africa. ghana has been one of the shining beacons of light in africa for the transition to business, trade, prosperity and economic development. john adam mills deserves the credit for taking ghana to the heights it's gone to today. senator coons from delaware and i traveled to ghana last year to meet with president mills. we saw firsthand how he's developed a large-scale oil-producing country in ghana, making that wealth come back to be reinvested in the people of that country. we visited the millennium challenge compact that ghana made with the united states of america to help her pineapple plantation producers to be able
5:57 pm
to extend the life of their pineapples and export them for increased trade in ghana. we visited hospitals where the money from the oil has been reinvested in that country and in her people. and today with this tragic death, we also saw the light of democracy as the government made its transition, the vice president ascended to the presidency, and elections will be held later in the year for the next president of ghana. but it's important to pause as a tribute to president bush and condoleezza rice, president obama and hillary clinton, our secretary of state, who have worked tirelessly for the last decade and a half to work with the countries of africa to develop. we have invested the -- we have reduced the growth of aids. we have reduced the growth of malaria. nigeria is the last place on earth where polio exists. it's about to be eradicated because of the investment of the american people. i have said oftentimes as the ranking member of the african subcommittee that africa is the
5:58 pm
continent of the 21st century for our country, and i think it is. i think the investment our taxpayers have made and the investment of our last president and our current president and both secretaries of state have made are paying great dividends. but it's important for us to pay tribute to those bold, brave african leaders who ran for office to promote democracy, who served and reinvested the profits they made in their country's wealth and their people and shine as beacons of light for hope of what has been known in the past as the dark continent. so on this sad moment for the people of africa and particularly the people of ghana, it's time for us also to rejoice of what democracy has made in that country and what john adam mills did to produce that democracy and make it work, and i yield back. a senator: mr. president? ms. snowe: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. snowe: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to pay tribute to
5:59 pm
the life and legacy of dr. sally ride, the first american woman to enter space and who passed away, sadly, this week. a truly extraordinary woman and an american icon and hero, sally was a trailblazer who with a steadfast fortitude and an insatiable spirit of exploration accomplished what no other female in american history had before. when she rocketed into the heavens aboard the shuttle challenger on june 18, 1983, she also soared into the hearts of millions of americans, including myself. indeed, we recognized in her landmark achievement the realization of the quintessential american dream, that anyone, regardless of their gender, can succeed to even the greatest of heights, even if it is the stars. i was fortunate enough to have been present at cape canaveral -- by the way, along with a colleague, congresswoman barbara mikulski, on that historic june morning when sally took to the skies, and i can
6:00 pm
vividly recall the palpable optimism and unabated excitement that saturated the air. at that point i had been a member of the house of representatives for four years and one not only 34 women in congress. you can imagine the pride we felt at wntsing such a watershed moment. it was a fight progressive stride in the movement to shatter oppressive social norms. it was a bold response to those who could see only, will you wear makeup in space? do you cry on the job? it was a bright beacon of hope to millions of young girls who would come to recognize sally ride as the embodiment of their most fervent hopes and dreams. i was very proud to be able to participate in a tribute at the air and space museum as cochair
6:01 pm
of the qims caucus on women's issues and a month later to pay tribute to dr. sally ride and the challenger crew that their achievement as i said, is america's achievement. in fact, in a testament to the depth of her remarkable character, sally ride lamented the unprecedented nature of her trip when she said it's too bad this is such a big deal. it's too bad our society isn't further along. it's time people in this country realize that women can do any job they want to to. she recognized while her ex ciewrgs was extraordinary it shouldn't have been. today we nonetheless recognize through her words she gave voice to countdownless women's and through her actions gave them vision and courage to seize their creams dreams. that is the message sally ride engendered as a astronaut, a professor and the founder of the sally ride science, her company which strives to inform students
6:02 pm
by providing them with innovative science programs and resources. i had the opportunity to see sally ride last year, and she was recounting with enthusiasm the work that she was doing in working with so many young people across this country, and sharing, you know, her commitment and her passion for education and for space. indeed, she was a pioneer and true american icon whose inoperational journey into space and long -- will long serve as an example we can accomplish anything we put our minds to. but perhaps even more importantly she bequeathed to you future generations a legacy that transcends her time inbounded by earthy ties. she leaves to us the only anybody tent notion we can and will do what is hard and that we will achieve what is great are regardless of who we are. and it will indisputably resonate for generations to
6:03 pm
come. leonardo da vinci observed "when once you have tasted flight you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward for there you have been and there you will always long to return." mr. president, today we finally -- fondly remember a woman who had her eyes turned skyward not only for herself but for the woman of future generations who would follow in her example and in her footsteps. we take comfort in knowing that the stars are now indeed where she rests and we continue to keep her family and friends in our thoughts and prayers. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: mr. president, i rise today to join my colleagues who have been to the floor earlier this afternoon to
6:04 pm
emphasize the importance of getting the house to act to pass the violence against women act. we passed a bipartisan reauthorization in the senate and now it's time for the house to do the same. there are provisions in the senate version of the bill that offer critical protections for survivors, for native americans, for immigrants, for the lgbt community and for students, for young women who are on college campuses and it's that importance of protecting those victims on college campuses that i want to specifically address this afternoon. according to the department of justice, 25% of college women, that's one in four, 25% of college women will be victims of rape or attempted rape before they graduate within their
6:05 pm
four-year college period. the rape, abuse and incest national network reports that college-age women are four times more likely than any other age group to face sexual assault. in addition, experts believe that rape and sexual assault are among the most underreported crimes, so that one in four could be even greater. in the senate-passed legislation, so the leahy-crapo bill, there are provisions to address the challenges that young women face on college campuses. the legislation that we passed here in the senate requires schools that receive vawa funds to do the following: first of all, to state the policies and procedures that are in place to protect victims, and to provide prevention education for all incoming students.
6:06 pm
many young girls arrive on a college campus to live on their own for the very first time. they're struggling to orient themselves in a new environment and this makes them vulnerable. they need to be given clear guidance about what to do in case they become victims. the legislation also requires institutions to implement a coordinated response both internal and external to the campus. so this means that survivors are helped if they want to hold their attackers accountable whether through a process the university has set up or by bringing criminal charges and working with the police. this provision tells young women you are not alone. you're supported, your school will help you. and the third provision that's very important in the senate-passed bill is that it would provide training -- require schools to provide
6:07 pm
training on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking for campus law enforcement, and to members of the campus judicial boards. now, last week in new hampshire my office spoke with the sexual assault coordinator at keane state college which is a small college with about 6,000 students in the western part of new hampshire. forrest said all the provisions in the senate-passed bill are really important and really necessary because universities need more guidance about how to best serve students who are victims of rape, dating violence, and stalking. this is especially important at small universities like keane where they have limited resources. training for campus law enforcement is critical because they're the first responders. and school administrators who serve on campus judicial boards also need special training
6:08 pm
because word spreads very fast on college campuses about whether survivors should feel comfortable going forward. so these processes need to be handled with appropriate sensitivity, and the training that's required by the senate violence against women act will help make sure that these young women feel safe. the senate-passed version of the bill will help young women like harmony who began her first year in college at plymouth state university in new hampshire in 2006. she was really excited to be there. she made new friends and she quickly became comfortable in her new surroundings. unfortunately, one night someone she thought was a friend took advantage of that trust and sexually assaulted harmony. harmony was ashamed and confused. she felt violated. she began to question all of her
6:09 pm
new relationships. she was scared all of the time, and she was sure everyone could tell she was a victim. so harmony didn't tell anyone. she didn't know where to turn. she was scared that she wouldn't be believed. and she even considered dropping out of school. but fortunately, harmony did finally reach out and she found support. she graduated from plymouth and now she works as a case manager for survivors of domestic violence in an emergency shelter helping other survivors through the most difficult periods in their lives. now harmony shares her story all over the country, encouraging victims to come forward, promising them they will be believed, they will be supported. if harmony has the bravery and the courage to make these promises to survivors, so should we. we owe it to the young, to the vulnerable women on college
6:10 pm
campuses across this country to pass the violence against women act now. it's time for the house to act. session is running out. we need to see this legislation reauthorized, we need to see the senate version reauthorized so that we can guarantee to young women like harmony across this country that they will get the support that they need. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:
6:14 pm
the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. udall: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. udall: i ask consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: mr. president, like you i come to the floor this evening with a heavy heart. i know as senators and leaders we're expected to have words for
6:15 pm
every occasion, and what happened last friday morning makes it very difficult to put words that are appropriate. however, as i think of the coloradans that were there that we're so lucky to represent, their actions spoke louder than words. their actions spoke very loudly on a friday morning in the city of aurora and i want to focus on the actions of all those brave, decent coloradans who were victims in a variety of ways at the horrific movie theater shooting that took place there in aurora. and it cut short the lives of 12 people, injured approximately 58 others. and i'm rising to pay tribute to all of those people as well as to their families and their loved ones.
6:16 pm
but i think -- and i know the presiding officer, my colleague and my fellow senator from colorado knows that most importantly we're going to be here to state emphatically that aurora will triumph over adversely in our state and colorado will emerge stronger than ever. i know from the time i woke up to the news of the movie theater shootings in aurora early friday morning, july 20, i, along with the rest of colorado and our country, have experienced meigss ranging from deep, profound sadness to utter -- frankly -- outrage. our state was just starting to recover from the devastating wildfires that have destroyed hundreds of homes, forced tens of thousands to evacuate their communities, and scorched thousands of beautiful acres in our state of colorado. with that in mind, none of us could have been prepared for the
6:17 pm
news of these mass shootings in one of our communities. i know the presiding officer has three beautiful daughters. i have two children. i know that having loved ones stolen from us in such a tragic and violent fashion is something you can never be prepared for. but it's during these times that we're also reminded to cherish those all-too-brief moments that we have with the people we love. and though this heinous crime may have shaken us, it did not break us, and it will not break us. we will mourn those we've lost and those who are injured, and with them in mind we'll heal and we'll become stronger. sadly, mr. president, this kind of tragedy is not new to colorado. it was 13 short years ago that we learned of another mass shootings at columbine high school on the western side of denver. and as a nation, we're reminds
6:18 pm
of more recent shootings at virginia tech, fort hood texas, and tucson, arizona. these incidents may occur in one city or in one state, but they're national tragedies that tear at us all, and then cause us all to tear up and cry together. like all americans, my heart goes out to the victims and their families, and i also remain hopeful that the presiding officer and i were at the hospital -- one of the hospitals on sunday -- that survivors are going to defy the odds on their road to recovery and we've been truly inspired by their stories. i want to take a moment and applaud the leadership shown by colorado's public servants from governor john hickenlooper, aurora mayor steve hogan and especially the police chief, dan oates. there are also other law
6:19 pm
enforcement professionals that came to the scene immediately, first responders, medical professionals on site and in a number of hospitals where the victims were taken. i think what's most notable is that they worked seamsly to carry out the city's disaster plan and protect the victims from further harm. the aurora police and firefighters arrived a mere 90 seconds off the first 911 call was placed and there is no question that lives were saved by the swift and coordinated action of aurora's first responders. i have to say, this incident showed, as similar tragedies have before, that america shines brightest when the night is darkest, and that was literally the situation at midnight on friday morning in aurora. mr. president, we had the uplifting experience of hearing the stories of bravery coming out of aurora. we marveled at those stories on
6:20 pm
sunday. and you can't but start with the fact that at least four young men demonstrated the heights of heroism when they i sacrificed their lives to protect their girlfriends from the hail of this gunman's bullets and one young woman had the courage to remain by the side of her wounded friend camelia plying pressure to the friend's -- calmly applying pressure to the friend's wound while the gunfire continued around her. let me put it this way: lives were saved friday morning by those who did not let fear override their capacity to care for one another. mr. president, these experiences have underlined for me and our entire nation that what makes us great and will help us endure this tragedy. and that is our people. i saw that sunday night.
6:21 pm
we all saw that sunday night while participating in a moving vigil in aurora where our community not only mourned together but also held together during this most difficult time. although the west is known for its rugged individualists, colorado is also known for its rugged cooperators. people help their neighbors in times of adversity. we saw it after the recent wildfires and we see it again now. president obama's visit with victims and families on july 22, just sunday, two days ago in are aurora, provided comfort those in need and again reminded us that the sanctity and strength of family and community is what unites us in the face of adversary. coloradans have seen in the wake of this tragedy, our nation has come together for aurora and our
6:22 pm
state and to my colleagues and anyone listening today, let me say humbly, we are grateful. mr. president, i want to take a moment to say the names of the 12 people who were taken from us too soon, and i know that later you will share even more of their stories with us and with the nation. their families and friends have my commitment that we will -- to honor these good people, these coloradans -- never forget them as the healing process goes on. so, mr. president, the 12 coloradans, americans who we lost friday morning, jonathan t.bluyk, alexander j.boik, jesse
6:23 pm
childress, jays could ghawi, michaela medek, matthew m mcquinn, john larimer, alex sullivan, alexander teves, rebecca wingo, and i think the hardest name for all of us to say, that of 6-year-old veronica moser-sullivan. i think the presiding officer has seen the photo of her with an ice cream cone in hand, delight on her face, ice cream on her nose. and i guess maybe what we could do is each take the time to enjoy an ice cream cone, maybe leave that ice cream on our nose for a little bit and remember her. in honor of these victims, i filed a congressional resoluti
6:24 pm
resolution, senate congressional resolution 53, along with my colleague, the presiding officer, senator bennet. congressmaan identical resolutin filed in the u.s. house of representatives and the resolution among many things strongly condemns the atrocities which occurred in aurora, offers condolences to the families' friends and loved ones of those killed in the attack and expresses hope for the rapid and complete recovery of the wounded. applauds the hard work and dedication exhibited by the hundreds of local, state, and federal officials, and others who offered their support and assistance. and last but certainly not least, it honors th the resiliee of the city and the state of colorado in the face of such adversity. i ask all of my colleagues in thinsenate to support aurora and
6:25 pm
support this resolution. as we pay tribute to our fallen fellow americans and the heroes around them, here's what i hope can come out of what can only be described as a senseless tragedy. can we harness the sense of community we feel this week and use it to create a lasting sense of collaboration in america? and use it to solve our shared challenges in a measured, respectful, and thoughtful way? we can truly learn from those who selflessly gave of themselves during the chaos of the aurora shootings. and draw from it the strength, a better people, better family members, and, yes, even better legislators. in rowman mythology, aurora is
6:26 pm
the goddess of dong. at dawn on friday, the chaos and the pain and the tragedy of the night before still lingered over that wonderful city of aurora. but by dawn on the second day, the signs of heroism, of recovery, and of community began to shine through the darkness of the great colorado city called aurora. as each dawn signals a new day, we owe it to the victims to rise to the occasion and renew our commitment to make this a better, stronger, and more perfect nation. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:
6:31 pm
mr. bennet: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i'd ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to first thank my friend -- and i don't mean that in the political sense, i mn in the real sense -- the senior senator from colorado, the presiding officer, for his incredibly thoughtful remarks about the tragedy last week in colorado. and i can't think of any more fitting place to be than here with you tonight to have this conversation. so thank you very much for your
6:32 pm
words. mr. just a few dark moments last week in aurora, colorado, 12 innocent lives were taken from us, 12 people full of life and aspirations, loved by family and friends, and now 12 people remembered by an entire nation. as the presiding officer said, thousands of coloradans attended a vigil hosted by the city of aurora on sunday evening. we shared tears and prayers. we -- we also resolved to support one another, to heal and to always remember those who lost their lives on july 20, 2012. and it's for that purpose that the presiding officer and i come to the floor this evening. first is jonathan blunk, age 26.
6:33 pm
jon was a father of two who moved to colorado in 2009 after three tours in the persian gulf, the north arabian sea for the u.s. navy. he was a certified firefighter and e.m.t. jon lost his life protecting his friend, jansen young, from the gunman's line of fire. jon shield her from gunfire by pushing her to the ground while shots were fired. he was supposed to fly on saturday to nevada to see his wife, chantal blunk, and his four-year-old daughter and two-year-old son. instead, his wife had to put up the dress her daughter had picked out to wear to the airport. she told her daughter that they wouldn't see their dad anymore but that he would still love them and look over them. his daughter, hayley, is comforted by calling her fathe father's cell phone and hearing him on voicemail.
6:34 pm
this is a.j. boik, alexander boik. age 18. a.j. recently graduated from gateway high school. he enjoyed baseball, music and making pottery. a.j. was to start art classes at the rocky mountain college of art and design in the fall. he was described -- quote -- "as being the life of the party. a.j. could bring a smile to anybody's face." he was a young man with a warm and loving heart. this is jesse childress. age 29. jesse was an air force cyber systems operator based at buckley air force base. he loved to play flag football, softball and bowl. he was a devoted fan of the denver broncos, for which he secured season tickets.
6:35 pm
and he was described by his superior officer as an invaluable part of the 310th family who touched everyone he worked with. this is gordon cowden, age 51. gordon was originally from texas and lived in aurora with his family. he was -- quote -- "a quit-witted world traveler with a keen sense of humor." he will are remembered for his devotion to his children and for always trying to do the right thing, no matter the obstacle. gordon took his two teenaged children to the theater the night of the shooting, both of whom thankfully made it out unharmed. >> this is jessica ghawi, age
6:36 pm
24. jessica was an aspiring journalist, most recently interning with mile high sports radio in denver and went by the nickname redfield. she was hard working and ambitious with a generous spirit and kind heart. when numerous homes were recently destroyed by colorado wildfires, ghawi decided to start collecting hockey equipment to donate to the kids affected because she wanted to help. >> thithis is john thomas layer. she was a cryptological technician also at buckley. a job which requires "exceptional good comarkt and skills." originally from chicago, he was the youngest of five children and joined the service just over a year ago, like his father and grandfather. john chose to serve in the u.s. navy.
6:37 pm
john's superior officer called him -- quote -- "an outstanding shipmate, a valued member of the navy and an extremely dedicated sailor. colleagues were drawn to his calming demeanor and exceptional work ethic. he was also known as an extremely competent professional. here's matthew, matthew mcquinn, age 27. matt died while protecting his girlfriend, samantha sw yowler, by jumping in front of her during the shooting. matt and samantha moved to colorado from ohio last fall and worked at targ he. and he samantha were very much in love and planning their life together. because of matt's bravery, samantha was only wounded in the knee and is expected to make a full recovery. this is cayla, micayla medek,
6:38 pm
age 23. cayla was a gradual of william c. hinckley high school in aurora and a resident of westminster. she worked at subway and was a huge green bay packers fan. cayla would plan weekend activities around watching the games with her brother and father. she is remembered as a loving and gentle young woman. this is veronica moser-sullivan, age six. veronica had just learned to swim and attended holly ridge elementary school in denver, colorado. she was a good student who loved to play dress-up and read. veronica's mother, ashley moser, remains in critical condition at aurora medical center. she was shot in the neck and abdomen. we pray for ashley's recovery and strength and working through
6:39 pm
the passing of her daughter, veronica. alex sullivan, age 27. alex was at the movies celebrating his 27th birthday and first wedding anniversary. he loved comic books, the new york mets and movies. alex was such a big movie fan that he took jobs at theaters just to see the movies. alex stood 6'4" and weighed about 280 pounds. he played football and wrestled before graduating high school in 2003 and later went to culinary school. alex was known as a gentle giant and loved by many.
6:40 pm
this is alexander teves, age 246789 alex received an m.a. in counseling psychology from the university of denver in june and was planning on becoming a psychiatrist. he also competed in the tough mudder, an intense endurance challenge, and helped students with special needs. alex was at the theater on the night of the shooting with his girlfriend, amanda winger, when the gunman opened fire and he immediately lunged to block amanda from the gunfire, held her down and covered her head. this is rebecca wingo, age 32. rebecca, originally from texas and a resident of o aurora, joid the air force after high school, where she became fliewntd in fln mandarin chinese and served as a translator. she was the single mother of two girls and worked as a customer relations representative at a
6:41 pm
mobile medical engine company. rebecca was also enrolled in the community college of aurora since fall 2009 and had been working toward an associate of arts degree. she was known to family and friends as a gentle -- as -- quote -- "a gentle, sweet and beautiful soul." mr. president, here is a photo of the gathering that we had last sunday night in aurora. i believe, like you, mr. president, that the early morning hours of july 20, 2012, will not be remembered for the evil that happened. scripture tells us -- quote -- "not to be overcome by evil but overcome evil with good."
6:42 pm
that's what the people of aurora and colorado have been doing since the first moment of this tragedy, and that is what we'll continue to do. in time, we'll not remember the -- the morning of july 2 20th for the evil that killed 12 innocent and precious people. instead, we'll remember the bright lives of those we lost and the families they leave behind. we'll remember the 58 wounded survivors whose recovery bears witness to humanity's strength and resolve. and tonight, knowing that some are still in critical condition, we pray for their recovery. we'll remember the heroic acts of everyday citizens, our first responders and medical personnel that saved lives that otherwise surely would have been lost. we'll remember the continuing generosity of those coloradans and americans who donated blood in record numbers and raising funds to support the families in this trying time. and in time, because we are all
6:43 pm
6:45 pm
quorum call: mr. bennet: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. the senate is in a quorum call. mr. bennet: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i ask unanimous
6:46 pm
consent the committee on indian affairs be discharged from further consideration of s. 2090, and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 2090, a bill to amend the indian law enforcement reform act to extend the period of time provided to the indian law and order commission to produce a report, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i further ask that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to this measure be printed at the appropriate place in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the consideration of s. res. 527 which was submitted earlier today.
6:47 pm
the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 527, designating august 16, 2012, as national airborne day. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. bennet: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 528 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 528, recognizing the 100th anniversary of the american podiatric medical association, and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and
6:48 pm
any statements be placed in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: i understand that s. 3429 introduced earlier today by senator bill nelson is at the desk, and i ask for the first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: s. 3429, a bill to require the secretary of veterans affairs to establish a veteran job corps, and for other purposes. mr. bennet: i now ask for its second reading and object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will receive its second reading on the next legislative day. mr. bennet: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until
6:49 pm
9:30 a.m. on wednesday, july 25, that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning business be deemed expired and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, that the majority leader be recognized and that the time until 2:15 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the second 30 minutes. further, that at 2:15 p.m. on wednesday, the senate proceed to a roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to s. 3412, the middle-class tax cut act. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: the first vote tomorrow will be a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the middle-class tax act at 2:15 p.m. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until
6:50 pm
what can you tell us about the senate democrats' tax proposal that is coming up for a vote? >> well, i can tell you that it is very much like what you have heard since the obama campaign 2008. it would extend all the existing tax cuts that for about 90 percent of the population. it would basically allow the tax rate to go back to clinton era levels for households that make more than 250,000.
6:51 pm
>> wide the senate democrats say their proposal is better than what the republicans are offering, with the president has said? >> well, they are making a big case right now fer trying to improve fairness, trying to give the impression of increasing opportunities a middle-class. end they see this as a big issue, not only for the campaign, but progressivity in the tax code. they point to things like middle-class is losing income at the same time as people in the top 1% are seeing their incomes increase over the last decade or so. and they see these changes to the tax code. the report of the fundamental tax reform. in 90's changes immediately rather than wait another year so
6:52 pm
>> what about the senate republicans' proposal? was sent and will devote? >> it sounds like now they will not get a vote. although, it's basically the same proposal that the house will be voted on next week as well. so the house will vote on it with the. [indiscernible] the key difference is that the senate proposal does go ahead and increase more or less what you see now in current tax policy. all the existing tax rates would be extended for additional years democrats have been having to point out, things like changes made since the income tax credit and check out tax credit. predominantly lower-income folks that are not included in that bill. those were not part of the original 2001-3 tax cuts. those were added later. those are the big changes.
6:53 pm
there are also and as -- there is also an estate tax provision and the republican bill that the democratic bill does not include . democrats, we don't want the estate tax portion in there. we want to keep the focus on the middle-class for this one. republicans come back. there is a lot of middle-income people out there who were affected by the estate tax as well. farmers or small business. could face a big tax increase. i was inheritance tax was looking ahead to the vote, where do you see the votes falling? anybody going to break from their party ranks? >> not on this vote. i don't want to try and predict too much, but there is really no expectation of that. there is going to be a major breakthrough on this bill. this is mostly seen as sort of a
6:54 pm
pre-game show. they're going to put this bill out there. they will do votes on it. it is going to go along party lines with the expectation, and then really serious later on, likely after the election and find a way to figure out some of these hard issues, what to do with those top income people, what to do with the estate tax if him whether he should have things like the earned income-tax credit, the child tax credit extended. those are the big items. they will wait and are expected to try and solve in a lame-duck session. >> brad ferguson is senior congressional reporter for bloomberg dna joining us from capitol hill. thank you for the update. >> thank you. >> today marks the 14th anniversary of the u.s. capitol hill police officers. john gibson and jacob says that were shot and killed while on duty inside the capitol. both chambers of the moment of silence. earlier today the senate majority and minority leaders
6:55 pm
paid tribute on the floor to thn two officers. >> mr. president, what to take just a minute and talk aboutffer agent gibson and of the successn that. it has been 14 years ago, and in is hard to come brunt -- -- comprehend. hel officer chestnut i knew by saying hello. we had an advance in virginiae when my wife became ill.son i never forget agents gibsonuas running from the headquarters a and administering a to my wife.o that was agent gibson.ul i remember that so clearly. he was a wonderful, wonderful man. k i knew him. i felt i knew him so well his because it was happening. wife. last week this nation was reminded how fragile life is with what happened in colorado and how quickly it can be taken away at random, as we learned in colorado.
6:56 pm
senseless acts of violence. 14 years ago the capitol community was similarly reminded we must never take life for granted. on this day in 1980, two dedicated united states capitol police officers, special agent john gibson and officer jacob chestnut, gave their lives while protecting this building and the people in it. and their lives were not spent in vain, mr. president. as a result of their sacrifice, we now have a capitol that's much safer than it ever was. it was the result of their having been killed that we were able to finally get the visitors center done. we were able to get it done. we speeded that up. now we have people coming into this capitol, they are safe in the building. their security is as good as it is anyplace in the world. it's a much more pleasant visit now coming to the capitol. so their lives were not given in
6:57 pm
vain. while guarding the capitol, agent gibson and officer chestnut were shot to death by really a mad man, no other way to explain it. with the facilities we have now, that would not happen. while nothing can erase the pain of losing a loved one, i hope their families take some measure of comfort knowing agent gibson and officer chestnut are not forgotten. even 14 years later those of us who work here in the capitol -- mr. president, this is a side note. i take special pride in the fact that i was a capitol policeman. i worked in this building. i carried a pistol. i worked the swing shift as we called it from about 3:00 to 11:00 when i was going to law school. so every year that we give this special recognition to this event having happened, i think
6:58 pm
of my days here and what a different place it was. of course this were things we had to look out for, but mr. president, as i said before the most dangerous thing i had to do was direct traffic. but that isn't the way it is now with these men and women who take care of us here in the capitol. not just the senators, not just the staff, but all the millions of people who visit this facility every year. so i honor their service and their sacrifice. and of course i'm forced to think back on really the days of my youth when i was walking around these, this facility mostly at nighttime, a lot of times quite lonely in this build building now for someone where i came from walking in these halls most of the time at night alone. i have to reflect back on that.
6:59 pm
so we're grateful for the brave men and women who safeguard the people's house. they do it today. they do it every day. we take them for granted and we shouldn't. they are gallant in the work they do. the capitol police is a wonderful, wonderful organization, and i'm proud, every member of the senate is and everyone in the country should be of the work they do to make this building safe. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i'd like to start this morning by remembering another deadly shooting, one that hit very
7:00 pm
close to home for most of us. it was 14 years ago today that officer jacob chestnut and detective john gibson of the capitol police were shot dead in the line of duty right here in the capitol by a lone gunman. their deaths serve as yet another reminder not only of the reality of evil but of the precious gift of life. and so today we honor them for their lives and the final act of heroism that ended them. a plakin side the capitol commemorates their sacrifice and the capitol police headquarters now bears their names but it is appropriate that we also pause in the midst of our other duties to honor these men and every member of the capitol police force who work so hard to ensure our safety.
7:01 pm
our officer chestnut was a veteran of the air force. detective gibson also had 18 years of capitol police service and until the day he died had never, never drawn his weapon. both men left behind wives, children, and friends. today the senate honors both of these good men once again and these good men once again and >> to senators came to the senate floor to talk about the shooting in overall last weekend the victims. >> like you, i come to the floor this evening with a heavy heart. i know as senators and leaders r
7:02 pm
were expected to have words for every occasion.y what happened last fridayorning morning makes it very difficult to put words that arepria appropriate. however, as i think of the to r, their actions spoke louder than words. their actions spoke very loudly on a friday morning in the city of aurora and i want to focus on the actions of all those brave, decent coloradans who were victims in a variety of ways at the horrific movie theater shooting that took place there in aurora. and it cut short the lives of 12 people, injured approximately 58 others. and i'm rising to pay tribute to all of those people as well as to their families and their loved ones.
7:03 pm
but i think -- and i know the presiding officer, my colleague and my fellow senator from colorado knows that most importantly we're going to be here to state emphatically that aurora will triumph over adversely in our state and colorado will emerge stronger than ever. i know from the time i woke up to the news of the movie theater shootings in aurora early friday morning, july 20, i, along with the rest of colorado and our country, have experienced meigss ranging from deep, profound sadness to utter -- frankly -- outrage. our state was just starting to recover from the devastating wildfires that have destroyed hundreds of homes, forced tens of thousands to evacuate their communities, and scorched thousands of beautiful acres in our state of colorado. with that in mind, none of us
7:04 pm
could have been prepared for the news of these mass shootings in one of our communities. i know the presiding officer has three beautiful daughters. i have two children. i know that having loved ones stolen from us in such a tragic and violent fashion is something you can never be prepared for. but it's during these times that we're also reminded to cherish those all-too-brief moments that we have with the people we love. and though this heinous crime may have shaken us, it did not break us, and it will not break us. we will mourn those we've lost and those who are injured, and with them in mind we'll heal and we'll become stronger. sadly, mr. president, this kind of tragedy is not new to colorado. it was 13 short years ago that we learned of another mass shootings at columbine high school on the western side of denver. and as a nation, we're reminds
7:05 pm
of more recent shootings at virginia tech, fort hood texas, and tucson, arizona. these incidents may occur in one city or in one state, but they're national tragedies that tear at us all, and then cause us all to tear up and cry together. like all americans, my heart goes out to the victims and their families, and i also remain hopeful that the presiding officer and i were at the hospital -- one of the hospitals on sunday -- that survivors are going to defy the odds on their road to recovery and we've been truly inspired by their stories. i want to take a moment and applaud the leadership shown by colorado's public servants from governor john hickenlooper, aurora mayor steve hogan and especially the police chief, dan oates. there are also other law
7:06 pm
enforcement professionals that came to the scene immediately, first responders, medical professionals on site and in a number of hospitals where the victims were taken. i think what's most notable is that they worked seamsly to carry out the city's disaster plan and protect the victims from further harm. the aurora police and firefighters arrived a mere 90 seconds off the first 911 call was placed and there is no question that lives were saved by the swift and coordinated action of aurora's first responders. i have to say, this incident showed, as similar tragedies have before, that america shines brightest when the night is darkest, and that was literally the situation at midnight on friday morning in aurora. mr. president, we had the uplifting experience of hearing the stories of bravery coming out of aurora.
7:07 pm
we marveled at those stories on sunday. and you can't but start with the fact that at least four young men demonstrated the heights of heroism when they i sacrificed their lives to protect their girlfriends from the hail of this gunman's bullets and one young woman had the courage to remain by the side of her wounded friend camelia plying pressure to the friend's -- calmly applying pressure to the friend's wound while the gunfire continued around her. let me put it this way: lives were saved friday morning by those who did not let fear override their capacity to care for one another. mr. president, these experiences have underlined for me and our entire nation that what makes us great and will help us endure this tragedy. and that is our people.
7:08 pm
i saw that sunday night. we all saw that sunday night while participating in a moving vigil in aurora where our community not only mourned together but also held together during this most difficult time. although the west is known for its rugged individualists, colorado is also known for its rugged cooperators. people help their neighbors in times of adversity. we saw it after the recent wildfires and we see it again now. president obama's visit with victims and families on july 22, just sunday, two days ago in are aurora, provided comfort those in need and again reminded us that the sanctity and strength of family and community is what unites us in the face of adversary. coloradans have seen in the wake of this tragedy, our nation has come together for aurora and our
7:09 pm
state and to my colleagues and anyone listening today, let me say humbly, we are grateful. mr. president, i want to take a moment to say the names of the 12 people who were taken from us too soon, and i know that later you will share even more of their stories with us and with the nation. their families and friends have my commitment that we will -- to honor these good people, these coloradans -- never forget them as the healing process goes on. so, mr. president, the 12 coloradans, americans who we lost friday morning, jonathan t.bluyk, alexander j.boik, jesse
7:10 pm
childress, jays could ghawi, michaela medek, matthew m mcquinn, john larimer, alex sullivan, alexander teves, rebecca wingo, and i think the hardest name for all of us to say, that of 6-year-old veronica moser-sullivan. i think the presiding officer has seen the photo of her with an ice cream cone in hand, delight on her face, ice cream on her nose. and i guess maybe what we could do is each take the time to enjoy an ice cream cone, maybe leave that ice cream on our nose for a little bit and remember her. in honor of these victims, i filed a congressional resoluti
7:11 pm
resolution, senate congressional resolution 53, along with my colleague, the presiding officer, senator bennet. congressmaan identical resolutin filed in the u.s. house of representatives and the resolution among many things strongly condemns the atrocities which occurred in aurora, offers condolences to the families' friends and loved ones of those killed in the attack and expresses hope for the rapid and complete recovery of the wounded. applauds the hard work and dedication exhibited by the hundreds of local, state, and federal officials, and others who offered their support and assistance. and last but certainly not least, it honors th the resiliee of the city and the state of colorado in the face of such adversity. i ask all of my colleagues in thinsenate to support aurora and
7:12 pm
support this resolution. as we pay tribute to our fallen fellow americans and the heroes around them, here's what i hope can come out of what can only be described as a senseless tragedy. can we harness the sense of community we feel this week and use it to create a lasting sense of collaboration in america? and use it to solve our shared challenges in a measured, respectful, and thoughtful way? we can truly learn from those who selflessly gave of themselves during the chaos of the aurora shootings. and draw from it the strength, a better people, better family members, and, yes, even better legislators. in rowman mythology, aurora is
7:13 pm
the goddess of dong. at dawn on friday, the chaos and the pain and the tragedy of the night before still lingered over that wonderful city of aurora. but by dawn on the second day, the signs of heroism, of recovery, and of community began to shine through the darkness of the great colorado city called aurora. as each dawn signals a new day, we owe it to the victims to rise to the occasion and renew our commitment to make this a better, stronger, and more perfect nation. thank you, mr. president.ent. i'd ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to first thank my friend -- and i don't mean that in the political sense, i mean in the real sense -- the senior senator from colorado, the presiding officer, for his
7:14 pm
incredibly thoughtful remarks about the tragedy last week in colorado. and i can't think of any more fitting place to be than here with you tonight to have this conversation. so thank you very much for your words. mr. just a few dark moments last week in aurora, colorado, 12 innocent lives were taken from us, 12 people full of life and aspirations, loved by family and friends, and now 12 people remembered by an entire nation. as the presiding officer said, thousands of coloradans attended a vigil hosted by the city of aurora on sunday evening. we shared tears and prayers. we -- we also resolved to support one another, to heal and to always remember those who lost their lives on july 20, 2012. and it's for that purpose that
7:15 pm
the presiding officer and i come to the floor this evening. first is jonathan blunk, age 26. jon was a father of two who moved to colorado in 2009 after three tours in the persian gulf, the north arabian sea for the u.s. navy. he was a certified firefighter and e.m.t. jon lost his life protecting his friend, jansen young, from the gunman's line of fire. jon shield her from gunfire by pushing her to the ground while shots were fired. he was supposed to fly on saturday to nevada to see his wife, chantal blunk, and his four-year-old daughter and two-year-old son. instead, his wife had to put up the dress her daughter had picked out to wear to the airport. she told her daughter that they
7:16 pm
wouldn't see their dad anymore but that he would still love them and look over them. his daughter, hayley, is comforted by calling her fathe father's cell phone and hearing him on voicemail. this is a.j. boik, alexander boik. age 18. a.j. recently graduated from gateway high school. he enjoyed baseball, music and making pottery. a.j. was to start art classes at the rocky mountain college of art and design in the fall. he was described -- quote -- "as being the life of the party. a.j. could bring a smile to anybody's face." he was a young man with a warm and loving heart. this is jesse childress.
7:17 pm
age 29. jesse was an air force cyber systems operator based at buckley air force base. he loved to play flag football, softball and bowl. he was a devoted fan of the denver broncos, for which he secured season tickets. and he was described by his superior officer as an invaluable part of the 310th family who touched everyone he worked with. this is gordon cowden, age 51. gordon was originally from texas and lived in aurora with his family. he was -- quote -- "a quit-witted world traveler with a keen sense of humor." he will are remembered for his devotion to his children and for always trying to do the right thing, no matter the obstacle. gordon took his two teenaged children to the theater the night of the shooting, both of
7:18 pm
whom thankfully made it out unharmed. >> this is jessica ghawi, age 24. jessica was an aspiring journalist, most recently interning with mile high sports radio in denver and went by the nickname redfield. she was hard working and ambitious with a generous spirit and kind heart. when numerous homes were recently destroyed by colorado wildfires, ghawi decided to start collecting hockey equipment to donate to the kids affected because she wanted to help. >> thithis is john thomas layer. she was a cryptological
7:19 pm
technician also at buckley. a job which requis "exceptional good comarkt and skills." originally from chicago, he was the youngest of five children and joined the service just over a year ago, like his father and grandfather. john chose to serve in the u.s. navy. john's superior officer called him -- quote -- "an outstanding shipmate, a valued member of the navy and an extremely dedicated sailor. colleagues were drawn to his calming demeanor and exceptional work ethic. he was also known as an extremely competent professional. here's matthew, matthew mcquinn, age 27. matt died while protecting his girlfriend, samantha sw yowler, by jumping in front of her during the shooting. matt and samantha moved to colorado from ohio last fall and worked at targ he. and he samantha were very much in love and planning their life together. because of matt's bravery,
7:20 pm
samantha was only wounded in the knee and is expected to make a full recovery. this is cayla, micayla medek, age 23. cayla was a gradual of william c. hinckley high school in aurora and a resident of westminster. she worked at subway and was a huge green bay packers fan. cayla would plan weekend activities around watching the games with her brother and father. she is remembered as a loving and gentle young woman. this is veronica moser-sullivan, age six. veronica had just learned to swim and attended holly ridge elementary school in denver,
7:21 pm
colorado. she was a good student who loved to play dress-up and read. veronica's mother, ashley moser, remains in critical condition at aurora medical center. she was shot in the neck and abdomen. we pray for ashley's recovery and strength and working through the passing of her daughter, veronica. alex sullivan, age 27. alex was at the movies celebrating his 27th birthday and first wedding anniversary. he loved comic books, the new york mets and movies. alex was such a big movie fan that he took jobs at theaters just to see the movies. alex stood 6'4" and weighed about 280 pounds. he played football and wrestled before graduating high school in
7:22 pm
2003 and later went to culinary school. alex was known as a gentle giant and loved by many. this is alexander teves, age 246789 alex received an m.a. in counseling psychology from the university of denver in june and was planning on becoming a psychiatrist. he also competed in the tough mudder, an intense endurance challenge, and helped students with special needs. alex was at the theater on the night of the shooting with his girlfriend, amanda winger, when the gunman opened fire and he immediately lunged to block amanda from the gunfire, held her down and covered her head. this is rebecca wingo, age 32.
7:23 pm
rebecca, originally from texas and a resident of o aurora, joid the air force after high school, where she became fliewntd in fln mandarin chinese and served as a translator. she was the single mother of two girls and worked as a customer relations representative at a mobile medical engine company. rebecca was also enrolled in the community college of aurora since fall 2009 and had been working toward an associate of arts degree. she was known to family and friends as a gentle -- as -- quote -- "a gentle, sweet and beautiful soul." mr. president, here is a photo of the gathering that we had last sunday night in aurora. i believe, like you, mr. president, that the early
7:24 pm
morning hours of july 20, 2012, will not be remembered for the evil that happened. scripture tells us -- quote -- "not to be overcome by evil but overcome evil with good." that's what the people of aurora and colorado have been doing since the first moment of this tragedy, and that is what we'll continue to do. in time, we'll not remember the -- the morning of july 2 20th for the evil that killed 12 innocent and precious people. instead, we'll remember the bright lives of those we lost and the families they leave behind. we'll remember the 58 wounded survivors whose recovery bears witness to humanity's strength and resolve. and tonight, knowing that some are still in critical condition, we pray for their recovery. we'll remember the heroic acts of everyday citizens, our first responders and medical personnel
7:25 pm
that saved lives that otherwise surely would have been lost. we'll remember the continuing generosity of those coloradans and americans who donated blood in record numbers and raising funds to support the families in this trying time. and in time, because we are all aurora, we'll draw strength from the example set by one great american city and the faith of her people in one another. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.ehouse: thank.
7:26 pm
tomorrow, madam president, we will have the opportunity to deliver a little bit of tax certainty to the american people by advancing the middle class tax cut act. this legislation would prevent tax rates from increasing for the vast majority of american families and would preserve an important tax credit that currently helps millions of students and families avoid th the -- afford the costs of a higher education. this middle-class tax cuts act is the right thing to do for the middle class and i intend to vote for it. the question is: will it be filibustered? a tax cut for millions of hardworking americans filibustered simply to protect the wealthiest americans from paying a fair share. we will find out. this is not a new story.
7:27 pm
in 2001, when president george w. bush decided to spend a large portion of the surpluses he inherited from president clinton to cut tax rates across the board, many democrats opposed it because the tax cuts were unfairly waited towards the highest-income americans. as a result of this opposition, republicans were forced to set the tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010. as 2010 drew to a close, president obama and many democrats in congress, including myself, supported extending the tax cuts for middle-class families but letting the lower rates on income above $200,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a family revert to the clinton-era levels, as was scheduled. senate republicans filibustered that effort, refusing to allow the middle class tax cut without a tax cut for america's
7:28 pm
wealthiest. not wanting tax rates to go up on middle-class families still struggling during the economy. the president and senate democrats reluctantly agreed to extend all of the tax cuts through this year. which brings us to now. once again these tax rates are set to expire. i would like to keep rates low for middle-class families. those families in rhode island are still struggling in the aftermath of the mortgage meltdown on wall street. and this is not the time to raise their taxes. but i agree with president obama that for reasons of fairness and to begin to address our deficit, it would be wise not to extend the bush tax cuts for high levels of income. and bear in mind in this discussion that the middle-class tax cut act actually would
7:29 pm
benefit even high-ends taxpayers. when we protect the first $250,000 in income, it's the first $250,000 for somebody making a million dollars. it's not just the first $250,000 for a family that makes $100,000 or $185,000. if you make $100 million or $185 million, you still get the first $250,000. if your family, for instance, makes $255,000, you'd only see an increase on the $5,000 and only to the clinton era rates that were in effect during the 1990's, when our economy was thriving. a family earning $255,000 would pay an extra $150 as a result of this bill. extending the lower tax rates for income above $250,000 for one year, again as the republicans have proposed, would add over $49 billion to our
7:30 pm
deficit. even in washington, $49 billion is significant money, money that would have to be borrowed, adding to our deficit problem. now, many of the same republicans who voted in the name of deficit reduction to end medicare as we know it -- deficit reduction was so important to them that they voted in that ryan budget to end medicare as we know it, to put thousands of dollars in costs on our seniors, they would support deepening the deficit with high-end tax cuts. there is a double standard here, and for most rhode islanders, these are exactly the wrong priorities when it comes to deficit reduction. in addition to the deficit concerns, we should let the tax cuts at the top expire just for fairness reasons. loopholes and special provisions allow many super high income
7:31 pm
earners to pay lower tax rates than many middle-class families. according to the nonpartisan congressional research service, 65% of individuals earning $1 million or more annually pay taxes at a lower rate than median income taxpayers making $100,000 or less. let me say that again so it sinks in. 65%, two-thirds nearly, of individuals earning a million dollars or more a year, the vast majority of individuals earning a million dollars or more annually, pay taxes at a lower rate than median income tax taxpayers making $100,000 or
7:32 pm
less. because of the loopholes, because of what the special interests have done, our supposedly progressive tax system is upside-down to the point where 65% of over million dollar earners pay a lower tax rate than the median income taxpayer making $100,000 or less. as you know, madam president, earlier this year, we voted on my paying a fair share act, legislation that would implement the so-called buffett rule and ensure that multimillion-dollar earners paid at least a 30% overall effective federal tax rate. during debate on my buffett rule bill, i cited an i.r.s. statistic that the top 400 taxpayers in america in 2008 who earned an average of $270 million apiece, they each earned on average $270 million in that one year, and they paid the same 18.2% effective tax rate on average that's paid by a
7:33 pm
truck driver in providence, rhode island. the single biggest factor driving this inequality is the special low rate for capital gains, 15% under the bush tax cuts. the special capital gains rate allows hedge fund billionaires to avail themselves of that so-called carried interest loophole and pay taxes at lower rates than their doorman, their secretaries, their chauffeurs. if we let the tax cuts at the top expire, these rates revert to 20% instead of 15%. now, 20% is still a pretty low rate for someone making $100 million a year, but it's more like what a family making $100,000 a year pays. let's also be very clear about one more thing. the proposal that republicans prefer, the tax cut bill introduced by finance committee ranking member orrin hatch would
7:34 pm
raise taxes. it would raise taxes on 25 million lower and middle-class americans. it would raise taxes on those 25 million americans still struggling in these challenging economic times. republicans claim not to want to raise taxes, but the republican tax bill would let very popular lower and middle-class provisions expire that would cost 25 million americans an average of $1,000 each. under the republican bill, 12 million families would see an end to the -- a smaller child tax credit. 6 million families would lose their earned income tax credit. and 11 million families would
7:35 pm
lose their american opportunity tax credit, which helps pay for college, provides a 2,500-dollar tax credit for higher education. that popular tax credit has already helped millions of students and their parents pay for college, along with pell grants, another subject of republican attack. extending the american opportunity credit, the college tax credit, through 2013 would cost about $3.2 billion. so republicans believe that we cannot afford a $3.2 billion investment in higher education for middle-class americans, but we can afford $49 billion in continued tax cuts for ultrahigh
7:36 pm
income earners. a $2,500 tax credit might seem pretty small in comparison to the $92,000 average tax break that millionaires, people earning a million dollars a year, would receive from another year of high-end tax cuts, but that $2,500 may make a much bigger difference in the life of that middle-class family with that child trying to get into a college they can afford than that $92,000 would make in the life of somebody earning well over a million dollars a year. once again, madam president, look at the priorities here. republicans fought to protect the tax loopholes and taxpayer subsidies for big oil. they have fought to protect the carried interest tax loophole
7:37 pm
that lets hedge fund billionaires pay lower tax rates than their chauffeurs and doormen, and they want to go after the child tax credit. they want to go after the earned income tax credit. they want to go after the college tuition tax credit. that is priorities that, like our tax code for too many americans, are upside-down. i hope the republicans will join us tomorrow in voting to advance a measure that would keep taxes low for the vast majority of americans, and i urge them to reexamine their proposal to raise taxes on 25 million low and middle-class americans. i thank the chair, and i y y y y
7:38 pm
represent -- you majorityt -- you competing philosophies. one plan introduced by majority leader of the dam supported by idnate democrats and the president proposed higher taxes, on american entrepreneurs and investors and small businessinvs owners the democratic plan represents the philosophy that if only the government could raise enough money that congress could somehow spend our way to prosperity. it is a viewpoint that holds that the federal government can spend hardworking american tax dollars better than they can. rather than leaving the money in the private economy where it can be invested or spent by private citizens, this view holds that the government should instead
7:39 pm
bring these dollars here to washington, d.c., to redistribute them through the federal bureaucracy. this philosophy was probably best articulated by the president recently when he said, and i quote, "if you got a business, you didn't build that; someone else made that happen." end quote. in other words, nobody is extraordinary bring by virtue of their hard work and accomplishments. when someone works hard and succeeds, we shouldn't celebrate that person as an example. we should instead take from him or her in order, as the president said, to spread the wealth -- to quote another of his lines. i am hopeful that the tax-and-spend philosophy of the reid tax plan will not be our only oftentimes i hope that we'll have the opportunity to vote on legislation introduced by senator hatch and minority leader mcconnell. this plan takes a very different approach by following the view that now is not the time to
7:40 pm
raise anyone's taxes. this view holds that our american freeent price system works best when government gets out of the way, leaving americans free to pursue their hopes and dreams. one way that we can leave americans free to pursue their dreams is by not raising their taxes next year, and we especially shouldn't raise taxes when americans are struggling to get by. ironically, the view that we should extend current tax policy at a time when the economy is weak was articulated interestingly enough by the president just two years ago when he signed and extension of all the tax rates. at that time, president obama said that raising taxes would have been a blow to our economy just as we're climbing out after recession. well, interestingly enough, at that time real g.d.p. growth when he made that statement, when that tax rate extension was signed into law, was around 3.1%. that was the average when the president made the statement
7:41 pm
that if we raise taxes it would be a blow to our economy. well, real g.d.p. growth this year is on a pace to average around 2% and possibly less. those numbers consistently are being revised and being revised downward. if it didn't make sense to raise taxes when our economy was recovering, why does it make sense now to raise taxes as our economy is slowing? how does it make sense to raise taxes in an environment where over 23 million americans are out of work or underemployed when the unemployment rate has been stuck over 8% now for 41 consecutive months? the votes tomorrow are incredibly important. not because either plan is likely to become law immediately but because americans deserve to know where their senators stand when they go to vote this november. do you stand for stable tax rates that encourage work and
7:42 pm
investment? or do you stand for increasing taxes on the very businesses we rely on for job creation? do you stand for a free enterprise system that rewards hard work and innovation? or do you stand for making it more difficult for small businesses to grow and succeed? mr. president, these are the important choices that they will have -- that will have real impact on hardwor hardworking as and on our economy at large. consider the reid tax plan. according to the committee -- joint committee on taxation, this plan will close a tax increase on nearly a million business owners. nearly a million business owners. now, proponents of this increase are going to argue that it will only affect a small segment of our economy. and yet the joint tax committee estimates that the tax increases in the reid plan will hit more than 50% of all income earned by businesses that pay their taxes at individual rates.
7:43 pm
these are called pass-thru businesses and they apply to "s" corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships and l.l.c.'s. they are the ones that will see their cost business go up next year for no other reason that are to tax the rich. small businesses which accounted for two-thirds of all the taxes over the last decade will be particularly impacted. according to a survey of small businesses by the national federation of independent business, 75% beaver of small businesses are organized as pass-thru businesses. nfib also found that the businesses most likely to be hit are those businesses employing between 020 and 250 employees. according to the u.s. census, the data that they collect, these businesses employ more than 25% of the workforce. and so the million small businesses that according to the joint committee on taxation will see their taxes go up under this
7:44 pm
proposal employ 25% of the american workforce and account for over 50% of all pass-thru income. and so you're going to see taxes go up -- taxes go up dramatically on over 50% of pass-thru income and on small businesses that employ 25% of the american workforce. now, does that make sense in this economy? it should be no wonder that the political party advocating this kind of tax policy has also presided over the weakest economic recovery literally since the end of world war ii. the impact of the reid tax increases on small businesses will be bad enough, but unfortunately these tax increases will have significant ramifications for our entire economy. according to a study released earlier this month by ernst & young be, the reid tax plan would hurt our economy in the long term. according to ernst & young, the
7:45 pm
tax increases in the reid plan would reduce economic output by 1.3%. this would mean $200 billion less in economic activity if translated into today's economy. the ernst & young study indicates that the tax policy in the reid plan would reduce employment by half a percent. meaning roughly 710,000 fewer jobs. the study estimates that the senate democrat approach will reduce the nation's capital stock by 1.4% and ivestment by 2.4% and that this approach will reduce after-tax wages by 1.8%.e investment, you're going to cost the economy over 700,000 jobs, you're going to reduce after-tax wages for hardworking americans in this country and yet here we are talking about a tax increase that would do dangerous, dangerous damage and harm to our economy. and i would say, mr. president, these aren't partisan statistics
7:46 pm
compiled by senate republicans. these are the estimates by a respected accounting firm as to what will happen if we follow the tax policies proposed by senate democrats and the president. we'll have less economic growth, fewer jobs, and a lower standard of living in the long run. these numbers simply confirm common sense. if we want individuals and businesses to spend and invest more, we shouldn't raise the amount of their income -- the amount of their income that they have to pay to the federal government. and that's what this does. we have major tax policy decisions to make, decisions reflected in the votes that we're going to take tomorrow. do we want to encourage capital formation in this country? in other words, do we want to encourage investors to put their capital at risk so that businesses will have money to make new investments? well, by raising the capital gains tax rate from 15% to 20% for some investors, the reid bill will make it less attractive to invest in our
7:47 pm
economy. according to an ernst and young study from february of this year, the top rate of capital gains will rise to 56.7% on january 1 of next year after taking into account corporate, investor and state taxes. this will be the second highest combined capital gains tax rate in the world among oecd and brick nations. america already has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. it appears as if the senate democrats are going for number one when it comes to capital gains taxes as well. if there is anything i can say that's positive about the democrats' tax increase plan, it is at least that they rejected the president's proposal to nearly triple the tax on dividends paid by upper-income americans. even senate democrats are not shy about raising taxes, understand that the president's proposal to impose a top rate of over 40% on dividend income will be terrible for millions of seniors who rely on dividends --
7:48 pm
for dividend paying stocks and for those american companies that rely on dividends to raise capital. instead, the reid bill would increase the top rate on dividends from 15% to 20%. now, i believe this tax increase is bad policy but it won't be nearly as harmful as the president's approach would have been. on another issue of critical importance, however, the senate democrats have decided to run to the left of this liberal administration and this is on the issue of the estate tax, better known as the death tax. the reid plan would impose a huge new death tax on family farms and businesses next year. under current law, businesses and farms are exempted from the death tax on the first $5 million of the value of an estate. values above this amount are taxed a top rate of 35%. well, i believe we ought to completely eliminate the death tax and i've introduced legislation with 37 of my colleagues to do so. but the current death tax treatment exempts the large
7:49 pm
majority of family farms and businesses from the tax. the reid plan, however, would allow the death tax to revert to the provisions in effect before 2001. this means that under the reid plan, family farms and businesses will face a top death tax rate of 55% on estates above $1 million in value. this is a massive death tax increase on tens of thousands of small businesses and family farms across america. in fact, according to the joint committee on taxation, the reid plan will increase the number of estates subject to the death tax in 2013 from 3,600 estates under current law to 50,300 estates under reid's proposal. according to the joint committee on taxation, the reid plan will subject 20 times more farming estates to the death tax in 20 2013, a 2,000% increase. the reid plan will subject nine
7:50 pm
times more small businesses to the death tax, a 900% increase. if the death tax policy in the reid plan were made permanent, over the next ten years, a number of small businesses subject to the death tax would increase from 1,800 to 23,00 and the number of family farms subject to the death tax would increase from 900 to 25,200. those are all -- that's all data put together and -- and roortd out by joint committee -- reported out by the joint cotaxation. the reason for this massive expansion of the death tax is the $1 million exemption amount is much too low given the value of successful farms and small businesses today. i'll use my state of south dakota as a good example. if you take family farms in south dakota, according to the department of agriculture, the average size of a farm in my state is 1,374 acres. and according to the usda, the average value per acre of cropland in south dakota is
7:51 pm
about $1,800. this means that the average value of a farm in my state is nearly $2.5 million. and so if you have a -- a death tax law that only exempts a million dollars and has a 55% top rate on everything above that, imagine what that's going to do to the average farm in a state like south dakota. and south dakota's not unique in that regard. we've seen land values rise across america's heartland, from nebraska to missouri to montana. let's be clear, the reid bill will subject many more families to a punitive double tax, the death tax, when a loved one passes away. it will make it much more difficult to pass family farms and businesses from one generation to the next. and we should never forget that most family farms are land rich and cash poor. lots of assets, land values, those sorts of things. what you don't want to see happen, mr. president, is to see a family farm that could be
7:52 pm
passed on to the next generation have to be liquidated to pay the i.r.s. because of a punitive death tax. it and that is precisely what -- and that is precisely what this policy as proposed by the democrat plan would do. the usda estimates that 84% of farm assets are comprised of farm real estate. that's where most farm and ranch families have their assets. that means that family farms don't have extra cash on hand to pay the death tax. instead, they'll have to sell off land or take on additional debt in order pay these higher taxes. mr. president, that is exactly what we don't want to see happen in this country. i don't believe that the president's proposal, which is a $3.5 million exemption and a 45% top rate, is adequate but it is much better than what the senate democrats and the reid plan have proposed. and so let me just summarize, if i might. tomorrow we're going to vote on the reid proposal to raise taxes at a time when americans are hurting and our economy is fragile. the reid proposal's going to
7:53 pm
impose higher taxes of more than $50 billion on successful small businesses owned -- small business owners and families. it will hurt our economy, reducing economic growth and job creation at the same time it lowers wages for hardworking american families. and it will impose a new death tax of $31 billion on 43,100 family farmers, ranchers and small businesses. we will also vote, i hope -- i hope, mr. president -- on the hatch-mcconnell alternative plan to keep tax rates where they are to prevent a tax increase on any american next year. in addition to keeping tax rates where they are, the hatch-mcconnell proposal provides instructions to the finance committee to report out fundamental tax reform legislation by 12 months from the date of enactment of the bill. the hatch-mcconnell approach is the correct approach. prevent a tax increase now and move to fundamental tax reform next year. of course, extending current tax
7:54 pm
law temporarily is only a short-term fix. what is really needed is comprehensive tax reform, much like the tax reform act of 1986. real tax reform will drive economic growth higher, will lead to robust job creation, and will result in more revenue to the federal government. but real tax reform is going to require presidential leadership, something that has unfortunately been lacking over the past 3 1/2 years. perhaps next year we'll have a president truly willing to commit to tax reform, a president who is not content is wimplely releasing a 23-page framework for corporate tax reform. but until we get to comprehensive tax reform, mr. president, the least we can do now is to ensure americans do not face a massive, new tax hike during the week -- during the weak economy. i hope we will get that vote tomorrow. i hope that -- you know, that the senate democrats will find their way to -- to give us a vote on extending the tax rates for all americans so that small businesses aren't whacked with a
7:55 pm
big tax increase next year, so that our economy doesn't get plunged perhaps into a recession. we don't see that. unemployment race particular even higher. those are the results. those are the outcomes, those are the types of things that are going to happen, according to all the independent analysis of the tax proposal that is before us today. and, remember, there's always this idea that somehow if we raise more taxes, that we'll have -- we'll be able to pay down more of the debt. and i got to say, mr. president, i've not been my experience around here that when there's money around washington, d.c., it gets sucked up and it gets spent. and i think a lot of americans would be -- we8 come the idea of seeing their taxes going to -- welcome the idea of seeing their taxes going to pay down the debt. but we're going to see a massive increase on americans that is going to be used to grow government near washington, d.c. and that is not what the american people want and that is not what we in the united states not what we in the united states
7:56 pm
what can you tell us about the senate democrats' tax proposal that's coming up for a vote? >> i can tell you that it's a very much like they have incurred since the obama campaign of 2008. about 98% of the population it would basically about the tax rates to go back to the clinton era levels and households according to under 50,000. >> senate democrats say their proposal was better than what the republicans are offering and the president has said. it's like they're making a big case right now for trying to improve fairness, trying to give the impression increasing opportunities in the middle class of only for the campaign for the progressivity in the tax
7:57 pm
code losing income at the same time these people at the top 1% are seeing their incomes increase over the last decade or so and if the tax code is something that has recurred on the fundamental tax reform and all to start now has a part of the awaiting. but in at the changes immediately than republicans propose. >> what about the proposal will lead to a vote? >> is on solid now it will not get a vote. it's the same proposal the house is when to be voting on next week as well so the house will vote on at. the key difference is that the proposal does the lead and increased or less what you see
7:58 pm
now in the incurring tax policy. outreach for the textbooks will be extended for an additional year. there's a couple smaller items and democrats have been happy to point out things like the earned income tax credit and the low-income vote that were not included in that bill republican said because they were not part of the original 20012003 tax cut. those were added later under president obama of there's also an estate tax provision and republican bill that the democratic bill does not include we don't want the estate tax portion we want to keep the focus on the middle class.
7:59 pm
they might be family farmers or small business and could face a big tax increase in the inheritance tax. >> where do you see the votes falling and is anybody going to break from the party ranks? >> not on this vote for. i don't want to try to predict to a much that there is no expectation that there's going to be a major breakthrough on this bill left. this is mostly seen as sort of a pregame show fy cahal there will be votes in the expectation and then its series later on likely after the election and to figure out these hard issue is what to do with those top income people kennedy estate tax whether you should have things like the earned
124 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on