mr. grassley: we've held hearings on this. it's amazing to me, the defense department won't undergo an audit, they're going through a process to show -- mr. johnson: they're showing that they can qualify to do an audit. wal-mart is over $400 billion large and they go through audit every year. i think you strike your tone of bipartisanship here senator. mr. enzi: the next amendment on your side? mr. sanders: ms. murray. ms. murray: i worked very hard to make sure the federal government meets its moral and legal obligations to clean up hanniford as well as similar sites throughout the couldn't thrism department of energy has the responsibility to uphold the legacy responsibilities of our federal government. these sites are the result of more than 50 years nuclear weapon research development and production from the manhattan is project in world war ii. i applaud the increase in the budget request for $5.8 billion but it's $200 million less than last year's budget request and still $43 million below what congress appropriated in f.

mr. grassley: i will yield. mr. nelson: thank you to the senator from iowa. you're very kind, because i think he would want to know that our former colleague senator landrieu is in the gallery in order to see the confirmation vote of carlos monje, who is from her state of louisiana. thank you mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i would ask consent that my remarks be printed in the record just prior to our going into executive session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: in recent years we've had a lot of discussion about senate obstructionism with competing claims about who is really at fault. i think the answer to that question is becoming increasingly undeniable to any fair observer. actions speak louder than words, and there's no denying the actions of the minority party which before this congress was the majority party in the senate for eight years. even in the minority, as we've seen last week, they're up to old tricks, blocking amendments and grinding the senate to a halt. given the distortions

mr. grassley. caller: mr. grassley. -- the clerk: mr. grassley. mr. sessions. mr. crepo. mr. graham. mr. portman. mr. toomey. mr. johnson. ms. ayotte. mr. wicker. mr. corker. mr. perdue. mr. sanders. ms. murray. mr. wyden. ms. stabenow. mr. whitehouse. mr. warner. mr. merck lee. -- merkley. ms. baldwin. mr. kaine. mr. king. mr. chairman. the yeas are 10 the nays are 12. mr. enzi: the amendment fails. the next amendment, senator crapo's amendment. mr. crapo: i yield to senator warner on this. mr. warner: we should not be using the fees which should be going to support our housing industry as a piggy bank for other programs. it's rare to see we've got bankers, civil rights groups, all aligned. s that fiscally responsible amendment and i urge passage. mr. enzi: any objection to a voice vote? seeing none. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. carried. next one is the murray amendment. ms. murray: this is the amendment that takes the deficit neutral reserve fund provided in section 307 and expands it to allow us to use it for drastically needed issues for our veterans and service mem

mr. grassley. >> no. >> mr. sessions. >> no. >> mr. crapo. >> no. >> mr. toomie. >> no. >> mr. corker. >> no. >> mr. sanders. >> aye. >> misstep and mr. warner. >> aye. >> mr. kane. >> mr. chairman. >> no. >> the yays are 16, the nays are 6. >> that amendment is adopted. this is a democrat side-by-side. >> i was told you wanted to wait. >> we are ready. >> have you got to see the side-by-side? >> no. none of us have. >> why don't we wait and do it with the side-by-side. senator enzi: we will move that down further in the list so everyone can review the side-by-side. [inaudible] senator enzi: the next amendment is the senator stevanbenow amendment. >> i have had a chance to look at the reserve fund side-by-side amendment. the way i look at it, it is identical to my amendment >> will you talk into the microphone. senator sanders: it concludes the language without raising new revenue. we are agreeing with your basic tenants. we are making it deficit neutral. senator portman: i would be happy to support the alternative . this is an opportunity to go on record. it is an important st

mr. grassley: the language that we just heard the minority party complaining about -- i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. mr. president, we just heard members of the minority party complaining that there are things in this bill that nobody knew anything about and on our side i think we've done a good job of refuting it. i'm going to suggest again that they ought to read the legislation. they had plenty of time to read the legislation. but it's kind of remindful of the story about speaker pelosi saying after the 2,700-page obamacare bill was written that you have to pass it to find out what's in it. now, obviously this legislation before us isn't law it's a proposal but it's just like people evidently don't read this legislation before it gets out of committee with a strong bipartisan vote of 20-0. the fact is that this legislation was on the web site several weeks before it was voted out of committee and this language was in it, so you have to wait until a bill gets out of committee before you read the language? no. there is 20 people on the judiciary committee that had an opp

mr. grassley. >> no. >> mr. sessions. >> no. >> mr. crapo. >> no. >> mr. graham. no. >> mr. portland. >> no. mr. tumi. >> 92. this ayotte. >> no mr. purdue? >> no. mr. sanders. >> yes. >> miss murray. >> no. mr. widen aye. >> stabenow. >> yea. >> mr. wardly. >> aye. >> mr. king. >> no. mr. chairman the ayes are ten. the nays are 12. >> the amendment is defeated. the grassley amendment. >> mr. chairman, it's my understanding that if i make this a deficit neutral reserve fund that will-t will be accepted, is that right. >> is that correct? >> okay. >> okay. then that's what i'll modify my amendment. >> okay. >> all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> opposed? adopted. the sanders second amendment on minimum wage. >> simple truth is that millions of americans are working in wages that are grossly inadequate. the minimum wage today inflation accounted for dollars is far lower than it was back in the 1960s. and if we are concerned about allowing low-income people to live with dignity and earn enough money to care for their basic needs it is time for the substantial in

mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i have a unanimous consent request from the leaders. i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: thank you mr. president. mr. president, i ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: the senate is in morchlt morning business. mr. casey: thank you mr. president. i rise today to talk about the nomination that will be before the entire senate next week, the nomination of loretta lynch to be the attorney general of the united states of america and to urge all of my senate colleagues to quickly confirm united states attorney lynch to this position. loretta lynch has dedicated much of her life, many, many years of her life, to public service serving twice as the united states to enfor to attorney for the eastern distric

mr. grassley. >> no. >> mr. sessions. >> host: no. >> mr. c.o. >> snow. >> mr. graham. [inaudible conversations] >> mr. portman. >> no. >> mr. tomby. >> no. >> mr. johnson. >> no. >> ms. ayotte. >> yes. >> mr. wicker. >> no. >> mr. corker. [inaudible] >> mr. sanders. >> yes. >> mrs. measurery. >> aye. >> mr. widen, jest. >> miss stab no., aye. >> mr. warner -- [inaudible] >> mr. merkley. ms. balled win. mr. cain. mr. king. mr. chairman. >> host: no. >> theist are 10, nays are 12. >> defeated. the next amendment is the stabenow amendment on oil spills. >> thank you mr. chairman. this is a taxpayer amendment to say if you have an oil spill from tar sands, that the oil companies should be paying for that. the cleanup. the oil spill liability trust fund should have those types of spills covered by companies paying into it. we permanently extend the tax and eliminate tax benefits that apply when there's a settlement or judgment because of oil spills and there's punitive damages, if somebody is found to be reckless, the taxpayers should not pick up the tab. i would ask for a

mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: mr. president i rise to discuss what i've discussed earlier in this day. in fact, i think it was this morning, i spoke to the reason why this legislation is not moving along. i'm not going to repeat what i said then, but since then the majority leader came to the floor and gave reasons for this bill not moving along and so i want to once again bring up some important things about this legislation and rebut the other side on not moving forward with this bill. as we all know, this bill was unveiled in january after weeks of negotiation among our respective staffs. it has been in the public domain since it was introduced in january. since that time, we have followed regular order with respect to this legislation. we had a hearing on this bill. we scheduled a markup in february. amendments were offered to the bill at that markup. the ranking member offered an amendment to the very same section of the bill that included this lapping. numerous committee members took the opportunity to speak abo

mr. grassley: mr. president i'm going to speak for three minutes or four minutes on an issue besides human trafficking and i would like to have my remarks placed in the record before we start debate on the human trafficking bill. officer sper without objection. -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: today i am introducing legislation with senator enzi and a few other senators to close a tax loophole that could mean billions of dollars in tax benefits going to individuals based on work that they performed illegally in the united states. the tax benefit i'm referring to is the earned-income tax credit. the earned-income tax credit was established as a work incentive to help move more individuals from the welfare roles rolls to the payrolls. the policy between the eitc is one that i and many of my colleagues support as it is intended to foster betterment and personal responsibility by giving those on the lower end of the labor pool an extra incentive to jump in and stay in the workforc

mr. grassley aye. mr. sessions. mr. graham. mr. toomey, mr. johnson, ms. ayotte. mr. wicker. mr. perdue, mr. sanders no. ms. murray, no. mr. wyden. ms. stabenow, mr. whitehouse. mr. kane, mr. king. mr. chairman. senator enzi: yes. the clerk: the yeas are 12 and the nays are 10. senator enzi: the amendment has failed. the next one -- the amendment is passed. the amendment is passed. sorry. next one is the kaine amendment. senator: this is an amendment to promote c.t.e. education co-sponsored by senators baldwin and portman. senator enzi: any opposition, seeing none. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . it is passed. next the ayotte amendment and there is a democrat side-by-side on this one. has the side-by-side been distributed? senator: can i move my vote after. we are awaiting a ruling by the parliamentarian. can i move my vote until the end? senator enzi: there is a side-by-side which has been handed out already. two minutes of debate each side? senator: my amendment creates a neutral deficit reserve fund to america's treasures and grow our rural economies in a balanced

mr. grassley? >> it has been defeated. next amendment on oil spill. >> this is a taxpayer amendment to say that if you have an oil spill, that the oil companies a should be paying for that, the cleanup. the trust fund should have those types of spills covered by companies paying into it. we eliminate tax benefits that apply when there is a settlement or judgment because of oil spills, and there are punitive damages. if somebody is found to be reckless the taxpayer should not pick up a tap. -- the tab. >> i would ask for a no vote, this is an issue that needs to be deliberated at length in the finance committee. i know that senator wyden has been here to hear the discussion. i don't think it is the intent of anybody to give people a special tax break on fines or penalties. i would recommend a no vote. poll the committee. >> dies on a tie. now to the final part, i move to the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2016 be reported favorably. will the clerk poll the committee. >> the resolution passes and i would

mr. grassley: mr. president i ask that my remarks that i'm going to make now not be part of the remarks on the bill that's before the senate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: on a number of occasions i have had to take to the senate floor to note my opposition to the so-called smarter sentencing act. does that mean that i'm against all sentencing reform? no. but particularly something is wrong with the suggestions that have been put in bill form so far. this -- my speeches on this have been necessary because there are so many misconceptions about that legislation and federal drug sentences and prisoners. before addressing them, i want to let my colleagues know that i do believe that there are some inequities in the criminal justice system. the judiciary committee will be looking at ways to address that. i will set out that part of the committee's agenda after discussing sentencing. the smarter sentencing act would arbitrarily cut in half the mandatory minimum sentences that are i

mr. grassley, senator grassley, asked you some questions about the impact within the internal revenue code and within your department of what the president has done on executive amnesty. you went back and forth with senator grassley, and he asked you about people who are benefiting from the amnesty claiming the earned income tax credit in arrears up to three years. do you remember that testimony with senator grassley? >> i do. >> and i don't know if we established what that would cost. have you had a chance to figure out what the total cost of that program would be? >> i have not. but before i get there i don't know where the 31 billion in refund fraud came from -- >> 21 billion. >> -- 21 billion came from. we stopped at about 61 billion in refund fraud and had about 75% is what came through. we're worried about it, but it's not 21 billion going out the door. in regard to the question you asked earlier in order to be eligible for the earned income tax credit you have to work. to be able to apply for it, you have to have a social security number. >> okay. >> and so if -- we have about 700,0

mr. chairman senator grassley's amendment represents the first appearance in a budget markup as something called a spending neutral reserve fund. we had a very instructive comment from senator king yesterday pointing out if we want to address the dataset we have a considerable number of tools to do so. we can cut spending and cut a lot of spending in the course of the last years. we can also raise revenues by closing from various mellie loopholes that are ron their faith hard to justify. we can make improvements in health care, which i think both parties have agreed is the real driver to our long-term deficit and we can make investments that grow the economy rose, highway infrastructure, better facilities, trains all the things the modern economy needs. by focusing on spending alone i think we take our eye off the ball and so i will categorically vote against everything that is a spending natural reserve fund. and this is the picture senator king so well laid out for us. at this rate deficit neutral reserve fund, fine. plenty of areas i support senator sessions and then if you just made b

mr. chairman, senator grassley's amendment represents the first appearance in a budget mark up of something called a spending neutral reserve fund. and we had a very instructive comment from senator king yesterday, pointing out that if you want to address the deficit, we have a considerable number of tools to do so. we can cut spending and have cut a lot of spend ng the course of the past years. we can also raise revenues by closing some smell li loopholes that are on their face, very hard to justify. we can make improvements in health care, which i think both parties have agreed is the real driver and we can make investments to grow the roads, infrastructure, better facilities, trains, all the things that a modern economy needs. by focusing on spending alone, i think we take our eye off the ball. and so, i will categorically vote against everything that is a spending neutral reserve fund because i think it misses the picture that senator king so well laid out for us. if this were a deficit neutral reserve fund, fine. i think there are plenty of areas i think i'd support senator sessions am

just don't have that information available, and i will have to try to get a response to senator grassley. mr. alley: if you would -- chairman hatch: if you would, i would like to have that response as well. senator isakson: thank you mr. chairman, thank you senator wyden, i walked in the backdoor last weekend my wife said to listen to a voicemail, and it was precisely the call that you said, where a woman said i own a substantial amount of money and to call as quickly as i could or they would arrest me next week. being a member of this committee, i realized i was being the victim of a fraud, and i knew that number could not be real because the iris knows the edification number of all of the numbers, and i thought i should know that, but the american people don't know that. it would be good that the irs or the treasury would let american people know that these phone numbers are not part of the iris and that they was a very convincing phone call. ms. klem: thank you senator this is very common and very upsetting when that call comes in, and this is precisely why that scam is so successful. we

mr. chairman senator grassley's amendment represents the first appearance in a budget mark up of something called a spending neutral reserve fund. and we had a very instructive comment from senator king yesterday, pointing out that if you want to address the deficit, we have a considerable number of tools to do so. we can cut spending and have cut a lot of spend ng the course of the past years. we can also raise revenues by closing some smell li loopholes that are on their face, very hard to justify. we can make improvements in health care, which i think both parties have agreed is the real driver and we can make investments to grow the roads infrastructure, better facilities, trains all the things that a modern economy needs. by focusing on spending alone, i think we take our eye off the ball. and so i will categorically vote against everything that is a spending neutral reserve fund because i think it misses the picture that senator king so well laid out for us. if this were a deficit neutral reserve fund, fine. i think there are plenty of areas i think i'd support senator sessions amend

mr. chairman, the ayes our time the nay is 12. >> the amendment is defeated. grassley amendment. >> mr. chairman, is my understanding if i make make this a deficit neutral reserve funds it would be accepted yet is that right? >> is that correct quick >> that as well modify my amendment. >> all in favor say subfloor. opposed? adopted. the sanders amendment on minimum wage. >> the simple truth is millions of americans are working wages that are grossly inadequate. the minimum wage today in inflation accounting for dollars is smaller back in the 1960s and we are concerned about low-income people with dignity and earn enough money to take care of their needs it is time for a substantial increase in the minimum wage and i ask you support the amendment. >> there really isn't any need to have any kind of a fund in order to debate minimum wage and be brought to the floor under any circus dances. i urge a no vote. please call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] >> the yeas are 10 79 r. 12. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is the budget point of order amendment relating to t

mr. chairman. >> thank you senator grassley. welcome, ambassador. for senator carden's benefit, i was with the ambassador two years ago on the negotiations with the aeu and watched him hold them hold accountable for rights. i've seen this man firsthand look out for exactly what you're talking about. and might add that mcc compacts have strongest anti-corruption language of any agreement the united states has. and i think the fact that tpp is talking about including that as a big benefit because it has worked in millennium challenge. it has held people accountable in the past. and that is an excellent, outstanding point. and you do a terrific job. i'll pile on with grassley and others to thank you for the job you have been doing. i have a couple of questions. question number one is you and i talked a lot about poultry. traveled to south africa a year ago. trade rep, not industry representative i think his name is davies i met with at length. and yesterday he was quoted as saying, there's an offer on the table regarding poultry between south africa an

mr. thune: i appreciate it. i thank the senator from texas for his leadership on this issue, as well as the senator from iowa, senator grassley, for moving this legislation to the floor. as the senator from texas who has authored and been involved with this legislation for a really long time, knows if there was ever an issue -- ever an issue that we deal with here in the united states senate that goes beyond the line of partisan politics it's this. it's this. i mean, we're talk about untold stories of thousands of american children and adults who are sold into modern-day slavery. those stories are bone-chilling and are undeniably some of the most deplorable acts of humankind. and what the senator from texas's bill was designed to do is start attacking this issue in way that we reason for a very long time and gives law enforcement the tools in order to target these traffickers to bring them to justice provides the tools that are necessary to help restore the lives of the victims of these heinous heinous crimes. and so i would ask the senator from texas because it is interesting to me that we are where we are. i mean, this is c

mr. thune: i appreciate it. i thank the senator from texas for his leadership on this issue, as well as the senator from iowa, senator grassley, for moving this legislation to the floor. as the senator from texas who has authored and been involved with this legislation for a really long

grassley. chairman hatch: if you would, i would like to have that response. mr. camus: yes, sir. senator: thank you, mr. chairman. last week, i returned home to atlanta from a week in washington. when i walked in the back door, my wife, whose name, by the way, is diane, she said i need to listen to the voice of it it was precisely the call you talked about where a woman with a very convincing voice informed that i would owed a substantial amount of money, and i was to call a tool to -- 202 number readily. the next morning, ironically, i was doing an event with the director of the rs and the atlanta region and gave him the telephone number to follow up on. he told me, well, this can't be real because we do not make any solicitation i telephone. i thought to myself, i should know that. but the american public to know that. there seems like there ought to be more ombudsman ship on behalf of the irs, and maybe even the treasury, to let people know that there are no solicitations by phone. they are all done by mail because that is a real problem and it is a very convincing phone call.

mr. chairman. >> deficit neutral or spending neutral. >> it does not involve taxes. >> i we will oppose it for the same reason i opposed senator grassley's. the underlying idea is a fine one. >> now i can't hear either side. >> probably a good idea of people tried speak closely to the microphone. i don't know that there is anything about the amendment per se. for the next 30 years the various trade policies have done just the opposite. while 60,000 factories in the country since 2,001. i would hope we are serious about increasing exports and creating manufacturing jobs we take a a very hard look at trade policy in this country over the last 30 years. >> spending neutral includes tax expenditures. >> i'm just asking. for those were spending neutral proposals on the table. includes tax expenditures. i lovingly together the issue of raising taxes. i no we have a disagreement. there is no need to raise taxes. let me make one more. how much time i have? twenty-nine seconds. there are trade policies and trade agreements. where we have a trade agreement it's only 10 percent of the global gdp. that 10 percent of global gdp takes 47 percent of ex

mr. chairman, i just wanted to -- >> five seconds. >> support the amendment, but say there is a way to do this right and as senator grassley knows as a member of the agriculture committee we actually cut more than sequestration in the farm bill without across the board cuts. we supported things that worked yell, cut thickngs that didn't. had over 100 different programs but did it i think the way the public wants us to by evaluating each program individually. i would hope we would do away with this crazyness and get back to evaluating programs for their wor thinkness. >> i'd like to get back to evaluating programs because i found there are 260 programs that are out of authorization that we're still spending money on. sometimes four times as much was originally authorized and that comes to $293 billion worth of spending a year, so there are thipgs we need to do within our budget and we shouldn't be just cutting across the board. there should be flexibility built in and we should be scrutinizing what we're doing and i don't think we've done that. one of the purposes of having a budget is so that operators can get back to 2013 and make

mr. president the senator from texas who's been a leader on this issue the craftsman of this bill along with the chairman of the judiciary committee senator grassley has laid out how we got to where we are. it is sort of a mind-boggling twisted path that makes almost no sense even to a casual observer. the dilemma seems to be that our democratic friends having read and signed off on this bill all along the way have suddenly discovered a piece of it they don't like. well, of course, the way to eliminate a piece you don't like would be to vote on it. so i'm going to offer a unanimous consent agreement that would give our friends on the other side an opportunity for an up-or-down simple majority vote on the provision they have recently discovered after reading the bill for two months, recently discovered that they find offensive. give them an opportunity with a simple majority vote to strike the provision they find objectionable that senator cornyn has pointed out has been part of the law for 39 years. and so, mr. president in that regard i ask unanimous consent that when the senate resumes consideration of s. 178 that it be in order for senator leah

grassley and senator leahy to get in the queue for consideration. it is my expectation that votes in relation to amendments on the trafficking bill will kick in after policy lunches tomorrow. mr. president, senators from both sides of the aisle and from multiple committees have worked hard to address the terrible crime of human trafficking. this is a growing area of domestic and international criminal activity. and victims are counting on us to act. that's why tomorrow the senate will begin consideration of the justice for victims of trafficking act. it is authored by the senior senator from texas and both sponsors from both parties. victims groups and advocates have called this bipartisan measure the most comprehensive and thoughtful piece of antitrafficking legislation currently pending. and similar legislation has already passed the house of representatives. it's no wonder the judiciary committee supported without opposition the bipartisan bill we'll be considering tomorrow. after a reasonable period of debate and amendment we hope to see strong bipartisan support here on the senate floor as well. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. r