vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there

any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the yeas are 42, the nays are 52. the motion is not agreed to. the senator from colorado. mr. gardner: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that senator casey be recognized to offer a motion to commit which is the desk and the time until 2:15 be divided in the iewrm form and at -- usual form and at that 2:15 we have a vote and following the disposition of the motion the majority leader be recognized. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i have four requests for committees to meet during the session of the senate. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. gardner: the judiciary committee does not have the approval so they will not be

permitted to meet past 3:30 p.m., but i ask that the authority to meet be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gardner: i am here to talk about growing the american economy, create jobs and make sure washington has less money in its pocket and the people across the country have more money in their pockets. i rise to support the pro growth tax system and make it competitive. i rise to support american workers who haven't seen wage growth far too long. i rise to support american families. it's been 30 years since the country last reformed the tax code. we haven't modernized our tax code in over 30 years. since that time we have had lobbyists adding on and building on loopholes and giveaways to what was once a competitive tax system. but that 30 years of drag on the tax code has made it more out of

date day by day. it is so out of date that american families and businesses now spend $6 billion -- $ -- six billion hours and $263 billion every year just to file their taxes. that's bigger than the economic output of the nation of new zealand just to file our taxes every year. meanwhile, we watch the world change since 1986. other countries have learned how to use their tax code to entice u.s. businesses overseas to their country to move away from the united states to their country's most competitive tax code. that disparity between the u.s. tax code and foreign tax rates has literally chased jobs and wages out of this country. companies not only invest in low-tax foreign countries but leave billions of dollars abroad without bringing them back into the united states.

those billions have piled up and now it's estimated that there is somewhere around $2.5 trillion in foreign profits being held by the united states multinationals overseas. that tell us three things. number one, corporations will find low-tax jurisdiction. number two, without this reform it isn't changing any time soon. and, three, american workers are the ones paying the costs of this failed economic system. it's the american workers who suffer in the form of higher taxes, lower wages, and a less competitive economy. but we have before us an opportunity to change this and this reform will bring the kind of relief that americans have been demanding for a number of years, for over a decade, lower taxes, higher wages, and less time and hassle filing their taxes. this change meanings a family of four earning the income of $73,000 would see a tax cut of

nearly $2,200. that's a 60% cut next year over what they paid this year with the passage of this bill. a single parent with one child and income of $41,000 would see a cut of more than $4,100 that is a cut of 70% in their tax rates. it is a change that will bring thousands of dollars in higher wages as companies begin to invest in america again. the council of economic advisors estimated that lowering the corporate rate would raise the income to $34,000. it suggests that the gains could be bigger. this change will reduce the wasted billions of hours spent filling out the paperwork, dotting the i's, crossing the t's just to file our taxes. the council of economic advisors

said that 95% will use the standard deduction rate. because it will have been expanded, they will end up being better off. it shouldn't be more fun going to the dentist than it is figuring out your taxes. we can't let this moment pass without bringing this relief to america's taxpayers. doing that would only chase more dollars an jobs out of the country. the result of voting against this reform can be summed up in the information that i have right here next to me and here's the first one. this shows how our corporate tax rate since the 1980's and 1990's has stayed the same while our competitors have lowered their rates and become more and more competitive over time. countries like france, germany, spain, and italy, and greece and country after country have lowered their corporate tax rates far less than our rates today. indeed the average european statutory rate is 18% or 19%. the united states remains stuck

at 35%, the highest statutory tax rate in the industrialized world. when a company decides it wants to expand or buy new equipment, it looks at this to see if it can make the expansion profitable. the higher the rate the harder it to justify the investment. it doesn't take much more than this chart to know that investing abroad has made a lot of sense to far too many people. businesses have responded to this. they moved. as a result they invested -- as result business investment in capital in the united states is at a low. investments in new structure, equipment, intellectual property is some of the low knesset we have he -- lowest we have seen. kevin hassett has warned there is a crisis in our country because of a lack of what is called capital deepening is what economists use for the term meaning the impact of capital stock on worker protecty --

productivity. the more productive a worker is, the more the employer is willing to pay that worker to keep him or her working. that leads us to the next piece of information. you can see the effects here. the relationship has broken down over the past couple of decades prior to 1990 wages went up by more than 1% because that has changed because of our uncompetitive tax system are. from 2008 to 2016 a 1% increase in corporate profits corresponded with only a 3% increase in worker wages. and so when we hear about a growing income inequality, which is something we have to address, this is part of the reason that we income inequality, because it has resulted with jobs overseas and our taxes being out of date and out of order. one of the biggest culprits is that corporate tax rate it's

what causes the disconnect between profits and wages, business investing jobs overseas and lay off workers in the united states, expanding in poland instead of portland or not expanding at all. no matter what they choose, the american worker loses out. employees bear 45% to 75% of the burden of corporate taxes because businesses invest in them less as the higher the tax rate goes. so that brings us to the third point of information. the empirical evidence is remarkably clear. countries with lower tax rates have higher wage increases than countries with higher corporate tax rates. high tax countries like the united states have weak wage growth, less than #%, even -- 1%, even close to zero. the lowest corporate tax rate countries in the world have less than 1% wage growth.

high countries -- high tax countries like the u.s. have the extremely weak wage growth. low tax countries see wage growth of 4%, and that is because they create an environment that encourages businesses to grow and expand while high tax countries like the united states chase money out of the country. over the last several years we've been told we need to get used to low wages and used to low wages and low g.d.p. growth. we have been told we need to accept a secular stagnation theory, that the american economy's prime has gone away. i don't believe that. i don't believe anybody in this country should believe that. i believe our economy's best days are ahead of us if we pass the kind of policies we can this week. until the tax code is competitive, there are people who think that secular stagnation is all we can get. bipartisan groups have pushed

for ways this, simpson-bowles commission, wyden-coats and president obama called for tax cuts in the state of the union address. president obama's economic advisor said that reducing the corporate tax rate and lowering the -- this disadvantage is about as close to a relunch as tax reformers will get to. here we stand at the end of this reform process and the opponents to this reform pound their fists on their desks and shoot off standard talking points about millionaires and billionaires many they told us from the outset in a letter to senator mcconnell, they didn't want to have tax cuts for everyone and wouldn't accept a credible package. they could have worked with us and offered proposals to help us find solution that benefits all. they often mixed up with what is in the house proposal with the

senate proposal because it is politically ex peed yernt. there -- expedient. there have been no substantive amendments. because i'm afraid the opponents aren't interested in making the bill better. they are interested in a political fight and continuing to see americans suffer under low wages and low and -- and high taxes, but they don't tell us why other than just not this bill. we have a chance to help the middle class. we have a chance to cut taxes, to grow the economy. for coloradans it means more jobs, higher wages, it means true economic growth. let's get away from the atari1986 tax code and let's put something that works for this generation, the next generation, building competitiveness, building opportunity, and building an america we're all proud of.

mr. president, thank you, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president, i have a motion to commit at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: the senator from pennsylvania, mr. casey, moves to commit the bill h.r. 1 to the committee on finance with instructions to report the same back to the senate in three days not counting any day in which the senate is not in session -- mr. casey: mr. president, i ask that the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i rise to speak about this motion to commit. the amendment that i'm offering is very simple. it states that if companies are giving executives a raise and giving more money to shareholders through dividends or stock buybacks because of this tax windfall, then workers who help make these profits possible in the first place and who also need a break would see their wages go up.

it is as simple as that. i hope that every member of the senate would support this sensible amendment. by one estimate over the last 16 years there seems to be little or no correlation between rising corporate profits and increased wages. we've seen record corporate profits over years and, in fact, profits as a percentage of the economy has nearly doubled over the past 20 years. "the new york times" tells us that, quote, in the united states the richest 1% have seen their share of national income roughly double since 1980 to 20% in 2014 from 11%. no other nation in the 35-member organization for economic cooperation and development --

oecd countries -- no other nation is unequal among those with comparable tax data and none have experienced such a sharp rise in inequality. unquote. so -- so says "the new york times" analysis. i'm going it review that again. from 1980 to 2014, the richest 1% have had their share of national income roughly double from 20% -- to 20% from 11%. so since 1980, the top 1% has had a bonanza. they have done quite well. what has been the case with workers? well, at the same time, wage growth has stagnated. many have seen the reports over the last couple of years, one by the economic policy institute that indicated that if you compare wage growth after world war ii from 1948 to about 1973,

wage growth was 91%. and then from 1973 forward to about 2014, 2015, wage growth was only a total of 11% growth. so 91% wage growth after world war ii. only 11% since then. and in many years, it wasn't even 11%. it was stagnating. people can go to the economic policy institute website and read those series of reports. about wages and about workers, which i thought was the focus, the prime focus, i would hope, of both parties when it comes to this bill, but apparently it's not with regard to what the majority is presenting. so those are the top -- at the top are not only getting richer. they have been getting richer in a big way since 1980. that increasing rate of benefits to the wealthy continues at a fast pace in this bill and continues year after year.

the republican tax plan gives hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars of net tax cuts to major corporations. by one estimate, the total corporate tax cut exceeds $1.3 trillion. trillion with a t. some estimate that the number is even higher than that, but i will go with that lower number. but there is no requirement with that corporate tax cut, no requirement that any benefit go to worker wages and no requirement that companies invest in the united states of america. no requirement at all. so what should we do about that? well, we can pass an amendment like mine to make sure that if the executives benefit, if the shareholders benefit, the workers benefit. the workers have a lot to do

with the profits. the workers have a lot to do with the productivity of the corporation. in fact, many large corporations have told shareholders exactly what they're going to do with the money they get, with the benefits drived from this corporate tax cut. and here is the conclusion, unfortunately. all they're going to do is increase dividends. here's a report from bloomberg. this report is dated november november 29, 2017. headline -- trump's tax promises undercut by c.e.o. plans to reward investors. here's the opening graph of the story, and i quote. major companies including cisco systems incorporated, pfizer incorporated and coca-cola company say they will turn over most gains from proposed corporate tax cuts to their shareholders, undercutting

president donald trump's promise that his plan will create jobs and boston wages for the middle class. that's what that report says that i'm quoting from. i will quote from it a little more a little bit later. that's what they tell us in that report. what about the workers? what about the workers and their wages which have not gone up very much over decades and in some measure have stag stagnated? -- have stagnated? the republicans have promised over and over again that this corporate tax cut would lead to higher wages. in fact, they even put a number on it. they said $4,000. and then they said it might go higher than $4,000 if you give this corporate tax cut. so they weren't just making a broad, unspecific promise. they made a very specific promise about what would flow from this corporate tax cut, which i would call a corporate

tax giveaway. workers are the reason those profits exist when a corporation is profitable, and they should see the benefit of the gains from their labor. i will go back to this bloomberg report. they quote jack vogel, the founder of vanguard, a major company in pennsylvania. jack vogel, the founder of vanguard, spoke in new york on this very topic this week. he is quoted in this bloomberg story from november 29. i will just read you part of what he said. he said that -- this is jack voting -- vogel speaking. he said the tax proposals being debated in washington are, quote, a moral abomination. a moral abomination, unquote. that's his words, not mine, because they favor corporations at the expense of workers. my words, not his. here is what jack vogel goes on to say. quote, just think about this. corporate profits after taxes last year were the highest they have ever been in the history of

g.d.p., going back to 1929. and we're thinking of giving relief to the corporations at the highest levels ever. individual wages are at the lowest level in about 15 years as a percent of g.d.p., unquote. that's what jack vogel said. he goes on to say, so we are helping people who are doing very well and doing nothing for the people doing very badly. one of the flaws is that corporations are putting their shareholders ahead of the people that build the corporation, the people who put their heart and soul on the line and are committed to the company. quote, it's just the unfairness, unquote. that's jack vogel of vanguard, not some democratic source. he finishes with these words.

but the worst part of it is that corporations are making so much money now, they don't know what to do with it. they aren't investing in new equipment and innovation. they are buying back their own stock, which helps the stock price. he goes on to say the following. quote, i am all for capitalism, he said. i'm a capitalist myself, but there is such a thing as too much, unquote. that's what jack vogel said about this bill and about the effects of the corporate tax break. bloomberg reported wednesday that corporate leaders are saying the tax cut proceeds will go to shareholders, as i said, which is the exact concern that many people have about this bill, among many other concerns. republicans say this tax cut is to help competitiveness and wage growth.

this amendment would simply put some teeth into that promise. if, because of a tax cut, a company spends, say, $50 million more on executive raises and increased dividends and stock buybacks, then they ought to have to spend $50 million as well to increase worker wages. that's the effect of the amendment. if you're truly reinvesting in your company, you're complying with -- your complying with this amendment should be an issue. but if your only goal is to put more money at the top, then without this amendment, this tax bill is grossly unfair to workers. if you don't want to take my word for it, talk to jack bogle. mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise to discuss four amendments that i have

introduced to the tax cuts and jobs act that would strengthen this legislation in ways that are important to our middle-income families. i want to express my thanks to the majority leader, my colleagues and the administration for working with me on these proposals. mr. president, the first amendment would allow taxpayers to deduct up to $10,000 in state and local property taxes. in recent years, more than 95% of all those who itemize on their tax forms and 28% of all federal income tax filers deducted state and local taxes, including property taxes. yet, the senate bill would

eliminate this deduction altogether. mr. president, the deduction for state and local taxes has been part of our tax code since 1913 when the income tax became law. it was intended to prevent a federal tax from being imposed on a state tax. in other words, it prevents double taxation. this deduction is especially important to the people of maine. in my state, 166,000 itemizeers deducted a total of $275 million in property taxes on their federal income tax returns. this amendment would allow the vast majority of mainers to

itemize to continue to fully deduct their property taxes. improving the bill in this way by preserving the property tax deduction up to $10,000 is crucial for middle-class taxpayers across the united states. in fact, for filers earning less than $75,000 who itemize, the state and local property tax deduction is typically larger than the state and local income tax deduction. private school i would prefer allowing the deduction of both state and local income and property taxes, the benefits of the property tax deduction are particularly important to middle-class families with less than -- middle-income families with less than $75,000 in income. in addition, by allowing the

deduction you of -- deduction of up to $10,000 in property taxes, my amendment parallels the provision that has been included in the house version of the tax bill. mr. president, my second amendment would strike a provision of that could lessen the retirement benefits of church, charity, school, and government employees, including firefighters, police officers, and teachers. i appreciate very much that my colleague from ohio, senator portman, has cosponsored this amendment. mr. president, we are in the midst of a retirement crisis in this country. according to the nonpartisan center for retirement research, there is a $7.7 trillion gap

between the savings that american households need to maintain their standard of living in retirement and what they actually have. as americans are living longer, seniors are in danger of outliving their savings or of no longer being able to enjoy the comfortable retirement they once had envisioned. we must do everything that we can to encourage people to save more for retirement, not less. employees of churches, charities, schools, and local governments are generally paid less than their counterparts who are working for for-profit businesses, and thus, they are less able to save for their retirement, especially early in their careers. accordingly, there are special

catchup rules that allow these employees to contribute additional amounts near the end of their careers when they are likely to have higher salaries. there is also a special rule that permits churches, charities, and public educational institutions to make contributions for employees after they retire so as to make up for the shortfalls in the employee's retirement savings during their working years. regrettably, as drafted, the senate bill would hurt many church, charity, school, and government workers by eliminating these critical tax rules, including the ability to make these catchup and makeup contributions to retirement accounts. striking this provision, as my amendment would do, would ensure

that those employees who serve the public achieve greater retirement security. my third amendment, mr. president, would improve the child and dependent tax credit credit -- the child and dependent care tax credit by making it refundable. thus providing much needed assistance to low-income working families. making this credit refundable would help many families afford high quality child care or adult day care for older parents or other relatives who can no longer care for themselves. working families are increasingly faced with difficult decisions when it comes to balancing care and work with some concluding that the steep cost of care serves as a

barrier to working more or working at all. nearly 15 million children in america under the age of six have working parents. these parents, particularly single parents, often struggle to find affordable, quality day care that ensures that they can continue to work while having the peace of mind that their children or their elderly parents are well cared for. congress should make this tax credit refundable, meaning that families who have no federal income tax liability but pay other taxes will also benefit. since that it's not currently refundable, most low and some middle income tax paying families are unable to take

advantage of the child care tax credit. in fact, mr. president, according to the tax policy center, almost no families in the bottom income quintile have been able to claim that credit. think about that, mr. president. these are the lowest income families who need help the most in paying for child care or care for a dependent elderly parent or grandparent or other relative virtually none of them qualify for the credit. none of them are able to claim the credit. to pay for making the child and adult dependent care credit refundable, my amendment would close the carried of interest

loophole, a tax reform that the president has endorsed. finally, mr. president, high medical expenses are continuing to burden many american consumers, yet due to a highly unfortunate provision in the affordable care act, consumers can deduct medical expenses only if they exceed 10% of their income. that threshold used to be 7.5% and my amendment would return the threshold to that level to help taxpayers and particularly seniors who are struggling with the cost of long-term care for a loved one. just this past week when i was in maine, an elderly gentleman stopped me in the grocery store to tell me that he simply cannot afford long-term care for his

beloved wife given the change in this threshold. for those who suffer from chronic medical conditions, experience unexpected illnesses or injuries or find that long-term care services are a necessity but are not covered by insurance or medicare, health care expenses can quickly become an unbearable burden. many americans are forced to choose between purchasing medical services and making other equally necessary expenditures. since world war ii, the medical expense deduction has provided much-needed assistance to americans with catastrophic medical expenses. we should reverse this

ill-advised provision of the affordable care act and reinstate the ability of those hard-pressed b by high medical costs to deduct expenses in excess of 7.5% of their income. mr. president, i believe that all four of these amendments would strengthen this legislation in critical ways and make it more beneficial for middle-income americans. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. a senator: thank you, mr. president, for the recognition. mr. president, the republicans' tax bill is a disaster for the american people. it would give the ultrawealthy a tax cut and make middle-class families way for it. mr. udall: and i can't tell you how strongly i'm opposed to t.

we heard a lot from the president and the republicans how their tax cuts will be a rising tide to lift all boat. but this claim just doesn't hold water. look carefully. on the top of the $1.5 trillion in new deficits, they are hiding more than $5 trillion -- where the $5 trillion cuts will come from and who will actually benefit. the republican budget would force deep cuts in health care, education, and other programs that working and middle-class families rely on. it's a terrible plan for my home state of new mexico where a lot of families already have a hard time getting by. plain and simple, the republicans' plan is a massive redistribution of wealth. it would take money -- listen to this who it's taking money from

and where they're giving it to. it would take money from working families, seniors, children, the sick and the disabled, rural families, and the poor, and give it to the very top, the top 1%. and they proposed it at a time when the gap between the very rich and everyone else is already growing. we now have greater income inequality in the u.s. than at the height of the gilded age, over a hundred years ago. mr. president, i want to highlight for my colleagues across the aisle another big problem with the republicans' bill. it has not been talked about enough but it's important to might home state of new mexico and to many western states. the republicans' defici deficit-creating tax cuts are going to cause automatic sequestration, and this will cut several mandatory programs under

the pay as you go act. one of those is the mineral royalties from oil and gas drilling and coal mining on public lands that the federal government shares with the states. new mexico's royalty share is projected to be $437 million next year. other states count on these payments for millions of dollars in their budget, too. colorado received over $80 million in 2016. all of that would be at risk. wyoming received over $660 million last year. its state budget cannot afford to lose that kind of money. utah, montana, and north dakota all received tens of millions in mineral payments last year as well. these are royalties that new mexico and the states are entitled to. in new mexico we mainly use this

money for public schools. other states use it for vital government programs, like health care, roads, and police. our state legislature has struggled the last couple of years to balance the budget. the chair and vice chair of the new mexico legislative finance committee wrote just this week to our entire delegation. they warned that losing so much revenue would -- and i quote here -- would have a devastating impact on the state's budget and would wipe out the reserves our state has struggled to rebuild. end quote. mr. president, new mexico's schoolkids just can't afford to take a $437 million hit. and now i know it's possible -- now i know it's possible for congress to pass legislation sometime in the future to take mineral royalties out of sequestration, but there is no guarantee at all of that ever

happening. and i'm not willing to take chances with the education of new mexico's schoolchildren. the republicans' tax cuts will also hit medicare hard. that's also another concern for new mexico families. tax cuts for the super wealthy and big corporations will mean new mexico could lose out on about $178 million of federal medicare payments every year. i'm opposed to trading off seniors' health just so the rich can get richer. but the republicans seem bound and determined to take away america's health. even though the american people have spoken up loud and clear. they want their current health care rights fully protected. republicans want to do away with the individual mandate under the affordable care act, but we also

know that that will mean millions of americans will lose coverage and we know that premiums will go up because the insurance companies will be covering a sicker population. i'm opposed to trading off the american people's health just so the rich can get richer. mr. president, the majority's bill is a bad idea for basically everyone in new mexico and across the country, except for the very wealthy individuals, multinational corporations, private equity and hedge funds. these are the folks that are being helped, the very wealthy, multinational corporations, private equity and hedge funds. let's instead get down to the business of governing on behalf of the american people, not just the top 1%. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey.

mr. booker: thank you very much, mr. president. if you look at the united states of america today compared to, say, when my dad grew up, we see very disturbing trends in our economy. in fact, we do not have the same economy, the same bargain that we had in my parents' generation that we have right now. you see, even if you were someone that had a minimum-wage job back in the 1950's and 1960's -- or the 1960's, if you worked that -- that minimum-wage job, you were taking over $20. the bargain was in the united states of america, if you were willing to work hard, if you were willing to sweat and struggle and sacrifice, you could make ends meet. you could make it work. what we've seen and disturbingly over the last few decades is that economy twist and contort. we see massive disparities in income come about in our nation with the wealthy getting wealthier and the wealthy doing better and better, compounding,

doubling down on their privilege. but you see the middle class shrinking in the united states of america and the poverty trap where people are playing by the rules, where people are working hard, they've seen their wages stag -- stagnate and everything going up. prescription drugs, cost of food, cost of child care, the cost of college. the bargain in our country is not working now, and we need to do something to change this. at a time that american families are feeling the burn and the challenge of high taxes, low income, high costs, we could be targeting middle-class americans. we could be targeting low-income earners in a bipartisan tax bill that would not only help those who are struggling in america but when you give a break, a tax break to those folks, that money

gets reinvested in our economy because people spend that money. and you literally have a turbo charge, a boost to our overall economy. but that's not what we're seeing right now. we are on the verge tonight as the republicans scramble for their votes, we're on the verge tonight of doing something completely counter to what evidence, facts, and logic would tell you to do if you were going to devise a tax plan to truly help the middle class, to truly help working americans, to truly help those struggling wondering why they're not doing as well as their parents do. understand this, if you are a baby boomer in america, 90% of baby boomers in america, by the time they were 30 were doing better than their parents economically. well, that has now been cut in half in the united states of america. if you're a millennial born in the 1980's, it's now half of

that rate are doing better than their parents because of the challenges i'm describing, because of the economic hardship, because the bargain isn't working. everything is going up but wages are stagnant. we know factually for the past 40 years while workers' wages have failed to rise alongside increased productivity, workers are getting more and more productive, but for 40 years now workers' wages have failed to rise alongside of that increase in productivity. what we have seen is that corporations, their profits have reached a 60-year high. the facts in our country are disturbing when we see indices of social mobility -- the ability of someone born poor to make it out of poverty. we see other nations, from canada to england, doing better and increasing social mobility better than we are.

we see other countries out-americaning us, taking the idea of the american dream that every generation should do better than the one before and showing more progress toward that dream than we are. social mobility, integral to our country, disappearing. wages zag nateing. -- wages stagnating. corporate profits, all-time high. costs skyrocketing. everyone here knows it. i live in the central ward of newark, new jersey. i see it in the faces of families in grocery stores, working full-time jobs, sometimes dual earners,ed finding it hard to make their money stretch to meet their needs, finding more month at the end of their money, than money tend of their month. families sitting at kitchen tables finding it hard to balance their budgets, find

trying to figure out how they're going to go to college. the bargain is not working and we should be working in this body to figure out way to empower the overall economy and empower middle-class workers. we're not doing enough to help american workers' incomes grow. we're not doing now make the bargain work. we're not doing enough. but i'll tell you this. the tax plan that seals to be moving to the floor today, it will not help restore that american bargain. it will not help restate the american progress. it will not get us back to those days. and it won't help american workers. it will actually make things worse over the long term. we can debate philosophies about tax codes all we want, but we cannot debate facts. and the fact of the matter is the, this plan is not

pro-growth. it's anti-middle class. it is not pro-worker. it is an even more severe violation of that bargain between american workers and this nation that created the -- our modern economy. it's an affront to the idea of hard work earning a living wage in america. this plan is not investing in the success of american workers. it's not a plan to give hard workers a break or boost. it isn't going to make our economy more favo fair. the bill is poorly designed and devised by the president of the united states and by republicans in congress to give a tax cut to those who need it least on the backs of those americans who need it and deserve it most. now again, this is not partisan rhetoric. a recent nonpartisan report from the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation found that, on

average, americans earning less than $75,000 will face a tax increase over the next ten years under this plan. and, remember, adding insult to that injury, the corporate tax provisions of this plan are permanent but the individual tax provisions are not. in other words, this plan actively targets the folks who are struggling the most. it targets them with a tax increase and a sunsetting of the the provisions that were intended to help them. meanwhile, on the other hand, the biggest corporations and the wealthiest individuals will receive a massive tax cut, and they'll receive that tax cut -- this is not free money. this is borrowed money, $1.5 trillion added to our deficit, borrowed money that we will have to pay for over the long term.

it is a massive giveaway to the wealthiest of people in our country and corporations, all under the theory that somehow this is going to benefit the average american worker, blowing up the deficit and pumping more money to the wealthiest in our country at a time that wealth disparities are already greater than they've been in a century. now some of my colleagues are going to argue that this bill, giving $1 trillion to corporations, will somehow result in a trickling down of things like raises for workers and somehow creating new jobs. but, to me, this is a fantasy. i'm a believer that you look at facts, you look at history, and we don't have to look that far. this fantasy has been disproven, this idea of giving it to the

wealthiest to show trickle down, of giving it to corporations, somehow trickling down to job creation, this has been disproven time and time again by economic data, historical data, by the words of corporate leaders themselves. listen to the facts. a new survey found that the majority of small business owners -- these are the people that are the backbone of our economy and creating jobs. they open the plan. six in ten think the benefits are going to wealthy corporations the most. well, that's not just them thinking that. that is actually the facts of this plan. take the word much leading economists, the university of chicago's i.g.m. forum, a collection of many of the top economists from this country, from a range and spectrum of political philosophies. they've recently surveyed these economists asking, and i quote -- they asked, if we pass a bill

similar to the one being considered by congress, will the u.s. g.d.p. substantially be higher for the decade from now than it is currently under the status quo? will this bill help our economy grow? work the 42 respondents, 41 said, no, it will not. there's only one dissenter. there are some of the world's -- these are some of the world's preeminent economists. we didn't invite them to the united states senate to hear their opinions. we didn't have hearings. we didn't have an open process where we brought in the best economic minds from both sides of the political aisle, from both sides of the political spectrum. we did not have a process that brought in the best and the brightest to inform the investments we're making, $1.5 trillion. and what they're saying now is this will not do what republican leaders will say it will do.

senate republicans wrote a budget to free up $1.5 trillion. that's what this will do to our deficit. to create these tax cuts, they could distribute this -- these resources any way they see fit and somehow they've managed to create a tax bill, astonish asta tax bill that will increase taxes on low-income and middle-income people, especially in states like new jersey, by getting rid of the state and local taxes provision, this is why republican congress "people" in my state are -- why republican congresspeople in my state are against this. this doubles down on stated like mine. they have created a bill that small businesses don't like because they know that the benefits are largely going to the wealthiest and the biggest

corporations and the kicker is that economists say that it won't even spur economic growth. and then when major corporations see their earnings go higher or get an influx of capital, that's going to happen? it's far more like think that their executives and shareholders, not their frontline workers, will benefit i don't take my word for it. look at what's happened over the last decade. we have seen record corporate profits and what is happening with those profits? 80%, 90% of those profits are not being invested in hiring more people or increasing pay. the overwhelming majority of profits are going to paying dividends and doing stock buybacks. that's the fact of what happens when corporations are getting more resources. and don't take my word for it. look at what corporate leaders

themselves are saying. they've made it clear time and time again that increases in profits will not trickle down to workers. major american companies have said, point-blank, that they will not use their huge tax windfalls to raise wages for workers. companies from cisco to pfizer to coca-cola, companies like van guard have said that their tax breaks will go to dividends for shareholders, not for wages for workers. according to bloomberg, one c.e.o. said on an earnings call in reference to the tax plan, and i quote, we'll be able to get much more aggressive on the share buyback. that's where corporate profits have been going for a decade or more, creating more wealth for the wealthiest and not for the average american worker who has seen decade after decade of stagnant wages. this shouldn't be surprising.

corporate profits -- record high right now -- and we see wages at a record low. that is a fact. and to double down on what we know is not factual, that we know is not happening now, is just a fantasy. corporations are making more money today than they have in over 80 years, but the average worker's wages are at their lowest point in six bein -- in x decades, but this plan gives more relief to corporations and less to middle-class workers and low-income workers. we could have gotten rid of carried interest, something even the president of the united states talked about on the campaign trail and targeted the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit, but that is not what this plan does. this tax plan is a fundamental and costly misdiagnose of the problems facing american workers

across the country, and the right way to go about addressing them is not being done. so here's an idea. instead of giving massive tax breaks to corporations and hoping it somehow gets to workers, let's just give the money directly to workers by giving the lion's share of this to middle-class and low-wage earnings. we don't need some fancy system of hoping things will trickle down. let's cut out the corporate middle man. that's a bill i would support. we should have been discussing here in a bipartisan meeting in hearings, discussing how we can empower american workers and the middle class because the problem with the economy today is not that the rich are not getting richer. it is that middle-class workers are not seeing their wages grow. we should be discussing what we can do to break up this culture

amongst financial institutions and across the country that prioritize short-term returns over long-term worker investments, that's making c.e.o. after c.e.o. focus on stock buybacks that manipulate their stock prices up and increase their incentived pay but are doing mog for the corporation's long-term strength or the workers on the frontlines doing the work and earning the profits. right now despite profits, investing in the long-term success of their employees through things like pay raises, pathways to the promotion, innovation, that has become the exception in american society and not the rule. we have a problem and this tax bill doesn't address it. it will make it worse. there is no evidence to suggest that the senate tax plan, which hands 80% of that $1.5 trillion borrowed from the chinese and other countries that are controlling -- that are owning

our treasury bonds, that $1.5 trillion, 80% of it, it's going to corporations and business owners and the top .i .1 .l.% o- and the top .1% of wealthiest estates. this is insanity. this is folly. this is fiction being foisted upon the american people. too many employers are failing to hold up their end of the bargain when this comes to fair wages, safe workplaces, workforce investments. and now republicans in congress want to reward them with $1 trillion and more. this is bad policy. this is unfair. this is bad faith. this is going to worsen the erosion of the american dream and the american bargain that people who play by the rules, who work hard, who sacrifice for their families can get ahead.

it's not going to stop the trend of stagnating wages. it's not going to stop the trends of everything going up but our salaries. it's not going to change -- be the change that we need. trickle-down economics, no matter how it's disguised, doesn't work, and republicans' attempts to camouflage it as tax reform is offensive and won't work for american workers. we've proven that we're a country and a society that can create wealth. we've got that covered. we've proven. what we haven't proven and what this tax bill fails to do is to show that we can be a society that can create great wealth and great opportunity for all. we've gotten off the tracks from where we've been generations before. we've got to get this train back moving in a direction that takes all of its cars, all of the

american people to the promised land that this country needs to be, must be, and was designed to be. this is the challenge before us right now, to stop a tax bill that will make our problems and the disturbing trends worse, and design one that's directly targeting middle-class americans, working-class americans with enlightened policy that will help our nation be one that fulfills its promise and its dream. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. roberts: if i have time at

the end of my remarks, i would like to yield to the distinguished senator from hawaii. and i will try to be prompt. mr. president, soon this senate will take a historic vote that will impact every american. these votes do not come very often. the last was decades ago. and we all understand, i think, or at least most of us understand how critical tax reform is. all of us in the senate, on both sides of the aisle are familiar with the burdens and the complexity and the lack of competitiveness associated with our current tax act. it is abundantly clear that this antiquated corporate system acts as a break on our economy. it is equally clear that in recent years our economic growth rate, our gross domestic product has been stuck at an historic low level of 1.9% or

less. now there are many opinions as to why our economy has been so stagnant causing american job loss, unemployment and more reliance on government programs. and i want to underscore what the people of kansas have told me repeatedly as to why at least in part this has happened. small business owners, manufacturers, our community bankers, other lending institutions, individual workers, laid off or hanging on paycheck to paycheck workers, virtually everybody in rural america -- farmers, ranchers every twowl meeting have told me the number one concern is the crushing weight of federal regulation. that was summed up by one western kansas rancher who said, pat, i feel ruled, not governed. but we are unwinding right now this regulatory overkill. today we are making government a partner, not a regulatory, a

regulatory adversary. i wonder how we reached this sad state of affairs. there are many factors. administrative policy that seemed to mimic or compare to the european monetary policy. government agendas and central control. but with this tax bill, that can change. and it will change. if only we recognize and take this important opportunity, an opportunity that many members in this body have never had to truly make a difference. this time we can. can america get back to a place to make history and to once again experience the power of the american dream? i am confident that we can. we have before us now a comprehensive plan to address these issues. cleaning up and modernizing the tax code to help generate more growth in our economy. the bill before the senate does

exactly that, providing meaningful tax relief for families, small businesses, farmers and ranchers and growers. i am especially pleased with the rates and bracket structure the legislation would put into place on the individual side. we have done a good job pushing these rate reductions down to lower and middle-income families. this would provide a net tax cut for families in kansas of about $2,500 and over 10,000 new jobs. as many have pointed out today, we accomplish this by reducing individual tax rates, raising the standard deduction, and increasing the child credits and the tax code. let's be clear, these are consensus bipartisan ideas and are proposals that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have in the past at least -- not now i know because

of the legislative standoff we've been going through. but in the past regularly proposed and supported. mr. president, let me also comment on concerns raised by some of my colleagues that we simply cannot afford this bill and that it will worsen the country's financial condition. in putting this bill together, we have used very modest economic growth estimates below the historic postworld war ii norm of 3%. in fact, the congressional budget office is currently projecting 1.9% growth over the next ten years. and we learned today that the joint committee on taxation says the senate bill will create only modest economic growth. now not withstanding the fact that i have never seen a c.b.o. or joint tax projection that has been really accurate, i think the assessments are far too low, hard to believe, simply

unacceptable. i refuse to accept that we cannot return to a more robust economic growth. and i think we will achieve better growth rates and observe that we are well on our way, recent economic visitor bears this out. the economy is now growing at a solid pace with low unemployment and low inflation. real g.d.p. growth during the first two quarters of the year averaged 2.1% at an annual rate, and since january the unemployment rate fell point six percentage points, the lowest rate in about 16 years. overall growth is poised to average at about 3% over the second half of this year. three percent in the second half of this year. these are positive trends. but my colleagues, we can do more. we need even stronger growth. stronger growth leads to higher

living standards, less dependence on government support and lower need for spending on entitlement and other government programs. so how do we get there? we have a tax bill, a tax bill to maximize growth, to create jobs, and increase wages. this is not what we have just heard from many on the other side trickle-down economics or any other name that you want to call this. this is commonsense economics, which i have yet to see be refuted by any mainstream economist. increase the supply of capital in the economy, and you expand the productivity of the economy. this result is more business investment, leading to worker productivity gains, workers who can then earn more, increase their after-tax income and in the end raise their living standards. i want to turn to an essential sector of our national economy: agriculture, those who are responsible for feeding america

in a troubled and hungry world. i am pleased, very pleased that the bill reflects the importance of production agriculture to our economy. it is important to keep in mind that few other sectors of the economy face the multiple uncertainties of production agriculture. we're talking about weather, storms, fires, volatility in our global commodityty prices, trade disputes, transportation issues, and the list goes on. when we pass this bill, the agriculture industry will have a number of provisions in the tax code that recognize the uncertainty and the volatile nature of the income and expanse associated with agriculture operations. these provisions -- and we're talking about 34 and 35 of them at last count, clul accounting rules that allow farmers to manage their income and expenses. for example, in a year when our

commodity prices are low -- and yes this year they are low -- they can account for costs in a way that keeps them in operation. there are also specific inventory rules to help manage costs associated with the livestock and dairy operations, and to handle items needed for other basic operations such as fertilizer and also crop treatments. there are unique rules for timber operations. you want to get down into specifics and just how far we drill down to help agriculture, mr. president, even baby chickens have their own inventory rule which, by the way, differs for the rules for ostriches and emus. i would imagine nobody would even think of drilling down to that extent. there are rules set for how to handle damaged crops in livestock disasters. they are certainly important as of today. i can tell you that these disaster rules provided a

critical boost to ranchers in my state enabling them to begin to recover from the devastating prairie fires in western kansas earlier this year. turning to the new provisions in the bill, we have developed with agriculture in mind, and here i would be remiss not to mention the strong input and advice i received on these matters from senator grassley, senator thune, senator scott, others, my colleagues who also share a strong interest in the agriculture economy. the bill, for example, liberalizes the depreciation rules for agriculture operations, giving farmers and ranchers five-year property depreciation and preventing full expensing of plant and equipment purchases. the bill would greatly improve the ability of the agriculture community to use the cash method of accounting which provides flexibility in managing cash flow, which is essential to providing certainty in operations. there are significant provisions in the legislation that

establish a new income tax rate for pass-through organizations. now this is a very important issue, mr. president, for the agriculture community. the majority of farmers and ranches are set up as pass-throughs and most of the income by farmers flow through these structures. the bill includes new rules for farmer cooperatives, a very important part of production agriculture. we worked very hard to ensure that the benefits of cooperative farming are held whole in this tax reform plan. the bill also doubles the exemptions from the estate and gift taxes up to $22 million per couple. i know this sounds like a lot to some of my colleagues, but for land owning, cash-constrained farmers, they can hit this exemption amount very quickly especially in my state of kansas. and even when they do not, many farmers and ranchers spend thousands of dollars a year on lawyers and accountant fees to

plan for the best way to pass their life's work on to their children, something very special in rural and small town america. while i will continue to press for a permanent repeal of the death tax, for now let's modify it so we reduce its damaging reach. finally, and above all, the legislation will provide farmers and ranchers with certainty during a very difficult time that we're going through. certainty that they will be not taxed out of business in a down year. certainty that they will have cash available to fund their own operations. certainty that their hard-earned income farmer ranch will not have to be sold off just because someone has died. certainty that the federal government recognizes their irreplaceable role in meeting the challenges of a very fractured and hungry world. so i'm very pleased to say the least that the senate bill keeps the ag tax provisions, but will also help our farmers by creating a much more pro-growth

tax system, lowering their tax burden and simplifying the tax provisions relating to the ag sector. mr. president, we have an opportunity to experience a renaissance in our american economy. for too long it seems to me that we have had sort of a copy cat kind of economic policy based on the european union. we're talking about a lot of government control. we're talking about more taxes. we're talking about a lot of things that simply have enabled us to tread water. i know that we're in a difficult time in this senate with regard to partisan differences. it reminds me a little bit of a country in a western song that obviously my staff would hope i would not mention. it was the ridge was washed out and i can't swim and my baby is

on the other side. well, the bridge is not washed out and the tax bill is on the other side along with an american renaissance that will make america enjoy even more economic growth and get us back to that historic 3% growth rate and even more. and that bridge is open. i urge my colleagues to consider it as we go forward in this debate hopefully we have the votes, and if we have the votes, and i hope we do, hopefully some of my colleagues across the aisle will join us. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. ms. hirono: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to speak for up to five minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hirono: mr. president, the republican tax plan we are debating is a sham. it's a solution in search of a problem. the president and his allies in congress are bound and determined to give the richest people in our country and large corporations huge tax cuts that

will magically trickle down to create a fantastic, incredible, wonderful economy. why? why do we even need this? corporations and the richest 1% people in our country are doing fine, thank you very much. they don't need more goodies. over the past ten years corporate profits have grown. more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the top 1% than at any time since the great depression. groups claim this is for new investments and to help workers. what world are they living? corporations have sheltered over $2.6 trillion offshore to avoid paying taxes. this is money they could already be using to create jobs, build factories, or rage employee -- raise employee wages. it will not happen. they do not need more money for

profits. on the other hand, middle-class families have been seeing stagnant wages for nearly 20 years. health care continues to be a political football with the president sabotaging the affordable care act and congressional efforts to repeal the health care law. the cost of a college education is increasing out of the reach of middle-class families. the list goes on. but rather than crafting a tax plan that would actually help middle-class families, donald trump and the republican party has decided to screw them over instead all to give rich people and corporations huge tax cuts they do not need. in hawaii we have a word to describe what's happening here. the word is b.s. we have had little time to debate the devastating impact of this massive bill. even in the short amount of time we've had, it's clear how many of the major provisions in this bill would harm middle-class families. for example, this limits the

individual mandate for health care, which is another way to repeal the affordable care act. how many bites out of it this repeal apple will the republicans take? 13 million people will lose their health insurance, premiums for everyone else will increase significantly every year as a result of this, yet another bite out of the a.c.a. apple. do they think that these people will not notice what is happening to them and their health care? i don't think so. the devastating impact of this bill is not limited to the parts we all heard about. the republican tax scam has a number of obscure appropriations that are -- provisions that are having a real harm. it eliminates the ability of state and local government to activate private activity bonds. you do not hear that on "morning joe," but they are crate cal. the federal government allows

state and local governments to finance certain kinds of projects that help our communities. state and local governments routinely issue these kinds of bonds to construct schools and for hospitals, et cetera. although this bill hasn't passed congress yet, it's already having a devastating impact. let me give you a concrete example. residents of west maui have been waiting for a hospital for decades. right now on their side of the island if there is a medical emergency, the only way an ambulance can get from west maui to maui memorial is on a two-lane highway. the road winds around next to a cliff. so on a normal day when nothing goes wrong, it can take over an hour to reach maui memorial from west maui. if there's an accident, you can

forget about it. for serious injuries and illnesses, even an hour is too long to wait for lifesaving medical care. construction of the west maui hospital and medical center is clearly important and needed. when the project is completed, west maui will have for the first time dedicated emergency room services and other services. it will save lives. although initial work on this project has begun, construction has stalled. why? because financing for the project is being held up out of fear that republicans in congress will eliminate the private activity bonds this project needs for completion. other hospitals in hawaii have used these kinds of activity bonds, one of the medical centers for women and children in hawaii that focuses on prenatal care and services for women, they have expanded their facilities and have treated thousands of new people.

i have visited this hospital. i heard from them. they cannot understand why donald trump and his republican allies in congress could, in good conscience, cut a program that save lives all to finance tax cuts not needed for the richest people and corporations in our country. so if we're serious about a tax plan that will truly help middle-class families in a meaningful way, we need to kill this terrible bill and start over. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to be allowed to speak for five minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. putin putin mr. president, -- mr. peters: today we are debating legislation that will dramatically reshape the american economy. it was rewritten and continues

to be rewritten in secret by one party. it didn't have to be done this way. this process could have had broad bipartisan support. we could have passed legislation that was fair, simpler, and fiscally responsible. we could have passed tax legislation that was truly focused on middle-class families and raising their wages. instead we have a bill that fails dramatically on every single one of these principles. this bill fails in so many different ways that i think it is helpful for us to talk about each myth that is being told. first, let's dispense with the myth that this is a middle-class tax cut. the bill makes dramatic, permanent cuts to corporate taxes while making very small, temporary changes to the taxes that middle-class families pay. according to the joint committee on taxation, for many working

families the tax changes are less than $100 per year, or more simply put, about $2 a week. that is not a middle-class tax cut, that is a myth. the second myth that we hear is that corporate tax cuts in the bill will trickle down and raise wages for average workers. if that were true, we would probably hear some of the c.e.o.'s delivering the good news to their hardworking employees. but it's not true, it's a myth. we know this because the c.e.o.'s themselves are telling us what they will do. yes, they are actually telling us and it isn't raising wages. they have been clear. they are going to use the money that this bill gives them to buy back shares of their own company's stock and they are going to increase payments to wealthy shareholders. c.e.o.'s are telling the white house this directly. at a november 14, c.e.o.

gathering, gary cohen, the top economic advisor, was in a room full of executives that were asked what they would do with the money from the tax cuts. would they grow their business, would they increase wages? and only a couple of hands went up in a very large room. they went up because they have no reason to lie. their intentions have always been clear. they will take the money that tax bill hands them and reward their executives and shareholders. again, we know this because c.e.o.'s are telling us. we are hearing myths that the tax bill will pay for itself. well, it won't. after telling americans for years how important it is to address the debt and deficit, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will pass a bill that dramatically increases deficits. nonpartisan analysis shows that this bill will inject

$1.5 trillion of had new debt, debt that my republican colleagues should be prepared to accept as their own creation if this bill passes. $1.5 trillion in new debt for our children is not fiscally conservative. it is irresponsible. we can build a tax code that allows working families in michigan keep more of their hard-earned money, level the playing field, and keep good jobs in the united states. michiganders and all american deserve a tax code that is fair, simpler and more responsible, not more multinational giveaways and massive new debt. this bill clearly fails on all of these points and i would urge my colleagues to vote no. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president --

the presiding officer: the chamber will be in order. mr. casey: mr. president, i ask to speak for a minute before the vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: if the corporations get a windfall because of a corporate tax break, the workers should benefit as well. workers wages should go up. let me read directly from the motion itself. we want to ensure that any tax windfall to profitable corporations goes to workers wages. aggregate workers wages would be equal to the increases in executive compensation, stock buybacks, and dividends to shareholders. it's that simple. i would urge a yes vote, and i want to thank my colleagues for their support, senators stabenow, white house, udall, and bald within. -- whitehouse, udall, and baldin. i yield the floor -- baldwin. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. is there a sufficient second?

there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: