send your photos for additional chance for prizes. and our getting started page at student cam.org has information to guide you through the process of making a documentary. c-span will award $100,000 in total cash prizes including a grand prize. all eligible entries must be uploaded and received by midnight on january 20th, 2020. >> the best advice i can give to young film makers is not to take it seriously. you're never too young to have an opinion so let your voice be heard now. >> for more information go to our website, student cam.org. >> the u.s. senate is about to gavel in and continue work on judicial nominations. nell' also vote on a suicide prevention bill today at noon eastern. now live coverage of the senate here on c-span2.

the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, we are reminded at this time of year of the greatness of your

gift to us in sending your son. use us as instruments for his glory. because of our faith in you, make us bold as lions in these turbulent times. may our lawmakers work together to protect and defend our constitution, realizing, as iron sharpens iron so friends sharpen friends. make our senators grateful for the fires in our nation's history that have tested their commitment to freedom, providing opportunities

to become profiles of courage, serving their generation with faithfulness. we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., december 11, 2019. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable marsha blackburn, a senator from the state of

tennessee, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: chuck grassley, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, lawrence vandyke, of nevada, to be united states circuit judge for the ninth circuit.

mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that following disposition of h.r. 2333, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the van dyke nomination, further the postcloture time expire at 4:15 today and the senate vote on confirmation of the nomination. further, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. further, following disposition of the lawrence vandyke nomination, and notwithstanding the rules of -- rule 22 the senate vote on cloture on

sullivan, hahn and skipwith nominations, and if cloture is invoked, the confirmation votes occur at that time to be -- at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democratic leader on thursday, december 12. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so madam president, it's no secret that washington democrats have been itching to im -- to impeach president trump since the moment he took the office. remember "the washington post" headline, this was on inauguration day in 2017. the campaign to impeach president trump has begun. that's "the washington post" headline on inauguration day 2017. just a few months later in april of 2017, one leading house democrat had already made up her

mind. she declared she would, quote, fight every day until he's impeached. as an aside, this same snoor democrat is one of the committee chairwomen that speaker pelosi helped to lead the impeachment process. she was literally standing at the speaker's shoulder as she announced yesterday she'll bring two articles of impeachment up for a vote. yet, she had her mind made up more than two years ago, long before this supposedly fair inquiry. sort of emblematic of their whole process. yesterday house democrats announced they would rush ahead and prepare to send the articles of impeachment based on the least thorough and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history. well, the house democrats

denigration of their solemn duty will not cause the senate to denigrate ours. if the house continues this destructive road and sends us articles of impeachment, the senate will take them up in the new year and proceed to a fair trial. now, in the meantime, our colleagues' obsession with impeachment has left us with a host of important bipartisan legislation that is still unfinished at this late date. for months senate republicans have been calling on our democratic colleagues to go beyond picking fights with the white house and actually legislate for the american people. but practically the entire autumn our democratic friends political calculation seemed to be that these vital pieces of business could wait until the eleventh hour because impeachment was a higher priority. and wait they have. finally after weeks of pressure

from republicans and hardworking americans across the country, speaker pelosi backed down yesterday and announced she'll let the house vote on president trump's usmca. democrats have stalled this agreement for so long that it is now impossible -- impossible for the usmca to become law in 2019, especially given all the other urgent things they stalled right alongside it. democrats, madam president, have simply run out the clock. and assuming that house democrats send us articles of impeachment next week, a senate trial will have to be our first item of business in january. so the usmca will continue to be a casualty of democrats' impeachment obsession for several more weeks before we can actually turn to it. but i'm glad the speaker's finally beginning to bring her usmca obstruction to a close. as we triage in the coming days,

republicans hope to pass not only the ndaa conference report but also funding legislation that allocates taxpayers' hard-earned money to urgent federal priorities. the ndaa has consistently brought members from across the political spectrum together with good reason. it's congress's opportunity to set priorities for the u.s. military of the future. the ndaa helps guide the pentagon's investments in modernization and readiness, cutting-edge weapons and capabilities and in service members and military families. and i'm grateful for the efforts of chairman inhofe and ranking member reed, who made compromises from the beginning and worked hard to ensure the conference report remain true to the 58-year tradition of a bipartisan bill that prioritizes our military and sets aside unrelated partisan priorities. i cannot say the same thing

about democrats in the house, unfortunately, but i hope they will learn from this year's difficult path to a conference report and next year i hope they can produce a bipartisan bill from the beginning that puts our national security interest first. now, obviously that authorizing legislation should be paired with the appropriations measure that will actually fund our service members tools and training and enable our commanders to actually plan ahead. i'm grateful for the hard work of chairman shelby, his counterpart in the house and our subcommittee chairs to reboot a stalled appropriations process and try to get bills over the finish line in the short time that remains. to be frank, only a laser focus from both parties and both chambers on getting results will create a path to pass appropriation bills this year. there simply is not time left for my democratic friends to

continue haggling over the exact kinds of poison pills, partisan riders, and presidential transfer authorities that the speaker and the democratic leader had explicitly agreed months ago would be off the table. under the agreement months ago, these are supposed to be off the table. the white house, republican leaders in both chambers, and the democratic leaders in both chambers all agreed to these parameters. literally pledged in writing that these kinds of partisan roadblocks would be kept out of the process. so if all parties honor what they agreed to, we should have an opportunity to agree on government funding in time to make this a law this month, which means next week. now that our democratic colleagues are back at the table, senate republicans stand ready to do all we can in the time we still have. let's end this legislative year

on the right foot. let's deliver for our all-volunteer armed forces and for families all across our country. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: madam president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we are. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent it be vitiated. over in the house, the democrats are taking up their latest installment to have the government take over americans' health care, the pelosi prescription drug bill. madam president, there is no question that high prescription drug costs are a problem. one in four seniors reports difficulty affording medication, and there are too many stories of patients being forced to ration pills or to abandon their prescription at the pharmacy counter. but the pelosi drug bill is the wrong prescription for the problem of high drug prices. why? because it would reduce americans' access to lifesaving

treatments and discourage investment in prescription drug research. madam president, between 2011 and 2018, more than 250 new medications were introduced worldwide. american patients had access to nearly all of them, but that's not the situation for patients in a lot of other countries. the chamber of commerce reports the patients in france have access to just 50% of those new drugs. french patients, in other words, are missing out on fully half of the new drugs that have been introduced in the past eight years. so why do americans have such tremendous access to new drugs while other countries trail behind? because the united states government doesn't dictate drug prices or drug coverage. as statistic after statistic demonstrates, when governments start imposing price controls, patients access to new drugs and treatments diminishes. government price controls also discourage the medical research and innovation and produces the

prescription drug breakthroughs of the future. the u.s. leads the world in prescription drug innovation, and a big reason for that is because of the u.s. government -- because the u.s. government doesn't dictate drug prices. it wasn't always this way. european investment in drug research used to exceed u.s. investment, but that changed, madam president, when european governments stepped in and started imposing price controls. today european investment and drug research and development is almost 40% lower than u.s. investment, in large part because of european governments' price controls. no other country comes close to achieving the number of prescription drug breakthroughs the companies in the united states achieve. that situation, madam president, however, is not going to last if the democrat party has its way. the pelosi drug bill would impose a system of government price controls on up to 250 medications, and reduce the access to drugs and fewer medical breakthroughs would soon

follow. the california life sciences association released a statement noting that the pelosi drug bill could result in -- and i quote -- an 88% reduction in the number of drugs that are brought to market by small emerging companies in california. it goes on to say that such a dramatic decline would be felt most in the higher risk, smaller population therapeutic areas of r&d, including new drugs for endocrine, metabolic, genetic, and rare diseases and pediatric cancers, end of quote. that, again, from the california life sciences association. in other words, fewer medical breakthroughs for those who need them the most. madam president, as i said earlier, the high cost of some prescription drugs can be a real problem for many families, but the answer, the answer, madam president, is not to introduce a government-run pricing system that would mean that important prescription drugs would not be there when you or your child need them.

there are a lot of things we can do to lower the cost of prescription drugs without resorting to government price controls. multiple senate committees have been actively engaged on this topic. there are options for how to improve transparency in a complicated and often opaque drug-pricing process. there are ideas to examine exe testing and consolidation in the pharmaceutical simply chain. to ensure that generic companies can access the samples that they need to develop a new generic or biosimilar. to prevent companies from engaging in patent thickening to block competition. to promote real-time benefit tools to help inform consumers of cheaper drug options. to advance value-based insurance design to support coverage of high-value items and services like medicines that people with chronic conditions need to manage their health. and to modernize the medicare

part d plan design and cap seniors' out-of-pocket costs. republicans in the house recently introduced legislation on prescription drug costs that both promotes innovation and contains bipartisan ideas for reform, including increased transparency and drug pricing and provisions to prevent drug companies from gaming the system. this bill provides several ideas passed by the senate finance committee while focusing on policies that can be passed through both chambers of commerce -- or congress. importantly, it eliminates those policies that have divided us. madam president, there are bipartisan solutions on the table. it's unfortunate that house democrats have abandoned bipartisan efforts on drug pricing and have decided to pursue their government-run alternative. madam president, it boils down really simply to this. government price controls mean access to fewer drugs.

and access to fewer drugs means that when you or your child or your mom or your dad needs a lifesaving medication, that drug may be out there, but it may not be out there for you, and that is not acceptable. the pelosi drug bill is a bad prescription for the american people. madam president, i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: before i begin -- are we in a quorum? the presiding officer: we are. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the qowrk be vitiated. mr. schumer: i want to express deep sympathy of the families in jersey city, which left one fallen police officers, detective shields, and several bystanders. my heart goes out to their friends and family today. local and federal law

enforcement must investigate quickly and professionally so we can implement the best responses. we're not sure yet if this was motivated by hate or if it was criminal in nature. but whatever the answers, rest assured, the response must be swift, sure, and strong. now on impeachment. yesterday the house judiciary committee announced two articles of impeachment against the president of the united states. the articles allege the -- that president trump abused -- biewfd the office of the presidency by -- abused the office of the presidency by soliciting appearance of -- they also allege the president obstructed congress in the investigation of these matters. the president has had every chance to defend himself against these allegations. he has had every chance to rebut the specific evidence that was presented in the house. if there's an -- if there's

information or a witness who the white house believes can provide ex cull trievidence in defense of the president, nothing is stopping them from testifying under oath. but if the president is so innocent, if this is a mere witch hunt, why isn't he answering the specific charges? why is he blocking witnesses from testifying who would have direct knowledge of these facts? the house has made an extremely strong case. the burden now lies on the president to rebullet it if he can. and what most americans -- the majority of americans saying is, the fact that he refuses to -- to produce rebutting evidence, the fact that he blocks witnesses from testifying, the fact that he won't let documents come forward may well indicate that he did everything alleged in the house proceedings.

to talk about things that are run related to the charges against the president have nothing to do with what happened here. the president merely claims his innocence. if he has nothing to hide, he should have nothing to fear from handing over documents or allowing witnesses to testify. so their silence, the silence imposed by the white house on top officials with knowledge of these dealings speaks volumes. and what the president, the white house, and congressional allies here in the senate and the house try to do? instead of defending the president with facts, the white house, the president himself, congressional republicans employ one fringe conspiracy theory after the next to explain away the president's conduct, even though they have nothing to do with the specific charges against the president. here in the senate,

unfortunately, we have several members on the other side of the aisle who are forming had their own conspiracy caucus. any conspiracy theory pulled out of the air by known cranks, then broadcast on fox news which shows an all too willingness to broadcast this stuff is then picked up here as a diversion. why do they want to divert? is it because they know the facts can't be answered? for the past few weeks certain republican senators have repeated the fiction invented by putin's intelligence services that ukraine, not putin, interfered in the 2016 election. they are mouthing the putin -- they used to be anti-putin, but now all of a sudden because president trump has created so many different diversions because he seems to go along

with what putin wants, these republicans have become putin mouthpieces when it comes to these conspiracy theories. today, an example, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee is holding a hearing on the report issued this week by the department of justice inspector general which found no evidence -- no evidence of a political motive for the f.b.i. investigation into the trump campaign. the deputy council of the f.b.i. said -- counsel of the f.b.i. said there was an obligation to investigate once, not by anyone's design, once they heard these allegations that came from a credible source. what will the judiciary chairman do? will he focus on the central finding of the i.g. report? i suspect not.

i suspect republicans on that committee instead will take every opportunity to contort the facts, to further the president's baseless claim the f.b.i. was out to get him. so many people accused of crime and wrongdoing instead of addressing the issue when they know they are guilty blame the prosecutor that is not what our system of justice is about. but, astonishingly, that's what the chief law enforcement officer of the land, the attorney general of the united states, did yesterday in interviews, contradicting the findings of his own inspector general, someone who had studied the case for months, someone who the attorney general himself had recently praised as fiercely independent and a superb

investigator, what attorney general barr did was push the false narrative that the f.b.i. acted in bad faith when it investigated the trump campaign. attorney general barr has signed himself up to be a charter member of the conspiracy caucus. the real bad faith is the relationship between the attorney general and his oath of office. he did not swear to, quote, support and defend president trump, but that's what he's done as attorney general and it's deeply, dangerously corrosive to the primary rule of law and our constitutional system. at the same time, attorney general's hand-picked prosecutor john durham put out a ridiculous statement on monday criticizing the findings of the i.g. report. durham used to have have some credibility, but when barr chose

him, i said, uh-oh, because barr is not a down the middle guy and by putting out a hugely partisan political statement on a pending investigation he's doing, mr. durham has signaled to the world that he's not capable of producing a report anyone can take seriously. unfortunately, mr. durham, like too many others, has aligned himself with attorney general barr and consigned himself to the world of alternative truth facts, many of them on the fringe. whatever reputation durham had for fairness is now in tatters. now, mr. president, there's a possibility that the senate will be served with the articles of impeachment for the president from the house. we may soon, in all likelihood, con front the demands of hosting a trial for the chief executive and serving as judges and jurors in determining the fate of that

trial. with such a weighty constitutional responsibility on the horizon, i implore my colleagues to stop dipping their toes in the murky waters of conspiracy. view the facts. don't prejudge the outcome. remember our oaths to the constitution, our responsibility to do impartial justice in the senate trial. that is our responsibility. history will judge whether we lived up to it or not. now on the recent decision about the wall by a federal court in texas. yesterday a federal court in texas issued a nationwide injunction blocking the trump administration from using military construction funding to build his wall. the decision confirms what many democrats, and a few republicans in the past, have said. the president's emergency declaration, which allowed the

administration to steal funds from military families to pay for a wall president trump promised mexico would pay for is an outrageous legal power grab. the injunction is a win for the rule of law. it should serve as a warning to republicans in congress and the trump administration that the power of the purse, given exclusively to congress by the constitution, cannot be usurped. at his rally last night president trump said, the courts are siding with me on the wall. he hadn't read the decision. he's already built so much of the wall. well, thank you, president trump. you have just buttressed a portion of the wall that president trump built. nothing new. as we look ahead to concluding negotiations on appropriations for the end of the year, my republican colleagues should remember that a federal court ruled the trump administration was beyond its legal right when

it took funding from other sources to build a wall. the vandyke nomination. today the senate will vote on the confirmation of lawrence vandyke to serve on the ninth circuit court of appeals. after seeing so many radical and unfit judicial appointments over the past few years, i'm almost surprised that president trump is still able to find nominees like mr. vandyke who is unqualified in comparison to some of the worst nominees that we've seen under this administration. vandyke has a history of bigoted writing about lgbtq, radical views on gun safety legislation and approving hostility to reproductive rights. on top of his radical views, vandyke has received stunningly negative reviews on his qualifications and temperament. the american bar association doesn't do this much, but it rated him not qualified. in over 60 interviews with

vandyke's colleagues, he was described as, quote, arrogant, lazy, and idealogue and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice. it went on to say, quote, the nominee lacks humility, has an entitlement temperament, does not have an open mind and does not always have a commitment to being candid and truthful. this is who we're voting on today, my republican friends. what is going on here? because someone is hard right and radical, we excuse all of their personality defects found by the a.b.a.? and amazingly, this is someone not even for a district court but the circuit court. this is getting to the point of utter absurdity. for obvious reasons, both home state senators objected to vandyke's nomination. in the past, the senate would respect those objections.

it would be a check on someone so unqualified on getting to the bench. but leader mcconnell and senate republicans are in such a rush to fill the bench with these hard right nominees, they have blown through senate traditions and most standards of reason and good judgment. please reject this nominee. he is so unqualified. he's a low human being, at least according to all of this. he'll have a lifetime appointment on the circuit bench. that would indicate the decline of america, one more indication, unfortunately, propagated by this administration. finally, in a week or so, it will be two years since republicans jammed through a massive tax cut for corporations and the megawealthy on a party-line vote. two years later, it's worth looking back on the promises republicans made when selling this to the american people. at the time, the president said the bill would be, quote, a

middle-class miracle. the administration promised americans would get a $4,000 raise. congressional republicans said giving corporate tax cut would boost jobs and investment. two years later, it's clear the tax bill has failed to live up to any of those sunny predictions. middle-class wages still aren't growing fast enough to keep up with the cost of living. businesses aren't investing their newfound profits in jobs or wages. in fact, since the passage of the trump republican tax bill, while capital expenditures by businesses remain low, that's investing in jobs and equipment and things that employ people and give them better wages, that's low. while corporate stock buybacks which benefits by and large wealthy shareholders explodes, setting annual records. last year alone, over a trillion dollars was spent on stock buybacks while millions of

middle-class americans didn't see enough improvement in their quality of life. so as many democrats, including myself, predicted two years after its passage, the republican tax bill has overwhelmingly benefited shareholders and corporate executives, not workers and their families. america will remember that as we head into an election year. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: mr. president, i rise today -- i want to make it very clear. it's going to be short and succinct -- that time is running out on our coal miners. we need to fix this now. not in 2020, but now. i will explain why. we have over 13,000 coal miners who will lose their health care and 82,000 coal miners who will lose their pensions next year if we do not do something now.

that is why i'm standing here before you. that's why i'm putting a hold on all legislative business coming through the senate until we get assurances. this is not who i am. anybody that knows me knows i don't do this, but i am so committed to the people that built this country and a commitment that we had in a 1946 agreement with the federal government that they would be able to have a pension and retirement for the very difficult, very dangerous hard work that they do, and they weren't asking taxpayers or anyone else to bail them out. it was coming from the sale of the product, the coal that they mined for the energy for this country. only my bill, which is the bipartisan american miners act, has bipartisan support on both sides, here in the senate and oaf in the house, and i know congress passed passed it, president trump would sign it. i know that. can you imagine being one of the coal miners trying to enjoy your holidays this year knowing you

might wake up january 1 with no health care coverage or reduction in your pension. let me explain to you the pensions. the average pension of these coal miners. most of these are widows. the miners have passed away. most of them are widows, $600 or less. so we're not talking about thousands of dollars. we're not talking about that whatsoever. this is all the means of sustaining a quality of life or helping them through a quality of life. these coal miners and their families deserve the peace of mind knowing that the health care they have earned, the pensions that they get, this is something they have paid into and they earned. this stayed right there in their investments. we can give them that peace of mind today, and no legislative business will pass without coal miners first. i reluctantly say that we might be here through christmas, we might be here through new year's, but i will make whatever sacrifice i can for the people who made the sacrifice for us, an that's the coal miners that provide the energy for us to be the greatest nation on earth, for us basically to be the superpower of the world and be the leader of the free world,

and it's because of the energy they produced. if we can't honor that, then what do we honor, who do we honor, and what's our purpose of being here? so i ask that each one of my colleagues please talk to all of our leaders. let's come together sensibly. let's make sure this is all in the package we put together, and we'll continue business and we'll be able to go home and enjoy the holidays, the same as they should be able to enjoy the holidays. us going home and them not being able to enjoy is not who we are, and it's not the american dream, and it's not who we are as americans. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. boozman: i rise today to honor the life of fayetteville arkansas police officer steven carr who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty on saturday, december 7. officer carr was sitting in his patrol car in the parking lot

behind the police station when he was shot and killed. the 27-year-old had been a member of the fayetteville police department for two and a half years and was assigned as a patrol officer in the dixon street entertainment area. in that short time, with the police department, he demonstrated his professionalism and duty to upholding the rule of law. fayetteville police chief described carr as an exemplary officer who was an all-american boy. quote, if i had 131 steven carr carrs, i wouldn't be more exthat the i can, end quote, the chief said at a press conference over the weekend. carr grew up in a law enforcement family. he witnessed the dedication, service, and commitment to protecting the community by people he loved. his friends describe him as a strong and kind person whose

lifelong dream was to serve as a police officer. he loves spending time outdoors hunting and fishing. a graduate from the woodlands high school in woodlands, texas. carr played football and earned recognition as an all-district offensive lineman. he went on to play football at southwest baptist university in missouri, and his former coach described him as a young man who made a big impact on campus. we rely on law enforcement officers to keep us safe. each day they put on their uniform, knowing the risk that -- risks that come with the public duty to serve and to protect. officer carr's death is a reminder of the dangers these first responders face daily and how quickly the situation can go from ordinary to deadly, which is why those willing to take on this role deserve both our gratitude and our respect. the outpouring of support from

the fayetteville community has been a tremendous strength to the police department as they mourn the loss of a brother in blue. i pray they will find comfort from this encouragement during this very difficult time. my thoughts and prayers go out to officer carr's family and friends. i also stand with all arkansans in expressing our gratitude for officer carr's service and commit to honoring the sacrifice that he and others have made to protect us. we will forever remember him as a true american hero. with that, mr. president, i yield back.

mr. wyden: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, over the next 45 minutes or so, finance democrats will come to the floor, and we will be discussing the second

anniversary of the trump tax bill, and the ranking democrat, i'm going to begin it, and i know my colleagues will be joining me. mr. president, the trump tax law is now two years old, and for millions of middle-class americans, it is not a very happy anniversary. my own view is the economic legacy of the trump administration will be that they spent $1.5 trillion to widen the economic gap in america. and if i were to cup up what the law was all about, the trump tax law, it was about making wealthy

people wealthier and the middle class being an afterthought. and i'm going to walk through some of the reasons why i reached that judgment and then i know my colleagues will be getting into some of these issues as well. now, donald trump and republicans in the congress promised, promised they'd write a bill that was focused on helping workers and the middle class. the president told me personally that he thought that he and people like him should not get a tax break. he said that to me personally. but that simply wasn't the case. now, we were told that the trump tax legislation would pay for itself. that was wrong by a couple of

trillion dollars. we were told that it would kick off a towering wave of job-creating investments in so many hard hit american communities. that's not been the case. we were told that workers would get on average a $4,000 raise. wrong once more. wrong on all counts with respect to the promises made to the american people. now, what in fact did happen is rates slashed for folks at the top and multinational corporations. the corporations then turned around and shuffled that money back -- shurchled that money -- shoveled the money back to the shareholders who by and large are wealthy themselves and so you saw a historic boom in stock

buybacks. now the sugar high has worn off. and, mr. president, i've been going home for town meetings open to all. i'm going to be in a county this weekend that president trump won listening to people. don't give any speeches. just listening to people. and what i hear at these meetings in counties in oregon that donald trump won is that folks see very little evidence that their lives have changed, that somehow this tax bill ended up trickling down to them. my sense is it's amazing that a bill can cost so much, you can borrow so much and fail the middle class so thoroughly.

now, there are two issues that it's important to focus on going forward. we're going to talk about that. there's a lot of talk about how congressional republicans and the trump administration are talking about another, another scam tax proposal basically going to the same playbook that made the middle class an afterthought two years ago. i think that it's important that people understand that all the evidence indicates that the second bill isn't going to focus on the middle class either. according to the reports in the press that have been discussing this new republican proposal which is infect an admission that the first proposal failed

the middle class while helping the most fortunate, what we hear about this new proposal is that republicans are considering what would amount to yet another massive handout for folks at the top of the economic pyramid. one trump advisor is reportedly discussing a proposal that would effectively wipe out the taxation of capital gains and we all know that a fraction, a tiny fraction of the american people get most of those capital gains and they happen to be the most fortunate. the u.s. tax code is already a tale of two systems. we've got one for cops and teachers. their taxes are taken out of every single paycheck. and we've got another for high

flyers who can make most of their money, for example, off investments and to a great extent because of the laws that allow them to defer paying their taxes, those high flyers can pay what they want when they want to. i don't know of any cops or teachers in north dakota or oregon that have that. their taxes are taken out of every paycheck once or twice a month. their system is mandatory. but if you're a high flyer and you make most of your money off investments, your taxes aren't mandatory. and if you use the doctrine of tax deferral, you can just defer and defer and defer. and after you pass, you can hand everything off to your kids johnny and mary. they get the stepped-up basis

and then they get to do the same thing. so you've got to have one set of rules, mr. president, that apply to everybody. that's what we on our side of the aisle have been working for. we think you ought to have one set of tax rules that apply to everybody and by the way, you give everybody in america the chance to be successful. that's what bill bradley, somebody i look to for advice, a member of the finance committee, another tall democrat with a lot better jump shot than me, but he and ronald reagan got together and they produced a proposal that gave everybody in america a chance to get ahead. but that's not what this new trump tax discussion is all about, this new proposal. i'm not talking about the top paying a fair share. i just mentioned what it could

mean for folks at the very top, wealthy people whose income is based on capital gains could be off the hook completely, completely. the first trump tax law took what's already broken about our tax system, the embedded unfairness to the middle class and made the problem even worse. they aren't going to fix it by doubling down on the same failed policies. the second issue that the trump folks are going to be focusing on apparently going forward is the handouts to billionaires and corporations. that's the big accomplishment to date. but it's inseparable from a trump agenda that's all about helping those at the top at the expense of everyone else.

donald trump has sought to kick more than 20 million americans off their health care since day one. he's tried to gut medicaid which is a lifeline for so many seniors who depend on long-term care in nursing homes and is the centerpiece of our fight against opioid addiction. the president proposed education funding for students and teachers, slashing housing funds at a time when millions of americans are struggling to afford rent or to cover the mortgage. i can go on. home heating assistance, meals on wheels. same pattern again and again. tax handouts for the most fortunate, the multinational corporations, billionaires, the one that we were told would pay for itself sent the deficit into the stratosphere. and then working people and the

middle class in addition to being an afterthought in terms of benefits are expected to endure the pain of the trump budget cuts. now, middle class folks know they got a raw deal in the trump tax law in 2017. that's why it's been so unpopular. i was struck in the campaign of 2018, republicans who thought they had done something that would be so valuable to the american people. they couldn't even go out and talk about it with middle-class folks because middle-class folks would say we didn't really see much of anything. might have gotten a little bit. take the family to dinner. but we don't remember getting much of anything. so on the anniversary of the trump tax law, the people who are celebrating are the high flyers, corporate executives who are tallying up stock buyback benefits, the handouts they got. but if you work for a living,

you really say this sure looks like a con job. and in the months and years ahead, my democratic colleagues and i on the finance committee and in our caucus are going to be working with anybody who's interested in fixing our broken tax system for good. mr. president, we've shown that's our interest. personally i wrote the only two comprehensive bipartisan proposals to reform our taxes since bill bradley and ronald reagan got together, first with judd gregg, then the chairman of the budget committee, most recently with our colleague who is director of national intelligence dan coats. so i and others and i see tom carper, a valued member of the finance committee from delaware here. we are committed to working with our colleagues in a bipartisan

way to have a tax system that gives everybody a chance to get ahead. that's not what we got two years ago. but we want it understood that we're going to continue -- and i say it personally as ranking democrat on the finance committee -- we are going to continue to reach out a hand of welcome to republicans who want to work for something different than what passed two years ago and a tax code that would create one set of rules in america built on fairness that applies to all americans. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and note my colleague from delaware is here to make remarks on this subject. mr. carper: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: i thank my colleague, my friend for his leadership and also thank him for yielding the floor to me.

mr. president, i've been here 19 years. pretty hard to believe. my -- some of my detractors say it seems longer. but it's gone by pretty fast. one of -- in the past i've been privileged to be a navy flight officer for many years, retired navy captain. last vietnam veteran serving in the senate today and i've been prerchled to serve as -- privileged to serve as governor from my state. i love being governor. love being senator. there are 1 disw,900 people whoe the privilege serving here and we get to be among them. before i came here, i was governor for eight years. got to be chairman of the national governors association as well which was just a huge honor to work with governors. we have a bunch of former governors here that i get to work with today and i like that a lot. the eight years that i was

governor, we had eight years of balanced budgets. seven out of those eight years we actually cut taxes. but we always balanced our budget. we paid down some debt. we earned aaa credit ratings for the first time in state history. and more jobs were created in those eight years than any eight-year period in the history of the state of delaware. i don't say that to be boastful. i didn't create one of them. as governor i tried to provide some leadership to work with stakeholders in our state to -- a lot of stakeholders inside of government, outside of government, people from all walks of life large and small. we tried to create a nurturing environment for job creation and job preservation. that's what we tried to do. and we were pretty good at it. pretty good at it. we're still pretty good at it in delaware. that nurturing environment is made up of a lot of different

things. among the elements are workforce, people that are educated, trained, have the experience to work -- to contribute in a workplace whether it's agriculture, tourism, financial services, manufacturing, technology, you name it. but right now we have a big challenge in filling all the holes across the country. we just got a jobs report last friday to show how the job market was going in this country, and the month of november -- in the month of november. and one of the things that we learned in that jobs report that while there may be about 156 million, 157 million people went to work in november every day, there were 5 million or 6 million jobs where nobody showed up. nobody showed up because they didn't have the skills, the education, the training, they didn't live in the right part of the country, they didn't want to

do that kind of job, maybe they couldn't pass a drug test. but a lot of jobs are going wanting in this country, and that's got to be a concern as we try to provide a nurturing environment on the workforce side of preparing them for success and to help bolster our growth of our economy going forward. among the other pieces of that nurturing environment, besides environment, are access to foreign markets, the investment by the federal government and state governments, too, in the private sector for the investment into r&d, research and development that can be commercialized in order to create successful businesses and going forward in the future. transportation is important, not just roads, highways, bridges, but rail transportation, shipping, air, all that's important.

access to the internet. a lot of places in our country we don't have access to the internet. we think they're all just rural areas, but a lot of them are in cities, cities that are tough neighborhoods and struggling. last night i was privileged to have dinner with the cabinet secretary for the state of delaware who's been working in a great partnership in our state, where the state provides some money, we work with private-sector partners, to help bring broadband to virtually every rural part of our state. and that's a great goal, and i think we're closing in on achieving that. but that's another important element in the workforce, frankly provides the environment for successful businesses, for business growth. other ingredients include public

safety. they include the protection of our intellectual property, cybersecurity, the ability to make sure that our products, whether they're goods or services or both, to make sure that we have the ability to sell those into markets around the world without impediment. and another one that's important is the tax code -- tax code, a tax code that is fair, a tax code that fosters economic growth, a tax code that is not incredibly difficult for people to understand and comply with, and a tax code that doesn't leave with us a huge hole in our budget deficit. folks at c.b.o. tell us these days that if we look at spending

as a percentage of g.d.p., federal spending as a percentage of g.d.p., it is today about a little over 20%, maybe 20.5%. revenues as a percentage of g.d.p. are about 16%. you spend 20% of g.d.p. and you raise about 16% of g.d.p. in revenue, that delta there is our deficit. the deficit for the last fiscal year was $850 billion, $850 billion. i haven't set down and added that up. that's probably more than the first 200 years of our country combined, and it's like $850 billion in one year. the deficit for the current year is expected to be $1 trillion, $1 trillion. it's just an unimaginable number except maybe in the case of a war, like world war ii, maybe

world war i. but we were faced with -- i serve on the finance committee with senator wyden, senator stabenow, but we were faced with the opportunity to do smaller things with respect -- smart things with respect to our tax code, try to make it more fair, better able to foster economic growth, less complex, actually reduce deficits. as it turns out, we -- without a single democratic vote, in fact we didn't have the opportunity to offer a single democratic amendment. i just sat in a hearing in the finance committee a few minutes ago. they quoted rob wallace, a senior official now in the interior department. rob wallace like to say the best

solutions are the most lasting solutions, are bipartisan solutions, are bipartisan solutions, and we had the tax changes, massive changes to the tax code that were just rammed through here without any bipartisan support. we're told at the time -- we were told at the time that the tax bill was signed into law by president trump, we were told that it would pay for itself; it would not increase deficits, it would actually pay for itself. we'd just lower taxes and it would just pay for it. we'd have more revenues. well, as it turns out, that's not true. it wasn't true this time. it's been asserted frankly many times. we could cut taxes and revenue would just flow, and everything would be just hungy ambassadorry. and that's not -- and everything would be just hunky dory. that's not true.

i think it's time to take a good look at some questions that my colleagues -- democratic colleagues and i posed when we were debating this bill to see how this law has fared. first of all, is it fair? fair tax law would have ensured that working families across delaware and the country shared in the benefits of tax reform. unfortunately, the 2017 republican tax law fails the fairness test in spectacular fashion. according to the nonpartisan tax policy center, by 2027 the top 1% of earners will receive 83% of this tax relief, 83% to the top 1%. at the same time americans earning less than $he 75,000 will actually see their taxes go up. when it became clear that the wealthiest americans would get the lion's share of the benefits, is this administration tried to play a game of smoke

and mirrors by promising that their massive corporate tax giveaway would trickle down to working families. president trump told us that the average household would see their income increase by $4,000 per year. it's clear that hasn't happened. according to a report by the nonpartisan congressional research service, ordinary workers saw very little wage growth in 2018, and the bonuses that workers were promised? well, that same congressional research service report shows that the bonuses attributed to the tax code comes out to $28 per person, not exactly the bonanzas that workers were promised. how has this tax law encouraged economic growth? two years ago -- it was passed at a time that i think we were

about eight years into one of the longest economic expansions in this country, when this was enacted. so it came really as the economy was growing consistently for almost a decade. but two years ago a survey from economists across the political spectrum found that only one out of 43 economists thought the tax reform would boost economic growth. in 2018 g.d.p., gross domestic product it grew by 2.9%, the same as what the nonpartisan congressional budget office predicted before the tax law was factored in. business investment did increase in 2019, but c.r.s. found that the investment did not align with the incentives in the 2017 tax law, raising questions about how much longer-term growth will

result from the law. it made invests in r&d more expensive than investing in other structures. r&d investment actually increased faster than in 23018. now that the sugar high of the corporate tax tax cuts has pass, business investment has started to slow to the point where the federal reserve has cite what had they call continued softness t as a key reason for the fed's most recent interest rate cut. instead of sustained investments, corporations have used their savings from the tax law for record-setting stock buybacks for wealthy shareholders and senior executives. job growth follows the same pattern, despite president trump's constant self-congratulations over job numbers, job growth has averaged 8,700 per month down from a sugar high average of 223,000 in

2018. average job growth in 2019 is more comparable to job growth in 02016 and 2017, about 179,000 per, the two years leading up to the tax law's enactment. did it simplify the tax code? one goal of tax reform was supposed to be simplifying the tax code but the 2017 republican tax law fails on this question, too. in 2017, republicans said that after tax reform, americans would be able to file their taxes on a postcard. we ended up with last year a mitety big postcard. it includes six new schedules and at a tax advocate predicted, it caused complexity and increased the risk of errors and resulted in higher tax preparation bills for most american families. in fact, the word "postcard" got to be so unwe wouldy, that the

i.r.s. has redesigned their -- we also failed to get great certainty. i heard from delaware families and businesseslike that they are concerned about the impact of the tax law's miss stakes and unintended consequences. an unsurprising development since our republican colleagues rushed to pass the law in the dead of night without any public hearings and with changes scribbled in the margins. what's move to reconsider the law created a new skill cliff at the end of 2025 which makes it more difficult for families. has it been fiscally responsible? even though the law's individual provisions including the increase in child care tax credit deduction expires at the end of 2025, this law blows a $1.5 trillion hole in our national debt and will be far costlier than that as the deficits grow in the years and decades ahead. two years ago our republican friends in congress and the administration repeatedly claimed that their tax law would

pay for itself, as i said earlier. it just hasn't happened. according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office, u.s. tax revenues in 2018 was $275 billion lower than if the tax law had not been enacted, lower than otherwise would have happened. this sharp drop in corporate income revenue has been particularly dramatic. c.b.o. data shows that the corporations paid $175 billion less in 2018 than they would have had the law not gone into effect. as a result, u.s. revenues as a percentage of g.d.p. in 2018 was 16.4%, a lot lower than the 19% during the four years of balanced budgets in the clinton administration, when we had a republican majority in the house and senate. the spending is 20.5%. that delta between those two numbers is -- explains the deficit. let me just close with this. i'd like to quote a fellow from

wyoming, who was recently before the energy and public works committee, nominated to be the head of the department of interior that includes the fisheries and wildlife. one of the things is he used to work for malcolm wallop here. a long time friend of john barrasso and others from wyoming, i think mike enzi. a very impressive guy. one of the things he said, he said bipartisan solutions are lasting solutions. that's what he said. bipartisan solutions are lasting solutions. the tax law that was enacted two years ago was not a bipartisan solution, and as it turns out in retroeffect, it has not been -- in retrospect it has not fostered the long term economic growth. it has not made the tax system simpler and finally, it is just dramatically, dramatically inflated the budget deficit.

and that's not -- it's not sustainable. with that -- other than that, it turned out just great. i now yield the floor to some others who have been waiting, shear rod brown and debbie stabenow. mr. brown: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. ÷r. brown: thank you, mr. -- thank you, mr. president. i appreciate the comments of senator carper and senator wyden before all members of the tax-writing committee with senator stabenow, and i believe a couple more will join us. senators cardin and cantwell. but thanks for the work that you do, debbie, on this issue and so many others. i want to -- we all know now what the trump tax scam did. we know that it was a giveaway to the richest people in the country. it was a $1.5 trillion tax cut. 7% of it went to the wealthiest people in the country. we knew that. we also knew the president said all kinds of things, said one lie after another about it.

but i want to tell two stories. one of them, i was at the white house with the president and a half dozen other senators sitting in the president's cabinet room when he was talking about the tax bill. he said every -- he said to me and to other senators, he said every -- every american will get at least, at least a $4,000, -- $4,000 more in their paycheck, at least. i guess he meant people in ironton, ohio, cleveland, youngstown, all over my state, lansing, michigan, and kalamazoo. he said it's going to be $4,000. everybody's going to get that. and he said -- that's what he said then when the bill was being written. when he signed it, he said everybody is going to start seeing a lot more money in their paycheck. well, he lied. no surprise there. he always does that. he lies about a lot of things, but i particularly take it personally when he lies about

something like that, when voters in lima, ohio, don't get what he promised them, when citizens and workers just don't get the help. now, at the same time, when i was at that meeting, i went up to the president, i had in my hand something called -- a bill i was working on called the patriot corporation act. i went up to the president after the meeting, and i said -- i mentioned it during the meeting, and then i walked up to him and said, mr. president, this is the patriot corporation act. i want you to consider this. unlike the bill we were looking at which gives tax cuts to all kinds of corporations and all kinds of the wealthiest people in this country, the patriot corporation act was simple. the patriot corporation act said if you pay your workers a decent wage, if you provide adequate benefits, help and retirement to your workers, and if you're manufacturing, if you do your production in the united states, then you will get a break on your taxes. so if you do things right as an

employer, decent wages, decent benefits, do your production in the united states, you get a lower tax rate, but if you don't, if you pay low wages, if you outsource jobs, you pay something called the corporate free loader fee, because so many companies in this country, companies that it might be retail outlets, whatever these companies pay $8 or $12 an hour, those workers are eligible for medicaid, food stamps, eligible for section 8 housing. those workers are basically -- those companies are basically subsidized by taxpayers, so why not have a tax system where corporations that do the right thing get a lower tax rate, corporations that rely on the government to fund them, on food stamps, on the earned income tax credit, on medicaid, all that, those corporations ought to pay a fee to the government, a corporate free loader fee. now, that's the first meeting. the second story i wanted to

tell you about was the three of us right here in this room right now, senator stabenow and i were in the midst of this. when this tax bill was written, it was written in the senate finance committee. you know when we do things in the senate, we do these things out in public, the senate finance committee. mr. president, down the hall, we know that much of the work is done at center mcconnell's office. that's where the lobbyists line up that want these -- corporate lobbyists that want these big tax cuts. we were doing our public meeting at the senate finance committee, and they were in such a hurry to pass this bill. we worked way into the night which we're all fine doing. the next day we worked -- we were -- they were moving so fast that you would get an amendment that would be handwritten and not very good writing, and it would be added to the bill. you really didn't exactly know what you were voting on, but they didn't want to give us any time to do it because they know -- the people that run this

place, senator mcconnell and the special interest lobbyists that line up down the hall, they know if they can operate, if people can't understand what they are doing, they will work all night sometimes. they will do things by hand instead of actual legible reading or writing so that we end up -- the kind of confusion that came out of that, if you know what happened, mr. president, there were all kinds of mistakes in this bill, and then the president signed it, didn't know what the mistakes were. we then find out, now republicans are coming back and they want us to clean up this mess. well, they want to give -- cleaning up the mess means more corporate tax breaks, more giveaways to corporate america, for help for the richest 1% in this country. we are saying we want to fix the technical mistakes you made when you hurry through this bill. we want to do all that. we all voted against the bill because it was that corporate giveaway and a giveaway to the rich. we want to fix this so the tax code actually reads right and there won't be all these court

cases about it. if we're going to do that, you are going to give some tax breaks to middle-class families, and you're going to pass legislation expanding the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit. we have simply said to the president and to the republican majority who writes these bills that we'll work with you. we want to do that, but you're not going to hurt middle-class and working-class taxpayers again. you're going to expand the earned income tax credit, you're going to take care of electric vehicles and the kind of issues we want to do there. but fundamentally you will help children, low income, moderate income children whose parents work just as hard as any senators work but don't have much to say for it. the president -- and again, it comes back -- comes down to whose side are you on? are you going to stand with workers or are you going to stand for corporations? do you fight for wall street or do you fight for the dignity of work? if you love this country, you fight for the people who make it work. the president promised to fight for american workers. he betrayed american workers as

he has betrayed american workers on minimum wage and overtime and trade deals. he has betrayed workers over and over and over again. he broke that promise he made. it's important that we fix it and we fix it for the broad middle class in this country. ms. stabenow: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i want to join with my colleagues and express great dismay as we are approaching the two-year anniversary of the massive republican tax giveaway that middle-class workers have not gotten even remotely close to what they were promised. instead, president trump and republicans gave the big drug companies, wealthiest americans, other special interests an enormous tax cut, just in time for the holidays. merry christmas to them.

but what did he give the majority of families in michigan? the equivalent of a beautifully wrapped gift box with nothing in it. and there's a word for that when you make a bunch of promises and fail to keep them. in michigan, we do call that a betrayal. president trump made some really big promises about the republican tax giveaway. in his words, it will be one of the great christmas gifts to middle-class people. unfortunately, president trump turned out to be less santa claus and more like ebenezer scrooge. the wealthiest 1% of taxpayers received an average tax cut 64 times the size of the one given to the middle class. he said, as my other colleagues have referred, people would get an average of $4,000 more in their income. and we are still waiting in michigan for that $4,000 per

person who's working to show up. in fact, what happened is the real number is about $514, and what's even worse that bonuses for working people have actually gone down 22% since the tax giveaway passed. bonuses are down, not up. you don't have to have the math skills of bob cratchet to know that's for from what was promised. he also promised we would see -- businesses would use their tax windfall to invest in workers and create jobs, and unfortunately that's not happened, and we know that in the third quarter of this year, business investment was a negative 2.7%. the second straight negative quarter for business investments, despite the promise of tremendous business investment. i'm deeply worried because we have had two straight quarters now of contraction on

manufacturing, which is actually the technical definition of a recession. coming from michigan where we make things and grow things, that's deeply concerning to me. meanwhile, in the first year of the republican tax betrayal, businesses rewarded c.e.o.'s and wealthy shareholders with more than $1.1 trillion in stock buybacks. what does that mean? it means you do a buyback of your stock, it drives up the price of the company's stock, enriches the c.e.o. and major shareholders but does nothing for the workers, nothing for the workers. in fact, corporations spent 140 times as much money on stock buybacks as they did in increasing wages and benefits for workers. in 2018 alone, the ten biggest drug companies spent $115 billion, with basement, on stock buybacks and dividends,

but i don't recall seeing the cost of medicine go down. instead, they keep raising the prices, which is outrageous. perhaps the most ridiculous promise that president trump made was on the national debt. he says we have $21 trillion in debt. that's what he said back in july, 2018, when the republican tax law really kicks in, we'll start paying off that debt like water. i'm not exactly sure what that meant, but it didn't happen. instead, the federal budget deficit has risen by $319 billion so far, and counting, since the passage of the republican tax law. and to add insult to injury, our friends across the aisle when doing the budget used the fact that there was a deficit to one more time say we need $1.5 trillion in cuts to medicaid and $800 billion in cuts to medicare to reduce the

deficit because, oh, my gosh, we have got a deficit. so we should take health care away from seniors and families across america. and on top of all of that, the trump administration now is implementing rules that could take food assistance away from up to a million people that work part time or seasonal work. they have got a job at the mall during christmas, but then they lose it. they are in and out of the market. and by the way, the average amount of help to these men and women that are working hard trying to hold it together, the average amount of help for them is $127 a month. barely just making sure they are not starving. as another republican president once said, there they go again. so let me just say in conclusion, mr. president, two years ago, president trump promised middle-class families, working families across michigan and the country a whole lot of things. he said the deficit would disappear, corporations would pass on tax savings in the form

of jobs and better wages, and that people would get $4,000 more in their paycheck and their income. and he said this giveaway would be one of the great christmas gifts to middle-class people. instead, the majority of americans got a lump of coal. promises have not been kept. we believe in keeping promises in michigan. and this is about more than the numbers. it's about making sure everybody working hard is treated fairly and has a fair shot to care for their families and have the american dream. that's not what happened with this tax giveaway. i yield the floor to my friend from maryland. mr. cardin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: mr. president, i join my colleagues on the floor today to point out that two years ago, we had an opportunity in the united states congress to

reform the tax code. the tax code basically was the one enacted in 1986, and in 2017, we had an opportunity to reform that tax code, and that opportunity was missed. what the republicans did, instead of engaging a process, the true bipartisan process that would have used the expertise of all members of congress, they went on a partisan mission in order to help big corporations and wealthy taxpayers at the expense of middle-class taxpayers and fiscal responsibility. as a result, our children and grandchildren will pick up the tab of this bill, and those who are going to benefit will not be middle-class families. they are the losers. the ones who will benefit will be big corporations and wealthy taxpayers. let me just talk about