Why does Senator Reed propose such legislative modifications?

Senator Reed’s shadow looms large, at least theoretically, over anyone considering renouncing their United States citizenship.
The 1996 Reed Amendment which is part of the immigration law (Title 8), but not the tax law (Title 26) - - has never been invoked by the federal government to bar reentry of a former U.S. citizen in its history (even when it was relevant from the mid 1990s through the following two decades).
This past week Senator Reed was a sponsor of a new appropriates bill for the Department of Homeland Security; the “2015 Homeland Security” bill that provides for US$47.2B (billion) in appropriates for a range of spending;  such as $10.2B for the Coast Guard, $5.5B for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), $1.6B for the Secret Service, among other spending items.

Senator Reed is identified in his own website as ” . . . A member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, which controls the purse strings of the federal government, Reed has been described by the Boston Globe as “a relentless advocate for his home state.”  -
Within Senator Reed’s “2015 Homeland Security” proposed amendments, he apparently introduces a new provision to the immigration law – which is explained in his website as -

• Reed’s provision to help prevent expatriate tax dodgers from reentering the United States calls on DHS to report within 90 days on their efforts to enforce the law that Senator Reed authored to prohibit individuals from reentering the United States if they renounced their citizenship in order to avoid taxes.

 The question remains why does Senator Reed persist on trying to get former USCs barred from re-entering the U.S., if and when they fully comply with the tax provisions; IRC Sections 877, 887A, 2801 ? It is about the framing and context. The headlines in the media and the common perception of the need for things like FATCA and compliance programs and the like all focus on the hunt for the "rich tax evaders."  So a very common problem I see is that the American au pair or visiting professor or artist or writer or musician or translator or English teacher or stay-at-home mother or university student (who most assuredly are not rich) do not see themselves as being concerned by any of it.
Where is the benefit for expats from this government for all of this? Do they receive free healthcare? No. Do they receive world class education for their children ? No. Do they receive any kind of guaranteed income should they loose their jobs ? No.
No, instead, they have a country which is the only one in the world next to Eritrea to tax its overseas citizens