vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or to change their vote? if not the yeas are 53. the nays are 43. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lee: mr. president, earlier today the f.c.c. voted to reverse a major impediment to a free and open internet. the title 2 internet regulations that were imposed under president obama in 2015. these regulations are commonly referred to as net neutrality. so for the sake of convenience, that's what i will call them. i want to congratulate f.c.c. chairman ajit pai for his brave

accomplishment today. he's fought for what he knows is right, and he's done so in the face of tremendous pressure and at times overwhelming opposition. i also want to use this opportunity to correct the record. about what it is that the f.c.c. has actually accomplished. because there's an astonishing amount of misinformation about this issue and there's a whole lot of hyperbole surrounding it. if you believe the passionate voices defending these regulations, then you may well believe that the f.c.c. just jeopardized the entire internet as we know and love it, and sometimes loathe. these activists tend to paint a scary vision of america without net neutrality. a vision in which large internet service providers prey on ordinary consumers and start-up

businesses, a vision in which internet access would be rationed or bundled up in really expensive, unaffordable packages. one viral tweet even suggested that google would start charging $2 a piece for internet searches. these are falsehoods, every one of them and they'll be exposed as such in the coming days, weeks, and months. when the internet hums right along just like usual and skyscrapers and all of our major cities remain standing. in the wake of all that we're going to look back at these dire predictions as mere his ster ricks, such as the y2-k or the appok clips. these have real-world consequences that go above and beyond scaring the public. in the last six months chairman pai and his family have been

attacked in the grossest and most unacceptable terms. even his children have been singled out for intimidation. these kinds of attacks have absolutely no place in our public discourse, mr. president. so why don't we tone down the rhetoric and see if we can get to the truth about net neutrality. we can start with just a little background. in 2015, the democrat-controlled f.c.c. issued the so-called open internet order. this order made dramatic changes to how the internet was classified for purposes of federal regulation. until 2015, broadband internet was classified as an information service. as such, it was subject to light-touch regulations that allowed innovators to build without seeking permission from the federal government. this classification reflected common sense and it reflected

the intent of congress. the internet is a fast-moving information super highway. if slow-moving government regulators got involved decades ago, they could have inhibited innovation, the same kind of innovation that keeps service fast and keeps prices low for all americans. not only was this a commonsense arrangement, it facilitated a virtual renaissance of innovation and discovery in this increasingly important part of our economy. this renaissance gave us things like smartphones, like ride sharing, and super fast fiber optic internet services. it gave us 3-g and 4-g and soon 5-g wireless service. yet this period also gave us twitter, so one could argue that maybe this wasn't all good, but just mostly good.

overall, the light touch regulatory arrangement works pretty well for ordinary users, big companies and entrepreneurs just starting out in their garages. contrary to net neutrality's most aggressive defenders, the internet of 2014 was not some sort of hopeless hell scape. it was actually pretty awesome. the f.c.c. threatened all of that in the early weeks of 2015 when it reclassified broadband internet as a telecommunications service. this innocuous sounding change subjected the internet to a whole host of regulations that were originally meant for new deal era telephone monopolies like ma bell. the government imposed 1930's style government regulations on 21st century technology. this outdated arrangement has

worked about as well as one might expect. broadband internet investment has fallen significantly since the net neutrality regulations were proposed in 2011. dr. george ford of the phoenix center estimates that between 2011 and 2015, just the threat of internet regulations scare off $200 billion in investment. and since the regulations were imposed in 2015, broadband internet investment has declined by 5.6%. that's billions of lost dollars over just two years. as chairman pai has noted, this is the first ever decline in broadband investment outside of a recession. and this recession just happens to be self-imposed. it may not seem like a big deal to you, the government is squeezing out billions in internet investment, but it hurts you and it hurts your

fellow citizens in material ways, in ways that might not always be obvious. less investment means less fiber optic cable, fewer towers, and fewer wi-fi hot spots. and this translates into spottier coverage and slower speeds for americans, especially those living on the periphery of society in poverty and in rural areas. f.c.c. regulations make it harder for these americans to have equal access to the internet. these regulations also have entrenched the market power of large internet service providers while hurting their smaller competitors. by their very nature, regulations impose conformity on a market. they limit company's ability to distinguish themselves from their rivals by offering innovative services. this works out fine for the companies at the top. they've already made it. in fact, it can work out really

well for some of them. they can kickback without worrying about some young punk coming along and changing the game. it works out less well for the young punks, the start-ups that want to win customers away from old-school companies. that's how it works in theory, at least, and there's good evidence that this is exactly what's happening in practice. small i.s.p.'s have been far more critical of net neutrality regulations than large i.s.p.'s. a group of two dozen small internet providers recently wrote that the regulations hang like a black cloud over their business, slowing or even halting their deployment of new technology. likewise, 19 municipal internet providers told the f.c.c. that they often delay or hold off on introducing new services because they cannot afford a potential complaint. internet providers that serve

predominantly rural areas have voiced similar concerns reporting that they've reduced network expansion in parts of the country that are already underserved. these examples show that net neutrality regulations are harming competition and increasing the consolidation of power in the internet industry. not -- not decreasing it. internet regulations have sheltered large i.s.p.'s from competition and from the nead to change. -- need to change. think about that the next time you're on hold with customer support. consumers will face an important choice, do we want an internet run by regulators or innovators? the innovators have a strong record. they've had a really strong track record over the last 30 years from the internet, so they are the ones i'm siding with,

not the regulators. how can we empower the innovators and more importantly how can we empower the families that rely on fast and reliable internet service every day. the f.c.c. did its part by returning the regulatory framework that governed the internet successfully, i would add, until 2015. this move classifies the -- reclassifies the internet as an internet service, but it goes beyond that. the f.c.c. will require every i.s.p. to disclose information about their network practices. if these companies block or throttle traffic, the public will know about it. and importantly they -- this will protect consumers from unfair practices.

the f.c.c. policed the internet successfully for years prior to 2015, now the cop is back on the beat. the f.c.c.'s action is a return to normalcy for the internet, but we should not rest easy. a future administration could undo all of chairman pai's hard work if congress doesn't act to solidify his accomplishment. over the summer i introduced the restoring the internet freedom act which would -- passing this act would give companies the regulatory certainty they need to invest in improvements for their customers. we should not discount how important congress can be in determining the success or directing the failure of things like the internet. in 1996 president clinton and

congress inaugurated the light-touch regulations of the internet. they wanted the superhighway to be unfettered by federal or state regulations. they were rewarded, and we were we warded, with the -- rewarded, with the tremendous innovation that has improve the -- improved the lives of people in this country and around the world. i say we should see what free men and women can invent in the next 20 years. thank you, mr. president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. van hollen: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor -- the presiding officer: excuse me. the chamber is in a quorum call. mr. van hollen: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor this afternoon because of the reports that the house and senate conference committees on the tax plan are nearing an agreement or may have reached an agreement, and by all accounts this is shaping up to be one of the greatest legislative heists in american history. it's hard to imagine you could take a tax code that was already stacked in favor of the very wealthy and very powerful special interests and actually make it worse, but that's exactly what we're hearing coming out of the conference

committee being worked on essentially by a republican house -- by our republican house colleagues and republican senate colleagues. the conference committee is a bit of a charade because of the real work with respect to the tax bill is done by lobbyists behind closed doors. here's what we're hearing of the reports. some of the details have been released. associated press, ample tax cuts for business wealthy in the new g.o.p. tax plan. that is the new tax plan coming do this senate soon. the reality is that any tax cuts for middle-class families are going to be a lot smaller than the tax cuts for the very wealthy and they are only temporary.

also, make no mistake, you will see millions of middle-class families actually see a tax increase, but those that will get some small tax relief will see it only on a temporary basis and then it will disappear, but the corporate tax cuts, they are forever under this republican plan. here's the head liern of "the washington post" -- headline of "the washington post" about what's coming out of the house-senate republican confrence committee. quote, house reach tax plan, expanding tax cuts for the wealthy. let's get this straight. we had a senate bill and a house bill, and the senate bill actually reduced the top rate, that's the rate that applies to the wealthiest in this country, to 38.5%. it is currently 39%.

they reduced it to 38.5%. in the house they kept the top rate where it was. so senate bill, 38.5%, house bill is around 39%, republicans from the house and senate go about behind closed doors and where does it end up? they actually cut that top rate for the wealthiest folks in this country to a place that is lower than either of the tawbles that went into -- tax bills that went into conference. so you take these bills, go behind closed doors, the wealthy, who were already doing well under the republican senate and house tax bill, are doing better because it is going from

39% to 37%. that is an average tax cut of $20,000 a year when millions of middle-class families are seeing their taxes go up and so many others are getting crumbs, and again, just temporary crumbs. now, mr. president, we were promised this would be very different. this is what president trump's secretary of the treasury, steve mnuchin told us. quote, there will be no absolute tax cut for the upper middle class. unquote. that is false because the upper class is getting a big tax windfall. and not only that, but as i just said, those tax windfalls are getting larger in the bill coming out of conference than they were going in. so what we're seeing,

mr. president, is a lot of promises that sounded really nice to the american people but it turns out it's been a scam. because what people were told was this was going to be out there to help working folks and that's not what they are getting. and that's why, mr. president, all the public surveys show that the american public doesn't like what they see and that is why there is this effort to rush this through so quickly. and so my plea today is there's still time. there is still time to turn back from this tax plan that's going to do so much harm to our country in the coming years and there's certainly an opportunity here for our members, -- our members on the republican side to take a look at what is coming

out of the conference and have a bipartisan basis for tax reform, not something masquerading as tax reform which is really a tax cut for big corporations. exhibit a as to why this is not tax reform is the broken promise with respect to closing the carried interest loophole. people remember president trump talking about that. i the don't know what's going to come out of conference in the end, but what i do know is that neither the house bill nor the senate bill closed the carried interest tax break. that's the loophole that hedge fund managers who are making big bucks -- that's the loophole that allows them to pay a lower tax rate than the folks working for them in their office, and for the secretaries who work in

their office and the folks who clean the office, the hedge fund managers pay a lower tax rate than those folks working for them. it is such an outrageous loophole that donald trump got big headlines during the 2016 campaign. he promised during the campaign that he was going to close that loophole. in fact, when he was asked on the campaign trail for an example of what was wrong with the current tax code, for an example of how powerful special interests got their day using their lobbyists in washington, he said take a look at that carried interest loophole. specifically he said, and i'm quoting candidate trump, quote, the hedge fund guys are getting away with murder, end quote.

that's what he said on the campaign trail. we're about to vote on a bill that claims it's tax reform and yet neither the house bill nor the senate bill that went into conference touched this loophole. and by all accounts the bill coming back to the senate doesn't close it either. and it's not as if we didn't have a chance to fix it. in fact, right here on the senate floor senator tammy baldwin offered a motion to close the loophole, to do exactly what candidate trump said he wanted to do, but every single one of our republican colleagues voted against closing the carried interest loophole. so i guess that means in now president trump's words from the campaign that this tax bill will let those hedge fund managers,

quote, get away with murder, unquote. so don't tell us that this is about getting rid of special interest loopholes when it doesn't eliminate exhibit a of a special interest tax break that candidate trump talked about and it's exhibit a of broken promises. he said, let's not let the hedge fund managers get away with murder when it comes to the tax code, and yet did nothing about it in this piece of legislation. and it gives you a clear understanding that this is not about tax reform, not about getting rid of thomas loopholes. what it -- rid of those loopholes. what it is about is stacking the deck even further in favor of very powerful special interests and the very wealthy against the middle class and working americans. after all, president trump said

that this tax bill is going to put the middle-class first. in fact, here's what he said, again, when he was running for president. quote, everybody is getting a tax cut, especially the middle class. unquote. more recently this is what the republican leader senator mcconnell said. and i quote, nobody in the middle class -- nobody in the middle class is going to get a tax increase. unquote. that's untrue and the republican leader has acknowledged that, but that is not what was promised to the american people, not by senate republicans and not by the now president of the united states. in fact, under the house and senate bills more than 10 million families -- 10 million families who make less than $200,000 a year are going to see immediate tax increases. what happened to that promise of no tax increases for anybody in

the middle class? already broken. and instead of putting middle-class families first, the biggest tax cuts by fargo to people make -- by far go to people making $1 million a year. in fact those families making more than $12 million a -- more than $1 million a year get an average tax cut of $35,000 a year right away. just to give people some perspective, this is a tiny sliver of american households. we want more millionaires, but how do you explain in a bill masquerading as the middle-class tax cut that it's the millionaires that are doing so much better than everybody else? just to give you some perspective, for every 1,000 american families there are four

who make more than $1 million a year. that's great for them and we want them to do well. but why we would give them the biggest tax cuts rather than folks in the middle who are working hard every day is something our republican colleagues will have to explain. because we're now talking about 710,000 wealthy families getting that tax cut of an average $35,000 a year compared to 10 million middle-class families who are going to see tax increases, tax increases. and it gets worse because the tax cuts for families are only temporary. you know, at first many people will pay more right away. other families may see a little

tax break right away. but it goes away. except the corporate tax cuts which are permanent. and in fact some families are going to see permanent tax increases to pay for the permanent tax cuts for corporations. in fact, this chart, this is from the nonpartisan professionals. this is the joint committee on taxation. as you can see, when this bill fully kicks in, here's what the situation looks like. if you make $75,000 a year or less, your taxes are going to go up when it's fully kicked in. imowe going to -- i'm going to say that again. if you make $75,000 or less, your taxes are going up when this plan fully kicks in.

as you can see, in addition to that, that means, of course, that your after-tax income is going to go down. what that means is this chart takes into account the idea that because you're going to give tax cuts to corporations, some people are going to see some lift in their income. and what this chart tells us, which is very important, is even if you take that into account, people's after-tax income if they're $75,000 or below, their after-tax income, what they have for their family, what they have to pay the mortgage or pay the rent is going down. and then there are some folks between $75,000 and $100,000, pretty much when this is phased in, no real change. but let's look out here. let's look at the folks who make

over a million dollars. when this kicks in, they're going to be doing even better, much better when it comes to their after-tax income. how much income they have after paying taxes for their families. and even after many of the tax cuts fade out, the after-tax income for folks at the top will go up. why? because folks at the very top are the ones who have most of the stock holdings in our major corporations. so they're the ones who will continue to benefit over time from those permanent tax cuts to corporations. so, mr. president, this is a really important chart done by the professionals here in congress that let's people know the answer to the very important question how much will i actually have in my pocket after tax for my family when this

thing fully kicks in. and that's what that tells us. and in fact this chart really undermines entirely the republican claim there's going to be some kind of big trickle-down benefit from this tax plan to most families. we tried trickle down before. we tried it in 2001 and 2003 with the bush tax cuts. trickle-down ran into the wall of reality around the country. after-tax incomes for the folks at the top went way up. the debt went way up. everybody else was standing still or falling behind. that's what happened and that's what will happen again. now, we were promised, mr. president, from secretary of the treasury that they were going to do this analysis that showed that if you cut taxes for all these folks at the top

wealthiest americans and you cut taxes for corporations, we're somehow going to create so much economic growth that the additional revenue, tax revenue from that additional growth would actually pay for the tax cuts. they promised they were going to get this big analysis. and at the end of the day they couldn't produce it, could they? they couldn't produce it. instead just a little while ago we got one page, got one page from the department of treasury. nobody put their name on it because the secretary of treasury couldn't find anybody, any professional person to put their name on this one page. and when you actually read it, you know why. because it just assumes the answer to the question. it assumes there's going to be

all this additional economic growth, although if you actually read it, they even acknowledge that the tax plan itself won't generate enough economic growth. they talk about other policies that are going to generate all that economic growth to allow the tax cuts for corporations and others to pay for themselv themselves. they don't tell you what it is. mr. president, you could make up a number. i could make up a number. that's all they did. they made up a number and put it on a page. i really hope our republican colleagues who were serious when they asked the treasury department for that analysis will recognize that they got taken for a total ride by the treasury department. because this doesn't pass the laugh test. this is intellectually dishonest and the folks who put it out i'm sure know that. so if it's not going to happen

by magic and it's not going to happen by magic economic growth, how are we going to see the benefits that were promised by our republican colleagues that when you give those big tax cuts to corporation, it's going to result in higher wages and all this economic growth? we know it's not going to be true because they -- they couldn't come up with any serious analysis. we also know it's not true because the c.e.o.'s of these corporations are themselves telling us it's not true. here's what happened just a little while ago. "the wall street journal" had a forum. they invited c.e.o.'s and at this forum they asked the c.e.o.'s in the room to raise their hands if they planned to use the tax cuts their corporations were getting to

invest in their own businesses, to invest in their workers. guess what? hardly any of those c.e.o.'s raised their hands. in fact, gary cohn, one of the president's top economic advisors looked arranged room. he said, you asked, quote, why aren't the other hands up, unquote. well, mr. president, the reason the other hands weren't up because those c.e.o.'s, those corporations do not plan to use their big tax breaks to give their workers wages or to invest in their businesses. these corporations are making record profits now and they're not using those profits for those purposes. in fact, as has been widely reported, those corporations tend to use -- plan to use their tax windfall for stock buybacks

and provide higher dividends to their stockholders. so stockholders are going to do great. c.e.o.'s are going to do great. everyone else is going to be left holding the $1.5 thrill debt -- $1.5 trillion debt that they're putting on the national credit card. here's what market watch reported. market watch, december 8, headline share buyback buyback . drawing a strong hint at what c.e.o.'s plan to do with the tax savings. this is before the tax plan is even passed. people are just salivating at the idea that they're going to get this windfall. it's going to go to c.e.o.'s and

other executives and big shareholders. here's the subheadline in market watch. forget trickle-down economics, shareholders, not workers will be the big beneficial rathers of tax reform -- beneficiaries of tax reform. next sentence, long-term investors and workers hoping that the tax overhaul and repatriation holiday will encourage investment in growth and a rise in wages should brace for a disappointment. mr. president, no senator should tell us a few months from now that they were not warned that this is exactly what is going to happen. and you want to know who a good chunk of those shareholders who are salivating about this windfall are? well, 35% of the shareholders in

american corporations are foreign stockholders. 35% of those folks who are waiting for that big corporate tax windfall are foreign stockholders. in fact, the senate tax bill gives these wealthy foreign shareholders a $31 billion tax cut in 2019 alone. in the house bill it's even bigger. $50 billion in tax breaks to foreign shareholders in 2019 alone. paid for -- paid for by increasing taxes on millions of middle-class americans. and for those americans who are getting a small tax cut, let's take a look at how their tax cut compares to the windfall for big corporations. because here's how skewed it is. in the year 2019, the house bill

gives $11 billion more in tax breaks to foreign shareholders than it does to every single working class and middle-class family in all of the states that voted for donald trump in 2016 combined. combined. think about that. every single middle-class family in every one of those states that voted for donald trump, those who are actually getting some tax cuts, you add it all up, foreign shareholders get $11 billion more than they do. and again millions of middle-class taxpayers in these states are actually going to see their taxes go up. so that they go into the pockets of foreign shareholders. so much for putting america first. so much for putting middle-class

taxpayers first. so just to be clear, it means that all of these families and all of the states that voted for donald trump with incomes of $100,000 or less, if you add up their small tax cuts o, it's stl $11 billion less than tax cuts for foreign shareholders, and that's for the folks who are actually getting tax cuts in those trump states. as i said, millions are actually going to see their taxes go up. now, mr. president, i want to focus on one other promise that was made by president trump and republicans about their tax plan. they said it's going to bring jobs back to america from overseas. and as we look at this plan coming out of conference committee, this may be the worst and meanest of all the broken

promises because when you look at this plan and you talk to economists who don't care about political party, they will tell you that this plan is actually going to increase the incentive of american businesses to move their jobs and operations and factories overseas. so let's just take a quick look at this because i'm appealing to my republican colleagues to fix this before it's too late. first, first it's important to understand that the republican tax plan now will allow u.s. corporations to pay zero taxes on their foreign profits. so if you have a company overseas, currently you have to pay u.s. taxes on the proceeds on that after you've made the foreign government. but under the republican plan, you pay z