House OKs Military Budget That Includes Jones’ Repeal of Widow’s Tax, Sends It to Senate
KEY VOTES AHEAD
The House will vote on articles of impeachment against President Trump this week and may take up a U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade pact. The Senate will consider the 2020 military budget and judicial nominations.
WASHINGTON – The House last week approved a $738 billion military policy budget (S 1790) for fiscal 2020 that included a repeal of the so-called “widow’s tax,” sponsored by Sen. Doug Jones, R-Ala.
The “widow’s tax” affects spouses of military men and women who were killed or disabled on active duty or during training. It prevents them from collecting the full amount for which they are eligible under a death benefit and a retirement program, even when retired service members elected to pay into that program.
The rules affect an estimated 67,000 surviving military spouses, 2,000 of them in Alabama, Jones stated in a press release.
Jones scheduled a press conference for Monday morning at the Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport to celebrate approval of the repeal. The Senate still has to take up the conference report on the military budget this week, but it is expected to pass the Senate in a bipartisan vote.
The House approved that conference report Dec 11 on a vote of 377-48. It also includes $69 billion for combat operations and more than $57 billion for active-duty and retiree health care. The bill sets a 3.1 percent pay raise for uniformed personnel; confronts global warming as a national security threat; requires Pentagon strategies for countering Russian interference in U.S. elections; and funds programs for military victims of sexual assault. In addition, the bill creates the U.S. Space Force as the sixth branch of the military; and establishes 12 weeks’ paid family and medical leave for the federal civilian workforce to accommodate childbirth, adoptions, foster care and serious illnesses.
Michael Waltz, R-Fla., said: “We are in a hot war with extremists around the world, and we are in a cold war with Russia and China and other rogue states. If the country isn’t safe, everything else that we do in this body is secondary. Our domestic priorities, our economy, our education, trade, everything else that we debate in this Congress is at risk if we fail to protect this great nation.”
Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said: “This defense budget is $120 billion more than what President Obama left us with. That could fund free public college for every American. It could fund access to high-speed, affordable internet for every American. When are we going to do our Article I duty and stop funding these endless wars and start funding our domestic priorities?”
A yes vote was to approve the fiscal 2020 military budget. A final vote in the Senate is expected to take place early this week.
Alabama
Voting yes: Bradley Byrne, R-1, Martha Roby, R-2, Mike Rogers, R-3, Robert Aderholt, R-4, Mo Brooks, R-5, Gary Palmer, R-6, Terri Sewell, D-7
Voting no: None
Here’s how area members of Congress voted on other major issues during the legislative week ending Dec. 13.
HOUSE
Requiring Negotiation of Medicare Drug Prices:
Voting 230 for and 192 against, the House on Dec. 12 passed a bill (HR 3) that would require pharmaceutical companies to negotiate with the federal government the prices of approximately 250 top-selling prescription drugs offered in Medicare Part D and employer health plans. The negotiated U.S. retail price of a covered drug could not exceed 120% of the average price that Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom have negotiated for their residents. Manufacturers declining to negotiate the price of specific drugs would be subjected to excise taxes of up to 95% on sales of that drug. The bill would cap Medicare Part D out-of-pocket costs at $2,000 per year and add dental, vision and hearing benefits to Medicare Part D. Manufacturers and the Department of Health and Human Services would start negotiations in 2021, with Medicare Part D receiving its first price cuts in 2023. Negotiators would add at least 50 reduced-price drugs to Medicare Part D and commercial plans each year, with the conversion completed by 2026. Negotiated prices would be indexed for inflation and remain in effect until a generic or biosimilar competitor emerges. Lower insulin prices for seniors would be negotiated in the law’s first year.
Thomas Suozzi, D-N.Y., said the bill is needed because “for too long, ‘Big Pharma’ has cashed in because our government, the largest purchaser of prescription drugs in the world, has been prohibited from negotiating lower drug prices. Americans pay nearly four times as much for prescription drugs as people in other countries.”
Kevin Brady, R-Texas, called the bill “a dangerous tradeoff of lower drug prices in the short term but fewer lifesaving cures in the future, and not just a few cures lost, but many … up to 38 cures lost, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and up to 100, according to the Council of Economic Advisers.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Alabama
Voting yes: Sewell
Voting no: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Aderholt, Brooks, Palmer
Not voting: None
Defeating GOP Plan for Drug Prices:
Voting 201 for and 223 against, the House on Dec. 12 defeated a Republican version of HR 3 (above) that omitted the requirement for manufacturers to negotiate drug prices with the Department of Health and Human Services. In addition to this free-market provision, the GOP substitute would cap Medicare Part D out-of-pocket costs at $3,100 per year; expand financial incentives for drug companies to discover cures; cap the cost of insulin for seniors at $50 per month; require drug advertising to list retail prices; expand the use of Health Savings Accounts for drug purchases; and require the U.S. trade representative to ensure U.S. taxpayers do not subsidize the drug costs in foreign markets. The GOP bill also would permanently cap the IRS threshold for deducting medical expenses at 7.5% of adjusted gross income, averting a scheduled increase to 10% in 2020.
Robert Latta, R-Ohio, said the GOP plan “lowers the costs of prescription drugs and caps seniors’ out-of-pocket costs. It encourages innovation and will increase competition, while enhancing transparency and getting more generic medicines to market faster. The American people deserve solutions that will be signed into law.”
Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., asked: “So what is the difference between what the Republicans are saying and what the Democrats are saying? At the core (our bill) is that there will be direct negotiations with the drug manufacturers to bring the price of drugs down. Our Republican friends do not support that.”
A yes vote was to adopt the Republican alternative.
Alabama
Voting yes: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Aderholt, Brooks, Palmer
Voting no: Sewell
Ensuring Innovation in Drug Research:
Voting 196 for and 226 against, the House on Dec. 12 defeated a Republican motion that would prevent core provisions of HR 3 (above) from taking effect until after the secretary of Health and Human Services has certified that the law would not reduce the number of applications from innovators seeking to put new drugs on the market.
Fred Upton, R-Mich., said Republicans “want to make sure that we have the resources to develop the cures that all of us want for the thousands of diseases where we don’t have a cure.”
Kim Schrier, D-Wash., said: “We absolutely must remain the leader in the world in innovation, but the thing is, we can reduce drug prices and still have money for research.”
A yes vote was to adopt the motion.
Alabama
Voting yes: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Aderholt, Brooks, Palmer
Voting no: Sewell
Overhauling Visas for Farm Workers:
Voting 266 for and 165 against, the House on Dec. 11 passed a bill (HR 5038) that would overhaul the H-2A visa program, which admits undocumented migrants for temporary U.S. agricultural jobs the domestic workforce is unable or unwilling to fill. Over time, the bill could enable hundreds of thousands of these workers to apply for legal residency for themselves, spouses and minor children.
In addition to meeting labor shortages, the bill would grant up to 40,000 Green Cards annually to those who complete a lengthy path to permanent status and establish a mandatory federal “E-Verify” system by which agricultural employers could determine workers’ immigration status.
Under the bill, migrants employed in U.S. farm work for at least 180 days over the two preceding years would qualify for Certified Agricultural Worker status, which they could continually renew by working at least 100 days annually in farm jobs. In addition, undocumented workers (and spouses and minor children) employed in U.S. agriculture before the law takes effect would qualify to pursue legal status. Those with at least 10 years of pre-enactment farm employment could apply for permanent residency by paying a $1,000 fine and working four more years; those with fewer than 10 years would have to pay the fine and work eight more years. All applicants would have to clear criminal and national-security background checks.
The bill would freeze overall migrant farm workers’ pay for one year, then allow wages to rise by 3.25 percent annually over the next nine years; authorize up to 20,000 H-2A visas annually for jobs at year-round operations including dairies; expand the availability of migrant housing; and require mediation in place of lawsuits to resolve disputes under a 1983 migrant workplace law.
Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said: “We have farm workers who have been here for a very long time without their papers, living in fear, and in some cases, being arrested and deported. We need to allow them to get an agricultural-worker visa that is temporary and renewable so they can do the work…that their employers need them to do.”
Tom McClintock, R-Calif., said: “I understand agriculture’s need for labor,” but this bill “ignores enforcement and rewards anyone who has illegally crossed our borders, both with amnesty and a special path to citizenship, as long as they claim to have worked part-time in the agriculture sector for the last two years.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Alabama
Voting yes: Sewell
Voting no: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Aderholt, Brooks, Palmer
Not voting: None
Approving Measures to Address Climate Change:
Voting 262 for and 151 against, the House on Dec. 10 approved a 10-bill legislative package (HR 729) that would authorize $1.4 billion over five years for programs to help Atlantic, Pacific and Great Lakes coastal communities and certain inland areas deal with the harmful effects of climate change.
The package would tailor the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act to better address rising sea levels; fund a Digital Coast Program for supplying data to help communities prepare for storms and their consequences; fund scientific initiatives to conserve the ecosystem and fish populations of the Great Lakes, which hold 18% of the world’s fresh water supply and have 9,000 miles of shoreline; promote the use resilient natural materials instead of hard barriers to protect facilities and ecosystems against flooding; and authorize loan guarantees in support of economic, cultural and recreational “working waterfront” projects underway in many coastal communities.
Jared Huffman, D-Calif., said: “Because of climate change, coastal cities will be devastated from sea-level rise, and commercial fisheries could be either totally collapsed or moved beyond the reach of our coastal communities, all in my children’s lifetimes. So, yes, adaptation and mitigation will be costly, but the cost of doing nothing is exponentially higher.”
Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., said the package largely duplicates existing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration programs and asked: “So why are we here? To create giant … slush funds that future Democratic Congresses working with future Democratic presidents will have available to funnel money to their schemes to combat climate change.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Alabama
Voting yes: Sewell
Voting no: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Brooks, Palmer
Not voting: Aderholt
Reducing Marine Mammal Protections:
Voting 160 for and 259 against, the House on Dec. 10 defeated an amendment to HR 729 (above) to scale back the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act to speed federal approval of applications for oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and coastal-restoration projects on shorelines including Louisiana’s. The law is designed, in part, to protect whales, dolphins, porpoises and other marine life against military and industrial sonar testing in gulf and oceanic U.S. waters. But critics call it one of several overlapping environmental laws that unduly hinder economic development.
Mike Johnson, R-La., said: “For anyone to insinuate that this amendment will destroy protections and result in wetland and species decline is simply untrue. In fact, (it) would further support coastal habitats and species restoration, U.S. national-security interests and American energy independence.”
Ed Case, D-Hawaii, said: “We understand that, for some industries interested in the exploitation of our oceans, that the Marine Mammal Protection Act is inconvenient.”
A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.
Alabama
Voting yes: Byrne, Roby, Rogers, Brooks, Palmer
Voting no: Sewell
Not voting: Aderholt
SENATE
Confirming John Sullivan as Ambassador to Russia:
Voting 70 for and 22 against, the Senate on Dec. 12 confirmed Deputy Secretary of State John J. Sullivan, 60, as U.S. ambassador to Russia, replacing Jon Huntsman, who resigned in October. In addition to holding Department of State positions in the Trump administration, Sullivan was Department of Commerce general counsel and Department of Defense deputy general counsel under President George W. Bush, an attorney in private practice and deputy general counsel to President George H. W. Bush’s reelection campaign in 1992.
A yes vote was to confirm the nominee.
Alabama
Voting yes: Richard Shelby, R, Doug Jones, D
Voting no: None
Stephen Hahn, Food and Drug Commissioner:
Voting 72 for and 18 against, the Senate on Dec. 12 confirmed Dr. Stephen Hahn, 59, an oncologist and cancer researcher, as commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, replacing Dr. Scott Gottlieb, 45, who resigned in March. Hahn’s nomination proved controversial over his refusal to endorse federal regulation of e-cigarettes. An active clinical physician and medical administrator, Hahn leaves the post of chief medical executive of the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston to take charge of the FDA. He worked at the National Cancer Institute from 1989-1999, serving as chief of its Prostate Cancer Clinic, among other positions.
A yes vote was to confirm the nominee.
Alabama
Voting yes: Shelby, Jones
Voting no: None
Source: Birmingham Watch
Next Article Previous Article