Pulling an all-night “vote-a-rama” Saturday that extended through the middle of the afternoon on Sunday, Senate Democrats defeated a slew of Republican amendments en route to passing a massive spending and taxing bill.
In her capacity as president of Senate, Vice President Kamala Harris cast tie-breaking vote for the bill, known as the Inflation Reduction Act. The final score was 51-50, with no party split at 3:18 p.m. on Sunday. The vote-arama started just after 7:15 p.m. Saturday.
The Democrats’ 755-page bill increases green energy subsidies, expands the IRS, and enacts other initiatives long sought by the left, and authorizes $430 billion in new spending. That’s supposed to be offset by $740 billion in new revenues from tax hikes and increased enforcement that includes the hiring of 87,000 additional IRS agents to conduct audits and seek tax liens.
Before the final vote, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called the bill “one of the defining legislative feats of the 21st century.”
“Our bill reduces inflation, lowers costs, creates millions of good-paying jobs, and is the boldest climate package in U.S. history,” Schumer said. “This bill will kick-start the era of affordable clean energy in America. It’s a game changer. It’s a turning point. And it’s been a long time coming. To Americans who have lost faith that Congress can do big things, this bill is for you.”
Amid passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, year-over-year inflation stands at 9.1%, with the typical employee’s real wages dropping by almost $3,400. Despite the legislation’s title, an analysis of itThe University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School found that the legislation would slightly increase inflation in near-term.
In some cases, Democrats–who hold a functional Senate majority despite the 50-50 partisan split in the chamber–even changed rules for individual amendments to prevent their adoption despite winning over some Democrats from centrist a conservative states. However, most amendments died on party-line vote
Expanding IRS
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced an amendment to strike the bill’s $80 billion to increase enforcement by the IRS. It was defeated by a party line vote.
“I guarantee you citizens in every one of our states, if you asked them what they want, they don’t want 87,000 new IRS agents,” Cruz said on the Senate floor. “They are not being created to audit billionaires or giant corporations. They are being created to audit you.”
Cruz stated that he would like to abolish the IRS.
“But at a minimum, we shouldn’t make the IRS larger than the Pentagon, the State Department, the FBI, and the Border Patrol all combined,” Cruz said. “That’s what the Democrats are proposing here. It is a terrible idea.”
Senator Michael Crapo, R.Idaho, proposed an unsuccessful amendment that would have prevented the IRS from using $80 billion in new funds to audit taxpayers who earn less than $400,000 per year.
This was despite the fact that President Joe Biden and Senate Democrats claimed that their bill would not increase taxes on those earning less than $400,000 per annum.
However, the nonpartisan Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation determined taxes would rise up to $16.7 billionAmericans with less than $200,000 will have a $14.1 trillion increase in 2023. This is for those who earn between $200,000 to $500,000.
A Heritage Foundation analysis concluded that the bill would impose a $4500 tax increase on the average American household for the next ten years. (The Heritage Foundation’s news outlet, The Daily Signal, is The Daily Signal.)
The Senate voted 57-43 for an amendment by Senator John Thune, R.S.D. that would reduce the 15% corporate minimum taxes on private equity firms.
Energy and Environment
The bill will limit the sale of oil and natural gases leases on federal lands. Senator John Barrasso, R. Wyo., proposed a bill that would have required the Bureau of Land Management (Bureau of Land Management) to hold oil-and gas lease sales every state where they were held in the month of June. The measure was defeated.
“Instead of pleading with dictators in other countries to increase oil and gas production, we should expand American production,” the Wyoming lawmaker said.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., proposed allowing oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and in Alaska’s Cook Inlet. It was also rejected in a party-line election.
Senator Richard Shelby, R.Ala., proposed an amendment that would require the Interior Department complete all pending coal leasing process that were paused by the Bureau of Land Management. It was also defeated.
Shelly Moore Capito from West Virginia, a senator, proposed $45 million in additional funding for enforcement actions by the Environmental Protection Agency. But, the amendment was defeated.
Democrats expedited the legislation using a Senate procedure called reconciliation. In this process, a simple majority (51 votes) is required to move a bill forward. The Senate parliamentarian must decide that the provisions are spending issues and not policy questions.
Democrats waived the rule for a few amends, which required 60 votes instead 51. This allowed some Democratic senators representing battleground states to vote for Republicans, but it did not eliminate the possibility of adding a popular amendment.
Cruz won bipartisan support to amend the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve to China to prohibit the sale of U.S. crude oil. The Cruz amendment received a bipartisan majority but failed to meet the 60 vote threshold to pass.
Some Democrats also voted in favor of an unsuccessful amendment from Senator Lindsey Graham, R.S.C. to eliminate a tax sur domestic and import oil.
This procedural change allowed Democratic Senators. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Raphael Warnock of Georgia, and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire to back Graham’s measure. Georgia’s Sen. Jon Ossoff joined them in supporting the Cruz amendment to prohibit oil sales to China.
Title 42 and Immigration
Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma proposed an amendment to Title 42 regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic Policy, Title 42. This would close the southern border from any asylum claims. The Biden administration tried to lift Title 42, which bars asylum claims in a national health emergency.
The Lankford amendment allocated for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to enforce Title 42 until 120 days after the termination of the COVID-19 public health emergency. This, too, was defeated 50-50.
“It’s nonsensical to say we have a COVID health emergency everywhere but our southern border,” Lankford said on the Senate floor. “If there is a public health emergency in this country, then Title 42 must remain in place. Title 42 is the last line of defense our Border Patrol agents have to protect our nation.”
After Lankford’s Title 42 amendment failed, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., offered his own proposal that would have set the timeline at 60 days, rather than 120. Democrats Warnock, Hassan, Cortez Masto, and Kelly, along with Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, voted for the Tester amendment—as did Republicans. The amendment failed to receive the 60 votes it needed to be included in the bill, with 56 votes.
Feeling ‘Bern’ of Bipartisanship
The 48 Democratic senators and two nominally independents, Angus King from Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucus alongside Democrats, remained firm against GOP proposals.
However, there was some bipartisanship as almost all senators voted against Sanders amendments.
Sanders asserted the legislation didn’t go far enough in taxing and spending.
The Vermonter began the debate by saying that the “so-called Inflation Reduction Act,” according to most estimates, “will have a minimal impact on inflation.”
Senators voted 98-1 to reject Sanders’ proposed amendment to spend an additional $30 billion for climate programs, such as a Civilian Climate Corps.
Lawmakers voted 99-1 to kill a Sanders amendment to ensure Medicare doesn’t pay more than the Department of Veterans Affairs for prescription drugs, and 97-3 to defeat a provision that would have expanded Medicare to cover hearing, dental, and vision benefits. Ossoff and Warnock voted for Sanders on the latter.
In arguing for another amendment to raise taxes on corporations to pay for a new tax credit, Sanders said, “This is the wealthiest nation on earth. We should not have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any country.”
At that point, Democratic senators began expressing frustration. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said he agreed with Sanders in principle, but added, “I ask my colleagues to vote ‘no’ because this will bring the bill down.”
Sanders responded, “Why would passage of this amendment, or getting 48 votes on this amendment, bring the overall bill down?”
Brown replied, “We know that this is a fragile arrangement, and we’ve got to pass it.”
Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., agreed with Brown: “We could lose the underlying bill.”
The Sanders child-tax-credit amendment was defeated on a 99-to-1 vote.
Pregnancy and Prescription Drugs
Senator Marco Rubio (Republican from Florida) proposed a measure that would require federal programs to aid biological women only.
“The only thing I am trying to do is make sure, since every pregnancy that has ever existed has been in a biological female, that our federal laws reflect that and that our pregnancy programs are available to the only people who are capable of getting pregnant, biological females. It’s simple,” the Florida lawmaker said.
The proposal came as some federal agencies have bowed to pressure from the LGBTQ lobby to refer to “pregnant people.” The Rubio proposal was killed on a 50-50 vote.
The legislation in progress includes a provision that allows Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate the cost prescription drugs. Critics claim that this will lead to price fixing and shortages of necessary drugs.
Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., proposed an amendment to exclude drugs that receive “breakthrough” designation from the Food and Drug Administration from price negotiation under Medicare. It was rejected.
Do you have a comment about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Be sure to include the article’s URL, headline, and your name.
