Pete Domenici: “first, I want to say my congratulations to the other side for attempting to tighten up the Budget Act, particularly…”

“first, I want to say my congratulations to the other side for attempting to tighten up the Budget Act, particularly Senator Feingold. On the other hand, this is not the way to do it nor the time to do it. The motion that has been made by the distinguished chairman that this amendment must fail is not a frivolous one. To have this kind of a change in the Budget Act requires hearings. That is what this is about. The statute says before you change this law--and we thank the Lord all the time that they put this in this law--on the floor, you have to send it to the committee. That is kind of new around here but it is very good stuff. So that you know the ramifications before you do the amending. The ramifications of this amendment are so farfetched that it is not farfetched to say you are voting against prescription drug reform if you vote for this amendment or to override the motion by the chairman who says we should not do this. Secondly, I want to offer an explanation. Today there is much talk about the tax bill, and people are saying that the tax bill, since many of the tax proposals do not go on forever, is jiggering the Tax Code. I should remind everyone that the tax bill we have done is done under the Budget Act. In turn, it is done under a reconciliation instruction. It is not done under the ordinary law of the Senate. Therefore, we are bound by the law not to pass permanent tax law changes. So it is not anybody trying to play with the Tax Code.”