vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to change their vote? if not the ayes are 57 and the nays 43.

the amendment is agreed to. there are two minutes of what debate prior to a vote on the kirk amendment number 1063. who yields time? mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president on behalf of the senator from illinois we're offering an alternative to the sanders amendment that failed earlier today, the sanders amendment

called for a substantial increase the minimum wage, an action that the congressional budget office has told us could kill up to a million jobs. the kirk amendment takes a different approach. it reaffirms the ability of the individual states to raise the minimum wage above the federal level but only if they choose to do so of their own volition. it also calls for policies that would result in higher wages for all americans pro-growth tax relief and the elimination of mandates bike those of obamacare. i urge my colleagues to support the kirk amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from 0 the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: frankly, i don't quite understand this amendment. this is what it says -- and i quote -- "this amendment would create a deficit neutral fund to reaffirm can raise the minimum wage while relieving mandates." states do do not permission from the federal government to raise the minimum wage. in fact, 29 states have already

raised the minimum wage and in the last election when that question was on the ballot in four states, all four of those states voted to raise the minimum wage. people all over this country want us to raise the federal minimum wage, which is now a starvation wage of $7.25 an hour. so this amendment quite frankly does not make a whole lot of sense to me and i would hope that it will be defeated. states are looking to the federal government to raise the minimum wage. we don't have to tell them what to do. they're doing just fine. mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. cornyn: this is a reafter a mission of the 10th amendment of the constitution. i would ask support of our colleagues. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. is there a second -- a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

the presiding officer: is there any senator wishing to change their vote? if not the yeas are 57 and the nays 43. the amendment is agreed to. the senator from florida. mr. nelson: mr. president i call up amendment 944.

the presiding officer: the amendment is pending. there are two minutes of debate. mr. nelson: mr. president? the presiding officer: o.t. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. nelson: this is an amendment to call a point of order on any legislation that would attempt to muzzle federal employees in using any scientific language that has -- causing change scientific language that would ply to oceans, to weather to the climate, and to atmospheres. it is an attempt to make clear that we do not agree with muzzling or censoring federal

agencies or federal employees when it comes to employing their scientific knowledge. and i'll reserve the balance of my time. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: this amendment is not germane to the budget resolution. it creates a point of order concerning subject matter that's not within the jurisdiction of the budget committee prohibiting federal employees or agencies from exercising the freedom of speech by prohibiting using terms from spheric literature while i know my colleagues have strong opinions on this topic it's not appropriate for inclusion in the budget resolution. in fact, this amendment is corrosive. it damages the privilege of the budget. therefore when debate time expires i will raise a point of order this is not germane to the budget resolution and i urge my colleagues to sustain it.

and i guess that probably concludes the debate. mr. nelson: mr. president, how much time do i have remaining? the presiding officer: seven seconds. mr. nelson: mr. president, this is an issue of freedom of speech, first amendment rights. this is fact --. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. enzi: amendment number 944 is not germane to the budget resolution now before the senate. therefore i raise a point of order against deposited under -- the amendment under section 305-b-2 of the congressional budgeting act of 1974. mr. nelson: mr. president i move to waive and i ask for the yeas and yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not on this vote, the yeas are 51 and the nays 49. three-finals of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative the motion is agreed to. -- is not agreed to. the point of order is sustained and the amendment falls.

there are two minutes of debate prior to a vote on the mccain amendment number 360. can we have order? the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: mr. president this amendment is simple. it says that children who show up at our border will not be allowed to stay. they will be returned to the country that they came from. right now they are be transported up by the lowest form of life that ever existed on the earth. young women are being raped people are being killed and molested and the drug cartels are the ones that are bringing them up. this has got to stop. they can go to the consulate and the embassies in their countries -- i am talking about the three central american countries guatemala, nicaragua and el salvador -- but to have the drug cartels and parents paying

thousands of dollars to have them transported up, many of the young women being raped on the way, is unacceptacceptable. i urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment. i have a modification at the desk anded ask that my amendment be modified. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. so ordered. the amendment is so modified. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. ms. mir row know:ms. hirono: i did raise an objection to the change. i rise to oppose amendment number 360 which would roll back critical anti-trafficking and humanitarian protections for children from central america. last summer i led a congressional delegation to the border to view the humanitarian crisis of unaccompanied children from guatemala honduras, and el salvador. clearly, concrete cells at border patrol stations are no

place for children, which is where they likely would be under the expedited deportation proceedings allowed under this amendment. these young children are fleeing danger and violence in their own home countries. so it is also no answer to require these children to seek asylum in their home countries while being exposed to the very violence that they're trying to escape in the first place. now, this is the portion of the amendment that the senator has eliminated. it still doesn't leave the part about expedited deportation. so let's keep the current law in place that protects these children. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. hirono: we voted for this law, united states of americaly united states of america -- we voted for this law unanimously signed by president bush. the presiding officer: question is on the amendment. all in favor say aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it.

ms. hirono: mr. president, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote sph if not the amendment as modified is agreed to. there are taboo two minutes of debate prior to a wyden amendment. mr. wyden: i ask that the wide deny-cray pop wildfires amendment be modified with the

changes at the desk. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. wyden: mr. president i call up amendment 968 and urge senators to support this amendment because it will cut taxes on the middle class and give millions of americans a new ladder of economic opportunity. this amendment rewards hard work makes college more affordable and helps parents who have a tough time making ends meet. let's create a new path upward for the middle class and those who want to be middle class support this amendment and i yield back. mr. enzi: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: once again i have to ask my colleagues to vote "no." this is a tax reform idea that has some merit but it has to be dealt with in the context of comprehensive tax reform rather than the stand-alone proposal. i suspect that he and his chairman senator hatch, should

be able to work -- i know they're working on doing a change to the tax code that would eliminate some of the overcomplicated, inefficient archaic language, so the budget resolution doesn't need to contain it, even though it's deficit-neutral, it's again telling a committee what to do and kind of how to do it, and it's even by the person that has the capability to do that. so i'd ask for a "no" vote. mr. wyden: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the question is on amendment 968. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 73, the nays are 27.

the amendment is agreed to. there are two minutes of debate prior to a vote on the lee amendment number 750 as modified. mr. lee: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: mr. president the federal government owns almost two-thirds of the land in the state of utah. and almost half of the land in the 11 co-terminus states in the western united states. but unlike other property owners the federal government does not pay property tax. as a result, areas with high concentrations of federal land, like most of utah and most of the western united states, face budget shortfalls that affect the ability of those states to

fund critical education transportation infrastructure, and emergency services. to help compensate local governments for this loss of property tax revenue the federal government created the pilt program. pilt stands for payment in lieu of taxes -- to provide some of the funding for these revenue shortfalls. historically though, pilt payments tend to represent just a tiny fraction -- just pennies on the dollar -- for what these taxing jurisdictions could otherwise collect. now, to correct the damage -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. lee: -- from this unfair system i ask my colleagues to vote nor this amendment which would bring us in alignment with what the other jurisdictions receive from taxes. ms. cantwell: i'd ucialg my colleagues to oppose this amendment. while there are many of us who support full if i understand funding for -- full funding for

pilt this amendment is impractical. the congressional research service report indicates that attempts to set up a tax equivalency for pilt would be wrought with error and gamesmanship. that's because counties routinely tax land differently and use different rates and second my colleagues should note that this may increase pilt payments by more than 350% of today's authorized level and that would raise the cost of this program from $4 billion to $5 billion to $ed 15 billion to $ed 20 billion. and because the amendment created a spending neutral reserve fund, only cuts to other mandatory spending could be used to fund the $ed 350% rise in payments. so mr. president i can't support this amendment. it is unsustainable and unworkable. i urge my colleagues to oppose it. the presiding officer: question is on the amendment. all those in favor say aye.

all those opposed say no. the amendment is agreed to. -- the ayes appear to have it. ms. cantwell: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: