Exxon would not benefit from a $6.5 billion tax break at all
KNOWLES: The candidates erupted into a brief but tense exchange when Knowles again pounded on Murkowski for supporting recent legislation passed by Congress that he says amounts to a $6.5 billion tax break for Exxon Mobil. Knowles has repeatedly said
Murkowski should have demanded the condition that Exxon pay $4.5 billion in punitive damages to thousands of fishermen affected by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound.
MURKOWSKI: Murkowski reminded Knowles that
Exxon has said the company would not benefit at all, but Knowles refused to back down. “Exxon can say whatever it wants,” he said. “All you have to do is do the math. and you have $6.5 billion. That is a giveaway with no strings attached.”
Murkowski said that number was pure fabrication. Earlier Thursday, she wrote a letter to Knowles, demanding that he start “telling the truth” in the final days before the election.
KNOWLES: Exxon, Knowles said, is getting a $6.5 billion tax break from the recent corporate tax bill, the same bill that carried two of the gas line incentives. The new law reduces the tax rate on income held in offshore accounts if companies bring the
money back to the US. “They got the award by just following Woody Allen’s law of 95 percent of life is just being there,” Knowles said.
To not attach some provision requiring payment of the punitive damages to Alaska’s 20,000 fishermen harmed by the spill “is unconscionable,” he said.
MURKOWSKI: “You know, we all want to have the
Exxon Valdez issue behind us,” Murkowski responded. “We have waited far too long.” But the legislative branch of government should not cut off judicial proceedings, she said. “What happens next, who else do we cut off?” she asked.
Voted YES on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions.
Amends Federal bankruptcy law to revamp guidelines governing dismissal or conversion of a Chapter 7 liquidation (complete relief in bankruptcy) to one under either Chapter 11 (Reorganization) or Chapter 13 (Adjustment of Debts of an Individual with Regular Income). Voting YES would:
Declare a debtor eligible only for Chapter 13, as anyone financially capable of paying back their creditors at a rate that still allows them to earn above their state's median income
Place domestic support obligations such as child support and alimony amongst the first priority claim category of non-dischargeable debts on a debtor filing for bankruptcy
Require debtors to pay for and attend credit counseling prior to filing for bankruptcy
Cap home equity protection at $125,000 if the debtor purchased a house within 40 months of filing for bankruptcy.
Reference: Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005;
Bill S 256
; vote number 2005-44
on Mar 10, 2005
Rated 86% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record.
Murkowski scores 86% by US Chamber of Commerce on business policy
Whether you own a business, represent one, lead a corporate office, or manage an association, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of AmericaSM provides you with a voice of experience and influence in Washington, D.C., and around the globe.
Our members include businesses of all sizes and sectors—from large Fortune 500 companies to home-based, one-person operations. In fact, 96% of our membership encompasses businesses with fewer than 100 employees.
Mission Statement:
"To advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, initiative, opportunity, and responsibility."
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
