stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. debate, th-

the answer is yes. we have a tax system right now in place -- and >> we have a tax system right now and when i hear my colleagues of course we don't like the taxes and we particularly don't like it if states we like mine where the companies shut down production in line in springfield and move to get a tax break for doing it. we ought to close that loophole, but this bill explodes that because as i said a few minutes ago if a plant shuts down in kenya or zanesville there would be a 20% on profits and if it shuts down and moves to asia it can build a factory and get a tax deduction while moving a --

[inaudible] >> very briefly. >> i y have not in three years heard my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say that economic growth of 1.5% for almost ten years is good for the country, workers in ohio. here's my question i was yielded to the question if it is a question.

>> reclaiming my time. t >> i d. >> i do not believe itld t is te new normal. nobody believes that. of course we don't think 1.5 is a new normal but the bust time we focus on the middle-clas midd cut taxes in the clinton years it was 22 million private-sector jobs. no economic net job growth. during the last few years we had a low level of gdp growth for a whole lot of reasons, but you don't fix it and you don't grow the economy by giving tax cuts to the rich with the hope of a trickle-down. if the company does the right

thing for benefits and retirement benefits that company keeps its production in the united states and to get a tax rate. $1,500 per worker is the way this amendment would work. president trump said m to me ina meeting with all of my finance committee republicans in the room now, we know that. that goes without saying in spite of the myth we continue but before you turn over to senatorbi durbin want to say one other thing, we have seen some pretty charts on the floor about middle-class tax cuts. what w we did and here mentioned was about the third year of the bill the tax cuts go down and down and down an into them becae aand then theycross as you go ax increase.

87 million, a. i will yield to the assistant theocratic leader senator durbin. in order to get this dynamic score for the republican tax bill because the ranking

democrat on the committee i heard my colleagues say week after week that all we need to do is get the dynamic score and people will see the value of the bill. this report shows that the bill would lose more than a trillion dollars. it slows the growth of the american economy after 2025.

this bill isn't more than a holiday bonanza for the multinational corporations and powerful interests. i've heard a number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisleci criticizing the analysis by the joint committee on taxation. i'm sure that they are unhappy because it' it unravel all of tr projections and they continued despite the fact that the hard evidence is being but they are still saying the tax plan is going to produce a magical unicorn and rainbow fantasy of economic growth. the best are in. the republican plan loses a trillion dollars. this republican plan slows

economic growth. the growth fantasy is over. i'm happy to extend the courtesy. it is over with this projection and i'm happy to yield to my colleagues. i think the ranking member and i know we have others ready to speak. since the senator believes the joint committee on taxation dynamic score the score demonstrates there is economic growth generated by tax cuts for

negligible t growth this slows e growth of the economy after 2025. that's not what we were promised. in fact the treasury secretary would generate so much growth it would take care of the 1.5 trillion generate a trillion dollars on top of it. what a difference of 2.5 trillion the number i've done on the sheet from the joint committee on taxation for $107 billion worth of revenue. i appreciate my colleague asking that to clear up more of what is in the issue. i appreciate senator thune being so gracious and giving me the extra time.

i would just ask unanimous consent that we be added as a cosponsor to amendment number 1720 and i want to thank the senatosenator from south dakotar his thoughtfulness. >> a lot of our colleagues on the t other side talked about wy they don't like your tax reform bill and many of those arguments have been focused on who benefits from it and then as it is usually the case so they can keep more of what they earn and the dollars of their pockets so they can decide to spend it rather than send it to washington, d.c., democrats dems complained that its tax cuts for the rich. again, i want to point out and this is based upon the joint

committee on taxation which was just eluded to where they find the benefits of the tax relief going. as you can see from the chart, they represent different income groups and the highest percentage of the tax cuts go to those in the lower and middle income group. they do particularly well under tax reform proposals of the argument again that this is a tax cut for the rich doesn't pass the smell test t test or ct with reality.

we have one of the most progressive tax codes in the world and a lot of people who don't have any income tax liability some of whom benefit from refundable tax credits that helps eliminate or partiall pary automate their tax liability as well but this shows under the bill when it's said and done who bears the tax burden and the tax liability and paid by each different group of congress. this is again their tax burden as a percentage of the entire tax burden the rate drops from 4.3 to 4.4% for the 20,000 to 50,000-dollar income and as a percentage tax burden in the country to pay less under a

proposal than they do today. if you look at the group from 50,000 to $100,000, that income group, they also as a percentage ofnt the entire tax burden pay less under our proposal than they do today they pay 60.9% today under the proposal they will pay 16.7% of the total taxes in this country. those making 100,000 or more will pay slightly more than the overall tax burden. today they pay 78.7% under the proposal so they will pay less as a share of the overall tax burden than they currently do today. i don't know how anyone with a straight face can argue that this is a tax bill that benefits those in the upper end. with the argument of those being made right now regarding the

joint committee release of the dynamic score i would say the same things my colleague fromgo texas did. it demonstrates what we are trying to do to generate economic growth. it generates how much we think the assumption is used by the joint committee that are not accurate because they assume we will continue to grow for the next decade and economy of 1.9%. historical average is going back to the end of world war ii in the american economy we have somewhere between three to 3.5% growth. and so, if you take the assumption they will never do better than the 1.9% growth in the economy than their estimate could be accurate. wwete have to believe we are gog to give a whole lot better than

that and if we put the right policies in place and we make america an attractive place to invest, we are going to see considerably higher growth than 1.9%, so what does it take to cover the number it takes about four tenths of 1% of growth increased t an annual average growth over thera next decade. that means for the next decade to not only covered this but actually start generating revenue above and beyond what the impact of the tax cut would be on the budget. when you look at the various models that are done and the assumptions that are made,

remember the joint committee on taxation and the congressional budget office and the numbers theyas are using we wouldn't hae more confidence than we can generate higher than 1.9% economic growth. that is a straight jacket that constrains their model. the tax foundation suggested that it would generate ane additional $1.26 trillion in revenue. secondly, to put the policies in place that will break the

conditions are favorable of economic growth so it can get it back up to the more historical level when it's growing at a faster rate it means companies and businesses are creating better paying jobs if there's a competition for labor in this country and i believe there will be when they start to expand and grow their operations and increased the demand. it goes into higher wages for the employees. the councilic of economic adviss suggest that i impact in fact we about $4,000 a year with an additional income per average household in the country. there is another study done by boston university where they would have $3,500 a year in additional income per household in this country.

so the impact of tax cuts were twofoldd. we lower the rate all of which impact the lower and middle income families and those are all features they can take advantage o of the generate initial benefits them, benefits expire way if you are an average family i in the country, typical family of four with a combined annual income o of $73,000 resu0 resulting 2,200-dollar tax cut. that is a 60% tax cut over what they would pay under the current law. succumso, as $2,200 the family's pocket that they will be able to spend on themselves and their families if that is sitting back to washington, d.c. having somebody decide how to spend the heaven to give us confidence in that the american people are better prepared and better equipped to decide how to spend their own money than the federal government, so that the direct benefit number one. second, as i said earlier if you get the benefit not only to the

tax cut but also the additional growth in the economy that generates better paying jobs and wages increases your overall household income. american families benefit from the legislation that we are on today. it isti with the economic trends are and i think it is interesting to note that the congressional budget office which in their analysis assumed 1.9% growth in the economy for the next decade we think we can do a lot better and i want to ask our colleagues from ohio aren't we already starting to do better economically? i think we have seen a significant improvement just in the last couple of quarters, and if we would continue to stay on that track were a similar track we might be able to get to the point that we are growing at a more at historic rate.

we have had a debate this afternoon about economic growth and will not be obvious from both sides of the aisle we could create is helping middle-class families to be able toer have a family budget andlp also workers with regards to the internationalre competition they are competing with one hand tied behind their back and this is going to generate economic growth and productivity. it's over $400 million of revenue coming in soon enough though r to generate that much more. >> the growth rate for the next decade is going to be 1. 1.9 isa

that's the number let's say roughly $400 million that they have and by th banned by the ra7 economists who tell us it will be about 400 billion but it will be a trillion dollars and desist." there's 137 economists who say it is twice as much and there's other studies you talked about that indicate there will be even morere economic growth, but we e already seeing that. so thate is one part is how much will come out of the tax reforms we are putting forward.

we believe this will help in terms of that growth. we have to go by december of 1.9% and 1.9% is growth, 1.9%, we have problems in this country and that is the next ten years projected. as you said it's kind of interesting they are projecting 1.9%i and others are projecting higher numbers in the context having finished a quarter was 3.3% andfo then before you are saying 1.9%. again there's others out there with a private forecast earlier this week and even the last 30

years hurricanes and other natural disasters and 2.5% or more, so this is not normal in others words this is a relativy low rate, and i know we can do better. some say this is the new normal. we've got to do better. we know we can do better and that's why this is important to get that economy the shot in the arm. but let's assume for a minute it will be only 1.9% growth. let's assume that tax proposal passes. it's about 1.4 to $1.5 trillion of tax relief that will be parti of this, that is over 44 trillion bucks will come in revenue for a little bit of a tax relief because we know that the growth will make up for that, so let's assume that this is true and assumed he was the

right policy baseline that we will continue with the current extenders which we always do with about 533 billion-dollar deficit over the next ten years if you assume this low rate of growth. if you assume it's up 1.9%, we go now to 3%, not to 2.5%, not even 23412.3 that lets take 1% growth, very conservative and i sure hope we will do better than that lets assume it is 2.1% that will generate enough revenue because it is $270 billion per every .1% to have to tax reform proposal in the money going back into theth treasure in other wos reducing the deficit, so i think that this is very fiscally responsible and conservative. i think 2.1% is not something that is at all out of bounds in

fact it's going to be higher than that. i thinkil it is just the opposie and it will result in more money going into the federal treasury to be able to get the deficit down and let me say something else. this is a debate we can have but we've got to deal with the growth side of your going to get the deficit under control. they can't just be done on the spending side. to do the important work we have to do it in atr bipartisan basis and it's much more likely when we have over growth if we are 1.9% we are not going to get there. let's get the economy moving and do something about the debt and deficit. we can do that and take money

that is currently in the economy at 1.9% not moving much good to get it moving more let's create more economic activity. let's do that to get the growth rate up a little bit for the tax reformef and then begin to redue the deficit so i just want to make that point when you hear this is fiscally irresponsible, i think it is responsible and it will do better than the numbers we have seen here certainly just 2.1% growth that reduces the deficit and i think that ought to be brought into the debate. >> to our colleagues, and viscount ourselves and the senator from ohio along with those of us who consider ourselves fiscal conservatives realize that init order to deal with debt and deficit, and yes, we have-c to get our arms out of control in the washington spending and do something to make the programs that are

driving that out-of-control long run which is to restrain spending that in order to deal with the debt and deficits, we need to growth in the economy because it is growing at a faster rate and people are paying taxes and government revenues go up. we need more growth and that is what this will accomplish. i yield back the balance of my time. i would like to respond briefly to the majority leader who counted whator he claimed was te a great benefit coming from the republican tax reform bill. i say to the public this isn't tax reform at all. tbut this is is a grab bag full

of special-interest goodies from the multinational corporations, powerful political supporters and lots of people who are in a position to have vast amounts of influence to sway the tax code their way. the fact is the independent tax umpire on taxation has just told us 37 billion middle-class families are going to pay more in taxes in 2027, so that's the consequences of the republican bill of rights into the wall a double standard of the per minute rate for the multinational corporation and

temporary break for the working class. we will have more to say on the analysis being done by the joint committee on taxation but already, we have seen a variety thisports indicating that proposal is going to produce negligible growth and deficits. that's why republicans are talking about how they would like to have some kind of trigger to deal with this proposal. what has been in the bill is this says a lot about their priorities if it comes true and the bill causes the federal revenue to skyrocket, multinational corporations would get yet another automatic tax

cut. they already get from 35 to 20. and by the way, when we had our bipartisan bill, they didn't insist on going to 20 for spending hundreds of billions of dollars more that could go to the middle class beyond what the bill called for and then on top of that it says that the republicans get their mathematics about the growth and the multinational corporations will get yet another tax cut. i just want to respond briefly to what the republican leader said because this doesn't resemble the kind of tax reform ronald reagan and the democrats wanted and i will close by

saying that it didn't have to be this way. there was a big group that said we would like to have a bipartisan bill and they asked me to come because i've written a bipartisan bill he and i want to show the contrast between what ronaldal reagan did in 1986 with democrats and what has happened unfortunately here. in 1986, bill bradley and democrats have served on the finance committee to the growth and innovation he flew ove all r the united states, mr. president, all over the united states to work out with republicans the variousvi provisions of the tax law that

would make the bill bipartisan. so, 1986, democrats flew around the country to meet with republicans to get bipartisan reform. this year, they haven't been willing to walk down the court or to discuss specific provisions about how we could move forward in a bipartisan tax reform. that's why the moderates are so concerned that we are missing a great opportunity. the multinationals by the way you look at the first letter from the joint committee on taxation. we could be looking at interest rates that make it hard for people to buy a house or a car because of this bill produces. this bill is not tax reform, it is a grab bag of goodies for the special-interest. it is embedded in the tax law and double standard with breaks

for the multinationals and vanishing benefits for the middle class and most importantly, it didn't have to bhave tobe coming and it still t have to be. there is another alternative. i was proud to join and we will have more debate on this over the courseid of the morning but since the leader did talk about how this was sort of a textbook case of what tax reform looked like i wanted to make sure we started this morning by injecting a little bit of reality with respect to what is offered and i will yield the floor. >> mr. president, later tonight or in the early hours of tomorrow morning, we will vote on the final passage of the republicanax tax bill. i'd like to make two main points about thcomplaints about the biy speech thisn morning first on te

process and second on substance. from the beginning, the republican tax bill has made a mockery of the legislative process. republican leaders disappeared behind closed doors and negotiate a framework without a shred of democratic input, then wrote a bill behind closed doors without a shred of democratic input. republicans brought the bill through a markup in the committee when it underwent scrutiny r of one expert witnes. finance committee democrats offered amendments to the bill. republicans have rejected every single one and made it crystal clear that they were not interested in bipartisanship. now the bill before us is on my floor even further significant

changes will likely be neede may the majority leader today to get huge changes in the building and try to put on it tonight. this is one of the most complicated issues before this. even these changes and the way the majority leader is handling this make it impossible for any independent analysts to get a good look at the end how it will impact the country from the one-sided as from which it was drafted into the reckless haste with which it was considered the republican tax bill can go through anything resembling a normal legislative process. before the night is out, i hope my republican friends asked if this is the way they want to remember the way that it was passed in over 30 years and i hope they ask themselves if it's left up to the fine traditions of this body as they were eloquently described by my

friends senators from arizona. the american people are clamoring for us to work together and believe that politics is broken. they think that politics were starved of common sense and compromise, anday it is. it's why the american people believe that the politics are so broken. nonow let me address the substae of the bill. i believe if this bill passes it will be remembered as one of the worst pieces of public policy decades. the vote for passage will be a vote that might republican friends regret. the republican tax bill makes it easier and eventually makes life more difficult on working americans exacerbating one of the most pressing problems we face as a nation healthcare

premiums will go up 10%. 13 million americans, fewer americans will end up having health insurance as a result of repealing the individual mandate. it will bloom in deficit by 1.5 trillion that in the next generation in diminishing the ability to support the military and invest in the schools and roads and scientific research. let me just repeat that. the increased deficits caused by the bill will cannibalize support from everything we know

that is essential to economic growthup and a strong middle cls including support for our men and women in uniform. ultimately, this deficit busting tax cut will endanger social security, medicare and medicaid. as my friend, the republican senator from florida admitted when he said higher deficits will mean instituting changes to social security and medicare for the future. so the win today will be a very temporary one. but it fails to grasp the bigger picture. there won't be a long-term win winner politically. recent polling has shown it is less popular than the previous tax hikes. let me say that again. recent polling has shown a tax bill is less popular than the previous tax hikes but more importantly it will win out in

the country graffiti 7 million who pay higher taxes in 2027 it won't be those that are no longer able to deduct state and local taxes and find it that much harder to send their daughter to college. it won't be for the 13 million americans go without health insurance and everyone else who will face 10% higher premiums next year. they have waited years to pass legislation to make things easier w on them. they watched an economy that rewards of hard work and fair play to turn against them but less pay and less work. for so many, it benefits few and leaves too many behind as a source of despair.

donald trump and the campaign for the presidency spoke to that anger and get his tax bill is a betrayal of the working men and women who feel that anger into what makes worse over the problems that led to it in the first place. we can do a better job on tax reform, but only if we work together. it is fro from purchasing multipartisan go with no attempt of bipartisanship has brought shame on this body and reinforced the skepticism that so many americans have about the politics. to my republican friends, today my conference have anpo opportunity to turn back from this partisan bill and process and if they do it in guarantee they will findat a leader that s eager to work with them.

as many of my colleagues know, there is a lot of intent on this side of the aisle. i've worked with senator hatch ander senator portman and many others have worked with republicans on tax reform ideas for years. we can certainly put together a bill acceptable to both parties that reduces the burden of the middle class. it creates jobs here at home and does it in a deficit neutral way. the bill doesn't do those things but we can write one that ties together. let's give it a shot at. if my republican friends close the door on the tax bill tonight, they will find an open door for bipartisan tax reform tomorrow. >> i listened to democrats year

after year talk about how they are so much more committed to the middle class and the poor as they've driven us right into bankruptcy instead of trying to work on these banners so we are not driven into bankruptcy. it's more and more spending, more and more federal government, more and more regulations, more and more control, all of which tend to make us less and less efficient, less able to do the will of the people, less able to do the things that we have been sent here to do. we are having a lot of complaining about what is going on, but to make a long story

short, the democrats are pushing the financial system that was bound to take us right into bankruptcy. we might have had twoayld more s where the payments could be made, but as far as being able to handle the matters that are so important to everyone o evers in this country. i have to admit our side has walls, tomac. some people t think that coming you know, we should do a better job without any money or do a better job without any increase in taxes or we should do a better job without the federal government. both sides have been in error and from time to time wrong.

but i have to say as a former democrat when i was coming up to pittsburgh pennsylvania, when i went to brigham young university i thought how could i have ever believed this stuff which is more and more government, more spin a than, or bureaucracy, moe control over all of our lives, less and less freedom. i remember the days when we could get the other side to work as hard as they showed on national security issues that were critical. both sides have room to grow. both sides have room to improve.

each side could do a better job. i lived for the day that we would both work together on an arm for the betterment of the country. but the betterment of the country is socialized medicine where the democrats actually took us until we finally pulled them back a little bit. the fact of the matter is it's their right to socialized medicine. it is as though they prey on the poor so they are the only ones that can help them, when in fact they are part of the reason we are poor. ..

you have to be a raving idiot to believe that. maybe i shouldn't have put it that way. the other side sometimes has trouble seeing how we should help the poor and help those who are less fortunate than we are. but we have a lot of people on the republican side who have spent a lot of time trying to help theid poor, trying to get this country going again, trying to get the economy on top tried to get it so we can help the poor and not just talk about it. i'm very concerned because if we

don't get together and start working together it's going to get worse and worse and worse. but i think about the other side as we have watched over the last two years them pushing us more and war towards socialized medicine something that will not work, one-size-fits-all government programs with no real restraint and growth were spending just more and more buying the votes. and then, wait. disgruntled and concerned about the directions we are going. both sides have enduring questions. both sides are wrong in some ways but we will sooner or later

have to find some way of assisting the greatest country in the world which has the greatest economic system in the world which has a belief in the free market system and do so without government. my friends on the other side like that government control because it means more control for them. we dislike it because we think they shouldn't have this kind of controlth. and we know that is not good for the country, it's not good for the people, it's not good for future, it's not good for our economy but that's where we are. i would like to see a sunday start working in the best interest of the country and a little less than they best interest of our parties. i'm concerned about where we are

going. i am concerned about how little effort is being put forward to try to bring us together. i'm concerned about the itty bitty partisan infighting that goes on here. it's not all bad but it's not all good either. i'm very concerned about a lot of this driven by the media that is one-sided. it really doesn't tell the truth truth. it doesn't help us in this country, everybody to know what's wrong. i think the media has gotten better in recent years but it's pretty well been one side. and i don't think anybody with brains would deny that. i am really concerned because i

believe, i believe we have great people here. there are some wonderful people on the democrat side and we have a lot of great people on the republican side. we have got to somehow find a way of bridging the gap in getting together, making this country solid dependable and economically sound. and deserving of the greatest country in the world. i think we can do that. but we can't do it if we don't work together. we can't do it if we can't put aside republican and democrat problems and work together. we can't do that if we don't

care. and we can't do it if we keep having the ridiculous, stupid politics that go on around here year after year. it's not all bad it's certainly not all good either. i hope that somehow the more reasonable people of both sides would get together and start to work together. i remember when i became chairman of the labor and human resources committee in 1980 at the advent of ronald reagan. the democrats had been in control for years and they knew it and my gosh when i got here there were 60 democrats in the senate and 62 democrats and 38 republicans. it was hard to get a point of

viewnt across, the republican point of view that is. then ronald reagan came along and i have two say it brought an awareness to the public that something was wrong here and was able to bring us together. we saw some of the greatest senators over the years on both sides work together. i sawed daniel patrick moynihan come here and worked with people like me. some mentioned senator kennedy and senator hatch when i became chairman of the labor committee, the labor and human resources committee. he came over to become iraqi member and i have to give him credit as he was willing to give and to work together. he always had to have his share

of whatever it was that he did move and he did come over. he was willing to answer some point in that particular hatch kennedy period was it pretty good time and the senate. since certainly ted kennedy did. he was calling me before he died knowing that i care for him knowing that we fought hard battles against each other from time to time but we really respected b each other because e both believed in our respective sides. and we were willing to stand up for our particular beliefs. i don't see as much of that today as i did then. maybe ai and short-sighted, i don't know but i don't think so. and i'm very concerned that we

are not doing the job here for the american people in our little baby place that we have around here that doesn't amount to a hill of beans. i am somewhat depressed because of the way things are going right now. i can't say i'm discouraged because i keep thinking we can come back, we can do better. we can win this thing. we can find ways of getting together. we can work together but so far i haven't seen it for a number of years. and you can blame both parties for it i am sure. one party believes the federal

government is the almighty blessing to all of us while the other one believes hey we need to not allow a central government to control everything everything. it's good that we have to differences of opinion in these areas. i don't think it hurts the country at all to have differing opinions but it does hurt the country when one side thinks their opinion is the only opinion that should be given any credence for consideration. i have seen a lot of that around here. and both sides are at fault, by the way. i am very concerned about it. i look over at my colleagues from oregon and i was his ranking member and when i was

chairman he was my ranking member. we got along well. he's a proud liberal and deservedly so and i am a proud conservative. i think most people would say deservedly so. two people who can help make this place sane and who have been working together to try to help our country. iac this two bit partisan politics are rising all the time around here and i don't think we .enefit from it in fact i know we don't benefit from it. i'm not meaning to blame anybody anybody. i think we all ought to do some self-awareness studies and determine just what role do we

have. the deterioration of what has always been great about the united states. are we living a plus roll or are we living a minus role? i like my democratic colleagues. there is one of them i don't care for and i'm hoping we can start working together and open our eyes and our hearts and our minds to some of the points of view of the other side. it's hard to do sometimes because we have some people around here that are partisan and they think there's only one side. i can tell you there are two sides. i remember the day when

republicans wouldn't vote for any social spending program and i remember the day when democrats thought everything r should be a social spending program and didn't care where the money's were coming from if they were there at all. i have seen both sides, both extremes throughout my 41 years the united states senate. i have also seen times when leadership, true leadership has brought us together where consideration was given to the democratic side. consideration was given to the republican side and we worked out our difficulties. we worked together. we didn't mouth off all the time against the other side. naturally i liked those days better than what we have today. >> senator hatch. >> yes sir. >> i thank you senator hatch.

>> i'm not yielding to you. i said i would yield her question. >> i'm appreciated the exchange we had the other night. >> i'm felt bad about that. >> that's fine, just wanted to clarify something. the senate budget priorities a couple of thursdays ago i talked about the bill i thought was much more heavily weighted towards the top 1%. i wanted to put another number out there and ask your opinion. the senate for budget priorities yesterday said of the bush tax cuts 27% of the tax cuts went to the top 1%. this bill, their study showed, their analysis is that 62% of this tax cut goes to the 1%. i know people thought too much of the went to the top 1%. that was that was only quarter. this is almost two-thirds goes to the top 1% and i just wanted

senator hatch if you explain that to us. >> i would have to look at that particular analysis. there are another analyses that indicate we could do better in this bill but also i would disagree with that one. i don't happen to have my hands on those documents at this time but to make a long story short we know you can come up with any outside liberal faction and come up with criticisms of anything around here and we also know that we can find someom outside conservative factions that would cause most of us to really cringe and wonder what in the world is going on. but i can tell you this, i know what's going on and that is we are spending ourselves intour bankruptcy. and we are not doing a good job here.

we are not watching the monies of the american people. in fact one reason we can't watch them very well is because they are all spent. and we continuously have people come here to the floor and act like they are better than others because they want to spend all of our money to help the poor. i love to help the poor. at one time i grew up in a very poor family, pour in the sense of money. let's just be honest about it. this country is in deep debt. you don't help the poor by not solving the problems of the debt debt. and you don't help the poor by continually pushing more and more liberal progressro through the don't do the job anyway and you don't help the poor by continually pushing programs

that really don't work. >> would the senator yield for further questioned? i accept that but this bill is not spending money on the poor except senator lee and senator rubio wants to do a child tax credit and the un-- earned income tax credit and you support so it is but one of the things we could be doing instead of this bill is the chip program which you probably was senator kennedy offered 20 years ago and there our soon-to-be letters that will go out to people in virginia and ohio and other states. this is not a giveaway. this is something we have done bipartisanav way. is there something we can do in the children's healthha program? >> i was the one who wrote it. kennedy came over and became the one who help put it through.

>> we recognize that mr. chairman. course. i don't think i do her thing on my own here. i don't think the democrats do either but let me tell you something. we are going to do chip. there's no question about it in my mind. it has to be done the right way but the reason chips is in trouble is because we don't have any money anymore. to just add more and more spending and more and more spending and you can look at the rest of the bill with the more and more spending. i happen to think chip system attracted job foro people who really needed the help. i've taken the position around here by whole senate service, i believe in helping those who cannot help themselves. what if they could? i have a rough time wanting to spend billions and billions and trillions of dollars to help people who won't help themselves

and expect the federal government to do everything. >> would the senator yield began? >> unfortunately the liberal -- have created people who depend upon the federal government rather than the opportunities for this great country grants them. i've got to say i think it's hard to argue against these comments. if you look at over for decades now we have been spending more than we have building more and more federal programs, some of which are lousy and summa of which are well-intended and some of which are actually good like the chip program. we are going to get chip through, there's no question about it. >> with the chairman yield one more moment?

c.h.i.p.. there are letters that are going to go out. my state and i so respect what he did was senator kennedy and i know your work with is exemplary to start the children's health insurance program. >> i wrote the wrote the dog gone bill. >> we appreciate that mr. chairman. my concern is when you write a bill like that you meet a lot of these families the benefit. 209,000 in my state along and some of those kids, those parents are going to get a letter in the mail if we don't move on chip in the next week or so they will get a letter in the mail thistt is sorry your childs health insurance is going to expire while we are sitting here just pretty well. know you said you grew up with the poor people is how you said it the other nightr. i worry that families, and these are families with jobs. you know that about chips. these are families that don't have insurance and they are going to letters saying your

insurance is canceled. how can we let that happen mr. chairman? >> i don't intend to let that happen. i think we will get chip taking care of and hopefully a number of other things to but we are going to have to resolve some of these big problems around here it seems to me before we did get that problem solved. >> thank you mr. chair. >> to prey upon the chip program as though it's the be-all and end-all of everything and every aspect of this debate isn't quite right either. all i can say is i don't know anybody who's not going to support chip when we bring it up up. i am one who wants to make sure we bring it up and i appreciate my friend's feelings on this matter. i like my friend from ohioans. he is sincere in these dedicated dedicated. he's liberal and he is well-meaninge. i would like to see and be a little more concerned about everybody else. let me just finish by saying

that i'm happy to be in this body. it's the greatest delivered a body in the world that we are not living up to our potential and we are not doing the job. when we get into these little snippets and fights around here that don't amount to a hill of beans in the final analysis. it like to see us all get together and start running this country in a good manner living within our means, finding ways of increasing our economy so that we can take care of the poor better than we are right now. and doing the things that we all know we shouldul be doing. with that i will yield the floor. >> mr. president? just to respond briefly to the chairman. the chairman i think said about

eight times that what really ought to be the focus here is workingg together. i so share thatw, view and i wod just like for the public to understand that this side was never given the chance on this tax bill to work together, never once. the majority leader and now right at the outset is the most partisan process that would be used called reconciliation means it's our way or the highway. we have got the votes. that's the end of it so i have appreciated what the chairman said about emphasizing working together. thatr. would put off the table y the majority leader when we started when it was declared he

would use the reconciliation process. now there are other areas and i will just touch on the chairmana made mention the fact that everybody over here is for socialized medicine. right now what we are trying to do is ensure that we don't have upheaval in the private insurance marketplace because of the majority effort to unravel the affordable care at. the affordable care act focuses on private-sector choices through the exchange and what to be isenge is going if you further hammer this effort to increase choices in the private sector were just going to cause more problems for people and make it moredi difficult for us to hold down

the cost of medicine. and i will close this section of the discussion simply by clarifyingoi again this point about the middle class. senator brown was right with respect to the number of families that are going to get hammered under the republican bill but when the republicans said that's a partisan group, they are supported by nonpartisan organizations. the joint committee on taxation which are the people who are our independent tax referees have indicated that by 2027 more than 50% of middle-class persons are person's are going to see a tax hike. that's not a democratic group. that's not a republican group. that's an independent group so i

think this has been this morning and as one who has tried to dedicate my time in public service and try to find common ground t senator cornyn and senator toomey both with whom i talked to about bipartisan tax reform again and again in. when the chairman who i very much enjoyed working with on this tax bill has really been an anomaly that so different from anything else. importantly the public knows when there's a discussion about working together the majority leader puts that prospect off the table. it was ruled out. not going to happen. it's going to be a partisan bill. it's going to be just the opposite of what democrats and ronald reagan wanted and that'ss why 13 democrats made one more

pleaha that we will continue through the day to talk about that if you want to do tax reform right it has to be bipartisan to bringdi predictability to the year. it's not about socialism. it's about predictability for private sector growth. i yield the floor. >> the senator from pennsylvania. >> mr. president i want to respond to my friend from oregon and i have enjoyed the many conversations he and i have had on tax reform and other policies but i want to strongly disagree with this characterization of this process. what our friends on the other side of the aisle want to do is they want to be able to kill tax reform. that's their goal here. that's what they want to do and in fact they were kind enough to be explicit about it in a letter that they made public. 45 of the 48 democratic senators stipulated the terms under which

they'd be willing to work with us on tax reform and one of those terms included that we had to use a process that would allow them kill it. they put that in writing. 45 of the 48 signed a letter. how could we proceed and deliver this tax relief in a tax reform we want to provide for the american people and our economy with the democrats holding this thread overhead that they would be able to vilify a filibuster. but they finish my point. obviously would be malpractice for us to allow them to. we have taken an approach that fully allows unlimited democratic purchase a patient but at the end of the process a simple majority vote in a minority will not bee able to kill this bill i filibuster. every step along the way our

democratic colleagues had every opportunity to play and to engage. we had i don't know of how many hearings on this. we had a full markup and the committee unlimited amendments were offered and debated, voted on and over the next day or two ie expect we will have many more amendments. there is no limit to the amendments areoc democratic colleagues can offer. it's not true to say the reconciliation process includes bipartisan participation and i hope it doesn't because this bill cuts taxes for middle income families. that's a f fact. it's not a convenient fact for some of my friends on the other side of the aisle but it will worst taxes for lower income families and middle income families. that's it act and encourages tremendous economic growth by allowing us to be competitive and we will get into why and we will get into the details but the fact is this is exactly what our economy needs right now and more importantly it's exactly what her constituents need right

now and there's nothing about this process that precludes my democratic colleagues from engaging in debate in supporting the product and by the way i'm hopeful there will be some support in the end because he will be hard to explain opposition to working-class and middle-class tax cut and corporate tax are formed is going to generate strong growth. i would be happy to yield to the gentleman from ohio. >> the republican time has expired. >> the majority's time has expired. the senator from ohio. >> i'm so amused at how any of my republican colleagues can talk about this as a legitimate process. i sat at the white house with senator wyden with senator cornyn and senator toomey, number of probably 11 or 12 for public and senators, six from the democratic side of the finance committee and i had a

copy of two bills in my hand i brought it up to the whole group group. it does exactly what president trump wants to do and we award corporations that pay good wages and pay decent benefits and keep the production in this country. the president said he liked it and he had an interview with "fortune" magazine not too much earlier talking about it and then i brought it to the president for the workings -- working families tax relief act which put money in the people's pocket people's pockets who make $75,000 a year. he said in a phonecall little bit later you know what happened mr. president? know that it would happen. they went down the hall and to the majority leader's office all my republican friends walked into thatep office. they are there wall street and drug company lobbyists in the tobacco company lobbyists and that's where they wroten the bill. there was no light of day in this and my colleagues on this

committee tell us it was a legitimate process. tonight we the nightly at the markup and the finance committee committee. hugh call this legitimate you give us a bill with no warning you change it in the middle of the night and then you change it in the middle of the night again. you have a health care provision that the congressional budget office said 13 million people will lose their insurance, rates will go up in premiums 10% a year. if you pay five end of the month today you will pay 550 next year and 600 by the following year and 660 something a month of following year. don't even insult us by saying this is a legitimate process. i don't even want to talk about the process because that doesn't mean that to people. my friend mentioned the first line is we express interest in working with you on bipartisan tax reform. mr. president i want to talk about my amendment which is exactlyre what rock they trump

campaign and pretty much everybody on the side of the aisle stands for but most importantly exactly what the american people about for. it's called the patriot corporation act. if you do right thing in your company that pays good wages and provides decent health and retirement benefits to your employees and you do your production in the united states you get a significant tax break based on the number of plays you hire a significant tax break. presidentre trump said he liked that and he told he wanted to build economic incentives for companies. the president said repeatedly i want legislation and by one attacks where we support companies that stayre here and e patriotic and he said we penalize companies that don't do their production in this country. this bill and comments from my friend from pennsylvania notwithstandingut gives permanet tax has two large corporations and gives them more incentive to move offshore pay the presiding

in the cleveland suburb of plant shuts down in cleveland heights where i grew up it moves overseas and he gets a tax break now. don't you think we should fix that? this bill greece's thed wheels o send more jobses overseas. of all the things that we should fix mr. president that's it. instead senate republicans again that deal was cut back and senatorto mcconnell's office. bill gives huge tax cuts to the wealthy in this- country. the senate for budget priorities just yesterday came out, this was done precisely according to the numbers. 27% of the bush tax cuts went to the top 1%. 27% of the bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 went to the top 1%. this bill has more than doubled back, 60-plus% of the benefits.

it's not going to mean a tax break for the middle class. they know that when they say that over and over. and it -- and it kicks 13 million people off of insurance. we know that. let me say at this winter this bill that a u.s. company would pay a rate of 20% on profits earned in a manufacturing plant in akrononio ohio. that same plant could shut down its plant layout those workers build a new factory in asia get attacked adduction or the cost of moving and you know what they would pay?? they would potentially likely pay 0% taxthe rates. what are they going to do? even in the senate and its committee where people are not as quick as you might think thes areen 20 is a larger number than zero. even we can figure that out mr. president sons 20%, that mes there's a greater tax. the presiding officer knows i live in a neighborhood in cleveland ohio. my wife and i in our z

neighborhood zip code 44105 there were more foreclosures and my neighbor in the first half of 2007 than any in the united states of america. it wasn't the wall street scam that cause so much foreclosure later. it was mostly mr. president about loss of manufacturing jobs and you know why that is? partly because of trade agreements like nafta and other trade policies with china and all that but it was much about tax legislation. why are weth doing more of this mr. president? this billes rewards companies fr sending jobs overseas for their legislation in the patriot corporation act will work to keep jobs here. we know these corporate tax cuts are not going to end up in the pockets of ordinary working americans. senator hatch and i had a very public discussion on the finance committee a couple of thursdays ago when the bill was voted out. one of the things we talk about,

a number of things we talked about the one of the things we talked about is this assertion this bet that if you give the company a big tax cut they are going to handed out to their employees. they are going to get a four, five or six or 7000-dollar year raise. that never happens. when this body passed the tax holiday a decade or so the money went to executive compensation. that money m went to stock buybacks. that money went to dividends, almost all of it. workers didn't get raises. companies are sitting on large stacks of dollars now, huge caches of cash and those companies could hire more people now. they are not doing any of that mr. president. but we have to do here instead of shoveling more money to the top to these largera corporatios that outsource jobs what we have to do is cut out the middleman and put the money direct leap in

the middle class. if you want to give a tax cut to the middle-class water we give a tax cut to the middle-class? why don't we directly put the money there? the b president said he's a big loser on the stone will cost him joint of dollars. we know that that's not even close to true but if we really care about the middle-class i ask my colleagues let's give a tax break to the middle-class but think about it. they are not even hiding what they are doing here. these cuts go to corporate stockholders. they don't raise wages paid to go to and they don't go to creatingth jobs. they go to stock buybacks. we know what will happen. as senator rubio said after he passes bill the president signs into law the budget deficit explodes. do you know what will happen? you guys will all say you know we m are going to have to raise

the social security retirement age and you know what that means for a construction worker in worn ohio or do you know what it means to somebody that's working in manufacturing the mansfield ohio? they can't work until they are 70. we have these jobs. a lot of our constituents can't and if that's the scenario and that's almost inevitable we pass this bill with big tax cuts for the wealthy people in this country, we drive a hole in the budget deficit and we come back and make middle-class working families pay to fill that hole. that's morally reprehensible mr. mr. president. >> thank you mr. president. mr. president i rise to discusst for amendments that i have introduced in the tax cuts and jobs at 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 in 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 20% of all federal income tax filers deduct that 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

with the income tax became law. it was intended prevent a federal tax from being imposed on a state tax. in other words it presents double taxation. this deduction is especially important to the people of maine read in my state 156,000 itemize ers detected a total of $725 million in property taxes on their federal income tax return. this amendment would allow the vast majority of mainers to continue to fully detect their property taxes. improving the bill in this way by preserving the property tax deduction of up to $10,000 is

crucial for middle income taxpayers across the united states. in fact for filers earning less than $75,000 to itemize the state and local property tax deduction is typically larger as a state and local income tax deduction. while 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 income families with less than $75,000 in income. in addition by allowing the deduction of $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 2nd amendment would strike a provision that sets their retirement advocates of church, charity schools and government employees including firefighters, police officers and teachers. i appreciate very much that my colleague from all high zero senator portman has cosponsored thisrt amendment. mr. president we are in the midst of her retirementri 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 r retirement and what they actually have. as americans are living longer

seniors are in danger of losing 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 and schools and local governments are generally paid less than their counterparts who are working for for-profit businesses. in fact they are less able to save for their retirement especially early in their careers. accordingly there are special catch-up rules that allow these employees to contribute additional amounts at the end of their careers when they are likely to have higher salaries.

there's also a special rule that permits churches charities and public educational institutions to make contributions after they retire to make up for the shortfalls in the employees retirement savings during their working years. regrettably as drafted, the senate bill would hurt many church charities schools and government workers by eliminating these critical tax rules including the ability to make these catch-up and makeup contributions to retirement accounts. striking this provision as my amendment would do was 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, the child and dependent care tax credit by making it refundable. thatan provides much needed assistance to low-income working families. making this credit refundable would help many families afford high-quality childcare or adult daycare for older parents or other relatives who could 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 daycare 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 it's not currently refundable most low in some middle income taxpaying families aree unable to take advantage of the childcare 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 this the most in paying childcare or caring for dependent elderly parents or grandparents or other relatives had yet virtually none of them qualifyr for the credit. none of them are able to claim there credit. to pay for making the child and adult credit fundable my amendment would carry the loophole. finally mr. president high medical expenses are continuing

to burden many american consumers yet do to a highly unfortunate provision in the affordable care at consumers can deduct medicalxp expenses only f they exceed 10% of their income. that threshold used to be 7.5%. 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 elderlyem 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. those who suffer from chronic medical conditions and

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-neededo assistance to americans with catastrophic medical expenses. we should reverse this ill-advised provision of the affordable care at and reinstate the ability of those hard-pressed by high medicalal 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. >> thank you mr. president for the recognition. mr. president the republican tax bill is a disaster for the american people. it would give the ultra-wealthy attacks that and make middle-class families pay m fort and i can't tell you how strongly i am opposed to it. we have heard a lot from the president and the republicans on how their tax cuts will be a rising tide to lift all boats. 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 billion in cuts over the next 10 years will come from and just 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 ofil families already have a had time getting by. plain and simple the republicans plan is a massive redistribution of wealth. it would take money, listen to this who is taking money from men who they are giving it to. it would take money from working familiesld, seniors, children, e sick and the disabled, rural families and the p poor and give it to the top 1%.

they propose a time when the gap between the very rich and everyone else is growing. we now have greater income inequality in the u.s. that the height of the gilded age over 100 years ago. mr. president i want to highlight for my colleagues across the aisle another big album with republicans bill. it has not been talked about enough but it's important to my home state of new mexico into many western states. the republicans do have a secreting tax cuts are going to cause automatic sequestration. this will cut several mandatory programs under the pay-as-you-go at. one of those is the mineral royalties from oil and gas true wing coal-mining on public lands that the federal government shares with the state.

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 to. colorado received over $80 million in 2016. all of that would be at risk. wyoming received over $660 million last year. it's 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 useit it for vital government programs like health care, roads and police. our state legislature has struggled in the past couple of years to battle the budget.

the chair and vice chair of the newce mexico finance committee wrote just this week to our entire delegation. they warned that losing so much revenue and i quote here would have a devastating impact on the state'sta budget and would wipe out the reserves are state has struggled to rebuild end quote. mr. president new mexico's school kids just can't afford to take a 437 million-dollar gift. and 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 the new mexico schoolchildren. the republican 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 billion dollars of federal medicare payments every year. i'm opposed to trading off seniors health just so the rich can get richer.. the republicans seem bound and determined to take him -- away america's health. even though the american people have spoken up loud and clear. they want their current health care rights protected republicans want to do away with the individual mandate in the affordable care act but we also know 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 and i yield the floor. >> thank you very much mr. president. if you look at the united states of america we have seen very disturbing trends in our economy. in fact we do not have the same economy, the same bargains that we had in my parent's generation that we have right now.

even if you are someone that had a minimum-wage job back in the 50s and 60s or the 1960s you work that minimum-wage job you are making the equivalent of over $20 are now. the market in the united states of america if you are willing to work hard and if you are willing to sweat and struggle and sacrifice you could make it work. what we have seen disturbingly over the last few decades is that economy twisted and contorted we have seen massive disparities in income come about in our nation with the wealthy getting wealthier and the wealthy are doing better and better compounding and doubling down on the privilege but you see the middle-classg shrinking in the united states of america and the poverty trap where people are playing by the rules, where people are working hard they see their wages stagnate with everything going up. prescriptionpr drug costs, costf

food, cost of childcare, the cost of college. the bargain in our country is not working now and we need to dohi some things to change this. at a time american families are feeling the burn and the challenge of high taxes and low income, high cost we could be targeting middle-class americans 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 we would give a tax break to those folks. that money gets reinvested in our economy because people spend that money and you literally have a turbocharged a boost for overall economy. but that's not what we are seeing right now. we are on the verge tonight as

the republicans scramble for their votes we are on the verge of doing something completely counter to what evidence facts and logic would tell you to do. if you were going to devise attacks planned to truly help the middle-class, truly truly help working americans, to truly help those struggling wondering why they are not doing as well as their parents. .. 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 along

>> >> that the profits have reached a 60 year high. the facts are disturbing when we see the indices of social mobility to make it out of poverty b.c. other nations from canada to england doing better than we are. pc other countries that every generation should be doing better then the one before and more progress than we are. social mobility wages are

stagnating and corporate profits the cost is skyrocketing and everybody knows it. the central board did new jersey ica in the faces of everyone in the garage restore sometimes finding it hard to make their money stretch finding their cells with warm month at the end of their money. talking about how they will come out with over $100,000 in debt we should be working in this body to figure out ways to empower the overall economy to manpower

middle-class workers. we're not doing enough to help american income growth we're not doing enough but i will tell you the tax plan that seems to be moving to the floor today will not help restore that american bargain and will not get us back to those days or help american workers it will make the news worse over the long term we can debate philosophy and a tax code all we want but we cannot debate the facts and this plan is not to i pro-growth it is anti-middle-class and even more severe violation between american workers and this station that created the modern economy.

to is the idea of hard work earning a living wage in america. not investing in the success of american workers or a plan to give a g break will not make the economy more fair. it is devised by the president of the united states and republicans in congress to give a tax cut of those you need it the least but those that deserve it the most. thispa is not partisan rhetoric. from the joint committee on taxation found on average americans earning less than $75,000 will face a tax increase over the next 10 years under this plan. remember at the insult to injury those provisions that

our permanent but the individual provisions are not so this plan actively targets those who are struggling the most with a tax increase and those provisions that were intended to help them but of the biggest corporation and the wealthiest individuals will receive a massive tax cut. this is not very many 1.$5 trillion added to the deficit we have to pay for over the long term it is a massive giveaway to the wealthiest in our country and their the theory that somehow this will benefit the average american worker blowing up the deficit to pump more money at the time

will the disparity is a or a greater than it has been in a century. some will argue gives $1 trillion to corporations will resulted the trickle-down of things like raises and creating new jobs. this is a fantasy. this fantasy has been disproved and give it to the t wealthiest given to corporations to trickle down to job creation it has been disproved and time and time again the economic data by the corporate leaders

themselves. listen to the facts a new survey found a majority of small business owners, the people of the backbone of ourey economy and creating jobs t they're going to wealthy corporations the most. that is the fact of the plan if the university of chicago looks at the top from the raging and spectrum that they recently asked these economist if we passed a bill similar to congress will the gdp the substantially higher ed decade from now than under the status quo? forty-one

respondents said know it will lot. peyser some of the of preeminently economist we did not invite them to bid descended to hear a their opinions or the open process to bring in the best economic lines from both sides of the aisle of the political spectrum we did not inform the investments we're making of 1.$5 trillion. and what they say now it will not do what republican leaders say that it will do. they wrote a budget to free have 1.$5 trillion that is what this will do to the deficit. to create these tax cuts using these resources any

way they see fit but somehow they managed to create a tax bill that will increase taxes of low income and middle income people especially in states like new jersey by getting rid of the state and local tax provisions by republican congress people in my state are against this because a plan has been devised to hurt middle-income families to hurt states like mine. they created a bill that small business doesn't like because the benefits are going to the wealthiest and the biggest corporations. the kicker is that an economist would not even support economic growth than with major corporations go

higher orbit the influx of capital who gets the benefit? don't take my word for it. looked at the last decade. record corporate profits in what has happened? 8890% the overwhelming majority will pay dividends and stock buyback. that is what happens with corporations getting more resources for growth don't take my word for a look at what the corporate leaders themselves are saying. they made it clear increases the profit will not trickled them to the workers for a major american companies have said point blank that they will my use their wages for workers from cisco to

pfizer to coca-cola coca-cola, vanguard have said tax breaks will go to dividends for shareholders. according to bloomberg in reference to the tax plan we're able to get much more aggressive of the share buyback. to create more wealth for the wealthiest to see decade after decade this should not be surprising. that is a fact two -- on what we know is happening

and then the corporations make more money today than they have over 80 years of the average worker's wages and tax relief. we could have gotten rid of carried interest even the president of the united states talked about of the campaign trail with the earned income tax credit that is not what this plan does. that is a costlyn misdiagnoses across the country and the report to address them is not being done. so here it is an idea the seven getting massive tax

breaks to give the money directly to workers by given the lion's share of the tax breaks to middle-class and working-class and low wage earners. it isn't complicated we don't need to hope it will trickle down just cut out the middleman we should have been discussing how we can empower workers with the middle-class because the problem with the economy today is not that they are getting richer but middle-class workers do not see their wages groper crow we should break of the culture of financial institutions across the countryer to prioritize short-term returns over investment that makes the zero after ceo manipulate the stock buyback the do

nothing for the long term strength for those other doing the work and earning a profit so investing in the long term success that is thety exception and not the rule we have the problem in the tax bill doesn't address thato. there is no evidence to suggest to the senate that has 80 percent of 1. $5 trillion and those that own the treasury bonds 80 percent is going to corporations and business owners the top 1 percent of the wealthiest has no evidence to . suggest this will somehow reverse the trend to increase wages for

workers it is insanity and folly and fiction wasted upon the american people to many employers are failing to hold of their end of the bargain. work place investment and then republicans in congress want to reward them with $1 trillion or more. this is their policy coming it iso unfair it will worsen the erosion of the american dream and the american bargain for those who play by the rules and work hard and of sacrifice it will lot stopit the trend does stagnatingth wages can it will not be the change that we need. oh trickle-down economics no mattergu how disguised does notor work and the republicans

attempt to camouflage tax reform is offensive and won't work for american workers we have proven we are a society that can create wealth row we have proven it with the tax bill fails to do is to show we can be a society to create great well inopportune -- wealth and opportunity. into the promised land that they must me and designed to be. this is the challenge before us to stop that tax bill to make the disturbing trend

work to directly target middle-class americans and working-class americans a policy to help the nation the one that fulfills the promise and the dream mr. president if yield the floor. >> byy halftime i'd like to yield to theil distinguished senator from hawaii and will be prompt. >> the senate will take a historic vote to impact every american. the is the roots do not come very often in the last was decades ago and we all understand how critical tax reform is. all of us on both sides of the aisle are familiar with the burdens and complexity and lack of what is

associate with the current tax system and it is abundantly clear this antiquated system acts as a burden on the economy and equally clear that in recent years our economic growth rate and gdp has been stuck at historic low level 1.9%% or w less. there are many opinions why our economy has been so stagnante causing american job losses and reliance on government programs but i wantnt to underscore what the people of kansas have told me repeatedly as to why this has happened. small-business owners, manufacturers, lendi ng institutions, individual workers virtually everybody farmers and ranchers tour of me the number one issue of

concern of federal regulation that was summed up by one kansas western ranger that said we are unwinding right now as regulatory overkill to make government a partner not a regulatory adversary per girl there are many factors the administrative policy the scenes to the neck or compare thehe european monetary policy with government agenda that with this tax bill that can change and it will change. if only we recognize to take this important opportunity that makes as many members have had to make a difference but this time we can and. can america us get back to a

place to experience the power of the american dream? i am confident that we can and. before us now we have a comprehensive plan to address theseta issues to clean up ben modernize the tax code to generate growth in the economy to provide meaningful tax relief to farmers and ranchers i am especially pleased with the rates the legislation put into place on the individual side per we have done a good job pushing reductions down to lower middle-income families to provide the next tax and cut to families in kansas 2005 of dollars and over 10,000 new jobs. as many pointed out reducing tax rates raising the

standard deduction and increasing the child cracked -- tax credit, be clear that this is consensus bipartisan it is and the proposals of many colleagues in the past at least i know not now because of the legislative standoff but proposed to let me comment on concerns that they cannot support this bill and that it will worsen. and in putting this bill together we have used very modest growth estimates below the norm of 3 percent and in fact, to the cbo is currently projecting 1.9%% growth over the next 10 years and we learned today the joint committee on taxation says the senate

bill will create modest economic growth notwithstanding the fact i have never seen the cbo projection that has been really accurate, these estimates are probably low, hard to believe and unacceptable. but we cannot return to a more robust economic growth and we are well on our way that recent economic activity bears this out the economy is growing with low unemployment and lowering inflation to average 2.1% at the annual rate and since january the unemployment rate fell 0.six percentage points to the lowest rate in

16 years. overall growth is poised to average 3% over the second half of this year from these are positive trends but we can do more with stronger growth that leads to higher living standards and though ready for spending on entitlement so how do we get there? we have a tax bill to maximize growth to create jobsav and increase wages mrs. said trickle-down economics it is common sense which is yet to be refuted by any mainstream economist with the supply of cattle to expand productivity this result is more business

investment workers that can have more and in the and raise their living standards are want to return to the essential sector of bari economy, agriculture i am very pleased the bill reflects the importance of agriculture to very economy it is important to keep in mindf that face the of multiplebo uncertainties whether in storms and fires volatility in local commodity prices transportation issues in the list goes on. when we pass this bill the agriculture industry will have a number of provisions in the tax code to recognize the uncertainty involved child major of that expense

associated with those provisions o 34 or 35 with accounting rules for example when the commodity prices are low and this year they are though they account for costs in the way to keep them in operation also specific inventory rules to manage costs associated with the livestock and dairy operations. such as fertilizer and crop treatments. and even baby chickens and

that differs from ostriches and emus nobody would even think to drill downe to that extent there are rules that have to handle damage crops and livestock disasters and i can tell you that these disasters provide a critical boost to ranchers in my state so they can recover from the devastating three fires earlier this year. turned to the new provisions hear i would be remiss not to mention the input and advice i have received from senator grassley or others the strong and -- share in interest in the agricultural economy lifting those rules for operations to give farmers and ranchers five-year depreciation for

licensing of all equipment and planned purchases it could approve the agriculture committeein -- community to provide flexibility to manage cash flow which is essential to provideer certainty there are severe deprivation in of the legislation to establish for the past through organizations this is a very importantaj issue mr. president the majority of farms and ranches are set up as a pass through most flows through the structures the bill includes new rules which is a very important part of productionlt agriculture we work very hard those benefits are held whole in this tax reform plan. it a also doubles the exemptions from the estate and gift taxes 22 million

per l couple i know which sounds like a lot to my colleagues those cash constraint farmers could hit that very in my state of kansas. when they do not many spend thousands of dollars on lawyers and accountant fees to plan the best way to pass on to their children something very special and small-town america i will continue to push for a repeal of the death tax and finally above all the legislation will provide farmers and ranchers with certainty during a very difficult time we're going through that they will not be taxed out of business and uncertainty to have cash available that their hard earned income their ranches not have to be sold off

because somebody has died research into the federal government recognizes their irreplaceable role to meet the challenge of a fractured and hungry world. i am pleased to say the least that the senate bill keeps those tax provisions by helping the farmers to have aow pro-growth tax system lowering of tax provisions relating to the agricultural sector. we have an opportunity to experience say renaissance over too long that we had the copycat economic policy based on the european union talking about more taxes and a lot of things that simply enabling us to tread water. i know we're in the

difficult time in the senate with partisan differences and reminds me a little bit of a country-western song that my staff hoped that i would not mention. the greatest wash job and i cannot swim and my baby is side. other . . . .

>> congress is bound and determined to give the richest people in our country a large corporations huge tax cuts that will trickle down to create a fantastic, wonderful economy. why? why do we need this? corporations are doing just fine thank you very much. they don't need any more goodi goodies. over the past ten years corporate profits have grown. more wealth is concentrated in the hands of the top 1% than any time since the great depression. they claim this is for new investments and help workers. what world are they living in? corporations have sheltered over $2.6 trillion offshore to avoid

paying taxes. they could be using this to create jobs, build factories or raise employee wages. not happening, and won't happen. they do not need more money and profits. middle-class families have been seen stagnant wages for nearly 20 years. healthcare is a political football with the president sabotaging the present affordable care act. in education is out of the reach of middle-class families. rather than doing a plan that would help families, donald trump and the republican party have decided to screw them over. all to give rich people huge tax cuts they do not need. and hawaii we have a word to describe this.

it is called bs. we have little time to debate the impact of this massive bill. in the short amount of time it is clear how many of the major provisions would harm middle-class families. it eliminates the mandate for healthcare which is another way to repeal the affordable care act. how many bytes are they going to take? 13 million people will lose health insurance. premiums for everyone else will increase every year as a result. today think these millions of people will be hurt will not notice what's happening to them in their healthcare? i don't think so. the devastating impact is not limited to the parts we have heard about. has a number of provisions that are causing real hard. the health bill eliminates the

ability of state local governments to issue private activity bonds. it's not something you care about being discussed. but there critical to the community. it allows governments to issue tax-exempt bonds and finance certain projects. see local governments issue these bonds for schools, hospitals, et cetera. although it hasn't passed congress it is having a devastating impact. residents have been waiting for hospital for decades. if there's a medical emergency the only way and plants can get there is on a two lane highway. the winds around the cliff

making its assessable to thought slides and stuff. it could take an hour to meet reach them. there's traffic or an accident you can forget about it. for serious injuries and hours too long to wait for life saving medical care. construction of this is very important. when it's completed will have dedicated emergency room services and other essential services. initial work has begun but construction has stalled because financing is being held up out of fear that congress will eliminate the bonds the project needs for completion. other hospitals have used these

bonds, there's it one that focuses on prenatal care and services for women have expanded their facilities and their ability to treat thousands of people. they can't understand why donald trump and his allies could cut a program that saves lives, all to finance tax cuts not needed for the richest people and corporations in our country. if we are serious about a tax plan that will truly help in a meaningful way? we need to kill this bill and start over. i yield the floor. >> the center from michigan. i asked consent that i can speak for five minutes.

>> today were debating legislation that will reshape the american economy. continues to be written and rewritten in secret. it didn't have to be this way. done right we could have had broad bipartisan support. we couldn't pass legislation that was fair, simple and fiscally responsible. tax legislation that was focused on middle-class families and raising their wages. instead we have a bill that fails on every one of these principles. the feels in so many ways we need to talk about the myths that are being told. first the myth that this is a middle-class tax cut. this makes dramatic permanent cuts to corporate taxes while

making small, temporary changes to the taxes that middle-class families pay. according to the joint committee on taxation, the text changes are less than $100 per year. or simply put, about $2 per week. that is not a middle-class tax cut. the second myth is the corporate tax cuts will trickle down and raise wages for workers. if that were true we would hear people delivering good news to the hard-working employees. it's not true. we know this because the ceos are telling us what they will do. they're telling us, and it is not racing wages. they have been clear they will use the money this bill gives them to buy back shares of the company stock and increase

payments to wealthy shareholders. ceos are telling the white house this directly. derek cohen, the white house top economic advisor was in a room of the executives asked what they would do, with a put it back into their business? the increase wages? only a couple of hands went up. they have no reason to lie. their intentions have been clear. they will take the money this hands them and reward their executives and wealthy shareholders. we know this will happen because ceos are telling us. were hearing this myth that the tax cut will pay for itself. it won't. after years of telling the public how important it is my colleagues are going to pass a

bill that dramatically increases deficits. this bill will inject one and a half trillion dollars of new debt. debt that my republican colleagues should prepare as their own creation if this bill passes. a trillion and a half is not fiscally conservative. it is irresponsible. it did not need to be this way. we could work together to build a tax code that lets working families keep their hard earned money. and keep good jobs in the united states. all americans deserve a tax code that is fair, simple and responsible. not more corporate good giveaways.

this bill fails on all of these points. i urge my colleagues to vote no. >> the senator from south carolina. >> have had the privilege of sitting on the floor listening to this debate. our friends are doing a good job of painting a picture of fantasyland. a land that does not exist in america. i think of the concept that sugar-free cookies will not help you gain any weight. anybody who has had sugar-free cookies can attest that that may not be inaccurate picture. but they might be sugar-free. my good friend oftentimes speaks in languages that are compelling but not necessarily accurate.

when i think about our tax reform package comes onto simple concepts. families. too many american families feel invisible. because often we hear folks talking about people before they talk to people. when he talked to the average american family what you hear is it is difficult for the average family to make ends meet. working paycheck to paycheck is too often common to many places the norm. so when we start talking about helping the average american family we talked about helping single parents were talking

about helping them keep their dollars. in other words, we believe they know better than government how to spend their money. if you are in average american with only one bread and our plan delivers a 75% tax cut if you are in route $41000. why do we talk about that for single-parent households? because the average single-parent household runs around $40000. we want to paint a clear picture, facts that lead you to the truth.

that is not what were hearing all the time in this chamber. when he think about an average family with two earners in the household, the average family in america makes around $73000. our tax cut for that family is 60%. here's what i struggle with. why is it not a bipartisan objective to deliver tax cuts to hard-working? wiser not a bipartisan coalition working to make sure there's a

tax break it every bracket? i can't figure out why doubling the standard deduction for an individual to $12000 is not bipartisan? i really can't appreciate why the single-parent household honest standard deduction is something my friends on the left are resistant to do. i cannot explain to you for those in south carolina why doubling the standard deduction from 12700 to 24000 isn't a bipartisan exercise. >> i can explain to you family that is strapped with kids in the home but we cannot say to

them that doubling the child tax credit is a good thing. where's the controversy? around saying that instead of getting the thousand dollar child tax credit we will make it 2000. where is the controversy? why can't we find our friends a part of that conversation? why is it they have come to the conclusion after eight years taking the ten training dollar debt accumulated over 230 years and then doubling it in eight years. now they want the american people to take them seriously.

about the debt. let me close 14700 businesses would still be american businesses if we had a 20% tax code, 4700 businesses are no longer hours, they have been acquired or inverted because our tax code punishes success. in a global competition were american workers deserve better. in a global competition, our

workers deserve the opportunity to work for companies whose tax rates are competitive in the global economy. if we don't do that, more american companies will -- and fewer americans will work at home. places like alaska, south carolina, and the dakotas. >> the senator from alaska. >> i want to complement my good friend from south carolina who came here and talked about what this was about. it's about families. about american families.

you have these poster board showing what this is about. i want to reiterate, first, the most important thing were doing the bulk of the relay for providing is to provide middle-class families with more take-home pay. more money in the pockets of american citizens. this with senator scott just talked about. on average right now are bill would bring the average american middle-class family 200-dollar additional money in their pocket per month. some people might not seem like a lot, but it is. over $2000 per year in every tax bracket we have right now we get

a reduction. so i echo the words, it is confounding to me that our friends and colleagues would deny hard-working americans that money in their pocket. if they would twist the facts to make it look like the middle class is getting the tax increase, the public is being stunned by that. this would be a tax cut for these families. what is puzzling about those who oppose it is how they would try to did neither the americans who

need it extra money in their pockets right now. i want to talk about an article i read in the atlantic magazine. it's titled the secret shame of the middle class. says nearly half of all americans would have trouble finding $400 in a crisis. they talk about families 47% of american families will not be able to come up with $400 in case of emergency. this is the definition of living paycheck to paycheck.

and the bill were debating helps this. more money in the pockets of american families and the quote from the article he said it was happening to the soon to retire as well as the soon to begin. the college grads and high school dropouts. all across the country including places where you would not see such problems. i knew i would not have $400 in an emergency. what i cannot have conceived is that so many other americans would not have the money available either. fred was the only man i knew who talked about his financial struggles.

he said if anyone says there sailing through right now they're lying. these are our constituents. the people we see when we go home. american citizens who need this relief. they tell us they are struggling. they tell us their left out of the system and no one is listening. the split was about listening and giving them a voice more economic security. the other thing it does and we should have noticed issues about bipartisan support, finally getting our economy back to traditional levels of economic

growth. growing the economy that has been stagnant for over a decade. the next chart i have is what i've come to the floor and talked about many times it's an important chart that shows the levels of economic growth that have occurred year after year in the united states since the eisenhower administration. eisenhower, kennedy, reagan, bush. president obama. these are the numbers. green is growth, the line i want people to take a look at is the

33% gdp. that is not a great growth rate. the average since world war ii was closer to 4%. 3% is good. when you look at this when you look at what were trying to do in the floor tiles are important store. story. reagan, bush, clinton directed to the obama years in the last ten years i never hit it. we had the bush great recession and then the eight years of president obama. we never hesitated. she says like a technical

economic term. it's a proxy to the health of our economy. it's a proxy for hope. we have a sick economy. one thing that surprised me how few of our colleagues talk about it. a lot of my colleagues are talking about growth how we have to get back to traditional levels of gdp growth. a bit of a surprise to me tonight i have heard any colic talk about this on the other side of the aisle. december below 3% second for the country.

some have bought into the obama administration would tell us. we can hit 3% so this is the new normal. you cannot expect 7% gdp growth. poster in the reagan era. expect that anymore. the new normal is one and a half or 2%. i guess my democratic colleagues to believe in the new normal? do you? it's a surrender of the american dream. there's a lot of talk about what makes america great. this is what makes it great.

strong economic growth. we have not had it in over a decade. this tax bill will spur it. that's why it is so important. finally getting back to traditional levels of strong, robust economic growth. griffin had bipartisan support to its most important thing were doing. tax reform? energy policies that unleash opportunities infrastructure and regulatory reform we have to get out of this decade the author

talks about the fact that people don't have the money they once did because of this because we're not crawling. the strongest economy in the last 100 years is sick after says that in the 1950s and 60s american recurrent economic growth democratized the sin we have strong economic wealth. then he says, but in the 2010 we have democratized insecurity to democratizing prosperity to

doing financial insecurity where half of the american people to believe $400 in an emergency. my colleagues don't want to provide a tax cut for middle-class families who are struggling? we need to end this democratizing get back to prosperity. get back to traditional levels through energy structural reform. we can do. any american watching please do not believe this idea of the new normal, that will never get back to the strong rates. , don't believe it. we need policies that can get us there.

plus i am hopeful that some of my colleagues will join us for promoting text for the important things we can do. the u.s. economy going again families will benefit middle class families will benefit. our economy will benefit, but we need to act we cannot accept it. i yield the floor. my colleague from connecticut. >> i think my colleague from alaska for yielding. i want to begin where he finished on the need for of bipartisan approach.

when they combines to points of view. compromise should not be a dirty word. neither is bipartisanship. yet a republican colic has insisted on a republican plan, whether they first rushed through the house of representatives and now have thought to do on their own that's where the process has reached this point. my republican colleagues are scrambling for a solution to an

overwhelming force that they brought on themselves and plan our children and grandchildren. searching and scrambling for another gimmick to be inserted in the bill which underestimates the additional debt that will be forced upon the nation. they estimate at $1.3 trillion but it is probably larger. the main point is that i have put it on our children to pay simply so that the wealthiest in this country and corporations what had tax cuts.

the people of connecticut and our country faces an army of economic trouble. this plan is unpopular among my constituents in connecticut. i have listened to them. what they tell ms. they can work their children in the eye and show them a chart like this one and see how this unsurmountable mountain of debt will result from the republican plans republican voted for middle-class taxes to rise to the presidents taxes and others can go down. this will raise taxes on

87 million the class families and half of all taxpayers it's a double standard. it is bait and switch because it makes a promise of fails to fulfill. tax cuts that will arise over ten years. it sells a false bill of goods the promise of middle-class tax cuts is a lie the president said this administrator to announce "everyone will experience a tax cut. but the fact is, everyone in

certain brackets experiences a tax increase under most circumstances. who was arm? we know will benefit, corporations but the one harm are the majority who earn less than $75000 a year they will be worse off within the next ten years. in connecticut that means 460,200 will experience a tax hike under this plan the tax plan and tax-deductible duty which means families will be taxed twice. increases the sun families.

what i hear, listening to my fencing constituents in connecticut is that the pay their fair share, they're willing to pay more when they receive back if they feel the system itself is fair. they are the ones that will benefit from this tax scam state local taxes are vital for supplying communities with resources to pay for essential local services. place in schools and infrastructures. vital services many houses did x

state local taxes. the average deduction is $19664. assuming someone pays a 25% rate of texas or 30, apply that to 19000, were talking about real money. the bill abolishes a critical deduction that provides relief for taxpayers who experienced losses on their property. including homeowners in connecticut. thousands that have crumbling foundations. under current law the irs ruled last week it could be deducted. they will be arrived of those

deductions under this misguided bill the ball so hurts working-class families. it expands the child tax credit it values the child to be born into a wealthy family and be with the $2000 tax credit. military families who have they will receive a child tax credit of only $75 or less. if you're wealthy it's worth $2000.

for gross income is $28000, $7575 or less. what is fair about that? it epitomizes what is wrong about this bill. it increases the quality is he insecurity about my colleague from alaska mentioned earlier. every betrays americans lot values. later this month the fraternal order of police wrote a letter to the house and senate leadership to protect the state and local tax deduction as is. if this is laminated it will be strained. no wonder the head of the fraternal order of police

objectivists. they found that gutting state local tax will seriously harm underfunded public education risking 250,000 educations. those are middle-class family jobs we talk a lot in the chamber about -- talk about making sure jobs are filled with people with the right skills and here we are getting our educational system those cuts will lead to $250 billion in

cuts to public education over the years. job creators are harmed. there is common ground, on infant structure there's bipartisan support number of those proposals would be repatriating funds at a lower tax rate so those could come back. it should come back it could come back at lower tax rates but this proposal makes no such proposal.

it's a realistic view of what is necessary for infrastructure .-ellipsis not about our red or blue state. it can strike us anytime. the tax plan will raise it and kicked 13 million americans off their health insurance also pay for a massive corporate tax cut to pass through to benefit the wealthiest the corporations that move overseas to avoid taxes to lower their effective tax rate will be rewarded they will have increase incentives to increase jobs overseas those will line

the pockets of corporate ceos. $1.5 trillion is equivalent to all veterans healthcare and benefit payments to every veteran in america over the next decade. with $1.5 trillion, you could increase the benefits to the veterans, enhance healthcare, trained for jobs that exist and by the way you could pay off all the student loan debt in our nation. think of the young people whose lives would be different, transform if there absorbed of the worry about paying off them

millions of loans for each of them. and drive them to jobs that were not there first choice but they have to do it to pay off debt rather than working for bipartisan tax reform this bill divides our nation. it increases the divisions economically but also socially and culturally. and politically. the tribes division in this body between two sides of the aisle between the republican colleagues and ourselves.

how wonderful it would be for us to take the time and markup twist on in the 80s when the last major true tax reform was done the time and the consultation in the compromise route the core of that work what is at the core of this work is simply blatant partisanship the question our tax code needs to be reformed. and prepared to work on weird all tax reform will need to

drive our economy forward and create jobs. that would be the right way to do it we could do it if we take a step back. it is not too late. we could do it tomorrow too. it is never too late to do the right thing. i urge my colleagues to take the shot and engage in will compromise legislation worthy of the name of the tax reform measure the truly is reform benefits all americans. thank you mr. president. i am before. the senator from new jersey. >> this tax bill is astounding

only in washington could republicans borrow a trillion dollars in china to fred massive tax cuts for big corporations still need to raise taxes on americans to pay for it. i understand my republican friends are elliptical. they need to present trump win. this white house is asking them to pass a tax bill the most unpopular policies in america. i think my colleagues know it. they know that after everything they've been through decades of the stagnation cutting taxes for

corporation taking healthcare way from 13 million people and raising clas taxes on the classn a recipe for winning the hearts of votes. let alone a strategy for building a prosperous economy for all americans. so republicans are in a tough spot. if we had a sensible -- it would spell disaster in 2018. they designed a tax bill that has nothing to do is simplify our tax code. to do more in the wages of

workers. i appreciate my friends for alaska talking about growth. i want to see growth in american wages. it's hard to have that when you take a trillion dollars and add it to the debt of the next generation think you have growth this pose creating jobs and everything with pleasing corporate special-interest that from the campaigns. that's how republicans are on the bird furniture trying to pass tax cuts for corporations that will be permanent. paid for primaries he taxes and

even her children and grandchildren with trillions in debt. how does the gop get a away with a middle-class tax cut? because they are using smoke and mirrors to make you think you are getting something of a tax cut. these deficits pass a budget that gives them permission to $1.5 trillion to the national debt. so long as they don't add anything to the year after. when it be nice to give yourself permission for an enormous amount of debt.

it's impossible to permanently permanently/the corporate tax rates from 35% to 25% without hiking taxes on millions of people. i call it inconvenient math. that's right republicans offer some families tiny, temporary tax relief without owning the fact that the chariot turns into a pumpkin really fast. americans who make under 30,000 dollars a year will be financially worse under this plan. by 2021 americans earning 30,000 dollars a year will be worse off. by 2027 earning less than $75000 a year will get hit there found

some pretty clever ways to pull this off. they and the state local tax deduction of force millions of hard working middle-class families in states like new jersey to pay taxes twice on the same money. they're not highrollers. the 3% who claim their state local tax deduction make under $200,000 per year. nearly half make under $100,000 a year. and in the state local tax deduction is like one giant hit job to middle-class families in states like new jersey. we cannot afford to do this anymore.

early this evening my colleagues from pennsylvania said the state local tax is a subsidy to states like new york and new jersey. he said, how could possibly be fair to force my constituent why they should pay more in income taxes to subsidize someone who gets to live in a multimillion dollar condo on the upper east side of manhattan. that is amazing to me. far from subsidizing their son that gets more in fact, according to the rockefeller foundation each resident takes $1500 a year and federal

benefits more than they paying federal taxes. even if the rockefeller foundation is wrong, let me read part of a letter sent by some executives and officials who represent the county. here's part of this letter. we are rising to express our deep concerns with proposes to eliminate deductions as the primary funding offset for federal tax reform. across the state meaning pennsylvania with a 1.8 million's household claimed this tax deduction for $2.4 billion. considering the loss of the text reduction will harm these

property values. our taxpayers would be doubly taxed. this policy is contrary to the intentions of our fathers and overturns the precedent set in the civil war income tax imposed by president lincoln in 1913. simply put, the state and local taxes novice special loophole but a core principle of fiscal federalism that should be preserved now. plus a letter, there's more to go on sunday series of

individuals who are elected representatives in pennsylvania including those who represent -- county. so every year successful blue-chip states like new jersey, new york and virginia contribute billions of dollars in revenue that go to less productive states another trying to take more. were tired of it and we want our money back. i will make a deal. since use claim not to do this how about you spend all of the federal tax dollars you receive above and beyond what you're taxpayers paid to the federal government any transfer that back to new jersey. sound like a deal?

i didn't think so. here's another thing, this is sneaky secret tax height's that are buried in the bill the take billions of dollars from paychecks in the next two days. we know why they have to do it. even after borrowing $2 billion from china there's no way to pay for permanent tax cuts without taking a bigger cut from the american workers. some most complicated, boring text increase in history. it takes 500 billions dollars out of american paycheck insensitive into the coffers of multinational -- is called the chain cpi.

seems like a tiny tweak, something we call inflation. ask any american walking down the street if their wages have kept pace with rising costs? they will laugh in your place. the college tuition gets more expensive every year. what if the government pretended the rising cost were hardship? that is what we called the chain cpi tax increase. don't take it from me, take it from a republican tax hero.

here's what he had to say about this back in 2013. he said quote, this is one of those things invented by people who are trying to raise taxes and pretend they are not. if you change the law to get more money that is a tax increase. it doesn't matter how you do it or what you call it. . . . . to pay more in taxes even if you don't get a raise. each year more of your income, under this provision, will be taxed in higher brackets at the very same time that your deductions and tax credits slowly lose their value. it's a clever way for the government to shave a bit more off your paycheck every

>> >> and those attacks of the millennial generation they are just now entering from 30 years not after the great recession were drowning in student loan debt in leave it to the of millenials to get a nice tax cut. and to get to know the big lie at the heart of the trump tax plan. and then written is disappearing ink but the tax

hikes are carved into stone with the public majority dirty little secret. even after baring and -- barring $2 trillion from china probably give the taxes to corporations but a high kim on middle-class americans and millions more who dream of becoming middle-class. wild claims for working families i was in the house of representatives and i oppose taking the historic surplus that clinton had created to be used by president bush which he inherited to squander on tax cuts, a 27% that went to the

top 1 percent of americans. that is jong change compared to the 60% that goes to the wealthy of the trump tax plan americans to make 40 through $50,000 perea year will pay a combined 5. $3 billion more in taxes. while those who make millions get 5.$8 billion cut. americans making 40 or 50,000 per year have a combined 5.$3 billion more in taxes and the others give 5.$8 billion cut.

republicans are okay with a wealth redistribution and so as long as they give it to the richest 1 percent and it does not include the plan to the affordable care act read the financial cost with 30 million americans lose their health care coverage and everyone else is saddled with higher premiums. some are openly in admitting the tax bill is the first shot fired in the race to dismantle social security and medicaid and medicare. they will trigger huge multibillion-dollar cuts to medicare and that is not the only way to american seniors

according to the arp 5.2 million seniors will face higher taxes in the next decade. think about that asking seniors who have given the country a lifetime of hard work to pay for corporate tax cuts. wehe know that corporations do with those tax cuts during the first holiday in 2005 republicans promised big gains for workers didn't bring the billions of dollars that they stashed to create millions of new jobs to pay better, wages. the alliance to share of the windfall was just two things, higher pay for ceos and kickbacks for investors on wall street. i am not sure white house

adviser seems so surprised at the end of the day when so few ceos said they use the tax cuts to invest in american jobs. only a couple raised their hands. will things be different this time? of course, not. how do we know? because i'd like my republican friends, corporations cannot lie to their shareholders what they plan to do with the $1 trillion of tax cuts the ceos are openly admitting it will go straight to wall street what i have been pushing for changes taking away the big corporate tax cuts if workers dulce bigger paychecks this tax plan to come - - his tax plan

still living paycheck to paycheck. cutting taxes for big corporations with record profits refusing to pay workers a decent wage about cutting taxes those born on third base -- and to pave the way of massive cuts of medicaid and medicare and social security to bankrupt thes states and to create the growth of opportunity for all.

tax cuts for big corporations will the campaign donors paid for by taking a bigger cut out of the workers' paychecks to saddle grandchildren like my granddaughter with to a trillion dollars in debt. only those coming up on top are already sitting at the very top. i hope b my colleagues come to their senses we can have tax reform that can be permitted to create stability and growth not just for companies but american worker wages to create a better economy for all. they deservee much better.

i yield the floor mr. president. i noticed the absence of a quorum

. >> the political machine boss of kansas city 1925 through 1939 and a political machine tied into new organized crime and other illicit activities to take bribes and kickbacks and using influence to make sure your preferred candidates are elected. >> let me introduce you to establish the nit --- the negro league taking place at the ymca. ride around the corner from where the of the museum currently operates in rare those team owners met to

form the first baseball league