companies, the companies that -- that tend to run this government, i want you to think of that. i want you to think are you on the side of the workers doing the heavy work who can't work until they are 70 or on the side of c.e.o.'s? it's a pretty clear case, mr. president. it's a picture that is pretty obvious. americans deserve better. we can do better for them by starting from scratch with one goal in mind. if we want a middle-class tax cut, senator hatch, if we want a middle-class tax cut, don't talk about a middle-class tax cut. don't do trickle-down economics. if you want a middle-class tax cut, then darn it, give a middle-class tax cut. give a tax cut to the middle class. it's pretty simple. i yield the floor. mr. portman: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio.

mr. portman: mr. president, i want to talk tonight about a once in a generation opportunity we have in this senate tonight to help middle-class families, to help grow our economy, and i'm going to talk about the facts. i'm not going to be making stuff up. i'm going to talk about the real middle-class tax cuts that are in this legislation. i'm going to show you charts that indicate not just what kind of tax relief is going to be there for you and your family, but who's going to pay, where the burden is. and despite what you're hearing on the floor tonight from some on the other side of the aisle, the burden of taxation actually increased in this tax bill for the wealthiest americans. and in terms of defending the status quo, which is the situation now where jobs and investment are going overseas, i think it is an outrage that this body has sat and watched company after company go overseas

because of our tax code. and to say we shouldn't fix it, i don't get that. if we don't lower the rate on businesses and workers who are competing every day when you have the highest rate in the industrialized world and you have an international system that rewards revenues being kept overseas, $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion of yearnings overseas instead of bringing them back, that status quo is not acceptable. so we can engage in all kinds of rhetoric here tonight, but if we stick to the facts, i think we might be able to see why this legislation is not only going to pass tonight, but why so many americans are struggling because they are living paycheck to paycheck are going to be happy with this legislation. the proof's in the paycheck. people say the proof's in the pudding. the proof's in the paycheck.

when people see their withholding changing, less money being taken out of their paychecks for taxes, when they see that they have got a little more take-home pay, that the family budget is a little healthier, when they see the economy begin to take off and when they see the end of this exodus of u.s. companies going overseas, 4,700, think of that number, 4,700 american companies have left our shores and gone overseas, being bought by foreign companies in the last 13 years that would not have gone if this tax code that we're promoting tonight had been in place. that's based on an ernst and young study, check it out. ernst and young. it's a big accounting firm. 4,700 companies. and when they leave our shores, guess what? they take their jobs and investments with them. you might wonder why wages have been flat in this country for the past couple of decades. it's because people who are supporting the status quo and

don't want to change this tax code are leaving workers in america with no opportunities to get ahead. because not only are wages flat but expenses are up. that's called the middle-class squeeze. it is very real, and it is happening. so i would just ask folks when they are thinking about what you're hearing tonight on the floor, remember, one side supporting the status quo. and the status quo is not working. it ain't working for people in america and people in my state of ohio who tell me, rob, i'm working hard, i'm playing by the rules, i'm not getting ahead. and the statistics bear that out. yes, some people are getting ahead, but it's not the guy or the woman working on the shop floor or the factory in cleveland, ohio, or columbus, or toledo, or dayton, or cincinnati, because their widges

have been pretty darn flat. and again, their expenses are up, especially health care, which is the largest single one of those expenses. they want some help, and this legislation gives them that help in two ways. one, real middle-class tax cuts we'll talk about in a second, and second, legislate them be competitive instead of competing with one hand tied behind their back because they are competing in a global economy, and they know that. give them a chance. give them a tax code that is up to date and competitive and lets them have the opportunity to build a better life. not just for themselves but their kids and grandkids, because that's what they really care about. so again, mr. president, i'm happy to talk about that opportunity we've got tonight. and it is a rare opportunity because we have not reformed this tax code over any substantial way in 31 years. think about that. i have celebrated my 62nd birthday today. that means we have not reformed

the tax code in 31 years. that's half of my life. by the way, 31 years ago, ronald reagan was president. pete rose was still playing for the cincinnati reds. "top gun" was at all the box offices. it was a big hit. that's how long ago that was. and during that time, i will tell you, every other country that we compete with, all of them have reformed their tax code except us. we have sat back and had this debate. we have had this gridlock, partisan gridlock here in washington because we can't get our act together. and by the way, if you're a worker trying to get ahead, you can't do it on your own because the tax code has you competing with that one hand tied behind your back. only this place, washington, congress, a president, can propose, develop, and sign legislation that can help to address this problem. this is our job. i sure hope we'll do it. back in 1986 when that tax

reform was passed 31 years ago, it led to two things. one, more economic growth. in the 1980's and 1990's, we did have economic growth. 3%, 3.5%, 4%, even 4.5% growth. i mean, think about that. we're now living over the last ten years with growth on average at about 1.5% to 2%. that's a big, big difference. the second thing it did, it got wages up. wages actually increased during that period after that tax reform. we need to do it again. our economy needs a shot in the arm again. again, not just to improve the economy but to improve take-home pay. and that's what this tax reform proposal is designed to do. we have heard on the other side of the aisle how this has moved too quickly. somehow there hasn't been enough thought put into this. i will just tell you, i think it's long overdue. i think we should have done this

years ago. i also know from being involved in these issues over the past couple of decades on the house ways and means committee and now here in the senate finance committee that there has been a lot of thought put into this issue. just since i was elected to the senate in 2010, there have been 70 hearings on this in the finance committee. 70 hearings on tax reform. chairman hatch is in the chamber tonight. he will tell you. two years ago, we had five bipartisan working groups covering every part of the tax code. the bipartisan working group that i cochaired with democratic leader chuck schumer focused on the international side. do you know what we decided? we decided we have got to have a lower business rate because it's got to be competitive, otherwise we will continue to lose investment in jobs overseas. we decided we have to have an international system that is competitive and bring back some of that $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion that is stuck overseas back to this country for more jobs and investment. guess what? it was bipartisan then.

and it's in the tax bill now. those are the ideas that are p in this tax bill before us, and they make sense. in fact, for years, there has been a bipartisan agreement that our tax code is broken, and it's congress' responsibility to fix it. i'd like to commend tonight speaker ryan, leader mcconnell, finance chairman orrin hatch who is here on the floor, ways and means committee chairman kevin brady who has been a strong and fair negotiating partner with the senate. i also want to thank my colleagues who have spent so many hours in this effort. senator toomey you heard a little while ago talking about the economic benefits as he does so well. senator scott, thune, cornyn, enzi, murkowski all in the conference committee, but many others, too. senator collins, johnson, rubio, corker who all helped us get to this point and improve the legislation. the bill that passed the house earlier today and we're going to vote on tonight is the result of

years and years of research and debate. it makes good on the promise we have made to create a tax bill that provides tax relief to hardworking families, but also positions america for leadership in the 21st century global economy. while we have seen some improvements in the economy recently, we have seen better economic growth numbers, again a lot of people i represent are not seeing the benefit of that. that's why we have got to pass this bill. for years, colleagues on both sides of the aisle have called for middle-class tax cuts to help ease the burden. this legislation will finally actually deliver that middle-class tax relief. we have the opportunity to provide it tonight. and starting january 1, less than two weeks from tonight, that tax relief goes into effect. people are going to see how this tax reform helps them as soon as the i.r.s. can adjust withholding in paychecks, which

i would hope would happen before the end of february. again, the proof's in the pudding. the proof's in the paycheck. people are going to see it. people can go online now and see they can use a tax calculator and see how it's going to affect them and their families. but this is going to happen and it's going to happen soon if we pass this legislation tonight. again, the most immediate benefit is for working families and for the middle class. this bill doubles the child tax credit. it also increases the refundability of the child tax credit, so for those families with kids out there, you have the opportunity now to save a little more money to deal with the expenses of raising a child. it doubles the standard deduction from $12,000 per family to about $24,000 per family. this in effect creates a $24,000 zero bracket for families, zero income tax bracket and simplifies the tax code. probably 90% to 95% of americans are going to take that doubling

of the standard deduction, i am told, and that will simplify their returns but also give them some tax relief right away. and it lowers tax rates for families across the board, with the largest proportional benefit going to those at the lower end of the income ladder, those who need it the most. in fact, the combination of these tax cuts for lower income americans means that at least three million americans who have income tax liability now are going to pay nothing in taxes. they will be off the tax rolls altogether. i have a letter from the joint committee on taxation that affirms that. you can see at our meeting last week of the conference where the joint committee affirmed that again. over three million people are going to pay no income taxes at all who pay income tax now. for those who say there is no benefit there, talk to those three million people. they feel the benefit. in fact, those people are going to be off the tax rolls

altogether because of the tax relief we're passing tonight. as this chart shows, every income group will receive a tax cut. this one is for the year 2019, so it's a year after the tax cuts are put in place, which starts? just a couple of weeks. we have heard a lot from opponents at the top end who is making a million dollars or more, as we just heard a little while ago, get all the benefits. it's simply not true. this shows that the biggest percentage cut is among folks making between $20,000 and $30,000 a year. that's the biggest, 16.3% cut. it also shows that the smallest percentage cut is among those making a million dollars or more, 5.9% cut. so, again, yeah, there is tax relief across the board here, but the bigger benefit is among folks at the lower end of the economic scale. in fact, when you look at who pays the income tax, you will see that those at the top are

going to pay a slightly bigger share of the tax burden under this bill. today those making between $20,000 and $50,000 a year pay 4.3% of the income tax. under this bill, they are going to pay a little less, 4.1% of the income taxes. those who make over $100,000 will go from paying 78.7% of the tax burden to 79.1% of the tax burden. so if you make over $100,000 a year, you're paying 78.7% of the tax burden today, that group is, and that's going to go up. your share of the burden is going to go up. so the tax code is pretty progressive right now, and it gets even more progressive under this tax legislation. these are not my numbers. these are the numbers from the joint committee on taxation, the

nonpartisan group that scores these things. check out the numbers yourself. go on the website of the joint committee, jct.gov, check it out. when you don't consider not choosing to buy health care insurance a tax increase, which is how the joint committee on taxation scores ending the individual mandate, every income group of taxpayers gets a tax cut under this plan every year. for the next eight years during the time this tax cut is in plates. yes, it does expire, as did the tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and we extended that tax relief. i hope we'll do that again and i expect we will. but during the next eight years this is real tax relief and it's needed. i reject the premise that choosing not to buy health insurance under the individual

mandate is a tax hike, and i think many americans do too. take a look at rules.house.gov and you will see how a typical family of four at the median income level will save more than $2,000 a year on their taxes as a result of this plan. so the median income family in ohio, in your state wherenever you are, is going to -- wherenever you are will save more than $2,000 on taxes. some said, well, that's not much money. well, you know what, for families living paycheck to paycheck, that is a lot of money and it does help. it can be used to pay for health care, buy gas, buy groceries, maybe add a little more to your retirement. beyond the middle-class tax cuts in this legislation, families and workers are going to benefit from more jobs and higher wages and this is because there will

be new investment. our productivity is weak. you have to do something to boost the productivity. more competition for workers is going to result in higher wages. and that's going to happen because this tax code is focused on increasing wages through more investment. we've talked about how companies are going overseas now and how the status quo isn't working. it's crazy that congress allows that to happen and fixing it is long overdue. we talked about the $ 2.5 trillion stuck overseas, and we want to bring that home and add more jobs and investment in this country. we did a study in the permanent sub committee and studied the companies that go overseas through inversions. what happens? do they just move their

headquarters overseas? no. we found out they also move jobs and investment. this is real. it's happening now. we can fix it. that's what this bill is intended to do and i believe you will see not just middle-class tax cuts, but you're going to see this increase finally, not just in economic growth, but in wages that also makes the family budget a whole hot -- lot more healthy. i see senator casey is on the floor. i heard one of my colleagues say, this gets rid of the historic tax cut, it does not. we actually retain the current 20% credit in the senate-passed bill and in the final legislation. by the way, this historic tax credit has been helpful and instrumental in generating more private funds to restore

historic buildings. we preserved important tax credits through the new markets tax credit and the private activity bonds which are still in this legislation, just as they are in current law. in ohio, again, this these tax incentives leveraged a lot more private sector dollars, spurred job creation and increased housing and increased the tax revenue. because as people are working as you get these buildings up and going, economic growth is generated and so is tax revenue. they pay for themselves in my view. i shared some of those success stories in my home state throughout the process and we maintained those provisions in the final bill. the final result is that we have a good tax reform bill that achieves what republicans and democrats alike have long supported, tax cuts for the middle class and a more competitive tax code for american workers and companies. some of my colleagues on the

other side of the aisle have talked about this being bad for the deficit. i respectfully disagree. the most important thing we can do to get the deficit down is get the growth back. economic growth results in more revenue. one point in economic growth alone brings $2.7 trillion more in revenue into the coffers of the federal government. that's based on the numbers from the nonpartisan congressional budget office. think about that $2.7 trillion more which is more economic growth. the budget score ee are forced -- we are forced to use is a conservative level of economic growth, a weak 1.9%. we don't want to repeat that. we don't have to repeat this. the average economic growth over the past 30 years has been more than 2.5%, and over the last two quarters we had economic growth of 3.3%. the federal reserve are above

c.b.o.'s growth projections as an example to show you why c.b.o.'s scores are too weak. i believe it is unacceptable. with the strength of our economy right now paired with the pro-growth changes, i belief economic growth will surpass this relatively low projects we're force -- projection we're forced to use and by increasing the growth by 1.4%, so growing the economy to about 2.3% than 1.9% there's sufficient revenue to pay for all the tax relief in the plan plus begin to pay down the debt. that's what i believe will happen fvment you do the right kind of tax reform. it has to be the right kind. it has to be pro-growth and i believe what we've done in the bill is that, there's no question we will have more economic growth and investment in america. the current tax code is so

broken, it's easy to do that, honestly, to create a more efficient and effective and productive tax code. i believe a more confident america with rising wages is much more likely to address the fiscal challenges we face as a country. this tax reform bill isn't just about bottom lines, it is about investment we're making in american families, american workers, american businesses. we're giving families the freedom to spend more of their own money, how they see fit, putting faith in american entrepreneurs to compete and win in the global market and creating a fairer tax system that levels the playing field and creates jobs and investment here in america. our constituents deserve this. they deserve better than the status quo and they deserve more than hollow promises. they deserve a brighter future. i believe the tax cuts and jobs act will reopen our economy as the best place in the world to

do business and create that brighter future for all americans. thank you, mr. president. i yield back. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, i want to personally congratulate the senator from ohio. he is one of the most intelligent people in this body. he's had all kinds of experience outside the senate. he's a person everybody should listen to. he makes a lot of sense. he's one of the most valued members of a very strong committee with all kinds of valued members on them. he's one of the most valued members on the senate finance committee, and i have nothing but respect for him. and everything he said here this evening is true. it's mindboggling to me that we even have awghts on the other -- arguments on the other side. we're talking about pulling this country out of the mess it's in and it's going to take this.

i want to compliment the distinguished senator from ohio. he's a terrific human being with a tremendous ability who has had a lot of experience outside of the united states senate and who has been successful everywhere he has gone. he's 1 of the more -- one of the more distinguished members of the senate finance committee. he's not talking politically, he talking factually. i just wish everybody in this body was on the floor to listen to him. i have tre mend respect for him -- tremendous respect for him and that's one reason i am getting up here right now. we can turn this mess around, but if we don't do it soon it may be impossible to turn it around. we've been spending this government into bankruptcy, and that's where we are.

we keep making excuses so that we can go back and beat our breasts and claim we're doing so much for the people when we're just spending them right into bankruptcy. it's making it more difficult for the committees to do their work. i just wish we could get both sides together once in a while instead of having all of this inner conflict on everything that comes up. it's almost like if a republican says something it's got to be contradicted. i might add if a democrat says something, it has to be contradicted. i don't mind good arguments, i don't mind people have different points of view. that's what makes this place a great place. that's what helps the united states of america to be a great country and a great government,

but we don't even listen to each other anymore. where is this bipartisanship that this country really drastically needs? we happen to be in the majority right now. it seems to me a decent minority would want to find ways to work with the, hopefully, decent majority. i think we can be very decent on our side. i believe my colleagues on the other side can and very -- can be very decent. let's get rid of the politics and do what's best for america. let's get this country out of the mess it's in. the distinguished senator from ohio has shown us some ways here. our tax policy is for the birds. we know what we need to do. but every time you raise a

solution, you've got somebody saying, well, that's not the answer. and this we have the conflicts between the two houses. well, that's good because that's what helps us to refine some of this legislation. all i can say is that i just wish all of us would put the country first, put politics second, be politically astute but at least be open to rational reason. whether it comes from the other side or our side. i'm just amazed at how we can sit and belabor these things day in and day out and never really get together. we're hurting the country. we're hurting the country because we're unwilling to get

together. we're hurting the congress of the united states because we're unwilling to get together. i could go on and on about our unwillingness to get together. i think it's time for us to wake up and start saying, let's find common ground. let's find ways of getting together. instead of constantly fighting each other on every stinking issue that comes up. there are reasons for differences in politics, reasons for differences in tax policy, but we ought to be able to at least discuss these differences without total partisanship, which is what we, unfortunately, are suffering from. i believe we can turn this mess around, and if we do, it will be

a banner for everybody to march behind, and it seems to me it will be an example for the whole world. i'd like to see us do it. i know there's people on the other side who can't stand the president. yeah, he won an election that they p didn't think he should -- that they didn't think he should win, but he did win. he's thrown his hands open to the other side, and i believe would do more. it was only seven or eight years ago where he was much more moderate than he is now. and i think all they need to do is to reach out and grab his hands and say, look, we'll find some common ground here in the best interest of our country -- in the best interest of everybody. let's -- it's not bad to fight

things out. i don't have any problem with that. i mean, that's part of this body. that's part of what we do. but you actually have to come to some conclusions that will push the country forward. we're not doing that. except on a limited basis. that really doesn't amount to all that much. look, we're coming to the end of a very difficult year. the democrats thought they were going to win the presidency, and they didn't. they especially feel badly about losing to somebody like donald trump, who i think has held out his hands and his arms for them. and would do so if they would just embrace a little bit more of what he's trying to do.

i would like to see us do this. i believe he would throw his arms out to whoever in this body would work with him. and by working with him, we may be able to get some ideas on both sides actually put into law that may help this country. i really particularly enjoyed and appreciated the comments of the distinguished senator from ohio. i think he's one of the most distinguished people in this body. earlier, i heard the distinguished senator from pennsylvania. he is a brilliant guy who works his butt off to try and get us into good places. we ought to listen more to these fellows. there are folks on the other side who are brilliant, too, who i think could make a real difference. i particularly enjoy my

counterpart on the senate finance committee, senator wyden from oregon. we're different. we have different philosophies. but i have never seen the day when he wasn't willing to sit down and see what we could do to work out our problems. and that to me is pretty important. our leaders are good people. i have watched chuck schumer for all the years he has been in the senate and before. he's a better leader than what we're getting here lately. i have watched mitch mcconnell. mitch is one of the surest people i have seen in this body since i have been a member. he's open. i'd like to see our leaders get together a little bit more, and i'd like to see a little less fighting and a little more constructive work together.

now, i don't expect miracles because i have been here only 41 years, but i do expect that we could do much better than what we're doing. and it's going to take both sides getting together to do it. and we happen to be in the majority right now. the democrats should give us an edge, and we should give them the edge when they're in the majority. i think i for one have done that. so i hope that we can put aside our differences and start working together in the best interests of the country. i believe in this country. it's the greatest country in the world. people all over the world are praying that the united states will get it together. they know that we can lead. they know that we have leadership in the congress of the united states.

we can get it together if we will. mr. president, i appreciate my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. i appreciate we have differences. i appreciate those differences sometimes evolve into pitched battles. that's not all bad either, but it is bad if we don't work things out, and if we don't look for the good on the other side in both ways. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i want to commend the distinguished chairman of the finance committee for his hopes for more bipartisanship and his

concern about the way the senate is working today. i appreciate that. i think we all hope that in the new year there will be more bipartisanship. i think there are some areas where we could work together. on this issue, though, i think we have just some basic disagreements, and we're still debating those and articulating our differences before we cast a vote tonight. i have said for a number of weeks now if not months but certainly weeks when describing the bill that's before us, the prior iteration of the bill in the finance committee and the version in the house, i just thought that each one of them had something a few things in common, in my judgment. this is my sense of the overall bill. first of all, i think every one of these bills has been a giveaway to the rich and the super rich and a giveaway to

profitable corporations. i think it's excessive. we have a difference of opinion on that. this is a tax bill, and yet it will have a substantially adverse impact on health care because of one basic provision that was added in the last couple of weeks. that provision alone will cause health care premiums to increase by an additional 10% a year and will cause 13 million people to lose their health care, according to the congressional budget office, including by one estimate five million fewer americans benefiting from medicaid. at a time when we should invest substantially in the middle class, invest in our children, our roads and bridges, our schools, scientific research, skills training, broadband in rural communities, you could make the list even longer, this tax bill prevents that from

happening in a significant way because of the giveaways that i talked about to profitable corporations and the super rich. this bill will literally pay for a permanent corporate tax cut on the backs of middle-class families in the next decade. congress' official scorekeeper, the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation, tells us in the most -- tells us that in the next decade, meaning the second ten years that this bill is in effect, the bill uses hundreds of billions of tax increases on working families to pay for a permanent corporate rate cut. i'll say that again. in the next decade, taxes go up for you across america, working families, to pay for a 14

percentage point cut for profitable corporations. this kind of result where we have a corporate tax rate that increases debt and someone else has to pay for it down the road, this is a result that only a swamp dweller could support, but unfortunately that's where we are today. how about for children? a lot of discussion about the child tax credit. thankfully, there was debate about that. we don't talk about children in this body nearly enough or that tax credit, but unfortunately even the proposals by some on the republican side weren't adequate enough. even the ones rejected may not have been enough. under this legislation, parents of 10 million children in the lowest income working families will either receive no improvement in the child tax credit or a token increase of $1

to $75. the last-minute changes to the bill which got a lot of publicity in the last couple of days. those last-minute changes to the bill will do nothing additional for these families. another 14 million children in low and middle-class working families would get something by way of the child tax credit, but less than the full $1,000 per child increase that a family making $400,000 a year would receive. for a fraction of the hundreds of billions of dollars going to the very wealthy and profitable corporations, we could have, we could have in this bill made sure that every low-income parent gets the full $2,000 per child tax credit. but because the way the bill is written doesn't allow that to happen for every low-income

parent. i think that would have been a worthy goal of the legislation, but that's not where we are. to say that is unfair is a vast overstatement. the families who need it the most aren't getting the full benefit of the tax credit -- i should say the child tax credit increase. but those who are wealthy get an extra $2,000 a child in tax credit. i mentioned the joint committee on taxation before. let me give you another way to look at the bill according to the joint committee on taxation. the j.c.t. estimates that in 2019 alone, the second year the bill was in effect, were it to pass, 2019 alone, more than $36 billion in tax cuts will go to households worth more than

$1 million. that's in the document entitled jcx-68-17 during the committee on taxation. $36 billion cut to the wealthiest americans, while over 57 million middle-class households -- my definition for those making under $100,000 -- will see a tax increase or a tax cut of less than $9 a month in 2019. so for 57 million middle-class households, they will see a tax increase or a tax cut of less than $9 a month in 2019. instead of lining the pockets of the rich with an additional $36 billion in tax cuts in 2019, those dollars, that money could

have been used to connect americans to the internet, especially americans who live in rural areas. 40% -- let me be more precise. 39% of rural america, the people living in rural america don't have high-speed internet in the united states of america. mr. wyden: would my colleague yield? mr. casey: yes. mr. wyden: my colleague is making a very important point, and i think it would be great if you could repeat those figures, because all night, we have had republican senators come to this floor and say hey, middle class, just wait until february. wait until february, your paychecks are going to be bulging. and i think what my friend from pennsylvania has just said is using this new data, data that we just got from the joint committee on taxation, what we have picked up -- and my friend

from pennsylvania has clearly done his homework -- is something like 67 million taxpayers -- 60 million taxpayers with an annual income of $200,000 or less are going to get practically nothing. maybe $100 a year in tax relief or a tax increase. i think what my colleague is talking about -- and i'd like him to just walk me through those numbers he used because i think it directly contradicts what we have been hearing last night where one republican senator after another is saying it's just going to be good times come february because your paycheck is going to bulge. can my colleague just repeat what he found? mr. casey: i want to make sure if you don't know the document. this is the document entitled jcx-68-17. and if you look at that category of americans who are making $100,000 or less, that's

57 million households who make $100,000 -- or i should say under $100,000, under $100,000, they would see either a tax increase of one kind or another or a tax cut of less than $9 a month in 2019. i don't think that's much help when you consider that it's not as if that's the only revenue available, that's all we can come up with is $9 a month because i just walked through the other number which is relevant, the $36 billion that will come in 2019, the second year that the bill was in effect going to households worth more than $1 million. if i had to choose, i would say we should give all of that $36 billion to middle-class families or folks trying to get to the middle class or at least

a substantial percentage of $36 billion. i have been asking for months why do people making more than a million dollars, why does that category of americans need $36 billion in tax cuts? i don't think they do. it's interesting. i want to commend the work of the ranking member of the finance committee in some of our debates one of the numbers that came out in the last couple of weeks is what happened to the top 1% since 1980? i said several times they have had a bonanza. i didn't have an exact number when i said that. now i do. since 1980 their share of national income -- these are folks in the top 1%, which is less than $1 million a year but it's about $730,000 and up. that's the, the 1% goes beyond the millionaires and up. the top 1% since 1980 has had

their share of national income go from 11% to 20%, from 1980 to 2014. so almost double. so my point is, you know, they've done pretty well since 1980. why do a big share of them, meaning the million-dollar and up crowd, why do they get, or why should they get $36 billion in this tax bill? doesn't make a lot of sense. so that's one way to look at it. what we could invest these dollars in. a bigger tax cut for the middle, a bigger tax cut for those struggling to get to the middle, working families trying to get to the middle or other priorities like infrastructure. i mentioned one idea on rural broadband. i think rural america should get some help being connected to the internet. that's one way that we could focus on priorities. let me give you another example. the estate tax. as many people know, in this

bill the estate tax -- i should say once fully implemented, the bill doubles the estate, doubles the estate tax ax exempting the first 22 million of inheritance from the tax, which is 11 million per individual. that, the cost of doing that will be roughly $9 billion a year. the earlier versions of the house and senate bills, that number was a lot higher, a lot higher revenue loss from the elimination of the estate tax. still even with these changes, a revenue loss of an estimated $9 billion a year. what could we do with $9 billion? we know in the midst of this debate about the children's health insurance program that we need to fund for just for five years of the children's health insurance program, that's roughly the number that we need. so one year of revenue loss in

the estate tax equals five years roughly of paying for the children's health insurance program. and that's not done yet. that was, the children's health insurance program expired september 30. i hope, i hope that in the midst of all of this work on tax policy that we're going to get that done. and i know the distinguished chairman of the finance committee for years from the beginning has been a strong advocate of the children's health insurance program and i commend him for that. but we've got to get it done in a few short days, getting it reauthorized. i want to talk as well about, and i know i'm probably limited on time, i'll move quickly, the republican budget because you can't really read the tax changes in isolation. you have to also consider them in the context of the republican budget resolution that passed. that budget proposal which did pass proposes to cut medicaid by

$1 trillion over the next ten years. that's $1 trillion with a "t" for medicaid. the republican budget also proposes to cut medicare by over $400 billion over the same period, over ten years. so the proposal roughly proposes to cut about $1.5 trillion from just medicare and medicaid. all the while this republican tax bill contains almost the same amount of unpaid for tax cuts. we heard recently from speaker ryan that he wants to, quote, reform, unquote, medicare, medicaid and social security. well, my view of that is when they talk about reform in that context, that means cutting. cutting funding for programs that working men and women of my home state of pennsylvania and the country have paid into to

ensure they have some retirement savings in a safety net for when tragedies and unforeseen events occur. some people refer to social security and medicare as, quote, earned benefits, because they are. they've earned those benefits for social security and medicare. how about outsourcing? the republican tax bill gives u.s. companies who offshore jobs a large tax cut on old profits unavailable to companies who kept jobs and production in the united states. this means that a company who outsourced to mexico to take advantage of cheap labor will pay less taxes on accumulated profits than a domestic company who kept jobs in the united states. in fact, once the bill is enacted, some profits from an overseas factory may never be taxed in the united states while a company that keeps those jobs here could be taxed at the u.s. corporate tax rate.

this disparity could actually encourage companies to move production and jobs overseas. we mentioned earlier the tax cut for major corporations. one of the great leaders of corporate america for many, many years, jack bogle of vanguard said the following a few weeks ago. this is in a -- i don't know what political party jack bogle but he said this most recently about corporate profits, quote, corporate profits after taxes last year were the highest they have ever been in the history of g.d.p., going back to 1929. he goes on to say, jack bogle, we're thinking of giving relief to the corporations at the highest levels ever. individual wages are at the lowest level in about 15 years as a percentage of g.d.p. not my words. jack bogle's words. corporations will have a tax

windfall to spend on increasing executive compensation if they want or increasing stock buy-backs or increasing dividends. all this with absolutely no guarantees that workers will see benefits from this tax cut despite assertions by many here in washington about what would happen on wages and other benefits. mr. president, i just have just maybe three more minutes. i know we may be a little over time. there's been a little bit of discussion, not enough, about what happens to the consumer price index which is used to measure, or used use a baseline for measuring programs over time. maybe the most pernicious tax -- and that's the best word for it -- in the bill is the so-called chained c.p.i., which alters the way inflation is measured. this bill raises an estimated $134 billion on the backs of

hardworking americans by changing how the tax code measures inflation. so-called chained c.p.i. it's a measurement of inflation that's going to change, and that's going to have an adverse consequence for untold millions of americans. this number grows over time. the joint committee on taxation told us that this single provision increases taxes by at least three times as much in the next decade as it did in the first decade, potentially as high as $400 billion in the second ten years. this will be in full force when a lot of young people are entering the workforce. as someone who is just starting their professional life will see this tax increase haunt, haunt their paychecks for the next 50 years. so there's a lot we could talk about in terms of missed opportunities here, but let me just conclude with this, mr. president. there's nothing in this bill that invests in rebuilding

america. i thought weed have an opportunity to -- i thought we'd have an opportunity to do that, but we don't have that opportunity with this bill. we could be using this opportunity to make a substantial investment in roads, bridges, schools, water systems or the like. that won't happen. in our state we've with got 4,500 structurally deficient bridges and we wish we would have some more help in addition to state dollars going for those. nothing in the bill to expand college affordability, nothing to ensure workers' wages increase. amendments like that were offered in the committee, and it was all democrats for the amendment, all republicans against it. those in the middle class and those working to join the middle class continue to tread water in this bill while the super rich zoom ahead. mr. president, i would yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. young: mr. president, i rise today in support of the tax cut and jobs act. we know the world has changed a whole lot in the last 30 years. the way we travel, how we communicate, the way we work, our hey styles, the clothes we -- our hair styles, the clothes we wear, music we listen to, the movies we watch but one thing hasn't changed, our outdated tax code hasn't kept up. we simply can't afford to wait any longer. now is the time to act. hoosiers need a raise. working families across america need a raise. american businesses need to remain competitive in what is an increasingly global and hypercompetitive economy. and the bill we're voting on today will provide real relief

to all americans, especially middle-class families and those of modest means. the tax cuts and jobs act will create a tax code that is simpler, that is fair, and that allows hoosiers to keep more of their hard-earned money. and that's what they want. this bill we're voting on today will help create an environment where jobs and businesses can grow by making permanent a 21% corporate tax reduction. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. that is no way to remain competitive. we will lighten the burden on small businesses with this legislation. i come from a small business family. my dad, he worked six, seven days a week growing up. he'd sell hvac equipment, spent a lot of time on the road. i know because he told me that it irked him that when he added

up his profits, he discovered towards the end of the year that over half of what he earned, he paid away to various forms of government. we provide relief to businesses like that. we shift the structure of the international tax system so that foreign profits from u.s.-based companies will be invested right here in american communities. not overseas. throughout this process, i've listened carefully to extensive feedback from the people of indiana, and i have to say i am grateful for all the hoosiers who weighed in over the course of this effort. they helped me shape this work product in a way that will more benefit the people of indiana. today and future generations. i heard, for example, from susan from indianapolis. susan said our tax system has

become so complicated, so complicated, the average person needs to hire someone with expertise to help. if most of us didn't have to hire help, right there we'd be saving money. susan, you're right. and that's why we've lightened the burden for millions of americans with this proposal. under this act that we'll be voting on this evening, nine out of ten americans can take the standard deduction. we have doubled the standard deduction. vastly simplifying compliance with a convoluted, unfair tax code that picks winners and losers. we undo so much of that with this bill we'll vote on this evening. i heard from debbie from clark county. debbie contacted my office about her business' challenges. debbie said the following, we're constantly striving to

reinvest in our company through new equipment and increase wages to hire and retain good employees. a lower tax rate will allow us to buy p more equipment and offer better wages. it's common sense. and i'm glad that debbie contacted me to reinforce what is on the mind of so many hoosier business owners. well, this bill continues and expands the support for indiana's highest priorities, and that's why i will be supporting it. among these priorities are the deductions for contributions to benefit our charitable organizations, essential to communities throughout indiana and throughout our country. keeping tuition waivers for graduate students untaxed. here again, i thank the glad watt students and all the stakeholders throughout indiana who had concerns related though

this issue. they weighed in. we made changes to the legislation to accommodate their concerns. and this will enable hoosiers to be better equipped to thrive in this ever-changing global economy in which we live. we've managed to maintain the earned income tax credit so that work pays more than joblessness. we have expanded the child tax credit for families trying to make ends meet. we have protected the adoption tax credit so that caring adults can become loving parents. and we preserve private activity bonds. these benefit low-income housing, help build hospitals and schools and other essential programs in the communities that need them most. now, the bill also makes good on its promise to repeal what many record as the most oppressive aspect of obamacare.

the individual mandate tax. i promised hoosiers for years and years because i would get rid of the individual mandate. tonight we will be fulfilling that promise. in indiana, nearly 140,000 hoosiers chose to pay this tax instead of buying insurance they either don't want or can't afford. in my home state, 81% of those who paid this tax made less than $50,000 per year. this comes from the i.r.s. in 40 years of the people who pay this tax make less than $25,000 a year. tell me this isn't a tax on the working poor. this bill lifts the burden for families in indiana and across the country, and it's one of the many reasons that i will be proudly supporting it.

collectively, this is a no-brainer. this legislation will lead to an increase in capital investment which will lead to an increase in economic growth. this bill will make workers more productive so that they earn me higher wages. this bill across every income category will cause americans to see a reduction in their tax rates and more take-home pay, more of their hard-earned money in their pockets. so many americans haven't seen an increase in take-home pay in well over a decade. it's time to provide relief to hardworking american families. it's time to create certainty for our job creators so that they can create more jobs. i look forward to helping move this legislation across the finish line this evening. i hope we get some bipartisan support in that effort. i thank you, mr. president, and i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: madam president, today is a terrible day. it's a terrible day for millions of working families in this country. they just want congress to work for them. it is a terrible day for people who just want to get on with their lives and not have congress cost them even more money. it is a terrible day for millions of hardworking people, but it is a great day for giant multinational corporations and billionaires who fund republican campaigns across this country. today is their day. every fundraiser, every fact check from a billionaire and every champagne and caviar party has been about getting to this day, the day when the politicians that they put in charge of washington would pay them back with a $1.5 trillion giveaway.

now, supporters of this bill call it tax reform. it's not tax reform. it is a heist. a heist that steals from millions of middle-class families and hands out money over to the wealthy. a heist that will hurt medicare and social security and reduce health care coverage by 13 million people in order to hand over money to giant corporations that are already rolling in profits, a heist that will hurt our economy and blow a hole in our national debt. the american people have seen through this scam. they see through every lie that's been pushed forward. they know that this bill doesn't provide middle-class tax relief. it ultimately raises taxes on more than 60% of working families in this country. they know that this bill does not promote economic growth. nonpartisan projections have

shown it will have a negligible impact. even former republican officials admit it. and they know that this bill won't raise wages for working people. corporate c.e.o.'s have already said so. those c.e.o.'s have said everyone who will listen that when they get their truckloads of money from the g.o.p. tax bill, they will turn right around and funnel that money to their wealthy shareholders. and they know that this bill isn't even to help americans. a third of those shareholders who will get truckloads of money from the g.o.p. bill don't even live in the united states. over the last month and a half, we have all watched as one republican senator after another has cast aside every single one of their supposed principles, to get behind this monstrosity of a bill. real relief for the middle class, gone.

concern about the national debt, gone. concern about economic growth, gone. now, there is only one principle left. reward billionaire campaign donors. this is not a conspiracy theory. this is not a partisan attack. it is what republicans in congress are saying in public to reporters. as one of my republican colleagues said in a moment of honesty, if they don't pass this tax giveaway bill, financial contributions will stop, and a republican house member said big donors told him to pass the tax bill or don't ever call them again. let's call this out for what it is. it's government for sale, and that's how you end up with a $1.5 trillion tax giveaway to corporations at a time of record corporate profits.

you know, it's not supposed to be this way. congress is elected by the people. it is supposed to represent their interests, not those of the people and companies rich enough to fund campaigns. and boy, is there a lot of work for us to do. over the last 30 years, corporate profits have skyrocketed while wages for working people have stayed flat. but even though corporations, not families, have been getting richer and richer, congress has forced families to pick up more and more of the costs of our military, our roads and bridges, and our schools. corporations used to pay about 30% of the cost of running the government. now it's under 10%, but today the politicians who run congress will slash corporate taxes even more and shift even more of the burden on to working families. working people will pay more so that giant corporations can pay

less. there is no better example of this than the bill's treatment of wells fargo. last year, we found out that wells fargo had opened millions of fake accounts so that executives could goose their sales numbers, drive up stock prices, and rake in bigger bonuses. and it turns out wells fargo has also charged half a million customers for auto insurance which they didn't need, which meant a lot of people including soldiers, sailors, marines, got their cars repossessed. sounds pretty sleazy, huh? but instead of holding them accountable for cheating their consumers, this congress is on the verge of passing a tax bill that will shower more free money on wells fargo than any bank in the country. that right. when this bill passes, the punishment for wells fargo's cheating millions of americans

will be a big gift-wrapped present worth billions of dollars in tax giveaways. this tax bill is shameful, and it is the result of a shameful process. no hearings on a bill that overhauls the tax code and shifts around trillions of dollars, no input from a single democrat, no time for vetting by actual tax experts. oh, big-time donors are happy, very happy with this outrageous tax heist, but the american people, the american people are angry, and they are right to be angry. over and over again and again, they have watched this congress ignore their pressing problems, ignore children's health insurance, ignore flat wages, ignore an opioid crisis, ignore hurricanes and wildfires, ignore working families that are ripped

apart by grainy politicians and politics built right here in washington. over and over again and again, they watch instead as washington jumps to do more favors for billionaires, more favors for giant companies, and more favors for campaign donors. today is just one more terrible day for hardworking americans, just one more terrible day in washington where washington works great for those at the top and won't lift a finger to help anyone else. people's anger is understandable. i share it, and sooner or later, a reckoning is coming. and i promise you this -- when it does, when the politicians who leave this congress and vote for this tax heist are held accountable for turning their backs on the american people who

sent us here, then, then we will be the kind of country we want to be. then we will be the kind of country we were meant to be, a democracy where everyone, even the richest and the most powerful, pay a fair share, and where we all work to build a better future for all of our kids. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: mr. president, c-span is an interesting phenomenon. when i go back home to illinois, i run into people who say i saw you on c-span, and i often joke and say do you have trouble sleeping? why are you watching c-span? because i wonder who it is that really watches c-span. it could be a lot of people who are really fascinated by politics. it could be folks who are finding it difficult to sleep.

and it could be some older folks who just pass the time by watching what goes on on the floor of the senate and the house. but tonight i think we have a special audience on c-span. tonight i think it is entirely possible that we are going to have the wealthiest section of crowd awed yens, television viewers in the history of c-span. do you know why? they have a bill coming up, a bill that is designed for them, for the wealthiest people in america. and so they are probably at this point trying to figure out how to livestream c-span onto their yachts so they can see if this tax bill is going to pass. why would they do that? why would they be tuned in? because this is the biggest tax break for the wealthiest people in the history of tax code reform. it is. it turns out that in 2027, 83% of the tax breaks in this bill go to the top 1% of wage earners

in america. boy, how could you sit down and write a tax bill that is so lopsided for the wealthiest people in america. you had to to have said to the staff first, find out what taxes are left that the wealthy might pay and get rid of them, reduce them right and left, and they did. imagine that's your starting point for tax code reform in america. that you are ignoring working families and the reality of the life that they lead. you are ignoring small and medium-sized businesses, and you're focusing on the wealthiest people in america and the biggest corporations. do you know what i found in illinois? when you travel around my state and meet the business leaders and ask them point-blank tell me about federal taxes, the biggest corporations never complain, because the tax code is loaded with escape hatches for the biggest and wealthiest corporations and individuals.

it's the small and medium-sized businesses that pay the most taxes. they are the ones that should have been the biggest beneficiaries on this bill. and secondly, the working families, people that are struggling paycheck to paycheck can't save money for their kids' future, worry about their kids' student loans. wouldn't it have been great if this tax code reform really focused on them instead of the wealthiest people in america? you know, it's a stereotype, i know, that the republicans worry about the rich instead of the working folks, but when you look at this bill, sadly, that's the reality. here's the good news, if there is any good news in that terrible story that i just recounted. the american people get it. they understand it. how in the world could you write a bill and call it tax reform and tax cuts and have two-thirds of america hate it instantly? they did it. congratulations. you put together a bill which instinctively the american people knew was a bad deal for

them, and it is. when you take a look at this bill, you realize why we're asked to vote on this republican tax plan, a plan written behind closed doors and rushed through congress on a last-minute rush this year. it's because the republicans are bound and determined to have something that they passed this year. in all fairness, they passed the defense authorization bill, but they spent month after month on repeal and failure to replace our health care system. and now before they leave town, the end of this calendar year, they're bound and determined to get this done whatever it takes, their so-called tax reform plan. after a year of control in congress and the white house and extraordinarily few legislative achievements to show for it republicans are forcing through this partisan tax plan a few short weeks after it was unveiled. you may not remember unless you were watching c-span that night i came to the floor when we were

finally given the senate tax bill. it was about 500 pages long. as i was going through it on page 275, i looked -- 257 i thought what is this, a page in the middle of the tax bill with scribbled handwriting which was impossible to read. now remember, this is a tax code that is going to have an impact on individuals, families, and businesses to the tune of millions of dollars. and here was a page in it which no one could read. and you know why i know no one can read it? i submitted it to the record and the clerk of the senate found me afterwards and said senator we can't this in the "congressional record" because we can't read it. that's what was going on here in writing the tax code of the united states of america. it was a slap-dash, hurried effort that sadly does not reflect the best of this institution or the best of the membermembers who are part of i. why would they do this?

because if this bill were subject to proper scrutiny, as it should have been, only really reform the tax code once every several decades a monumental thing to america would have occurred. while folks and their families are getting ready for the holidays my republican colleagues and friends are hoping most americans will be too busy to notice them passing a tax bill that will raise taxes on middle-income families. this is supposed to be the greatest deliberative body in the world, the united states senate. and my republican colleagues throughout regular order and bipartisan input right out the window of the capitol, they spent the past two weeks behind closed doors writing the final version of this tax bill. only last friday evening -- last friday -- we finally saw the text of this tax plan fully released, fully revealed.

more than 1,000 pages of new tax code, and that's what we're expected to understand and to vote on in a matter of days. are the memories of my republican colleagues so short they forgot their repeated calls of read the bill when we considered the affordable care act? did they forget their criticism of that process which took place incidentally over many months characterized by transparency, multiple bipartisan hearings and included well over 100 republican amendments? have they forgotten all the criticism they leveled on that effort to try to provide health insurance for more americans? this is no way for major legislation to be written, this tax bill before us. and it's certainly, it certainly reflects the best wishes and hardest work of many of the lobbyists and corporate donors who benefit my republican colleagues. is it any wonder that after this rushed process the initial

analysis of the final bill shows that millions of working families in illinois and across the nation will be hurt while the wealthiest 1% of wage earners in america receive a massive windfall? sadly, it's no surprise. in their plan, republicans chose to make essentially all provisions of the tax bill temporary in order to pay for massive permanent corporate cuts that will make overwhelmingly, overwhelming benefits for wealthy investors. the result, as i said, when the bill is fully phased in in 2027, more than half of all americans will see their taxes increase under the republican plan. these are tax increases that will be felt particularly hard by those in households in the bottom 60% and those families with kids. by 2027, while middle-income

families pay a higher tab, the richest 1% of americans will receive a whopping 83% of all the tax cuts under this plan. i just can't believe they pulled this off. that the republicans figured out how to give 83% of the tax breaks to the top 1% of wage earners in america and sell it as tax reform to help working families, it's indefensible. this devastating result is baked into the d.n.a. of this republican plan from the start. there is no greater example of this than the republicans' determination to erode state and local tax deductions. it used to be a standard principle in american taxation that you wouldn't tax people on the money they paid in other taxes. we don't tax a tax until this bill came along. we used to say if you pay a state income tax, that amount of money, or state sales tax or

state property tax we're not going to impose a federal tax on your tax payment. no tax on a tax. they didn't buy it. they changed it. they put limits on the amount of deduction that you can make for this. what does it mean? ask the realtors in my state, the home builders, and they'll tell you that this is going to be a damper on economic growth in the state of illinois, a growth that we desperately need in my state to create jobs and opportunities. this final deduction is taken by nearly one-third of all taxpayers and taxpayers in my home state benefit from it among the most in the nation. the principle is simple. illinoisans under the new republican plan will start paying federal taxes on the local, state property taxes that they pay, and they don't receive the deduction that historically has been there. republicans apparently feel differently because in the face of weeks of warnings from realtors, home builders, local school districts, state and local officials and first

responders about the increased difficulty which the elimination of this deduction will create, it didn't deter them one bit, and every single illinois republican congressman ignored all of this and voted for this terrible plan. it means higher tax bills for middle-income families in my state and many others and a strain on crucial state and local investments in education, infrastructure, and public safety. that isn't the only hit to middle-income families. here's the one that i find the most reprehensible. millions of people will lose health insurance because of this tax reform bill. it guts one of the major provisions of the affordable care act. after failing miserably to achieve one of their campaign promises to repeal the affordable care act and take away health care from millions of families, republicans slipped nooj tax bill a provision that undermines the affordable care act. the net result of it is an

increase of 10% to 20% for health insurance premiums for those buying in the marketplace, and, this is a kicker 13 million americans are goings to lose health insurance because of this tax reform bill brought to us by republicans. i don't know how you can go home and say good news i gave a tax break to corporations and average americans are going to lose their health insurance? how can say that is good for your state or country. republicans give tax cuts to the wealthy, shouldn't surprise us. the surprise here is that so many of the so-called fiscal hawks, how many times have i heard my republican colleagues come to the floor and pose for holy pictures when it comes to the national debt? oh, it goes over and over again, the speeches they give when there's a democratic president. now that there's a republican president, political amnesia

has set in. it turns out that this republican tax reform, giving tax breaks to the wealthy and not to the middle-income families of america, will add $1.5 trillion to our national debt. so who will pay off that debt for these tax breaks to the wealthy? i'm afraid it's our kids and our grandkids. somehow these fiscal hawks are able to convince themselves that cutting taxes on the wealthy is worth a new burden on our kids. when you get past all the fancy rhetoric, the bottom line is the republicans believe we can afford to add $1.5 trillion to the debt if it means giving tax cuts to the wealthy. but we can't afford it as a nation when we know that we need to make massive investments in things that mean a lot to working families. shouldn't we have put more money in fighting the opioid crisis? it claimed almost 2,000 lives last year in my home state of illinois. shouldn't we have put more money in helping kids go to college so

they aren't burdened with student loans it that change their lives? shouldn't we have put more money into medical research? couldn't we have put more money into investing in our infrastructure? no. the republicans say there's a much higher priority: tax cuts for wealthy people. what does make sense to my constituents and millions more across america is that a $1.5 trillion increase in the national debt poses a real threat to our economic future. and a threat to the future of medicare and medicaid. paul ryan, speaker of the house, republican leader, said they're going to take care of the added deficit and debt by cutting entitlement programs like medicare and medicaid. i would say to paul ryan, my neighbor from wisconsin, you're in for a fight, my friend, and it won't be just the democrats. it will be a lot of folks in wisconsin who aren't going to stand for that outcome. americans deserve better than what the republican leaders in congress brought to us in this

bill rushed through without bipartisan consideration and without review by experts. this may be a, quote, big political win for the republican party and their donors, but it's on the backed of hardworking families. some of these consequences that we face are already dangerously clear. others which we'll only discover as we poar throug -- pore throue fine print on this 1,000 page bill, we can only guess what they mean. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. a senator: thank you, mr. president. mr. perdue: i come from a different world, mr. president. i come from the real world. i've been here just a couple years, but this sort of rhetoric that we hear on the floor of the senate in the last few weeks is amazing to me. the disinformation, the knowing misleading statements that are made, that doesn't exist for very long in the real world, mr. president, because there are rules and regulations out

there where that's taken care of. but it seems that if you're good at it in this body, and can get away with it long enough, that what vladimir lenin once said can be true and that is this. it doesn't matter what you say is true. it only matters that you say it and say it and say it, and pretty soon to the common folks of your country it becomes a truth. well, mr. president, i think we have lived through a century where we've done nothing but disprove that as a free society here and as a leader of the free world. and i think what's at stake tonight in this vote is bigger than just a few changes in our tax code. good grief, we could work for the next ten years and not clean up every detail in this tax code. but this is the first step to bringing sanity back to our country. let me put a little perspective on this, mr. president. let's talk about what president trump inherited when he took office in january of this year. we had eight years of the lowest economic growth in the history

of the united states, mr. president, 1.9%. we had th lowest workforce participation rate in over 40 years. in the last eight years, mr. president, we borrowed 35% of every dollar that we spent by the federal government, this body, borrowed before you and i got in the city. in the last eight years and in the last administration, where under six years of that eight years the opposing part in this body had a supermajority for two years, had a majority for four. for six years that party had the white house and they had a majority in this senate at least. in those eight years, they doubled our national debt, from $10 trillion to $20 trillion this year. even though last year, or the last year of the last administration, in 2016, our federal government collected more federal tax than any other

year in our history. ithe last few years have been te same. but with all that borrowing, even when the last administration said we need to fix the infrastructure, we need to get the economy going, they put $1 trillion into fake infrastructure investments, mr. president, and none of these parameters -- we still had no economic growth. this is the same party that liberalized social security and medicare to the point where they're not sustainable. and just in 14 years, 14 years both those trust funds go to zero. this is not about going to medicare and social security and finding money to give to the rich, mr. president. this is trying to figure out how to get the economy going so we can save social security and medicare. it's no more complicated than that. but what we hear here are words like shameful, ridiculous. i think what president trump walked into here was shameful and ridiculous. the united states, the wealthiest country in the

history of the world, to have those sorts of performance parameters is ridiculous. it is shameful. there will be a day of reckoning, and it's today, mr. president. our president took that seriously. he said that job one is growing the economy. let's put that in perspective. he said in his first year in his administration he wanted to focus on three things that would grow the economy. one i -- one is he wanted to pull back on regulation. i want to tell you today that 860 of the most onerous regulations and rules have been reversed so far this year. the second thing president trump said, he wanted to work on energy. well, we got the keystone pipeline working. he actually moved on stopping the clean power plan that was thwarting the energy production in this country, and in this bill tonight, we will open up the anwr production capability to give us capability in the energy side of our economy. the third thing the president said he wanted to do was change

our archaic tax plan, not to give money to the rich, mr. president, but to open our companies and our workers to be more competitive with the rest of the world. for the last decade, maybe even for the last 30 years, mr. president, i have lived this in my career. in 40 years, i have watched u.s. competitiveness decline and decline and decline. why? because of two reasons. our federal government grew out of any proportion. in 2000, the size of our government was $2.4 trillion, mr. president. last year, it was $4 trillion. that's under one republican administration and one democratic administration. but we poured regulation on top of regulation. we liberalized all of our social programs to a point that we cannot afford it. and the second thing we did is we loaded onto this tax situation where we lost our competitiveness with the rest of the world. the rest of the world lowered their tax rates while we actually increased ours. they reduced their regulations while we increased ours. we just simply lost our

competitive edge, such that today, mr. president, two out of every three acquisitions regarding a u.s. company are u.s. companies being bought by foreign companies. now, that's a c corporation. in many cases, it's an s corporation. and why is that? it's because of the tax arc traj, the difference between our 35% corporate tax rate and the average of 18% in asian countries and 21% in europe, and all we're doing here is trying to reach to some point of being reasonably competitive with the rest of the world. so this president walked into a disaster, mr. president. and what we have seen in the first year are dramatic results. two million new jobs have been created this year. 860 regulations reversed. illegal crossings at the southern border are down 60%, mr. president. we passed a bill in this body 97-2 that allows a department head in the veterans administration to remove people for cause for lack of performance. and guess what? so far this year, over 500

people have been asked to leave because of performance reasons in our veterans administration. that's something that both democrats and republicans should be proud of. we also see a department of education that has removed 300 people for the same reason. c.e.o. confidence is at a 20-year high, mr. president. consumer confidence, despite what the other side wants to tell us, is at a 16-year high, and many studies are proving that today. but i want to tonight clear up some of the absolute unbelievable mistruths and myths about this bill being perpetrated. we heard several just in the last hour here on this floor, mr. president. the first, the great one, i love this. this tax plan is only going to help the wealthy. we're going to tax the low-income people in america, and we're going to give it to the billionaires. mr. president, let me just give you some examples here. a median income family today, family of four who work, family of four, two kids, who make a

median income of $73,000 a year is going to get a $2,200 tax reduction. that's a 60% reduction in their federal tax rate, mr. president. a single working mother, as an example, with one child at home, now, this is a parent that has to find child care, has to find her way to work, gets very little help from family or friends, i know many people like this. that person is going to get a 75% tax cut in this bill, mr. president. beyond that, today 52% of households in america, 52% of households in america pay zero income tax, mr. president. but this bill goes further. up to six million people will potentially be removed from the tax rolls because of this bill. i'm just a simple business guy, mr. president, but i just look at the facts. these are mathematical facts

here. there is no projection, no opinion. this is part of this current bill that belies half of the mistruths you just heard in the last hour on this floor. the second one is a process question. of course, this is what we always hear the minority party say. i dare say as an outsider i heard republicans say this in the last six years where there is no transparency. oh, we didn't have due process. there is no regular order. well, mr. president, in the last few years, there have been over 70 public hearings, senate hearings in committees about tax reform. this particular bill has been in full regular order. yes, it was done in reconciliation, but that is regular order. i personally would have preferred not to have done that, but it's within regular order. it went through committee. amendments were put up and passed and debated in committee. then the bill was brought to the floor. amendments here on this floor. and then it went to a full vote and was passed or will be passed

tonight, mr. president. this tax plan, the second -- the third plan, this plan will not generate economic growth. this is a really rich one, mr. president, because most of the people saying that have never written their signature on the front of the check. they just simply haven't been in business. these are now newfound experts in the body. it's not going to grow the economy. of course it's not. we need bigger government to grow the economy. haven't we proven it? no. we have disproven it. anything over the last eight years, mr. president, we have proven it. bigger government does not correlate with a better growing competitive economy. what this simply does is it gets government back out of the way to some degree, helps us become competitive with the rest of the world, and ignites this economy. let's just look at what is being said about this. first of all, it has been estimated that nearly one million new jobs will be derived because of this bill. it's estimated that annual incomes of working americans will go up somewhere between

$4,000 and $9,000. that's in addition to the tax cuts, mr. president. that's because of the demand for labor in a growing economy will create rising wages. the other side said well, to get rising wages, you need to increase minimum wage. that's the wrong way to look at this thing. this bill, i can tell you from personal experience will create demand for labor, and that labor will increase in price. g.d.p. will grow somewhere between 3% and 5% over the next decade. i actually believe it will be much more than that. the big one in my mind is by eliminating the repatriation tax. we're the last country in the world to still have this archaic tax which we collect no tax on today, but eliminating that brings almost -- over $2.6 trillion back in this country. now, mr. president, the other side said well, that's not going to get in the economy. it's going to be paid in dividends or pay down debt. guess what? in a capitalistic society, that is all contributory. it all adds to the aggregate benefit of growing the economy.

capital formation is part of what created this economic miracle in the first place. the last 70 years in america has been the greatest period of economic growth in the history of humankind. i would argue, mr. president, as a 40-year experienced veteran of the business community here, as the only fortune 500 c.e.o. in the senate and in all of congress, i would argue that this economic windfall that we have experienced over the last 70 years in america is based on three things. on the top of the best workforce in the history of the world, its innovation, capital formation, and the rule of law. quite frankly, because of regulations in this body over the last 15 years and because of our tax code, we have taken those for granted. tonight we begin to reverse that. the next claim i want to debunk is that this tax plan adds a trillion dollars -- i love this one. this tax plan is going to add a trillion dollars to the debt. this is from the other side that administered over doubling our debt in the last decade.

mr. president, no other president in the history of our country, part of the last administration added $10 trillion to the debt of this nation. there is no bigger debt hawk in this body than i, and i can tell you this is what brought me into the political arena. this $20 trillion debt is the beginning, it's not the end of the story. unless we do something today about our federal debt, it's going to grow $11 trillion is the latest estimate over the next decade. most of that is in the mandatory side, mr. president. to solve this debt crisis, clearly we have to grow the economy, but we will not solve the debt crisis only by growing the economy. but we will not solve it unless we start by growing the economy. excuse me. we're told by the joint committee on taxation and by the congressional budget office, and both of these modeling groups i have personal problems with, but

even if you take their worst case scenarios, mr. president, you only have to grow the economy .2% per year. that's going from 1.9%, which is the average baseline in the last eight years, growing by .2% to 2.1% for the next decade. now, mr. president, there has only been one time in the last one decade in the last 70 years where this economy didn't grow more than 2.5%. and in that decade, it grew 2.3%. so in no decade since world war ii have we grown less than 2.3%. in addition, c.b.o. says we have to grow 2.3%. mr. president, the last two quarters are already over 3%. the fourth quarter looks like it will be as well if we pass this tax bill tonight. it just seems to me that the people who have experience in the real-world economy know that investing in our workers is the best investment we can make, and that's what this tax bill does. don't be confused by the rhetoric. members of the other body in the

last hour said there is going to be a day of reckoning. you know what there is. because i believe that the other side have failed the working poor in this country. the best example is obamacare, perpetrated by the supermajority of 60 votes on the other side, and we know it's now collapsing under its own weight, but this is what they have done to the working poor in america, mr. president. in 2014, it's been that way since -- in the last three years as well, but 2014 is the last year we can get from the i.r.s. under obamacare, the i.r.s. fined eight million people in america $2 billion, mr. president. and the irony of that is that half of those people make less than $25,000. now, mr. president, that is outrageous. and for those same people to beat their chests now about this being for the rich, it is further outrageous. i'll close with this. this bill, the biggest argument they make is that this is for the rich. and the rich are not paying their fair share.

look, the top 1% today pay about 40% of all tax revenues that we have. the top 10% pay over 70%. that's before this bill, and that's going to be true after this bill, mr. president. what's going to be also true is the fact that working men and women of america will find that their place in mind, whether it be a one-man self-proprietorship, one-woman self-proprietorship or major corporation, those corporations are going to find themselves more competitive because of what president donald h. trump is doing in his tax bill and what we are backing up tonight. i argue that this is a historic day, not just because of tax relief for the working men and women of america or building competitiveness for those same people around the world, but for our kids and grandkids, mr. president, so that we can begin to deal with this huge, growing debt. people say well, you're adding debt to it. no, this is an investment. and by the way, it's not $1.5 trillion, mr. president. they know that $500 billion of

it, a third of it is this policy versus law, they know that. but it still makes a better story. they also know that $200 billion of that is fake cost because it says if you eliminate the way it's scored right now, if you eliminate the repatriation tax, the joint committee on tax and congressional budget office in their infinite wisdom say well, that's going to cost you over $200 billion. mr. president, we don't collect $200 billion today in repaid ration tax. this is what as an outsider i look at and i cannot believe that we sit here and talk about these fake numbers that way. mr. president, the president of the united states has a vision for our country. we need to rise up and be competitive again in order to deal with this long-term tax situation, but more importantly or as importantly, to be able to afford to do the right things for our people when we have hurricanes, when we have fires, we don't have the resources to do that. every dime we're spending behind these hurricanes and behind the fires and behind all the things we're doing is borrowing.

every dime we spend on our military today, mr. president, is borrowed money. the only way to eventually change that is to begin to grow our economy. this is only one of many steps that are required, but this doesn't becomes historic because you can't do the others unless you make this economy competitive. i want to praise our president tonight for having the guts to stick through this process, but we are going to pass this bill tonight and make america great again because we're going to make america competitive again. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, the american people understand this bill. they understand that this bill will hurt middle-class families, and they know this bill will add to the deficit. they understand the joint committee on tax has scored the bill as adding to the deficit, and i hear so many of my republican friends talk about being deficit hawks. we follow the recommendations of

our professionals. this bill will add to the deficit. that is why the american people believe this tax bill, which has been advertised by the republicans as a tax cut, is not good for america. that's an extraordinary thing to get the majority of americans against a bill that is purported to be a tax cut. ever that's because they understand it's not a tax cut for middle-class families. the corporate tax rate will be reduced from 25% to 21%. that is a substantial reduction in the corporate tax rate. only 5% of the largest businesses in america pay the corporate tax rate. this is paid by mega corporations. they are getting a tax cut and you look at the cost of that tax cut as scored by the joint commission on taxation, the professionals, and it's about $1.5 trillion of business tax

relief, and guess who pace that -- pays that $1.5 trillion. it goes on our national debt and middle-income taxpayers will be asked to foot the bill. they understand it will not help middle-income families. you are not helping middle-income families when you raise the estate tax limits. it only affects the .2% wealthiest in america. they are getting a break. already we have a concentration of wealth in america, the top 1% own close to 40% of the wealth of america. they understand that doesn't help middle-income families because they understand that we have seen in america the shrinking of the middle class, that we've had an increase in income and wealth disparity in america. that's not good for our economy, that's not how you grow an economy. you grow a middle class. this bill will not grow a middle

class, this bill will make it even more extreme, the income and wealth disparities in the country. they also get it when we talk about what is temporary and what is permanent. i appreciate my friends talking about the deficit. they don't include the fact that many of these tax provisions are only temporary, such as the tax relief for individuals. that is temporary, the business tax is permanent. i hear my republican friends say, we'll extend that. if you extend it, the deficit is larger than the $1.5 trillion. why are the middle-class families that get some of the benefits of the bill, when you add it all up, they lose, but the benefits they get are temporary. business tax relief is permanent. this bill is an assault on middle-income families. when we look at the deficit and how we have to pay off that

deficit and who will pay off that deficit, it will be middle-income families will be left holding the bill. we know that and that's why this bill is not popular, that's why we know that it is not good for middle-income families and it is not good for our economy. we go further than that. they even go further. it has been pointed out in the senate they added a provision that is now in the conference report that takes out an essential part of the affordable care act on individual responsibility that would ultimately leave about 13 million americans without health insurance. now, mr. president, why was this done? it was done for two reasons. first the republicans have been trying to repeal the affordable care act, and these are 13 million people who have benefits today who will lose it, but the second thing is you can use those savings -- and they are not real savings many we're talking about less money being

used to help people get health insurance. use that to provide additional tax cuts for wealthy americans and corporations so you're knocking 13 million people out of health insurance, using that money in order to extend these tax breaks for higher income and businesses. that is unconscionable. what's going to come next when you're not even subtle about this. you are now going to say the deficit is even bigger than expected. you're not deficit hawks when you deficit finance a tax cut. that's not helping this country. what comes next? we'll have to cut medicare and medicaid. who suffers then? it will be middle-income families. then we have to look at the federal budget. i heard some of my colleagues already talk about this. we saw plans that we're going to take it out on the federal workforce which has already

contributed about $182 billion to the deficit, getting pay adjustments blow the -- below the cost of living and going through sequestrations and shutdowns, asked to do more with less. we are talking about critical services to the american people, whether it's the research at the national national institutes of health, food safety, whether we're talking about dealing with the opioid epidemic in america. all of that is at jeopardy. we know they are coming back with cuts in the program because we now have a bigger deficit as a result of giving corporations these big tax cuts -- not all businesses, just the biggest businesses, and giving high-income people this tax relief. that's why the american people do not like this bill. we talked about creating jobs. i hear my friend again talk about creating one million jobs,

spending $1.5 trillion and creating one million jobs. we had a surplus that took one-time only revenues and said the only responsible thing would be to use that for infrastructure and if we could get that up to $300 billion, we created four million jobs. four million jobs for $300 billion. here you have one million jobs, by your own number, spending $1.5 trillion. it's a terrible investment for the american people. we can do better, but this bill is also an attack on our states. it's an attack on marylanders, it's an attack on the state of maryland. marylanders will come out much worse under this bill and there are many reasons for it, but one of the major reasons is that the bill eliminates the deduction for state and local taxes.

i'm going to talk a moment about that because i did serve on the state legislature, as did many of the members of this body, and i believe that we should respect state and local government. it's the same taxpayer that pays local taxes, pays state taxes, pays federal taxes. ever since we app don't a federal -- adopted a federal income tax, one of the only provisions that has remained in tact is to say we're not going to tax on tax. we're not going to impose taxes on state and local taxes, and that is one of the reasons that the constitutional amendment was changed to allow income taxes and now we're breaking that commitment on federalism. we're really breaking the constitutional spirit to tell our state and local government that's we're going to -- governments that we going to impose taxes on taxes and -- and

so in maryland about 45% of marylanders use the state and local tax deduction. we happen to rank number one in the nation on the number of taxpayers that use state and local tax deductions on their federal income tax returns. and the average amount -- the average amount in maryland on deductions for state and local taxes is $12,900. that's the average. the average taxpayer in maryland is going to pay more taxes as a result of the $10,000 limit that's impose haded in this bill -- imposed in this bill. it gets worse for marylanders, and this i think will be typical for a lot of states in the nation. married has itemized deductions as many states do, but i think marylanders are going to be surprised to find out that they may not qualify for itemizing their deductions at the federal level because as a result of the

changes that have been made here only about 5% of the people in this country will still use the itemized deduction. so you go to do your federal taxes, then go your -- go to your state thinking that you can deduct at the state, only to find that you can't deduct it because we hormonnize -- harmonize with the federal government. you didn't think about that when you put the provision in the bill. we never had a hearing on that provision. we never brought state people into our committee and say, what happens if we raise the standard deduction. what impact does it have on the states. what happens if we eliminate state and local tax deductions. we haven't had those discussions. it will be more challenging for our state and local governments to meet their needs. they had the primary function for educating our children be

keeping our community safe. that's a primary function of local government, sanitation, and dealing with public health. it's going to be much more challenging for our state and local government to be able to do their finance. did we consider that when we took up the bill? the answer is no. there are so many consequences to this bill that have not really been thought out. let me just give you a few. there's a reason why people who are concerned about the real state industry are concerned about this bill. the limitations we put on the deductions on property taxes, the limitations on the amount of interest you can deduct on mortgages will have an impact on property values. properties that americans own will be less valuable with the passage of this bill because they will not be able to get the same tax advantages as they had prior to it.

have we thought about that impact? have we thought about what that does to the wealth of middle-income families? have we taught about what impact that has on local evaluations on property taxes? there's been no consideration of that. i met this week, mr. president, with leaders in the nonprofit community in baltimore and some of the issues they deal with in providing health to our communities. several of them were faith-based charitable groups and i went over the impact that it will have on the restrictions on the people using itemized dedeductions. one -- deductions. one group said that the overwhelming majority of their givers are in middle income, and today they are able to take a deduction because they use itemized deductions. under this bill most of those

families are going to fall within the standard deduction and had -- and will no longer itemize their deductions on their federal tax returns. now, they don't know what impact that will have, but when their givers find out there's no tax advantage to that gift, you know it's going to have an impact. we know that. charitable giving is going to be down. i hear my colleagues talk about frequently that a lot of what we do to help people we rely upon the private sector, we rely upon the charitable groups. did we have the courtesy to bring them into a hearing to understand the impact this is going to have? no. it's going to have a negative impact on our nonprofit charitable groups, and that is another consequence of this legislation that we don't have the full impact to understand. let me talk just a minute about the 20% deduction on

pass-through income just so that the people in this country understand this is a rather complicated provision added to the bill. it provides for the -- providing additional tax relief for businesses that do in the use the c tax rate, these are our s corporations, limited partnerships, our sole proprietors. understand what we are trying to do because we cut the corporate rate so low, down from 25%, we recognize that other businesses will be at a disadvantage, and that's true. we're trying to find out a way to give them tax relief. i heard my colleagues talk about simplifying the tax code. this provision does anything but simplify the tax code. it has what's known as guard rails as to how we calculate how much you can take up to the 20% of the distribution as a nontaxable event. and that guard rails affect the

type of business that you're doing, affects the amount of assets that you have, it affects the amount of salaries that you give, the labor done within it, whether it's services performed by the partnership or not. my goodness, it's a mind field for accountants and tax lawyers to now develop shelters. mr. president, i'm old enough to remember the 1986 tax debate here in the united states congress. i was not part of the congress. i was in the state legislature at the time. i remember the effort to get rid of shelters because shelters are an inefficient way to set up business structures in order to minimize taxes. well, this pass-through provision is going to be used as shelters, there's no question about it, and we have had no hearings at all as to how we're

going to deal with that problem. and then i heard a lot of my colleagues on the republican side talk about how this is going to bring all these jobs back home. let's make this clear. what this bill does is move towards a territorial tax system. what does that mean? that means companies today that outsource some of their work to another country will be able to only pay that country's tax rate rather than the u.s. tax rate. that means that they'll be able to pay, in some cases less taxes. but what they can now do, because we are harmonizing to a territorial tax is that we are rewarding some companies to outsource. do we understand what the lower tax rates for corporation, what the net impact will be on jobs in america?

all we hear is we're going to create new job opportunities because we have lower rates for businesses. but we don't tell the american people that you can keep those jobs overseas and pay a lower tax rate. so let's be honest about that, and why didn't we have a hearing on that part? the consequences are far from understood. and then i heard several of my colleagues talk on the floor of the senate about preserving credits. we sprervepreserved this credite you're getting credit for leaving something in the tax code. let me say something. credits are important. in the city of baltimore we've used low income house tax credits, new market tax credits to generate a lot of economic activity. it's very difficult to put together a major economic program within our urban cente centers. now i could point to west baltimore and how we've used all those tools for urban redevelopment.

i could point to our arts district, how that's been used. but i know this, credits are not going to be worth as much under this bill as they were before because we changed the value of a tax credit. what impact is that going to have? i don't know. the problem is none of us know. but it's going to have a consequence. and it's going to affect economic growth and it's not going to be positive. and we haven't taken steps to try to counter that. and then i noticed that there are some changes in the renewable energy sector. i don't fully understand all the changes but i do know those that are involved in wind and solar believe that what we've done is made it more difficult for them to get investors. it sort of looks like perhaps this was an effort to help the fossil fuel industry. and when you look at the anwr provision which opens up the pristine areas of the arctic to drilling in alaska, you know that this bill is tilted towards

fossil fuels rather than having a level playing field for america's energy. i worry is this the first step to midatlantic drilling off the atlantic coast off of maryland and the impact it could have on the chesapeake bay. mr. president, i must confide that i've been in conversations with some of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, asking whether we will cooperate on a corrections bill. i find that amazing. we haven't passed this bill yet, and we're talking about the process to correct the mistakes that are clearly in this bill. that's not the way we should be legislating. we know that we're going to have to revisit the pass-through provisions because we know they're not drafted right. we know the tax credits are going to need additional time. we know the energy provisions are going to have to be revised. we know we've done damage to middle-income families they're going to demand that we correct. why don't we get it right the first time?

why do we have to look at passing a bill that we know is badly flawed? the last point i want to make is that there's been a commitment that when we take up a tax bill, don't we want to simplify the tax code? simplify it so americans understand it better and feel more comfortable that everyone's being treated fairly. and secondly, the one argument i hear from -- all stakeholders is make the tax code predictable so we can plan. give us the rules. don't change the law all the time. don't put temporary provisions in here because congress has a habit of missing extender dates. we've already missed extender dates in this congress, and now we're talking about leaving town this week while we have provisions that are expired such as the children's health insurance program. and what does this tax bill do? it's got numerous provisions

that expire, some within a short period of time, adding uncertainty to our tax code and the planning of our tax code. this bill is anything but simplifying the tax code and certainly not providing the predictability. so, mr. president, the american people get it. that's why they believe this bill should not be passed. it's an assault on middle-income families, dangerous to our national security by increasing our deficit. it will hurt millions of people who will lose their health coverage and it should be defeated. with that, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i'd like to spend a few moments talking about why my colleagues and why the american people should be supportive of this very important legislation. historic legislation that we're debating now on the senate

floor, and it's particularly historic for my state, the dpraigreatstate of alaska. there's been a lot of misinformation on this debate and we're seeing the debate, robust debate which is fine. i don't need to repeat all the arguments on both sides. but i will say to my colleagues on the other side have seemed to focus on one particular point. they're coming down here and they're making this point again and again and again. and that's the point that this bill will supposedly raise taxes on the middle class. we're hearing it. everybody's saying it. well, mr. president, the problem with that argument, it's just fundamentally untrue. and the truth will be in the paychecks of the american people that they'll see in a few months. so let me just talk about some of the provisions that are in the bill. the bill will be a middle-class tax cut for the vast majority of

americans. here are some of the provisions. these are in the bill. these are the facts. the bill doubles the standard deduction. for an individual the standard deduction goes from $6,300 to $12,000. for a married couple it goes to $12,700 to $24,000. that's in the bill. that's important for middle-class families. it doubles the child tax credit. the child tax credit is doubled from the current $1,000 to $2,000, so more parents can claim it. it's in the bill. that's a fact. and it lowers rates. in fact, it not only lowers rates for middle-income americans, it lowers rates on every single income bracket in the i.r.s. code. that is a fact. bottom line, mr. president, an average family of four making $75,000 a year will have about

$200 more per month in take-home pay under this bill. $2,400 a year. a single parent making $41,000 a year will see their tax bill decrease by $1,300. that is a 73% decrease. that's a fact. it's in the bill. and let me mention, mr. president, one other critical way in which this tax bill will bring middle-class and working-class tax relief. it will get rid of the very regressive and unfair individual mandate of the affordable care act. mr. president, about 20,000 hardworking alaskans and over

six million americans have to pay a tax, a penalty to the i.r.s. for not buying something, health insurance, that they cannot afford. let me repeat that. they are penalized for not buying something that they can't afford. think about the absurdity of that. and here's the thing why this is such an important middle-class tax cut when we get rid of that penalty. close to 80% of the americans, the six million americans who pay the obamacare individual mandate tax, close to 80% of them make$50,000 or less. think about that. but tonight we're getting rid of that tax, that unfair penalty, and that will undoubtedly bring tax relief for the middle class.

this bill also decreases taxes on small businesses and companies so they can reinvest here at home in our great nation. hire american workers, give pay raises and help grow our economy. mr. president, many of these ideas, doing these kind of things have been bipartisan policy ideas for years. when we've talked about tax reform. let me just give you one. in 2012, president obama said our current business tax structure hurts american businesses and inhibits growth. he said, quote, the tax system provides tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas and hits companies that choose to stay in america with one of the highest tax rates in the world. unquote. that's president obama. that's president obama. that was true then and it's true

today. something has to be done. we're doing it tonight. the bill will also give small businesses and large companies a chance to help grow our economy. mr. president, you have heard senators after senators come down here on the senate floor. my colleague from south carolina has talked about this eloquently for years. it's an issue i care deeply about, but here's the issue. is we have had a lost decade of economic growth. for over ten years we have not hit 3% g.d.p. growth once in a year. once in a year. now, mr. president, it's an issue i care deeply about. as a matter of fact, i come down on the floor and i talk about it a lot. one thing that i have noticed in my three short years in the senate is i'm not sure i've seen my colleagues on the other side ever come down and talk about

the need to really rev up the economy. the fact that 1.5%, 2% which is what we've had almost for the last 13 years is not good for the country. i think unfortunately a lot of them believe this idea the new normal, that america hit a 1.5%, a 2% g.d.p. growth is an meshing hittinamerica hitting ol cylinders. don't believe it. we talk about g.d.p. growth. what is that? it's a proxy for the american economy, a proxy for the american dream. in the last ten years that economy has been sick. and for millions of americans the american dream, which is based on a strong american economy, has been a mirage. we have to change this. this should be a bipartisan issue, getting back to traditional levels of 3% or higher g.d.p. growth should be something 100 senators agree on.

and this bill is going to help us do that. mr. president, finally i'd like to talk about something in the tax bill that will greatly benefit my state and our country. and that is opening the 1002 section of the nonwilderness arctic national wildlife refuge for american energy development. a lot of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle come down and talked about this. but i'm going to tell you this, mr. president. i can't begin to describe the elation that will be felt by many, so many in my state when this passes. the vast majority of alaskans support this provision and have supported it for decades. hundreds, if not thousands of alaskans have worked tirelessly

to get it passed since the 1002 area was set aside by this body in 1980 for possible energy development. don't believe all the rhetoric about, oh, that area is off limits. that area is actually on limits. the congress in 1980 said we know there's a lot of energy there and we should look at the opportunity to explore it. congress, come back and make the call someday. so hundreds, thousands of my constituents, my fellow alaskans -- and i know some are in the gallery right now, right above me, have been working on this for decades. and i want to thank all of them. but we've been stuck. we've been repeatedly stopped. you're seeing some of the arguments, many of which, many of which are truth challenged, let's just say that so i'm being polite to all my colleagues.

so year after year we've tried. the last time we made a big effort on this, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle killed this provision in 2005. it was a crushing evening. in 2005, when this provision did not pass, it was a crushing evening for the late great senator ted stevens, particularly when the then-senate minority leader said that beating ted stevens was, quote, one of the joys of my life. that was the senate minority and majority leader. well, propose, voting for the provision to unlock anwr tonight will be one of the joyce of my -- joys of my life and i'm certain that ted stevens will be joyfully watching from above

smiling. mr. president, last month a group of alaskans came to d.c. to testify before senator murkowski's energy and natural resource committee about the importance of america and to alaska and to our communities about the energy provision in this bill. matthew rexford who lives in rectovic, alaska, which is in the arctic wildlife refuge had rivetting testimony. let me quote from it. quote, we firmly believe that attempts to permanently block development in the 10-02 area, an area intentionally not designated as wilderness by congress because of oil and gas potential is a slap in the face to our region and its people.

it's exactly the same thing as saying, it's okay for everyone else in this great country to have a thriving economy, but you can't have one at all. you people living on the north slope, you people living in catovic, sorry, you can't do it. matthew went on to talk about how important oil and gas provides jobs, business opportunities, infrastructure investments like schools, hospitals, and clinics, things that most communities in america have in abundance, we don't have that in abundance in my great state. he said the industry has moved our people away from third-world living conditions and we refuse to go backward this time. it has provided basic services most americans take for granted, that communities like his don't have.

mr. president, increasing domestic energy production will not only be good for my state and for communities like cactovic, but it will also boost our country's economy -- and this is a very important point -- it will strengthen america's national security. my colleague from maryland, whom i have a lot of respect for, just talked about how this will hurt national security. i couldn't disagree with him more. producing more energy responsibly, oil, natural gas, renewables, and making the united states the world's energy super power once again will dramatically increase our nation's national security, and this is something we should all agree on. mr. president, i've served in the marines for over two decades, and i served as a u.s. assistant secretary of state whose portfolio included global energy issues. i have seen how energy can be

used for good productive diplomacy and as a power grab. when we don't have to import oil from countries that don't like us or when we have the opportunity to export american energy to our allies, this dramatically strengthens our nation's national security. mr. president, you and i both side on the armed services committee and we heard for years from department of defense military and civilian leaders, whether secretary carter, a democrat, secretary mattis, a great marine general, they have all consistently emphasized this point -- making america the world's energy super power will help with jobs, will help with our economy, it will

dramatically help our nation's national security. let me conclude by telling a story that really emphasises this -- emphasizes this point. last year i attended the national halifax security forum. i was in a meeting with a great national security leader of this body, senator john mccain. we were meeting with a senior level russian dissident and asked him at the end of the meeting, what more can we do in our country to help push back against the putin regime and the activities they are undertaking to undermine american interest around the world and in our country? what can we do? he looked at us and said, the number one thing you can do is produce more american energy. let me repeat that, mr. president. in terms of national security, the number one thing we can do

is produce more american energy, and we do it more responsibly with the highest environmental standards of any place in the world, and opening the 10-02 area, using those high standards, the world's high standards, with the most advance technology will produce more energy for the betterment of my state and my constituents and for the whole country. mr. president, we are on the cusp of passing a bill that will put more money in the hands of the middle class, grow our economy, and fulfill a 40-year-long dream for alaska. america will always be in the ingenuity of our people, the ability for americans to make decisions for themselves, live their lives as they see fit, to build to, to grow, to make a better tomorrow for the next generation.

the american dream does not have a price tag, but it can be stymied and stunted by an overbearing federal government that wants to hinder the freedom of the individual, an overbearing federal government that crushes economic hope and opportunity through overtaxation an overregulation, and it does this by telling someone like matthew rexford from a small village more than 5,000 miles from here that he and his people can't make a better life for themselves and their children by developing resources on their own land. well, mr. president, that's going to end tonight. at long last that's going to change. the vast majority of alaskans, democrats and republicans, native and nonnative are going to celebrate. and i believe when the american

people realize and experience the positive benefits of this bill through stronger economic growth, better jobs, more take-home pay, they are going to celebrate too. i urge my colleagues to vote for this historic legislation. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: mr. president, it's a pleasure to be on the floor ton with my friend alaska. the navy salutes the marine corps and for his service before and now i just want to qualify a couple of things that he mentioned. he doesn't need to stay on the floor, but if he wants to, he's welcomed to. he sent a little time criticizing the individual mandate. as harry truman used to say is anything new is the history we have forgotten and learned. the individual mandate was not

invented by barack obama. obamacare, which was never invented by barack obama. the idea of the slided income tax and the cost of health care in those exchanges, the idea that there's an individual mandate that everybody has to buy health care, and if you don't, you're not eligible for medicare or medicaid. if you don't get health insurance, you get find. that was not. that was not a barack obama idea. the notion insurance companies couldn't deny coverage to folks who had a preexisting condition, that was not an idea invented by barack obama. obamacare, with those fiving provisions, sliding scale to ride down the cost of care,

individual coverage, employer mandate, prohibition against insurance companies not providing coverage for those with preexisting conditions, that -- those five ideas have their origin from right here in the united states senate in 1993 -- right here in 1993. the legislation introduced by the republican senator from rhode island, chafee, cosponsored by 22 other republican senators, including the chairman of the finance committee, one of the people i most admire here in this body. those five ideas didn't go anywhere in 1993, but you know who took them? a governor of massachusetts took those five ideas and said, maybe we could use those five ideas to cover everybody in the state of massachusetts, and governor mitt

romney created remove any care. and you know what? for the most part it worked. they covered just about everybody there, and some had problems with affordability, but they've done better over time. and when we worked on the affordable care act, we took that republican senate proposal from 1993, we took remove any care from 2006 and we included in the affordable care act because it was a market-based approach to making sure that everybody who didn't get coverage from employer, and were not eligible for medicaid or medicare could get coverage. we see in this legislation not on-line changes to the tax code, but also a further -- not only changes in the tax code, -- they say -- it's a republican idea. it's a market-based approach. they happen to be good ideas.

they happen to work in massachusetts and they could work in 49 other states. and my colleagues here in this body and the house tried to destabilize the exchanges. i hope that when this legislation passes and we feel the individual mandate that we won't just repeal it, but why do we have it in the first place? to make sure that young, healthy americans are going to be getting coverage in the, changes. you can't just have sick and elderly people in the exchanges. you have to have young, healthy people in there too, and that's why we have the individual mandate. if we have to get rid of it, we have to replace it with something at least as effective and that's one of the thing that we node to work on between now and 20 -- and that's what we need to work on now between now and 2019.

i had the privilege to be governor of the state of delaware for eight years. we cut taxes seven out of eight years. we also balanced our budget eight years in a row. we paid down some of our debt. we earned triple-a credit ratings for the first time in history and we still have them. we had for those eight years a general assembly that was majority republican in the house and majority democrat in the senate, and you know what we did, we actually worked together. we worked together. we used sound budgeting practices. we used sound economic analysis and forecasts. we worked together and neither side got everything they wanted, but in delaware we have something called the delaware way and i describe it with four

c's, community, compromise, collaborate, civility. that's it. that's the delaware way, communicate, compromise, collaborate, and civility. we don't do that so much around here and we're the worst for it. during those years i was privileged to be governor and cut taxes seven out of the eight years, i would lead each tax proposal with four questions. one, is it fair? two, does it foster economic growth or impede it? three, does it simplify the tax code or make it more complex? four, what does it do to the deficit? do we end up with a balanced budget or a your -- or a surplus. 20 years later as we took up tax reform here in the united states senate, i asked the same four questions. is it fair?

does it foster economic growth? does it simplify the tax code? what does it do to the budget to the deficit situation that we face? those are the four questions. others already talked about fairness. let me just say that when you look at what's going to happen in the first couple of years after the passage of this legislation, lower income folks, families, they're going to get a tax cut too. it's not just the wealthy. low-income families will get a tax cut too for a couple of years. families making $30,000 will benefit. they'll end up with lower taxes for the first two years, after the implementation of this legislation. after three or four years families making $40 it,000 or less will be on the losing side. after five years families making $50,000 will be on the losing side. they will not be paying less taxes. they'll actually be paying more taxes.

meanwhile folks whose income is half million, million dollars and more, for the most part they will realize very substantial reductions in their taxes. really substantial deductions. deduction. some people say is that fair? it depends on who you ask. if you happen to ask the people who are making $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 they'll say maybe not. fair for awhile but not for long enough. i mentioned those eight years i served as governor of our state, how we balanced our budgets, paid down debt, got triple a credit ratings more jobs were created than any eight-year history in the state of delaware. i did not create any of them. i helped create a nurturing environment for job creation in our state so that little

businesses could get started and grow into bigger businesses. bigger businesses could make profit and hire more people. but the tax code is important, an important ingredient in the, in that nurturing environment for job creation and job preservation. not the only ingredient but an important ingredient. senator cardin talked about how important it is to have certain predictability. that's almost as important as the tax rates, to actually know what we're going to face and not face the uncertainty of rates going up or down and the rules changing in the years to come. but i just want to run through a short list of other ingredients in that nurturing environment that i don't believe we're addressing in these changes to the tax code. one is the commonsense regulation. one is commonsense regulation. regulations that protect us, protect our health, our

environment, do so in a way that's cost effective. another is to make sure we're producing out of our high schools, out of our schools, our colleges and universities, our community colleges people who can read, write, think, have math and technology skills, engineering, the ability to come out of the schools and work in the millions of jobs going unfilled these days. the skill sets demanded by these employers in these millions of jobs are not met up by people looking for work for the most part except for the daca folks who filled 800,000 of those three million or four million jobs unfilled. what is another ingredient? access to capital, to get money, raise money to be able to invest in plant equipment, employees and workforce. another is access not just to

capital but access to foreign markets, to be able to sell the products that we make or the services we provide in other countries around the world and get into those markets. energy costs. my colleague from alaska said that, his comments, he said that one of the things that we ought to become in america is the super power of energy. who invented nuclear energy? we did. we are the the saudi arabia of coal. we're the saudi arabia of natural gas. we create, as far as i know, as much electricity from wind and solar as i think any nation on earth and we need to do a whole lot more, and we can. health care costs, we pay way too much money for health care in this country. and actually we have a pretty good idea of how to bring it down.

one of those good ideas is the exchanges. and if we wouldn't stop undermining them and degrading them and destabilizing them they would actually work like they do in massachusetts and a bunch of other states. public safety is a key ingredient in the, among the forces and factors that are helpful in creating that nurturing environment. investing in research and development that could be commercialized, turned into jobs and economic opportunity hugely important. protecting intellectual property. protecting against cyber attacks. transportation infrastructure. earlier this year the nations of civil engineers, society of civil engineers evaluated our transportation infrastructure in this country. again this year, d, d as in dog, as our roads, highways and bridges are in deplorable shape in many parts around this country.

do we invest in this tax bill -- if i had $1 trillion to invest in the strength of this country i would put it in infrastructure, roads, highways, bridges, rail, airports, broadband, deploying broadband in rural areas of the country where we don't have access to the internet. that's what i would do. we don't do any of that in this legislation. so in terms of economic growth and jobs creation, what we're told by most economists is sadly a lot of the companies that will make extra money, realize greater pockets from the changes in the tax code, the majority of them, coming from folks smart than me say a good deal of that money is not to further investments in plant and equipment, not to their workforce. it will be turned into dividends and stock buy backs, not to create the kind of growth we all want. we talked a minute about the

third question i always ask by tax reform proposals, and that is has it accept polyfied the tax -- has it simplified the tax code or made it more complex? during our debate o in the finae committee, i think it was senator mccaskill had a stack about this toad of the federal tax code. one of the expert witnesses from the joint tax committee was asked will this legislation before us tonight, will it actually make that stack of books which make up the tax code, is it going to make it smaller. he said no, quite the oppose. -- the opposite. it's going to make it larger. the idea of doubling the standard deduction enabling more people not have to itemize their taxes, that makes the tax code simpler. that's a good idea. when you look at the other changes in this legislation, that stack which represents the tax code is not going to go

down. ultimately it's going to go up. not my words, the testimony of the joint tax committee. lastly, what is going to be the effect of this package of tax changes? what is going to be the effect on the budget deficit? here's where i think we really miss the boat. when bill clinton became president in 1993, we were in a deficit. we were in a recession. and he became president. eight years later when he turned the reins over to george w. bush, in those eight years more jobs were created than in the history of the united states. more. on top of that, the last four years of that administration, 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001, we had a balanced budget. surpluses. and when the reins of leadership were turned over to the next administration, to george w.

bush, i think c.b.o. was forecasting a budget surplus of at least $5 billion. at least $5 billion, probably more. there was a concern that we were growing the surpluses too fast. too fast. well, it didn't take too long for the surpluses to be eliminated. and when that administration came to an end, we're in the worst economic recession since the great depression. call it the great recession. we went from four years of surpluses to the worst economy since 1930. and that's what barack obama and joe biden and a new congress in 2009 inherited. i know some of my colleagues think that there's not been any kind of economic recovery. just look at where we were in 2008 and 2009. for the last eight years we've had economic growth. job creation in eight consecutive years. i don't think we've ever seen

that kind of sustained economic growth for, in the history of our country. and instead of paying down debt after eight years of economic growth, job creation, we actually last year increased the deficit by $660 billion. $660 billion. and with this legislation, we're going to add another roughly $2 trillion, $2 trillion to our debt over the next ten years. this is a missed opportunity, folks. it didn't have to be this way. there are good ideas in this legislation. the the the tax rate is too high, bring it down. standard deduction ought to be doubled. i think democrats are for that. child tax credit ought to be increased, maybe doubled. capital gains rate maintain where it is. i'm for that. repatriation of overseas profits, i'm for that. there's a lot of things that

could serve as a foundation on which we could come to agreement on bipartisan legislation. and -- as far as i'm concerned, we never really had a fair chance. i'll close with an african proverb my friend, senator scott, he's about to follow me here. he's heard me say this before. an old african proverb says you want to go fast, travel alone. if you want to go far, travel together. if you want to go fast, travel alone. if you want to go far, travel together. we should have traveled this road together. we should have traveled this road together. if we had, we would have maybe some short-term pain but long-term gain. i fear with this legislation it will be just the opposite. there's going to be some short-term gain. but i fear in the long run, long-term pain. with that, i yield the floor, mr. president, and pass it on to my friend from south carolina. mr. scott: mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, i've been listening to this debate for a long time, and i have to admit it's been interesting. but it's been prolonged to way beyond where it should have been. my friends on the other side very much make much about this process, demeaning the members and staff who really put it together. this bill was marked up in the finance committee. it is the first reconciliation bill to be processed in committee in the senate in over 12 years. during that period, democrats held power for eight of those years. republicans four of those years.

the reconciliation bill that made up part of the affordable care act never went through the finance committee. that reconciliation bill never went through any real senate process. now to be fair, the affordable care act repeal bill that my side proposed didn't go through the finance committee either. as difficult as it was, as chairman, i put out a chairman's mark, modified it, permitted debate and amendments, and put it to a vote.

all in conformity with committee rules. we had a full senate debate, amendments, and votes. so i don't want to hear tonight or any time that the process deteriorated. it didn't deteriorate. i'm going to insert --. a senator: would senator hatch yield for a question? mr. hatch: not just yet. i want to finish these remarks. i'm going to insert in the record analysis of winners and losers. the analysis is dated today. it was produced by the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation. i ask unanimous consent to

insert in the -- insert it in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: reserve the right to object, mr. president. i would just like to ask mr. hatch, senator hatch -- i certainly won't object --. mr. hatch: mr. president, i have the floor. mr. brown: i'd like to state my objection. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. brown: there is objection. mr. hatch: i withhold the unanimous consent. the presiding officer: the senator from utah has the floor. mr. brown: may i state the reason for my objection, mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah has the floor. mr. hatch: i'll insert it later. the analysis i have been talking about was dated today and produced by the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation, in -- and i would like to put it in the record. i hope my colleague will allow me to do that at this point and

i ask unanimous consent that it be put in the record at this point. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. hatch: that analysis shows that middle-income taxpayers are winners. that nonpartisan data shows -- sorry my writing is not too good here. it shows that they are winners, and the clear impact of this bill -- that data cuts through the rhetorical fog generated by my friends on the other side. my friends on the other side focus on the year 2027, ten

years from now, when, guess what, mr. president, that's the year past the sunset of the ten years in the individual side. if you focus on the years that the cuts are in effect and you will see the -- the sorry my writing is not all that good -- you can see that the middle class are really winners. there's no question about it if you focus on it. but i will put these -- these distribution of returns by the sides of -- size of the tax change for the conference agreement for h.r. 1, the tax cuts and jobs act, and other matters by the joint commission on taxation in the record at this particular point. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. hatch: i will yield the floor at this point. the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, we have had an opportunity for the last several hours to go back and forth to debate the benefits or the negatives of this bill. this is a historic night for america, 31 years in the making. and if you're watching the debate at home, you might be a little confused as democrats and republicans continue to talk about the same bill using very different perspectives and folks must be wondering where is the truth. and, mr. president, i would look to spend a few minutes clarifying some of the important points over the misinformation that's coming from the left. first, mr. president, this is not a health care bill.

our friends on the left have suggested that somehow, some way that this bill will eliminate coverage for millions and millions of americans. they will lose their coverage. mr. president, the only thing this bill actually does is eliminates the penalty for those folks who decide not to buy health insurance. in other words, mr. president, this bill reduces the tax burden on families who are working paycheck to paycheck. one-third of the families, mr. president, who pay the penalty are families who make less than $25,000. mr. president, 80% of the folks who pay the penalty make less than $50,000. and, mr. president, contrary to

popular belief on the left, no one loses their insurance, but, yes, they will have the option to do what is in their family's best interest, what is in the individual's best interest. mr. president, we have sought for ways to work with our friends on the other side because we know that this legislation is not about the republican party, it's not about conservatives nor is it about liberals. it's about americans -- americans who for too long have worked too hard and seen too little in their paychecks. mr. president, the government does not create jobs, no matter what either side says, we don't create jobs, but we can, through this tax reform package, increase take-home pay by taking less out. now, mr. president, some may ask

the question, what does that mean taking less out? well, mr. president, for your average single parent in america who makes the average income of $41,000, as my good friend from alaska already stated, that individual household will see about a 73% cut in their taxes. said differently, mr. president, that means an increase in their take home pay. now, mr. president, i was thinking about folks back at home in south carolina, one person in particular, sherry, who is a single mother, two kids, trying to start a new business. here's an opportunity to have just a little more margin at the end of each pay period.

$1,300. these are real dollars and my friends on the left seem to suggest that a 73% cut in the typical single-parent household's tax burden is not an increase. well, mr. president, the story continues. for the average family in america making $73,000, they are looking at a tax cut of 58%, over $2,000 more in their paycheck. i talked to my friends who are typical americans, michele and joe, living in south carolina, working hard, raising two beautiful kids, having a 60% cut

in their taxes is real middle-class relief. this is a bill that delivers, and the good news is only in about seven or eight weeks the average american will have an answer to which side is right? is it the left or is it the right? the fact is they will be able to take a look in their own paychecks and determine for themselves the benefits of this tax cut. mr. president, when we think about the things that we should be working on to restore confidence that the average person has lost in the government, to restore that, we do that by making sure that our tax proposal speaks to the average family.

so, mr. president, we do double the standard deduction for individuals from $6,300 to $12,000, for single-parent households from $9 .300 -- $9,300 to $1,800. and for two-earner households, we have created a zero percent tax bracket for folks living at the federal poverty level of $2,424,000. by doing that we -- $24,000. by doing that we have created a zero percent tax bracket. but the good news is it gets better. for those folks with children in the house where your child tax credit used to be $1,000, now

the child tax credit is $2,000 with 70% of that amount being refundable, an increase from what it used to be. mr. president, so many folks on the other side have talked about whether or not this is simplification, but when 95 out of 100 tax filers can simply use the standard deduction, it means that, yes, on the back of a clean piece of paper someone can determine their tax break. this is good news. six billion hours spent annually doing their taxes, we're going to cut that number down significantly. and for our friends living in blue states where the state and

local tax debate has been so important, we have decided to sweeten the salt solution by allowing a hybrid of either of property taxes or income taxes to be used within that $10,000 threshold. mr. president, we've even made it easier, through 529 plans, to prepare and to pay for education k through 12 as well as college. the one thing i will say, mr. president, that we've heard a lot of from our friends on the other side of the aisle, and you will hear more of it tonight, it's fear. it's an acronym that means false evidence appearing real. it's not the truth, but fear sells and it seems as though my

friends on the other side of the aisle have decided that if you just keep saying it, it must be true. and over and over and over and we'll hear it more when i'm finished, folks demonizing this legislation. the facts are simple and senator cardin said it and i wrote it down when he said it. i said that is clear. senator cardin say, major tax relief for families, our bill. mr. president, we are on the verge of resetting american competitiveness by lowering our corporate tax rate, we will allow the jobs of the future to be created here at home with a 20% cut in your qualified business income we will see small businesses prospering, and when they prosper, they'll hire

more folks. when i was at the gym this past weekend, a small business who runs a small battery company, seven employees, on january 1 he's hiring a new person. mr. president, a survey done of manufacturers, 7,000 manufacturers, the vast majority said that with this tax cut they will hire more people, they will increase wages, and they will improve benefits. this is good news from a global perspective. this is good news from a small business perspective, and this is good news from an individual perspective. mr. president, it is time for us to complete the people's business and vote yes for tax cuts, vote yes for improve --

improving the business climate and vote yes for global competition where american companies and american workers are winning. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. merkley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: one thing's for sure this is not the people's business. this is the business of the powerful and privileged. this is really a bank heist. and how big is this bank heist? well, it's about $3 trillion being delivered to the very richest americans. let's add it up, changing the tax bracket for those who earn more than $200,000, $ $673 billion, changing the alternative minimum tax, $637 billion, changing the estate tax, $83 billion,

changing the corporate tax rate, most of which goes to the advantage of the wealthiest americans, $1.35 trillion. changing the corporate a.m.t., $40 billion, and the pass-through legislation that favors the wealthiest l.l.c.'s, $414 billion. add it all up. well over $3 trillion. there it is. $3 trillion. $3 trillion, the very richest americans, that's the middle-class tax cut. now, we have -- let's say we think about how much this is per person here in the united states of america. that's about $8,000 per person in america being taxed so that you can deliver $3 trillion to the very richest americans. that's a fair square deal. well, what if we were to spend

$3 trillion on the middle class? what if we were to do that? what if we were to invest a approximately of it in infrastructure? it creates a lot of jobs today and creates the foundation for a lot of jobs tomorrow and the year after and the year after and the year after. what if we were to spend a trillion dollars on health care? we could go a long ways in terms of greatly amplifying the success and quality of the work from our community health clinics, making sure that basically health care is a fundamental, affordable right to every american. you can do a lot in health care with a trillion dollars. what can we do, i ask my republican friends, with a trillion dollars in education? how about $500 billion to strengthen our k-12 system and another $500 billion to strengthen and make college affordable for every single

american. $3 trillion this bill gives the richest americans. this is the biggest bank heist, not just in american history but in the history of the world, happening here tonight, brought to us by the powerful and the privileged, and this is absolutely unacceptable. while the rich gloat and all the gold they are piling up, $3 trillion worth, middle-class americans get coal in their stocking. this tax scam so favors the wealthy that 83% of the benefits goes to the richest 1%. that's a middle-class bill? i don't think so. this bill sends jobs overseas, hurting middle-class americans.

this bill increases our national deficit and our national debt, making it much harder to have programs that provide a foundation for families to thrive. this bill destroys health care for 13 million americans. and analyst after analyst says it will also raise the insurance premiums for everyone else who buys health care. wow. talk about cloppering the middle class by destroying health care for 13 -- clobbering health care for 13 million people and raising the premiums on health care for everyone else buying insurance. so over here, we have a pile of gold. $3 trillion for the richest americans. and over here, we have the loss of jobs shipped overseas, we have the increased price of health care, we have 13 million american people losing their health care, and then we have

the second phase of the republican plan, which was announced by the speaker of the house last week, that this week we pass $3 trillion for the wealthiest americans. but what do we do after that? we go after medicaid and medicare and social security. that's the plan we heard from the speaker of the house. so this is a diabolical bill. this is an abomination in a government of, by, and for the people. how does it come to pass that we even have this bill under consideration? i'll tell you how. it's a cycle of campaign corruption. megabillionaires funding the campaigns for the senate, having

people come in here to pass this bank heist for the billionaires. that's the cycle. citizens united allowing unlimited funds invested by third-party campaigns. corruption in campaigns producing this tax scam, this bank heist, this abomination against the people of the united states of america. now, oregon has about 1% of the population of the united states, so what would be their share if we would instead invest that $3 trillion in infrastructure and health care and education? for oregon, that would be $30 billion. $30 billion. now, that's 30,000 $1 million grants to invest in infrastructure needed all over our state.

to invest in more teachers all over our state. to invest in lower cost of tuition so every child could go to a public university without debt. but that's not what we have tonight. no. now, my friends across the aisle say we're going to wave the magic wand and give all this money, all this $3 trillion to the richest americans, and jobs are going to automatically appear. but it's been analyzed by the experts. they say this barely increases the growth of the economy. just a smidgen, almost immeasurable. and there are these countereffects. you have the challenge that this bill will create a lot of money for companies that are going to buy machines to replace people who work, accelerating the automation in america that destroys jobs. this bill is going to send jobs

overseas, destroying the foundation for success for millions of american families. this money is going to be used for stack buybacks and dividends, enhancing the wealth of the already wealthy. that's why the experts say this is not going to create a phenomenal growth in our economy or a phenomenal number of jobs. i would like to see us fight for middle-class americans, fight for infrastructure and jobs, fight for health care, fight for education. these are the foundations for thriving families. but that's not what we have tonight, and that's why anyone who believes in government of, by, and for the people should defeat this bill. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the

senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, tonight the senate will vote on a tax bill that will provide large corporations and wealthy individuals a massive, massive tax cut. the bill will result in well over $1 trillion in debt that will be passed on to our children and our grandchildren. the bill will result in dramatically lower taxes for people who earn their living off of stocks and investments, people who inherit millions of dollars from their parents and for the c.e.o.'s of multinational companies. and by the time the bill is fully implemented, it will lead to higher taxes and higher health care costs for millions of hardworking americans who show up each and every day to do their job and to earn a living. this bill we are voting on today was written in secret, in an entirely partisan fashion,

without input from nearly half of the united states senate. but it didn't have to be this way. if we wanted to give middle-class families a real tax cut, we could have. , we're voting on a bill that benefits for middle-class families will expire, just to pay for permanent tax cuts given to multinational corporations. if we wanted to reform the tax code, take away loopholes for offshoring jobs and help create good-paying jobs here in the united states, we could have. instead, we're voting on a bill that does nothing, nothing to target offshoring or job creation. what will it do? well, c.e.o.'s have told us directly they are going to buy back stock, which mostly benefits the wealthiest shareholders and the c.e.o.'s with stock options. and when we know that over a third of the stocks that trade on the market are held by

foreign investors, yes, foreign investors holding half of the value of the stock market, it's just impossible to argue that this bill is focused on michigan families. if we wanted to make the tax code simpler for small businesses, we could have. instead, we're voting on a bill that includes some of the most complicated provisions you could possibly imagine for a small business owner. and if we really wanted to tackle our fiscal challenges in a responsible way, we could have. instead, we are voting on the most fiscally irresponsible bill that i have ever voted on, adding $1.5 trillion to the debt that our children and grandchildren will be responsible for, all while doing next to nothing for middle-class families. this is not the way that we are supposed to make policy in this country. the bill that is on the floor tonight is here without any

hearings. we didn't hear from a single expert on the specifics of the bill. not a single economist, not a single small business owner, not a single middle-class family. it is simply wrong. i urge my colleagues to vote no and to defeat this bill. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, we need bipartisan tax reform. mr. van hollen: we should simplify our tax code. it's gotten filled over many years with all sorts of junk that was put there by high-powered lobbyists rather than because of the public interest. unfortunately, this bill has nothing to do with tax reform. in fact, it's hard to believe

you could take a tax code that's already stacked in favor of the very wealthy and the very powerful and make it even more favorable to the very wealthy and very powerful, but that's exactly what this republican tax plan does. and exhibit a about how this has nothing to do with tax reform has to do with a carried interest loophole. many may recall that during the last campaign, candidate trump, whenever he talked about the need to reform the tax code, what was his number one example? he said we have got to get rid of the carried interest loophole for hedge fund managers. go back and run the tape. every time somebody asked him what was broken about the tax code, that's what he said. in fact, he said, and i quote, the hedge fund guys are getting away with murder. they are making a tremendous amount of money.

they have to pay taxes. that was candidate donald trump. well, here we are. shortly, we're going to vote on the final republican tax plan. and guess what? in a tax plan that's over 500 pages, nowhere do they get rid of the carried interest loophole for hedge fund managers. hedge fund managers are still going to get a better tack rate than the people who work for them. better tax rate than their secretaries, better tax rate than their assistants. so in candidate trump's words, in this tax bill, it still looks like those hedge fund managers, quote, are getting away with murder. and that's why it's a farce to call this tax reform. all it is is stacking the tax code more in favor of the very wealthy and the very powerful. in fact, if you're a millionaire, if you're a millionaire in america, you're

going to get an average annual tax cut of $70,000. it's great if you're a millionaire. at the same time, millions of middle-class taxpayers are going to pay more. the folks who get the biggest windfall, big corporations, their tax rate will go up from 35% to 21%. now, who are these folks? well, primarily, they are the folks who are already the wealthiest people in this country. but i bet a lot of people will be surprised to learn that 35% of the stockholders in those american corporations, they are foreign stockholders. 35% of the folks who have stock in these companies are foreigners. so in the year 2019, foreign stockholders are going to get a

$48 billion windfall from that big corporate tax cut. in that same year, 11 million americans will pay more taxes. so money out of the pockets of middle-class american families into the bank accounts of foreign stockholders. that doesn't sound like america first to me. it doesn't sound like middle-class taxpayers first to me. in fact, i want my colleagues to see just how skewed this tax bill is because i mentioned that about 11 million americans are going to see their taxes go up right away, but if you take the tax cut to every working-class family in every state that donald trump won in the last election and you add up all their tax cuts, it's still

$5 billion less than what foreign stockholders get in the year 2019. think about that. these are families that make about $100,000 or less, you take the tax cut in every state that donald trump won, you add them up, their tax cuts come out less than foreign stockholders will get in the year 2019. i'm going to tell you, the american public, when they find out what's in this tax plan, they are going to get madder and madder. i heard speaker ryan say, people are going to see the results and they are going to like it. the more they see the results, the madder they are going to get. and here's the thing -- it gets worse with time. there's some things that do well

over time. this gets worse. when this bill fully kicks in, the tax cuts for american families expire. there's small -- they are small relatively to start with, but then they expire. the tax cuts for the corporations will go on forever. when this fully kicks in ten years from now, those foreign stockholders will get a $23 billion windfall that year, but average families making $75,000 or less are going to see their taxes go up -- they are going to see their taxes go up when this fully kicks in to give that tax windfall to foreign stockholders. that is it a bad deal for america, it's a bad deal for the middle class. we should say no to this tax

bill. we should start over and do real tax reform that benefits middle-class families and those working their way into the middle class. this is not it. let's start over. let's vote this down. mr. president, i yield back the remainder of my time. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: mr. president, tonight is a momentous evening but it's also a sad evening. it is a momentous evening because the senate is on the verge of passing historic tax cuts that are designed to bring back jobs and economic growth to bring back new jobs, raise wages, and cut the taxes on working families. but it is a sad day because it is a day of a demonstration of

democratic partisanship that is ill befitting that is the institution that is it the united states senate. for two centuries tax reform has been a bipartisan endeavor, for two centuries democrats have been willing to work with republicans on cutting taxes. in 1981 and in 1986 when ronald reagan enacted historic harm and tax cuts, democrats par participated. indeed a democrat, tip o'neill, was speaker of the house. they carried ronald reagan's tax cuts. in the senate, one of the leaders was a democrat from new jersey, bill radially. those so-called democrats have disappeared from this

institution. when the house first passed tax cuts, zero democrats voted for it. zero. not a single democrat in the entire body. when the senate passed tax cuts, zero democrats passed it. we can expect not a single democrat will break from their party. they are so enraged with president trump they are willing to say we don't care. tonight every democrat is going to vote against doubling the child tax credit. if you're a single mom at home and have three kids, right now the child tax credit is $3,000. in just a couple of weeks it will double to $2,000 per kid which means $6,000 in tax credit in your pocket and every single democrat in this body is going to say to the single moms, tough luck. we're not cutting your taxes. we have seen floor speech after

floor speech where democrats claimed that this tax cut is going to raise your taxes. they are used to be a standard for voracity in this body, but the beautiful thing is that when one political party makes representations to the american people that are outright falsehoods, that tends to become public. the beautiful thing is in january the american people are going to see. so i encourage the american people -- in january take a look at your pay stubs. the democrats are claiming wildly falsely that somehow your taxes are going to go up. let me tell you for virtually every american taxpayer, your taxes will go down. when someone in the old testament would claim he was a

prophet, if you claimed you were a prophet, people would say make ha short-term prediction and see if it comes true. the democrats have made a short-term prediction, they said your taxes will go up. take a look in january. i guarantee for the single mom when you look at the child tax credit, your taxes will go down. every single income tax bracket is going down. not only that, the standard deduction that you can take is it doubling for a couple from $12,000 to $24,000. the first $24,000 you make you pay zero, nothing, nada. yet, the democrats with their compliant friends in the media have succeeded in scaring people to think that a historic tax cut is an increase. the beauty of it is for every voter at home, determine if they are telling the truth or are they misleading because they have such partisan animosity for

the president that they can't vote for a tax cut? it's a sad state of affairs. mr. president, i'll tell you, despite that this bill is going to pass. despite that, we're going to see job creators, farmers, ranchers, small businesses growing because the taxes on each of them is going down. we will see working families, the taxes on them going down. there is one subset of people whose taxes will go up on this, rich people in high-tax democratic states. the irony of all the -- all of this from the democratic friends pounding this as a tax cut for the rich, the only people whose taxes are going up are the really rich. the middle class, their taxes are going down, the working class, their taxes are going down, every taxpayer, their taxes are going down except for the rich people -- rich people,

their taxes are going up. you see this theater of democrats pretending it to protect the people. and the facts are the facts and the fact is the taxes for the working class is going down. i urge everyone to look at their pay stub in january. if they weren't telling the truth. if you see that your pay stub, you're paying less taxes, you ought to stop and ask, gosh, why did 48 democrats in the senate all tell me something that was false? why did they say something that's not true in my family? well, mr. president, it's even sadder than that. one of the most important elements of this tax reform bill that we're getting ready to pass is an expansion of educational opportunities for parents, an amendment that i introduced that

this body passed. it was divided 50-50 and the vice president passed the tie-breaking vote, expanded 529 college savings plans. right now 529 plans are immensely popular. parents and grandparents can save for their kids and grandkids. the bill that i introduced that this body adopted expands it to include k through 12 education, to let parents spend up to $10,000 per child per year from a 529 plan on public school, on private school, on parochial school, on religious school, and as the amendment was passed, on home school. it puts the parents in charge, it puts the grandparents in charge. it is their own money. it is the most significant

federal school choice for education that has passed the united states congress. you know what we're in the middle of? the democrats have raised an objection to all of it. they were horrified that a benefit could go to 50 million school kids that parents would be able to save for those school kids. they raised an objection under the byrd rule which is an obscure rule that nobody knows what it is. they objected to it and said you can't benefit 50 million school kids, and, indeed, as we argued in front of the senate parliamentarians, one of the arguments was that this is popular with the american people. we don't want to do something that's really popular with the american people. this is a big policy change. they love 529 plans and now the parents of school kids in texas and every other state will be able to save for the education of their kids. that has the democrats horrified

because every senate democrat voted against the parents in their state saving in a 529 system for k through 12 education. welshing the senate parliamentarian issued a ruling that rejected most of the democrats' claim, but sadly adopted one small portion of it and i think that claim was an error. i think the parliamentarian was contrary to law. there was a moment for conscience to strike them. the senator from vermont stood up and raised a point of ordered that said they want to seclude home schoolers from 529 plans. there are 1.8 million kids home schooled right now, to every kid who is being home schooled right now, to every parent, to every mom who -- some dads but a lot of moms -- but mostly moms who put in a lot of time to home

school their kids. what every democrat is standing up to do right now is saying, we're going to discriminate against home schoolers. we're going to cut you out. why? because the democratic party can't stand the audacity of a parent who would take it upon himself or herself to educate their child free of centralized control. their point of order is to carve home schoolers out of this. one of the provisions they want to carve out is a provision that says that home schoolers can pay from a 529 savings account for tutoring. every senate democrat is getting ready to vote against tutors for children at home. another provision that they are objecting to that is going to be carved out says that parents can pay for 529 plans for books, for additional materials can pay for a student in high school who is

dual enrolled in a community college, can pay for it with their own money. the democrats are saying if your student is signed up in a community college, we, the democratic party, object to you paying for that out of a tax advantage plan. let me tell you what's most striking, a provision the democrats are arguing to strike provides that parents with a child with disabilities can pay for occasional therapy from a 529 plan that is their own savings that they put together and the democrats are saying to the parents to kids with disabilities, no you can't. let me ask my friends on the democratic side of the aisle, are you prepared to look in the eyes of a kid with a disability and explain why you said they are cut out. every other child has the ability to have their tuition paid for from the 529 plans, but

children with disabilities, democrats, not 1, not two, every single democrat stands united. why? because they can't stand the president. they are angry at the president. if they are angry at the president, stand up and yell at the president. don't take it out on kids home schooled. don't take it out on kids with disabilities. the democrats have an opportunity to demonstrate they're not going to punish children with disabilities because of their partisan anger. we've got right now a motion to waive this mean-spirited, vindictive point of order that discriminates against home schoolers and carves out kids with disabilities. i would ask my friends on the democratic side of the aisle, there are going to be issues we disagree on. but the vote to allow parents of children with disabilities to spend their own funds in a tax advantage fund to provide for educational therapy for those

kids with disabilities, that ought to be 100-0. all of us should agree on that. we might disagree on other things, fine. the death tax or as democrats like to call it, the estate tax, we can disagree on that. but educating kids with disabilities, you're really standing up, raising that objection. i would ask my friends on the democratic side of the aisle don't do that. don't discriminate against the home schoolers. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. enzi: mr. president, i yield back all remaining time for the majority. the presiding officer: the proponent time is yielded back. the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, the issue with the cruz amendment is straightforward. the byrd rule states that the primary purpose of a budget bill is to address spending and

taxes. if on the other hand you are debating a major policy change and the budget impact is merely incidental, the provision just doesn't comply with the byrd rule. that is the case here. the cruz amendment has a modest budget impact, but the impact is vastly outweighed by the profound impact as a matter of social and education policy of providing federal support for home schooling for the first time. in fact, last week, the senator from texas, he called his section 529 home schooling provision -- and i quote here -- the most far-reaching federal school choice legislation bill ever passed. i agree with the senator's

assessment of his amendment. the issue of federal support for home schooling is, in fact, major policy. there is no question that there are parents who want to home school their kids. i'm certain that many of them are very conscientious, yet this is the first time the federal government would provide federal support for home schooling. that's why the parliamentarian ruled against senator cruz. i urge my colleagues to vote against the enzi motion to waive the byrd rule point of order which we will vote on shortly. now, mr. president, i also want to close for the finance democrats on this tax issue with

some brief remarks. my colleague from texas once again has been saying, as many republicans have done tonight, is middle-class folks, wait until february. your paychecks are going to be bulging. here are the facts, and we just got them from the joint committee on taxation, a specific table that shows that 60 million taxpayers with an annual income of $200,000 or less will get $100 a year in tax relief or a tax increase. that looks to me like a third of all taxpayers are not exactly going to have bulging paychecks the way we have heard from our colleagues on the other side of

the aisle. the fact is some of the rhetoric we've heard from republican colleagues tonight didn't sound half bad, so it is a real shame that the rhetoric doesn't resemble the plan on paper. as i indicated, this bill is not centered on middle-class tax cuts. the fleeting sugar high the bill provides offers some middle-class families a modest amount of help, but it's basically a distraction from the giveaways to the multinational corporations and powerful donors. now, one of our colleagues -- one of our republican colleagues tonight repeated that if passed the deficit is going to drop when the bill is enacted. i just have to say, colleagues, that fantasy is over.

even independent conservatives are saying that there is no absurd alternate reality in which republican tax bills perform magic. and i want to close tonight, colleagues, and say to the public that i'd really like to wrap this up with a warning. the american people should know that the far right architects of this tax plan are going to be coming for your social security and medicare before you take your christmas tree down. that's the end game. that's what americans need to know is coming next. and on this side of the aisle, we want the american people to know that we're going to be on their side. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the democratic leader.

mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank my colleague, ron wyden, for the excellent job he has done in leading the opposition to this bill. i'm incredulous that someone on the other side of the aisle said this will decrease the deficit. that's just amazing. i mean, the lack of factual fidelity to what's in the bill and what the other side is saying is unparalleled, unparalleled. and i want to thank senator wyden for his valiant efforts in pointing that out. i want to thank senator sanders and senator cantwell as well, ranking members of our committees who worked so hard on this bill. now, in closing, mr. president, very soon the senate will vote for the final time on the republican tax bill. when future generations look back at the short and messy history of the republican tax

bill, its most enduring lesson will be what it has taught us about how not to legislate. after only a few months of frantic back-room negotiations by only one party, we are left with a product as sloppy and as partisan as the process used to draft it. even today, three provisions of the bill were found to violate senate rules, so now all of a sudden the house will have to vote again tomorrow. that's a perfect mcguire row come of the hasty and reckless process -- could we have order, mr. president? the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. schumer: it's a perfect microcosm of the hasty and

reckless process that produced this legislation. if my republican friends think these are the only mistakes that will be found in their bill, they are sorely mistaken. many more will almost certainly be unearthed. but the bigger issue is the failure of this legislation to live up to each and every one of the promises made by republicans about what it would mean for our country. what has been sold as a middle-class miracle will instead deliver a hefty windfall to the wealthy, and only -- an only paltry temporary leap for some in the middle class. others will see an increase right from the getgo. so all the talk, only a middle-class person will pay a tax increase, gone. and in a few years, a majority of the middle class will see their taxes go up. what kind of middle-class relief

is that? what has been sold as a deficit reducer will instead balloon the deficit by at least $1.5 trillion, maybe more. our children and grandchildren will be asked to clean up the mess made tonight by our republican colleagues in their eagerness to give the very wealthy, the very powerful corporations a big tax break. what has been sold as a bill to give more freedom to choose their health care, to give people more freedom to choose their health care will instead raise freedoms and reduce the number of americans with health insurance by 13 million. the number of people who get a small tax cut and still have to pay more than that tax cut in premium increases is large, is

large. what a huge mistake my colleagues made by eliminating that provision in the health care bill because the middle class is going to pay the price. and what has been sold as a job creator and wage booster will do little of either, as companies large, big, powerful companies are already initiateing stock buybacks instead of hiring more workers and increasing wages. is that what you intended? give them more money so they can buy back more stock, increasing the wealth of corporate c.e.o.'s, increasing the wealth of the very wealthy, sending billions of dollars overseas to overseas investors? that's what's happening already. corporation after corporation has said aha, with this new

money, we'll do even more stock buybacks. ultimately, the american people will learn that republicans have squandered their so-called once in a generation opportunity on corporate welfare and taxes for the rich financed by tax increases and health care increases on the middle class. the joint committee on taxation just released a report that found by 2027, nearly 145 million middle-class families under $200,000 will either get tax hikes -- could we have order, mr. president? mr. schumer: the senate will be in order. mr. schumer: this is serious stuff. we believe you're messing up america. you could pay attention for a couple of minutes.

145 million middle-class families earning under $200,000 will get either tax hikes or a tax cut of less than $100. 83% of the middle class will gen taxes or get little but crumbs. is that what you intended? is that this great bill that's helping the middle class? absolutely not. meanwhile, according to the tax policy center, the top 1% of earners in our country will reap 83% of the benefits of the tax plan. the top 5%, the top 5% will reap 99.2% of the benefits. is that what you intended? that's what you're doing. the very, very wealthy, the highest spectrum get almost all

the benefits. some bill for the middle class. the raw numbers are a staggering indictment, mr. president, of the republican tax plan, as they have been throughout the course of this debate. the data reveals what the republican tax plan truly is, a tax scam that will rob middle-class families to pay for corporate tax breaks and giveaways to the wealthy. in an age of extraordinary income inequality, when the upper echelons of our economy are capturing an ever greater share of the pie, the republican tax bill is like pouring gasoline on a raging fire, making income inequality, bad as it is now, even worse. it will exacerbate all the bad trends in our economy that over the past few decades have

produced dramatically more wealth for the already wealthy while producing less work and less pay for working people. that fundamental imbalance in our economy will be made even more precarious. what disgrace. that's what this bill is. it's an absolute disgrace. it's not just an ideological difference. it is something dramatically opposite of what america needs. there is no reason for a single middle-class family to pay more while every single corporation pays less. if you wanted to help the middle class, give them a real tax break. the rich get far more dollars back than the middle class. that is fact. irrefutable fact. on top of that, senator wyden

warned everybody a few minutes ago this tax bill will endanger social security and medicare. republicans have already said, led by speaker ryan, they'll use the deficit they're about to create as an excuse to come after those earned benefits. the aarp is very reluctant to stake stands on bills like this, but it was so bad for the elderly, the aarp felt compelled to publicly oppose it. elderly americans are not the only ones who should be worried, although they certainly should be. if you're 40, 45 or 50 working hard, trying to put money away for retirement while sending your kids to college, and you're counting on these programs to be there when you retire, know this. cuts to social security, medicare, and medicaid are likely to fall on your shoulders because of this monstrosity of a

bill. the republican tax bill is the first shoe to drop. the second will fall on the social safety net that allows millions of hardworking americans to retire with dignity, with security. for all of these reasons, it's not a surprise that in poll after poll after poll the american people overwhelmingly oppose this bill. my republican colleagues have done what's nearly impossible. it's a bad trick, but they've accomplished it. they've managed to make a tax cut bill even less popular than previous tax hikes. who would have thought they could accomplish that? who would have thought? in fact, it's the second least popular piece of major legislation in 30 years. opposed two to one by the american people. and the more they learn about

the bill, the less they like it. by the way, what was the first? the republican health care bill earlier this year. it's not hard to understand why the dark heart of the republican policy agenda, easing burdens on those who already have so much while punishing or ignoring those who have too little is a profoundly unpopular idea. my republican friends ought to listen to the american people. the fount of wisdom in our democracy where there will be a reckoning. the american people do not believe in trickle down as all of you seem to. give the very top money and they'll create jobs. hasn't happened. at&t, you know what their tax rate was over the last ten years? 8%. you know how many jobs they created? zero.

they cut 80,000 people. let's give them more money while hurting the middle class. it makes no sense. the american people are saying in a loud, clear voice that they oppose tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy. they don't believe in trickle down as you do. they oppose gutting health care, as you want to do. and they oppose this one-party approach to legislating. the american people know that a slap-dash partisan process will not result in good law. my republican colleagues ignored the warnings of the american people at their own peril. in just a short time republicans will have a choice whether or not to affix their name to this awful legislation. and though the republican propaganda may call passage a political victory, it will be

very fleeting and illusory. the substance and polling are so rotten that a year from now republicans will be running away from this bill in shame for voting yes this evening. there's an alternative. vote no. come to the table with democrats. begin serious bipartisan talks on tax reform. get a good bill and work in the way this chamber is supposed to work. bipartisan, moderate, thoughtful, open. we've done none of those. none of those. i have little faith that at this late hour my colleagues will choose that better course. but if they do, we could do something great for the country, madam president, and for this body at the same time. we could return to regular order where the legitimate policy

differences between our parties are argued in broad daylight and with pai painstaking effort we compromise even after we fiercely debate one another. isn't that what we came here to do? i challenge a single one of my republican colleagues to say they're proud of the way this tax bill was written and passed. i challenge a single one. i know this isn't what they'd like to see. i know that this isn't what so many of you came here to do. i know it's not what you tell your constituents the senate ought to be. i know so many of you lament the steady erosion of bipartisanship here in the senate, as do i, as do my fellow democrats. so rather than resign to the failures of the current moment, i plead, plead with my republican colleagues to imagine a better path forward.

vote no. vote no and prevent taxes from going up on millions of middle-class families. vote no and stop 13 million americans from going without health insurance. vote no so we don't add $1.5 trillion to the deficit putting the burden on our children and grandchildren. vote no and say that you want to have the kind of bipartisan debate befitting grand traditions of this united states senate. vote no. otherwise i believe the entire republican party and each of you will come to rue this day. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to waive the points of order. the yeas and nays were previously ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 51, nays are 48. three fifths of the senators not having voted in the affirmative the motion is not agreed to. the points of order are sustained. the material will be stricken from the conference report.

the vice president: the question before the senate is whether the senate shal recede from its amet to h.r. 1 and concur therein with the further amendment. is there a sufficient second? there is a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order to the gallery.

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.

the vice president: on this vote the ayes are 51. the nays are 48. the senate recedes from its amendment and concurs in h.r. 1 with further amendment.

the tax cuts and jobs act is passed. mr. enzi: madam president. madam president. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. the senator from wyoming. the senate will be in order. the senator from wyoming.

mr. enzi: i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. madam president. provided the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: the senate is not in order. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of s. con. res. 31 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. con. res. 31, concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the rotunda of the capitol for a ceremony to award the congressional gold medal to bob dole. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous

consent when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 11:00 a.m. wednesday, december 20. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. finally, following leader remarks, the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 11:00 a.m. today. >> that come as we approach the 1:00 a.m. hour in washington, d.c., the senate passing along a partyline vote republican tax bill 51 - 48.

senator john mccain who is in arizona following treatment cancer, we open the phone lines, (202)748-8920 for democrats. we will hear from the senate republican leader, mitch mcconnell his news conference is taking place not far from where the senate is leading. we'll have that when it happens. the senate passed the bill, it goes back to the house edging closer today, with the house approving that sweeping tax bill the hustle have to vote again tomorrow where the parliamentary rules which do not comply with the republican