mr. chairman? >> yes. >> briefly, i would like to follow-up on senator baucus' comments. i think it is progress that we move beyond december. i just want to say that separating policy from pay for is somewhat problematic because the pay for involves policy. so, i think we should not assume that there will be no reference to whether we pay for and how we pay for while we accept the notion that we're going to try today to focus on policies and not address or resolve the issue of pay for. there is a relationship in terms of policy whether we pay for and how. >> that will be -- when we know all of the policies we have, we will know all of the pay for. we don't know all of the policies. i'm glad to see that at least for this part of it, i r

though right again and there baucus which is the hero of interesting there's an investigation against mr baucus and maybe it's going to be found out that he did something but we're talking about you know the trade specifically with spencer baucus and i'm not going to defend him whatsoever because i think that there's a lot of problematic things that he's done but we're talking about real pittances here which sure that's wrong and so if we highlight things wrong but we're talking about you know ten thousand dollar tree and whatnot this is the amount of focus has been put on this is completely unwarranted relative to the other massive problems massive corruption things that go on crony capitalism washington it's not to say that this is not bad stuff and saying that this is a smokescreen away from what real corruption is in d.c. i would say then let's talk about the political intelligence industry which democrats are really upset about being left out of the stock act i mean do you think that represents a little bit of the bigger picture though right because that activity on capitol hill that then

mr. baucus: mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: start tar quorum call: mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant majority leader. mr. durbin: i ask consent that the quorum call be suspended. sphefer sphe without objection. mr. durbin: and consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, overnight and earl will this morning, parts of my home state of illinois and our adjoining state of missouri were pom manied by severe storms and for neigh doassments while the total extent of the damage is not yet known, it is clear that southeastern illinois was hit hard by at least one tornado and heavy stomples the towns of harrisburg and in saline and gallonnensburg have suffered greatly. several people have died as a result. the earliest reports suggest ten deaths. the exact number won't be known for sometime. more than 100 people have reported to suffer serious injury. this is an indication of

. >> thank you, senator baucus, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, you started this morning by reading what the words say, which is important. it is temporary. it's assistance to needy families. and i think it's really about two issues, really. one is trying to achieve self-sufficient efficiency in the lives of people who have really struggled, and also getting back to work, which is vital. i think that's why we're getting the kind of consensus we are. in program is a lifeline for families that have be so devastated, especially in the aftermath of this recession. and i know there are a lot of reforms that the committees of jurisdiction can deal with and should deal with. but i also believe that getting an agreement right now to extend this is very important. just this fall, the joint economic committee, the democratic staff put together a report entitled "assessing the impact of the great recession on income and poverty across the states." obviously it outline and highlighted the poverty increases for all americans. but i thought it was unf

senator baucus. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate that. and there is a great deal of consensus and i certainly agree with my colleague from maryland, congressman van holland. our focus needs to be on dealing with the payroll tax and medicare issues and unemployment insurance and i certainly support the bonus depreciation. i think that's an important tool we need to continue. i'm somewhat confused by the house rules. i served in the house for a long time but i'm confused. i thought your house rules allowed to you extend the tax breaks for the highest income people without any offsets but maybe i was wrong about that. and now you're saying that we have long standing tax policies that you -- i know that's for a different day but i would think that there should be a different standard used when we're talking about extending current policies that have been long standing but i think that's an issue that has to be coupled with this discussion and i know we're trying to get the policy today but i agree that how we offset this is very much affectin

baucus. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we have been trading ui offers back and forth on the second level and i'm hopeful that we've pretty much closed that out. on the larger ui issues, it's a number of weeks. drug testing, g.e.d., waivers and so forth. i think it might not be a bad idea if we in the senate were to send over to the house, very quickly an offer on that, on all of ui. and you could expect to see that very soon. >> well thank you very much. we'll look forward to that. that is obviously one of the core issues that we have to come to an agreement on fairly quickly, ui, payroll tax holiday and sgr being the three large ones. i do think that it appears from the conversation today, that the democrats rejected the offsets we in our legislation. but i think that we do want to get an offer, on those pay-fors as well. so i look forward to engaging with my senate colleagues and other members of the conference on trying to find a way to go forward. if, if we are successful on that, we will have three choices. one, to go

yield back. >> senator baucus. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield to the senator from maryland. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just point out a couple of things first to congressman upton. the legislate you were referring to was filed prior to the station' request where they were asked to meet with the industry and make modifications. since they were filed they did meet with the industry, they did make modifications and weep are prepared to move forward. i'm going to point out university boilers are no longer in the regulations. so we need to update to where we are today rather than going back to where we were a year ago. let me point out to senator grasso, the number -- again, you're referring to some of the revisions that were in the original regulation that had been modified. the numbers are nowhere near 200,000. the number is about 1,700 that are estimated will need to make modifications in order to comply with the regulation. and i think the major point i would just argue -- we're all entitled to our own views and i un

baucus. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will keep my remarks short. on the democratic side, senator casey will read off on the payroll, and i think senator kyl will lead off on s.g.r. with respect to the payroll tax, just a couple of numbers to help confirm its importance. it expires, the payroll tax cut expires, there will be a tax increase on 160 million american workers. we do not want that. that includes 600,000 employees in my state of montana. clearly, the expiration would hamper economic recovery. we all want unemployment down. we want to boost the economy. at extending the payroll tax cut for a year will happen that regard. the economist i have seen are pretty much in agreement that gdp growth would decline by about 1.3%, or about $200 billion if expires. americans who have expressed the payroll tax cut for a while now, if it is extended one more year, that is about as much as it should be, that will give certainty and confidence to americans that congress is not a yo-yo, enacting provisions without certainty. predictability is very important

. >> senator baucus? >> mr. chairman, i think this has been a pretty good discussion. we're not going to today resolve the ged, i don't believe, drug testing, i don't believe. the number of weeks, i don't believe. but on the other hand, there are some areas that -- where there has been discussion. not so much here in this room, but both sides trying to figure out how it makes some progress. they resolve around the job search. and taking some provisions in the house bill that i think are good, it makes sense that we n can -- hopefully peek favorably about putting off the other ones. the job search in the house bill is a good one. i think we should try to find some way to encourage more job search. reassessment of eligibility. and re-employment services. that is a second look. i think that's an important provision too. i think the strength of the program. i think we also talked about some enhanced re-employment services. to help people have the qualifications, go to work, overpayments. i saw a figure, a few years ago i was amazed at the amount of the payment. it was pret

. >> thank you, senator baucus. mr. chairman, thank you. as many of my colleagues pointed out, we have seen over the last 22 months, the private sector job growth with 3 million jobs. it is insufficient to meet the demands of families throughout the country. indeed, i think we have to begin with the notion of the benefits that were available to american working families over the last several years should be continued. i would make the point that we have historically met emergency spending. in 1982, there was an offset or a tax on employers or those receiving the benefits. at the time, we just agreed to reducing payroll taxes and adding to the taxes seems to be counterintuitive. we are at a point where history suggests that we have to provide continuous benefits in the last few years. we have to do it and i would urge to do it under the emergency basis that we also adopt it. one aspect of extending the benefits to the 99 weeks is the logic of this program. it is counter cyclical. if we trunkate the number of weeks, we may have 10% unemployme

mr. chairman. >> senator baucus? i don't think i have any other statements. >> let me just respond briefly. and that is, there's a lot of agreement here as to the purpose of this adjustment. when the affordable care act was passed, we wanted to provide affordability for our lower income wage earners. that's why we provided credit. the problem is, that that determination is made before we know the taxable income of the individual. so people make estimates in good faith. these are the lower-wage workers and we want to make sure as senator, congressman levin said, they are in fact encouraged to use the system to get insurance. because that's what we want them to be. we want them to be covered. so from the beginning, we recognize there was a need to do an audit at the end of the taxable year. so that there was not a, an overcredit beyond what we thought was reasonable for people to be able to expect. so you're correct. this is part of the framework for how the credits for lower-wage workers was intended to work. and it was included in the affordable care act. we have adjusted it as has been poi

mr. waxman. so senator baucus? >> i think senator cardin would like to be recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just quote from a letter i received from a doctor last night that i think really underscores the point that senator kyl made. i'm quoting. i think all of us have to recognize that real sacrifices from all of us are needed to make the solution possible i fear that some of my doctor colleagues don't realize that there will have to be some cuts. many of us take medicare patients and accept assignment of benefits. but life would be easier for all of fuss we had the certainty, knew the numbers, and were able to plan where we need to make cuts and adjustments. i think senator kyl really brought that out. down on the st wants to eliminate this cliff once and for all. and i think that is doable. senator kyl really a different issue, and we need to talk about updates. but eliminating the cliff is something that i hope we could agree to. ow i know, mr. chairman, we are today. but i just really want to point out that if we eliminated the cliff, it would be current policy, becaus

so with that, senator baucus, the time is yours. >> thank you, mr. chairman. these are interesting microphones. it's true they're light to touch. it's also true the red light is the dimmest red light i've ever seen in my life. you have to really look at it. i appreciate the comments congressman levin, mr. chairman. i think we should look at supplemental grants. it's true secularly outside the scope of the conference. but, you know, we're probably going to need 60 votes in the senate anyway. and a house rules can do what it wants if we agree here to the provision such as this. i have a hunch that it will prevail. second, it's not a lot of money here. it's in the neighborhood of like a couple hundred, million. and it is also true as congressman levin pointed out without it some states, some kids in some states are in much worse condition than kids in other states. so i would hope that we can work our way through that and find a way to include it. i believe now according to the program we're going to a different subject. >> in agreement. there wasn't a vote to te

. >> senator baucus, senator carden? >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, let me concur with senator baucus in that, to me, it's the illogical to say that we're going to ask medicare beneficiaries, most of whom do not work, to pay for the temporary tax relief giving to working families under the payroll tax holiday. i just think that's not a logical way for us to be going over our business here. so, first i concur with senator baucus's observations that we shouldn't be looking at this type of a source to offset that type of a cost. secondly, let me agree with senator levin. i think the point he raises is worth repeating. the intent here is to freeze the bracket at $80,000 to start. to freeze it, permanently, until we reach 25%. one out of every four seniors who would be subject to this higher part b premium. not 5%. we're talking about getting to as much as 25% of our seniors who would be subject to the surtax. let me also point ought we already have a progressive. that is, a financing mechanism in for medicare that those that make more money pay more

baucus. >> i yield to senator reid for two minutes. >> mr. chairman, one of the issues here i think is what rule are we talking about, the original rule that was proposed or the rule that has now been revised extensively with collaboration from industry and is much more focused. as the subcommittee chairman for the appropriations committee that responds to the epa, i had the occasion to listen to lots of pro potiposals with respect a jurisdictions the last year. with respect to issue we concluded, these are the both republicans and democrats, house and snats, the conferees are encouraged by the outcomes of epa's reconsideration of the boiler mack rule and offer no redirection regarding boiler mack standards. it includes additional flexibility with respect to biocourse and the last time we bicamerally took up the issue, epa was making progress. i think we should let them continue to make that progress and deploy a rule that's effective. with that i would yield my time back. >> i yield. we have about three minutes left. i'll give it to senator

mr. charge. >> thank you. senator baucus we have time to go one more round or given that there will be some proposal coming forward, we could move on to the -- >> i appreciate it. sure. i think senator reed would -- >> let's do one more round. >> it's such an important issue. >> quickly, mr. chairman, i thought it was interesting that this is a very productive discussion. i think we all have sort of agreement and sincere agreement on the value of education. we'd like to see everyone get as much education as possible. but i think it's interesting when you take mr. levin's points about the proposed cuts to basic state training workers, worker investment, worker training, access to geds, we're sort of saying two things. we're saying we want people to qualify for workers unemployment insurance by signing up for the ged, but doesn't look like we're going to put a lot of money into the states to support the efforts to get everyone so that they could automatically sign up. and get the program. no waiting list, no nothing. we're not

mr. chairman. >> i think senator baucus is a senate republican -- >> no. >> i wanted to make a comment on a different subject if i could. as i've been look around the table -- >> no, we're in 100%. >> i've noted the size of the water bottles on the house side and the senate side -- >> i had the same observation. >> i want the record to reflect the senate's going big. >> and some of you haven't taken a sip. >> we'll go to mr. levin. if there's no one else, i think we're concluded in this round of discussion on bonus depreciation. i think there might be some other items you might want to discuss. >> mr. chairman, i'd like to submit a senate offering and pass it out. this is with respect to ui. there's been a lot of discussions about work surge requirements, reemployment, eligibility assessment, work sharing, self-employment assistance and it's my suggestion that the house take this offer under consideration and see if perhaps if it's the house position to either agree next session or work out some way where we could at least get these provisions passed. the bigger ui issues of course are not yet being

>> thank you, senator baucus, mr. chairman. i think this is a positive development that we are developing consensus. mr. chairman, you started this morning by reading what the words say, which is important. it is temporary assistance to needy families. i think it is about two issues are really. one is trying to achieve self- sufficiency in the lives of people who struggle, and also getting people back to work, which is vital. that is the kind of consensus we are. this kind of program is a lifeline for families, especially those so devastated in the aftermath of this recession. i know there are a lot of florence b. committees of jurisdiction -- a lot of forums the committees of jurisdiction can deal with and will deal with. the democratic staff put together a report entitled "assessing the impact of the great recession on income and poverty across the state." obviously, it outlined the poverty, the poverty increases for all americans. but i thought it was unfortunately emblematic to highlight one or two of the points. 1 in -- on

i yield back. >> senator baucus. 11 minutes remaining. >> mr. chairman, i think what i am hearing is sort of the classic cherry picking. president obama suggested this, so we have to support the. when in fact, what i believe the president suggested was a comprehensive plan to deal with the deficit, which included increasing taxes on the wealthiest americans. would you have said -- which we have said persistently is not in the cscope of this conference. what we're saying is we have to look for -- mr. waxman said it well -- constructive ways to fund these three programs, which i believe are designed to confront the real emergency in the country in terms of people without work, people who are working but need more money in their paychecks, and the srg situation. i think he suggest the senate has suggested -- i stand corrected, but we rejected the house budget the came across with the medicare cuts. >> we all support it. >> everyone? >> every republican. >> well, that is why i open and up to be corrected. [laughter] >> that is ok. >> i believe in a

mr. levin and from a senator baucus. our time is short for. we do need to find pay-fors that will pass both bodies. i will ask all of the conferees to remain flexible because we do not have a lot of time left. in terms of scheduling, i cannot give a prediction, but we do need to remain flexible to be able to get together on a moment's notice if. with that, this meeting is now adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] road to the white house continues with campaign results from three states. the gop primary in missouri has been called with more than 80% of precincts reporting. rick santorum is the projected dinter with mitt romney withsecn and ron paul third. in minnesota with nearly 30% of caucuses, rick santorum is on top again, then ron paul and mitt romney. and the results in colorado, it's rick santorum, newt gingrich and mitt romney. in early results, rick santorum is ahead in all three states. ou can see some of ron paul's supporters there. he is expected t

. >> senator baucus, there are 11 minutes remaining. >> mr. chairman, i think what i am hearing is sort of the classic cherry picking. president obama suggested this, and so we have to support that, when in fact, what i believe the president suggested was a comprehensive plan. mr. waxman suggested to do with the deficit which included increasing taxes on the wealthiest americans, which you have said persistently is not within the scope of this conference. so to focus in on part of what the president said and ignore the rest i do not think it is instructive or helpful. what we are saying is that we have to look for, and again mr. waxman said it well, constructive ways to fund these three programs which i believe are designed to confront a real emergency in the country in terms of people without work, people who are working but need more money in their paychecks, and the srg situation. i think you also have suggested time and time again, the senate rejected this and this and this. i stand corrected to be corrected, but i think all of my colleagu

mr. upton is seeking recognition. the baucus touch on this mic. the light doesn't work but it is on. >> i want to say just a couple of things. this provision is within the scope of the conference because we include it, you'll recall, and the house passed bill. in factbill. in fact, what a separate vote on just this issue as an item under suspension last week, and it passed nearly three to one. i would complement my colleague from pennsylvania for voting for it last week, as i recall. 99% of federal employees that were eligible last year for a step increase, all federal employees, they have the table, they know where they are. step one, et cetera. so nearly 100%, 99% of federal employees who were eligible for a step increase, in fact, got it last year. and increased the average $1300 per person. and our roles in the house, more spending coming up to the offsets. this is eligible, part of the conference, part of the agreement. this is a pretty sizable offset that we on this side certainly on the republican side, that really on the house side are loo

mr. markey says, well, heck, if it's unlikely, let's just go ahead and outlaw it anyway, no harm, no foul. well, there's an article today in the "national journal" in which it quotes jim baucus, head of wto, former democrat from florida, congressman, who says that all forms of protectionism are politically appealing, particularly in an election year. he then add you but there's recent action by the united states against china for a similar export restriction similar to this, of condition not allowing commodities. and we have said china has broken free trade laws with their system of export, taxes and quotas. he goes on to say we would be at risk of offending the same law that we are kind of going after china on if we attempted to do something as well. also michael levy, an energy expert at the kounl on foreign relations is quoted in the same article, if this was somehow effective at trapping rocket in the united states that otherwise would be exported, the ultimate impact on gasoline prices could very well be bad rather than good. it would drive up prices. that's a reason why someone from massachusetts should oppose this, not just someone from louisiana. now, then there's th

mr. president, i urge all members to support this commonsense bipartisan bill. senators tester, mccaskill, baucus, blunt, grassley, hoeven, enzi, and scott brown, senator scott brown already have joined senator thune and me as original cosponsors. i want to thank them for their support. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. tester: mr. president, i want to thank the senator from alaska for his explanation of what's been going on as far as executive comp with fhfa. thank you very much for that. mr. president, i would ask consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up amendment number 1492. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the clerk will report. the clerk: -- mr. tester: 1492. the clerk: the senator from montana, mr. tester, proposes amendment numbered 1492. mr. tester: i ask unanimous consent that the reading be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection, the senator from montana is recognized. mr. tester: i ask this amendment be set aside and ask consent to call up amendment 1503. the presid

mr. president, i want to thank you for your hard work on getting us to this moment. i want to thank senator inhofe for his amazing cooperation, senator baucus and vitter and all the members of the committee. senators johnson and shelby of banking. senator rockefeller, who worked so hard with senator hutchison, and we hope we'll resolve the outstanding issues in commerce. senator baucus, who worked with senator hatch, and we did get a good finance piece. and we are so ready to go, and so we are going to await to see whether our colleagues on the other side will insist upon 30 hours going postcloture or whether they yield back that time and allow us to get started on the amendment process. so at this moment, i'm going to put in a quorum call, note the absence of a quorum and hope that we can can quickly move to amend this bill. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: skwhrao*eblgtsdz senior senator # quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. begich: i come to the floor -- the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call