[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 204 (Thursday, December 3, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7197-S7199]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE CALENDAR
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
The bill clerk read the nomination of Liam P. Hardy, of Virginia, to
be a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
for the term of fifteen years to expire on the date prescribed by law.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Young). The Senator from Maryland.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4810
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I am on the floor today to discuss a
question of fundamental fairness to members of our Armed Forces and to
Federal employees.
I think we all may recall a few months ago when President Trump
ordered the Department of the Treasury to establish a system to push
businesses, companies, and employers around the country to defer the
collection of employees' payroll taxes. Those are the taxes that go to
Social Security and Medicare. The key word here is ``defer'' because
this is really a shell game.
Any moneys that businesses do not pay into Social Security and
Medicare now are going to have to be paid by those Federal employees
right after the holidays, starting in January.
And many employees around the country were at first confused. They
thought they were getting a payroll tax holiday, but that is not the
case.
The reality is, whatever they didn't pay in the form of payroll taxes
now and in the past couple months they would be required to pay back
right after those holidays.
And when businesses looked at this and when workers and employees
around the country looked at this, they overwhelmingly rejected it.
They said they didn't want to participate.
Here is what UPS said about this proposal: ``We recognize that for
some, it may have been helpful to have more money in their paychecks in
2020, yet not all employees have professional tax planning needed to
prepare effectively for the added obligation they would face in 2021.''
So even though this payroll tax deferral proposal got a burst of
attention, it turned out to be meaningless for most workers around the
country. Most private sector employers didn't participate, and their
employees and workers didn't want them to participate.
Unfortunately, the one big exception to this has been members of our
Armed Forces, the folks who every day stand guard to protect our
country, and Federal employees who do the Nation's business with
respect to important services they provide.
And as the private sector has rejected this, we have heard from
thousands of Federal employees who say: We don't want to participate
either. We have heard from members of the Armed Forces that say: We
don't want to be used as guinea pigs and be required to participate.
So I want to be really clear that if we don't correct this, the
damage will continue to be done, and these members of our Armed Forces
and Federal employees will be forced to pay even more back after the
holidays.
Now, I wrote to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin and to OMB Director Vought
about this back in September, September 8, just as the deferral was
starting, and we were joined in that letter by 22 Senators--Senators
from both sides of the aisle. We had a simple bipartisan request. It
was: Make this payroll tax deferral optional, make it voluntary. If
Federal employees and members of our Armed Forces want to participate
in this proposal, fine. Let them do it, but don't force, don't require,
don't coerce members of our military and Federal employees to
participate.
And we didn't get a response to that letter to Secretary Mnuchin and
CBO Director Vought. So I asked Secretary Mnuchin about this issue at a
Senate Banking Committee hearing on September 24. I said: Mr.
Secretary, why shouldn't we make this voluntary? Why should you require
members of our Armed Forces and Federal employees to participate in the
program if they don't want to? And his response was: Yeah, it would be
``reasonable'' for
[[Page S7198]]
the payroll tax to be voluntary ``if people don't want to participate.
Sounds like common sense.''
Well, we expected some followup from the Secretary of Treasury.
Nothing. So we sent a followup letter--again, a bipartisan letter.
Nothing.
So now it is December, and the Trump administration is still forcing
members of our Armed Forces and Federal employees who don't want to
participate in this now-forced deferral program--they want to continue
to force them to do it. So we introduced a bipartisan piece of
legislation called the Protecting Employees from Surprise Taxes Act. It
is pretty straightforward. It says: If a Federal employee or member of
the armed services wants to participate, let them participate. If they
want to opt out, let them opt out of it.
I want to stress that the Federal workers we have heard from and the
organizations and unions that represent Federal workers strongly
support this measure. And why not? It is hard to argue that we
shouldn't let the folks who are standing guard to protect us make a
choice about whether they want to participate in this program.
Also, just to remind our colleagues--maybe they haven't kept track of
this--the Senate chose not to participate. The Senate chose not to
participate in this program, whether on a mandatory or a voluntary
basis. The House of Representatives chose not to participate in this
program.
So it is going to be interesting to hear the Senators say that they
want to require members of our Armed Forces and Federal employees to
enroll in a program that this Senate decided was not good for members
of the Senate staff and the House of Representatives decided was not
good for House staff.
Yet, if we don't support this proposal, this is simply passing the
bipartisan legislation I mentioned to give our members of the Armed
Forces and Federal employees that choice. If we don't pass this, we are
going to require them to continue to participate in a program they
don't like.
So, Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous
consent that the Finance Committee be discharged from further
consideration of S. 4810 and the Senate proceed to its immediate
consideration. I further ask that the bill be read a third time and
passed and the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table
with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Montana.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am here
to express support for this payroll tax holiday, and I think Congress
should do much better than that, and that is to come together and
forgive these taxes, period.
In fact, back in March, I pushed for Congress to include a payroll
tax cut in the CARES Act, and I still support that today because the
payroll tax cut is about supporting workers who might have had their
hours reduced.
These are workers who are living paycheck to paycheck, workers across
our country who are struggling to make ends meet because of the impact
of COVID-19 on our economy.
Allowing folks to keep more of their hard-earned money could make a
big difference. It would provide immediate support--immediate support--
for Montana's families who are struggling to get by. And, importantly,
we ensure that this will have no impact--zero impact--on Social
Security because we transfer money from the general fund to the
Treasury.
This is not a new concept. It has been done by Congress. In fact, it
was done under the Obama administration. As an example, a Montanan who
earns an annual salary of about $40,000 typically pays about $2,500 in
payroll taxes every year. Forgiving the taxes deferred during this 4-
month payroll tax deferral would save that Montanan about $827.
What we should be doing is working together to pass a COVID relief
package that delivers much needed aid for families who have had a tough
go the last several months. And it is going to get tougher going
forward, not only for these families but workers and small businesses.
Instead, my colleagues across the aisle have continued to block very
targeted relief, several times, right here on the floor of the U.S.
Senate, which is holding Montanans and the American people hostage. We
should come together and agree on this targeted relief. We can continue
to disagree on these other items, but let's get this targeted relief
package passed.
So instead of coming to the floor today to try to pass a bill that
undermines a payroll tax holiday to save folks more of their hard-
earned money, I urge my colleague here before us to work with Members
of his caucus and get the COVID-19 relief passed.
Once again, we should be forgiving these taxes as a payroll tax
holiday, not unlike what happened during the Obama administration, and
for these reasons, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator for Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, just to respond to the Senator from
Montana, I think he well knows that it has been over 6 months since the
House of Representatives passed the first Heroes Act with comprehensive
COVID-19 relief. They have also passed an updated ``Heroes 2 Act,'' but
we never even had a vote here in the U.S. Senate on that provision. We
have been blocked from having that vote by the Republican leader.
I don't know where my colleague stands on the bipartisan framework
that was just released. That is something that I can support and
pursue, but listening to the Senate majority leader, he has been
pouring cold water on it. And, by the way, the measure that the Senator
from Montana mentioned that we should pass right now for coronavirus
relief, that doesn't have a payroll tax holiday. It doesn't do what the
Senator just said he wants to do. It doesn't say anything about that.
So if the Senator or others want to introduce legislation to have a
payroll tax holiday for those who have been enrolled in this program
for the last 4 months, go ahead. But why would you allow another day to
pass requiring members of our Armed Forces who don't want to
participate to participate to participate or requiring Federal
employees who are out there providing public services to participate?
That is all this does. This doesn't preclude anything the Senator
talked about doing. All it does is to say: Right now, for those people
who are calling who don't want to be enrolled in this program, let them
out. Let them out.
And what the Senator from Montana is saying is: No, I want to
continue to hold them hostage to pass a proposal that isn't even in the
majority leader's own bill.
And that is what people get sick and tired about around this country.
So let's just pass this. This is a simple, straightforward bill. I
welcome debate on the bipartisan proposal that has been put forward by
a number of Republican Senators and a number of Democratic Senators,
but don't try and mix this up into that larger debate. This is very
simple. It just says to a member of the Army, the Navy or any of the
services who doesn't want to be forced to participate in this right now
that they don't have to. That is what this says, and by opposing this,
you are saying that you want to prolong the requirement that they
participate in a program that they don't want to be a part of
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I appreciate the Senator from Maryland
raising these points. In regard to the proposal of the bill that was
passed by Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of House, the reason we didn't take
a vote on that bill in the U.S. Senate is because it was full,
basically, of her wish list of many items that didn't really relate to
COVID-19 relief. We did put a targeted bill on the floor of the U.S.
Senate in the amount of $600 billion that, frankly, addressed many of
the issues that the House had in their bill, and we had many issues
that we agreed on here in the Senate that would be at least targeted.
This is about the Paycheck Protection Program. This is relief for
schools. This is resources for the vaccine, for additional PPE, for
additional testing. It is a long list, including relief for the U.S.
Postal Service. Of course, I would hope that you would support it, but
we were blocked from even bringing that bill to the floor of the U.S.
Senate. We couldn't get to debate on that bill in September when it
came before the U.S. Senate.
[[Page S7199]]
I appreciate these points. Obviously, we have a disagreement.
President Trump pushed for Congress to pass a payroll tax cut. I would
rather see a cut, not a deferral. That is the way to really help
workers across this country. When Congress failed to act in July, the
President enacted that deferral as a way to provide immediate relief to
the American people. I would ask that we come together and let's
forgive those taxes. Forgive them, and they won't be getting a surprise
tax increase if we do that.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, just very briefly in response, I think
everyone knows what is going on here. This is a very simple proposal.
If you want to participate in President Trump's deferral, you can
continue to participate in the deferral program. But if you are in the
Armed Forces or are a Federal employee and you are being required to do
that right now and you don't want to, we should let them opt out. That
is all this is about, and I am really surprised that our Republican
colleagues would block members of our Armed Forces and Federal
employees from making a simple choice which they believe is in their
best interest.
So I am disappointed with the objection and will continue to pursue
this.
Thank you.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back the
time in order for the vote to occur now.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.