Jon Kyl: “Let me point out what we are doing here and then explain the very modest amendment I have offered which would not…”

“Let me point out what we are doing here and then explain the very modest amendment I have offered which would not undermine the pension guarantee for employees. The basic problem we have is that the Treasury note that was used to calculate the payments that companies make to the fund to guarantee pensions for their employees is no longer being issued, so some substitute had to be found. The underlying bill uses the 30-year Treasury note as that substitute. I think everybody agrees that needs to be done on a temporary basis. There was a deficit created in the pension fund because companies were not paying in the appropriate amount during the period of time that the Treasury note was not being issued. As a result, the fund accrued a deficit. It is over $11 billion. So companies are being asked to pay in a deficit reduction contribution to make sure that the fund has the money that is required to ensure that employees will receive their benefits. Ironically, it is the proponents of the amendment that are undercutting the fund because what they are saying is not everybody will have to pay their fair share into the fund to guarantee payments to employees; that for a couple of steel companies and a couple of airlines, they will not have to make the full deficit reduction contribution. Instead, in the first year, they only have to pay 20 percent of what is required. In the second year, they would only pay 40 percent of what is required.”