Senate Votes - 2010 Voting Record (00285647-1)

SENATE

1. Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act – Vote #55

AFGE supported the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act (H.R. 2847), a $17.6 billion stimulus package designed to help create good-paying American jobs.

The HIRE Act would:

(a) Provide new tax incentives for businesses to hire and retain new employees. The bill provides businesses with an exemption from Social Security payroll taxes for every worker hired in 2010 who has been unemployed for at least 60 days. The maximum value of this incentive is $6,621, which is equal to 6.2 percent of wages paid in 2010 up to the FICA wage cap of $106,800. It also provides an additional $1,000 income tax credit for every new employee retained for 52 weeks.

(b) Extend Recovery Act of 2009 provisions that double the amount – from $125,000 to $250,000 – that small businesses can immediately write off their taxes for capital investments and purchases of new equipment made in 2010.

(c) Authorize states and localities to issue special purpose tax credit bonds for school construction, energy conservation, and renewable energy projects.

(d) Extend surface transportation programs through December 31, 2010, to provide states and localities with the certainty they need to make decisions on capital-intensive projects and allow for billions more to be invested in infrastructure throughout the United States.

The Senate passed the HIRE Act (H.R. 2847) on March 17, 2010, by a vote of 68-29 (D: 57-1; R: 11-28). A “Yes” vote in favor of H.R. 2847 is counted as a “Right” vote.

2. Health Care Reform Reconciliation Act – Vote #105

AFGE supported the landmark heath care reform legislation that President Obama signed into law in late March 2010. This legislation makes significant progress in three critical areas:

(1) Expanding the availability of affordable health insurance coverage. – The new health care reform legislation extends health coverage to 32 million more Americans, thereby increasing the share of insured Americans from 83% now to 95% in 2019. This robust coverage gain largely reflects provisions that (1) significantly extend Medicaid to all low-income individuals under age 65, and (2) provide premium subsidies to help low- and moderate-income individuals purchase health insurance in the new state-run health insurance exchanges.

{00285647.DOCX - 1} (2) Slowing the growth of health care costs. – The new health care reform legislation contains a wide range of measures to slow the growth of health care costs, particularly Medicare costs. For example, the legislation substantially scales back the overpayments that private insurance companies receive through Medicare Advantage, saving $132 billion over ten years.

(3) Instituting essential reforms in the health insurance markets. – The new health care reform legislation includes long overdue reforms that are intended to rein in harmful insurance industry practices, such as denying coverage to people with pre- existing health conditions, rescinding health insurance coverage when beneficiaries become ill, or imposing annual or lifetime limits on health insurance coverage, thereby refusing to pay the full cost of beneficiaries’ medical care.

On November 7, 2009, the House passed its health care reform bill (H.R. 3962) while the Senate passed its bill (H.R. 3590) on December 24, 2009. Although the House and Senate health reform bills were quite similar, AFGE and other labor unions were less supportive of the Senate bill primarily because it contained an excise tax on ostensibly “high cost” health insurance plans.

The Senate-passed bill would have imposed a 40% excise tax on the portion of the value of health plans that exceeds $8,500 for individuals and $23,000 for families, starting in 2013. Its sponsors argued that the excise tax was aimed at so-called “Cadillac” health plans of the very wealthy. The $8,500/$23,000 thresholds, however, were so low that the excise tax would have affected many “Chevy” health plans, particularly collectively bargained health insurance plans.

AFGE and our labor allies also were less supportive of the Senate bill because its premium subsidies to help low- income individuals purchase insurance in the new health insurance exchanges were significantly lower than the House subsidies. This would have made it much more difficult for low-income individuals to afford health insurance. For example, an analysis of the House and Senate subsidies by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that a family of three earning about $32,000 (or 175% of the federal poverty line) would have to pay $$1,738 per year under the Senate bill. But this same family would pay about $1,360 under the House bill. (“Changes in Senate Health Bill Make Coverage More Affordable for Millions of Moderate-Income Families, Although Not For Those On Low End of Subsidy Scale,” November 19, 2009, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.)

President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress settled on a filibuster-avoiding, majority-vote strategy. In essence, a two-step process was to be used to get around the forty–one vote Republican filibuster bloc in the Senate: Step One: The House Democrats would pass the 2009 Christmas Eve Senate-passed bill (H.R. 3590), along with a “sidecar” bill (H.R. 4872) that would enact substantial changes in spending and taxes to improve the Senate-passed bill (H.R. 3590). These changes included: (a) mitigating the excise tax’s adverse effects on “Chevy” health plans by increasing the thresholds to $10,200 for individuals and $27,000 for families, deferring the start-up date to 2018, and providing a transitional provision that exempts collectively bargained health plans from the excise tax through 2017; and (b) increasing the premium subsidies to help low-income individuals purchase health insurance in the new health insurance exchanges.

Step Two: The “sidecar” bill (H.R. 4872) would then be passed by a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate, by using the congressional reconciliation process. Reconciliation is a process set forth in the Congressional Budget Act that allows for expedited consideration of legislation affecting mandatory spending or taxes. A reconciliation bill only needs 51 votes to pass in the Senate, while other legislation effectively needs 60 votes. (Sixty votes are needed to invoke cloture and prevent a minority of Senators from blocking non-reconciliation legislation through a filibuster.)

The Senate passed its Step Two bill, the Health Care Reform Reconciliation Act (H.R. 4872), on March 25, 2010, by a vote of 56-43 (D: 56-3; R: 0-40). A “Yes” vote in favor of H.R. 4872 is counted as a “Right” vote.

(The Step One votes’ results may be found in the House section of this Voting Record.)

3. FY 2010 Supplemental Appropriations/Coburn Amendment to Freeze Federal Employee Pay for One Year and to Cap the Total Number of Federal Employees in the Federal Workforce – Vote #169

AFGE supported a motion offered by Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), chairman of Senate Appropriations Committee, to table (kill) an amendment offered by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) to: (1) enact a temporary one-year freeze on federal employee pay raises, bonuses, and other salary increases; and (2) cap the total number of federal employees by requiring that “the head of [any federal] department or agency shall ensure that the addition of a new employee is offset by a reduction of one existing full-time employee at such department or agency.”

Putting the federal government’s fiscal house back in order is certainly a worthy goal. But a temporary one-year freeze on federal employee pay raises, bonuses, and other salary increases is the wrong way to accomplish it. A one-year federal employee pay freeze would:

 Have little impact on the $1.3 trillion federal budget deficit, saving only $2 billion in FY 2011.

{00285647.DOCX - 1}  Enlarge the degree to which federal pay lags behind private sector pay (a 24% gap, according to a comprehensive analysis by the Bureau of Labor Statistics), thereby making it harder for the federal government to attract and retain talented workers.

 Unfairly hurt the many different groups of federal employees, including scientists at NIH conducting groundbreaking research, CIA employees serving bravely in war zones like Iraq and Afghanistan, Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Patrol Officers engaged in an increasingly dangerous mission, doctors and nurses at VA hospitals caring for wounded and ill veterans, and correctional officers guarding terrorists and gang leaders in federal prisons.

In addition, the Coburn proposal to cap the number of federal employees via a zero-sum mechanism would create serious problems for federal agencies and those they serve. As Chairman Inouye pointed out during the Senate floor debate on the Coburn amendment:

“For the Veterans Administration, when the agency is seeing an increasing number of veterans suffering from complex combat-related injuries and mental health problems due to numerous deployments, this is exactly the type of government action our veterans do not need or deserve. Congress has consistently, on a bipartisan basis, included funding for the VA to build its capacity to handle these types of disorders. This type of zero-sum amendment would ensure that in order to adequately serve veterans suffering from mental health and other combat-related injuries, the VA would have to decrease its capacity to handle other services, including addressing the backlog of claims processing.”

The Senate approved the Inouye motion to table (kill) the Coburn amendment on May 27, 2010, by a 53-45 vote (D: 52-6; R: 1-39). A “Yes” vote in favor of the Inouye motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

4. American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010/Thune Amendment Freezing Federal Employee Pay for One Year, Capping the Total Number of Federal Employees in the Federal Workforce, and Cutting Discretionary Federal Spending by 5% - Vote #193 AFGE opposed an amendment offered by Senator John Thune (R-SD) to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010 (H.R. 4213) to: (a) freeze for one year the salaries of all federal employees, except for members of the Armed Services; (b) cap the total number of federal employees in the federal workforce by requiring that the head of each department or agency shall ensure that the addition of a new employee is offset by a reduction of one existing full-time employee at such department or agency; and (c) cut discretionary spending by 5% across-the-board for all agencies, except for the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Putting the federal government’s fiscal house back in order is certainly a worthy goal. But a temporary one-year freeze on federal employee pay salaries is the wrong way to accomplish it. A one-year federal employee pay freeze would:

 Have little impact on the $1.3 trillion federal budget deficit, saving only $2 billion in FY 2011.

 Enlarge the degree to which federal pay lags behind private sector pay (a 24% gap, according the Federal Salary Council), thereby making it harder for the federal government to attract and retain talented workers.

In addition, the Thune proposal to cap the number of federal employees via a zero-sum mechanism would create serious management problems for federal agencies. For example, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is experiencing serious understaffing problems in all personnel categories – including correctional officers and registered nurses. This type of zero-sum mechanism would ensure that to increase prison security by hiring five additional correctional officers, the BOP would have to decrease its prison inmate medical services by letting go five registered nurses.

Finally, the Thune proposal to arbitrarily cut discretionary spending by 5% across-the- board is unwise and imprudent. It shows little concern as to whether a programmatic cut is proper or justified and even less concern about the cut’s consequences. Lawmakers who offer such across-the-board spending cut proposals may think they are taking the high ground, insisting deprivation be shared equally. But these political postures are disingenuous. In reality, across-the-board spending cut proposals allow lawmakers to avoid the responsibility of making the hard decisions as to which programs should receive increased funding and which should receive reduced funding.

The Senate rejected the Thune amendment on June 17, 2010, by a vote of 41-57 (D: 1- 57; R: 40-0). A “No” vote on the Thune amendment is counted as a “Right” vote.

5. American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010/Cloture Motion – Vote #194

{00285647.DOCX - 1} AFGE supported a cloture motion offered by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on the Senate’s version of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010 (H.R. 4213).

This Senate legislation is very similar to the bill the House passed earlier on May 28, 2010. It includes provisions that would create or save over a million American jobs, would provide help to unemployed American workers by extending emergency unemployment insurance benefits and COBRA health benefits, and would close various tax loopholes that have encouraged American businesses to move their operations overseas.

Senate Republicans had concerns about this job creation and unemployment benefits bill, arguing that more of the bill needed to be offset with revenues. In response, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, reduced the cost of the bill from $140 billion to $118 billion by shrinking unemployment checks, raising the per-barrel tax on oil, and softening provisions that would affect the taxation of “carried interest” earned by real estate investors, venture capitalists, and private equity managers.

The Senate rejected the Reid cloture motion on June 17, 2010, by a vote of 56-40 (D: 56-2; R: 0-38). (A cloture motion must be approved by 60 Senators.) A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

6. American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010/Cloture Motion – Vote #204

AFGE supported a cloture motion offered by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on a limited substitute amendment to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 4213).

This limited substitute amendment, introduced by Senator Reid and Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), would retroactively restore federal unemployment insurance, so that Americans who lost their benefits when the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program expired at the end of May 2010 can receive the support they need while they look for work. The substitute amendment also would extend federal unemployment insurance benefits through November 30, 2010, so Americans who lose their jobs through no fault of their own can continue to receive the benefits on which they depend.

In addition, the substitute amendment would give new homebuyers more time to qualify for the Homebuyer Tax Credit by extending the deadline for closing on a home purchase from July 1 to September 30, 2010. The Senate rejected the Reid cloture motion on June 30, 2010, by a 59-37 vote (D: 57- 1; R: 2-36). (A cloture motion must be approved by 60 Senators.) A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

7. Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 – Vote #208

AFGE supported the House-Senate conference agreement on the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 4173).

Years without accountability for Wall Street and big banks brought us the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Americans have paid for this financial crisis with their jobs, incomes, savings, investments and home equity, and with their faith in a federal government ready to protect them from harm. The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection of 2010 is a step toward redressing those losses and restoring that faith.

Highlights of this legislation include:

 Consumer Protections with Authority and Independence. – H.R. 4173 creates a new independent watchdog, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, housed at the Federal Reserve, with the authority to make sure American consumers get the clear, accurate information they need shop for mortgages, credit cards, and other financial products, and protect them from hidden fees, abusive terms, and deceptive practices.

 Advance Warning System. – H.R. 4173 creates a Financial Stability Oversight Council to identify and address systematic risks posed by large, complex companies, products and activities before they threaten the stability of the economy.

 Ends “Too Big to Fail” Bailouts. – H.R. 4173 ends the possibility that taxpayers will be asked to write a check to bail out financial firms that threaten the economy by: creating a safe way to liquidate failed financial firms; imposing tough new capital and leverage requirements that make it undesirable to get too big; updating the Federal Reserve’s authority to allow system-wide support but no longer prop up individual firms; and establishing standards and supervision to protect the economy and American consumers, investors and businesses.

 Transparency and Accountability for Exotic Instruments. – H.R. 4173 eliminates loopholes that allow risky and abusive practices to go on unnoticed and

{00285647.DOCX - 1} unregulated – including loopholes for over-the-counter derivatives, asset-backed securities, hedge funds, mortgage brokers and payday lenders.

 Enforces Regulations on the Books. – H.R. 4173 strengthens oversight and empowers regulators to aggressively pursue financial fraud, conflicts of interest and manipulation of the system that benefits special interests at the expense of American families and businesses.

The Senate passed the House-Senate conference agreement on the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 4173) on July 15, 2010, by a vote of 60-39 (D: 57-1; R: 3-38). A “Yes” vote in favor of the conference agreement is counted as a “Right” vote.

8. State Fiscal Relief and Teacher Jobs Act/Cloture Motion – Vote #224

AFGE supported the cloture motion offered by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on the State Fiscal Relief and Teacher Jobs Act (H.R. 1586).

H.R. 1586 would provide $10 billion to school districts throughout America to help avert the layoff of 130,000 public school teachers. The bill also would provide $16.1 billion in Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAP) funding for state Medicaid programs to help hard-pressed states maintain their Medicaid programs during a period of high enrollment growth and reduced state revenue.

H.R. 1586 would provide this assistance in a fiscally responsible way by including provisions to close international tax loopholes that currently allow multinational corporations to inappropriately lower their U.S. taxes.

The Senate approved the Reid cloture motion on August 4, 2010, by a vote of 61-38 (D: 59-0; R: 2-38). A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

9. Congressional Resolution to Disapprove the National Mediation Board’s Final Rule Relating to Representation Election Procedures in the Airline and Railroad Industries – Vote #239

AFGE opposed S.J.Res 30, a resolution offered by Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) to disapprove the National Mediation Board’s (Board’s) final rule relating to representation election procedures in the airline and railroad industries.

On May 11, 2010, the Board issued a final rule amending its Railroad Labor Act rules to provide that, in representation disputes, a labor union will win an election if it wins a majority of the ballots cast. The previous rule required a labor union to win a majority of all eligible voters. That meant workers who did not vote were effectively treated as “no” votes.

AFGE and other proponents of the change argued that the old rule ran contrary to democratic standards where the outcome of an election is determined by the majority of those who vote. The change puts the airline and railroad industries under the same procedures as most other companies, which are overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

The Senate rejected the Isakson disapproval resolution on September 23, 2010, by a vote of 43-56 (D: 3-56; R: 40-0). A “No” vote opposing the Isakson disapproval resolution is counted as a “Right” vote.

10. Paycheck Fairness Act/Cloture Motion – Vote #249

AFGE supported the cloture motion offered by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 3772).

This important bill would address the persistent wage gap between men and women by eliminating loopholes that hinder the effectiveness of the Equal Pay Act of 1963. That 1963 equal pay law made it illegal for employers to pay unequal wages to male and female employees who perform work requiring equal effort, skill, and responsibility.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would amend the Equal Pay Act of 1963 to strengthen penalties for equal pay violations, enhance data collection from employers so that patterns of sex discrimination in pay can be identified, and more directly place the responsibility on employers defending wage differences to show that the differences are due to factors other than sex. A particularly important provision establishes the right of wage discrimination plaintiffs under the Equal Pay Act to receive compensatory and punitive damages, a remedy that is available in most other anti-discrimination statutes.

The Senate rejected the Reid cloture motion on November 17, 2010, by a vote of 58-41 (D: 58-0; R: 0-41). (A cloture motion must be approved by 60 Senators.) A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted is a “Right” vote.

11. Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2010/Cloture Motion – Vote #266

AFGE supported the cloture motion offered by Senate Harry Reid (D-NV) to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (S. 3991). This important bill would grant public safety officers (law

{00285647.DOCX - 1} enforcement officers, firefighters, and emergency medical services personnel) the right to organize and collectively bargain in states that do not currently recognize that right.

The legislation would give states wide flexibility to write and administer their own labor- management laws, consistent with the following minimum rights:

 Providing for the right to bargain over wages, hours and working conditions;

 Making available a dispute resolution mechanism, such as fact-finding, mediation, or arbitration; and

 Requiring enforcement of any written contract between a labor organization and a public safety officer.

The Senate rejected the Reid cloture motion on December 8, 2010, by a vote of 55-43 (D: 55-3; R: 0-40). (A cloture motion must be approved by 60 Senators.) A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

12. James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act/Cloture Motion – Vote #269

AFGE supported the cloture motion offered by Senator Harry Reid to end a Republican filibuster and proceed to a vote on the James Zagroda 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (H.R. 847).

H.R. 847 would provide mandatory funding for medical monitoring, treatment and compensation to emergency responders, recovery and cleanup workers suffering from serious diseases as a result of hazardous exposures resulting from the September 11th terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, DC.

The legislation also would reopen the federal September 11th Victim Compensation Fund to provide economic relief to those harmed by the attacks as an alternative to the current litigation system.

The Senate rejected the Reid cloture motion on December 9, 2010, by a vote of 57-42 (D: 57-1; R: 0-42). A cloture motion must be approved by 60 Senators.) A “Yes” vote in favor of the Reid cloture motion is counted as a “Right” vote.

13. Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010/Coburn Amendment to Freeze Federal Pay for 3 Years and Reduce Federal Workforce by 10 Percent – Vote #273

AFGE opposed an amendment offered by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) to H.R. 4853, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, that would (a) freeze pay for federal employees, including Department of Defense civilians, for 3 years; and (b) reduce the federal workforce, including DoD civilian personnel, by 10% or by 200,000 via a hiring mechanism whereby only two new workers would be hired for every three who leave federal government service.

Putting the federal government’s fiscal house back in order is certainly a worthy goal. But a three year federal pay freeze is the wrong way to accomplish it. A three-year federal employee pay freeze would:

 Have little impact on the $1.3 trillion federal budget deficit, saving only $20.4 billion, according to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, the source of this proposal.

 Enlarge the degree to which federal pay lags behind private sector pay (a 24% gap, according to a comprehensive analysis by the Bureau of Labor Statistics), thereby making it harder for the federal government to attract and retain talented workers.

In addition, the Coburn proposal to cap the number of federal employees also is the wrong way to accomplish bringing the federal government’s fiscal house back to order. An across-the-board 10% cut in the size of the federal workforce:

 Would have little impact on the $1.3 trillion federal budget deficit, saving only $13.2 billion, according to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, the source of this proposal.

 Could result in a repeat of the 1990s within federal government when federal agencies attempted to comply with the Clinton administration’s effort to reduce the federal civil service by slightly more than 10%:

(a) Unable to fulfill their legal mandates with significantly fewer federal employees, federal agencies during the 1990s often simply privatized the work that had formerly been performed by reliable and experienced civil servants – usually at significantly higher costs.

(b) Federal agencies during the 1990s lost critical in-house capacities, eventually causing concern that the arbitrary in-house downsizing had left the federal government with a human capital crisis at the dawn of the 21st century.

(c) Outside audits reported that, on a widespread basis, contractors had been given functions during the 1990s that by law and regulation should always be performed by federal employees because of their sensitivity and importance.

{00285647.DOCX - 1} The Senate rejected the Coburn amendment on December 15, 2010, by a vote of 47-52 (D: 5-52; R: 42-0). A “No” vote in opposition to the Coburn amendment is counted as a “Right” vote.

14. Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010/Sanders Amendment Providing for Middle Class Tax Relief – Vote #275

AFGE supported an amendment offered by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to H.R. 4853, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, to provide substantial federal tax relief to middle-class American taxpayers.

The Sanders amendment would:

(a) Let President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans expire as scheduled at the end of 2010.

(b) Over the next two years, take the savings from letting those tax cuts expire – about $40 billion in 2011 and $90 billion in 2012 – and devote half to reducing the federal deficit and the other half to investing in infrastructure projects (bridges, roads, railroads, schools, etc).

(c) Replace the payroll tax holiday in H.R. 4853 - cutting the Social Security payroll tax from 6.2% to 4.2% for one year - with a fairer one-year extension of the Making Work Pay tax credit.

(d) Replace the estate tax proposal in H.R. 4853 - 35% tax rate and a $5 million exemption level - with a fairer 45% tax rate and a $3.5 million exemption level for two years.

(e) Provide a $250 Social Security COLA for over 57 million American senior citizens and disabled people.

(f) Keep all of the positive aspects of H.R. 4853 – extending middle-class tax cuts for 98% of Americans, extend unemployment insurance for 13 months, extend the child tax credit, earned-income tax credit, and college tax credit expansion.

The Senate rejected the Sanders Middle-Class Tax Relief amendment on December 15, 2010, by a 43-57 vote (D: 43-15; R: 0-42). A “Yes” vote on the Sanders amendment is counted as a “Right” vote. {00285647.DOCX - 1}