coming. as we learn those big crashes fall hardest on hard-working people who are just trying to make a living. billionaire willing to roll along on deep regulation poses a threat to the economic being well-being of every. for every single bayonet in america for me this is simple. tryinger to wherever we agree to help working families. when they pursue economic policy that load up that risk in our financial system i will vote no on mr. bessent.

>> will vote shortly burst scott bessent urged opposition to the nomination. here is why. unpaid medicare taxes. to the vast majority of americans, paying medicare taxes is automatic. every paycheck not so for individuals like mr. bessent. those at the very top who operate under a different set of tax rules, operate a different way. mr. bessent comes from wall street. it follows this comment among cultural wealthy hedge fund managers. they spend top dollar to get the

best tax lawyers and accountants. that mashed together loopholes and twist the law until medicare taxes just disappear. as avoided paying almost a million dollars there could be a lot more in other years. now the treasury department says what he is doing is a violation of the law has gone to court twice to fill this loophole. it won both times we raise this is going to wait out the appeals process in hopes he doesn't have to pay. if he is confirmed the date he's sworn in violation of treasury

policy let me repeat that madam president. the day he's sworn in will have a treasury secretary who is in violation of treasury policy. if he is confirmed, the day that he is sworn in, we will have a treasury secretary who was in violation of treasury policy. it is an absurd double standard to maintain for the benefit of one individual with immense power.

what he owes and medicare taxes is a trivial amount compared to someone with his wealth. he could do the right thing and pay, he would not even notice it it is routine for nominees that come through the finance committee tapped a result the

tax issues with the spot on the vetting process. madam president, i have seen a number of nominees and i cannot recall meeting one in my time on the committee who was more unprepared. struggle to answer basic policy questions and one-on-one meetings and in this committee hearing. for example, i asked a simple policy question. should wages be treated differently than wealth? madam president, this is a central question in the debate about taxes. when senators talk about the unfairness of the tax system. this issue i ask about is the center of the debate. a question of whether the ultra- wealthy should get a better deal than the people that work for a living.

after a bit he basically just said madam president, that is the way it is. asking the nominee another important issue. matter is that both sides care about. i know the president and the senate and i have talked about that many times. asking about the unfairness. donald trump also running up deficits through the big tax breaks. tax breaks individuals with incomes over and million, billion, 10 billion. senator lujan actually asked about trump cutting medicaid. it was not clear whether he knew

what medicaid was. nobody expects nominees to be walking encyclopedias on every possible question under the sun. the performance was, in my view, having watched a number of nominees, a new low when it comes to basic policy issues that will be at the center of the debate in the center of the job if confirmed. even worse i asked a simple question about the trump tariffs he will pay them, i asked americans or foreigners. responding with the convoluted who routinely distorts this issue.

now people in oregon, not people in america and it is just untrue one week into the trump second term and already gunning for a trade war. that will clobber american consumers and small businesses including a lot of farmers and ranchers. if anybody out there was looking for evidence that he would be a check and donald trump's worst instincts it is sure not looking good. the third reason why i oppose this nomination as he is already during congressional oversight. i will be brief on this. during the presidential campaign , boris epstein ran a quick pro quote scheme. he pushed trump to nominate an exchange for payments adding up the hundreds of thousands of dollars. among the people that donald

trump advisor boards spoke to according to numerous news reports. when the finance committee read about this game it was clear we needed more information. we sent the transition letters with a few key questions. again, no response. i asked about it in our one-on-one meeting. he confirmed that mr. epstein spoke with him about payments for public relations. a sleazy way for someone in the inner circle trump administration to pitch an obvious quid pro quo. a major donor following this issue quickly and actively because the story changed in response to a written question. his new answer was nobody ever asked him about payments in exchange for an appointment. there was an internal investigation and epstein's conduct, still will not reveal

who else in trump's orbit he talks about it. my point in bringing up this issue, we have now heard three different ways. it has never been more important for them to stand up and fight for congressional oversight. late on friday night, donald trump fired 17 inspectors general, independent watchdogs that we rely on, that every senator relies on. every democrat, every republican the independent watchdogs were fired. waste, fraud and abuse in the executive branch. treasury secretary general was one of the 17. let that sink in, madam president. here we are trying to get answers. the treasury inspector general

was reportedly one of the 17 that was just fired it the midnight massacre my view was an illegal act by the trump administration. my hope is that i believe that the court will strike this down immediately. the trump administration wants to eliminate those people who are going to stand in the way of corruption and call it out. major donor and cabinet nominee is volunteering to walk right into this culture of corruption that defines what we have just gone through with the trump administration. for him before he is confirmed, even before he is confirmed. madam president, these are the reasons that i oppose this nomination. just picture what it is like to

say to the people of alabama, to the people of oregon, all over the country, my colleague, senator, rules do not apply to the treasury nominate. they paid the medicare taxes. a nurse or a teacher. not if you are the new treasury appointee who is violating rules that the treasury department has said he violated. he has cheated on his taxes according to treasury policy. it would be a huge double standard, a major conflict of interest if he is confirmed and he can maintain his position that he does not have to pay medicare taxes like everyone else in america. we have already made the point and he was deeply unprepared on many of the big questions. i will tell my colleagues, they do not even get the view that he did prop 101 which is to go out

and talk to senators about issues and he would have heard that he would have been interested in matters like medicaid. that kind of prep is easy as part of the nomination process. and he has already shown that he has little respect for congressional oversight. though i think that this nomination is badly flawed. i hope that the senate will not accept it. i have been through a number of those and starting with violating the policy of not paying your medicare taxes, this nomination in my view is an exhibit of what you should not have come before the floor of the united states senate. with that, i yield the floor. >> madam president.

>> senator from idaho. a few detractors frame their policy preferences and i emphasis, policy preferences as if they are compliance issues with regard to his taxes. with regard to his taxes. sent followed all applicable law and met the finance committee's

long-standing and rigorous diligent standard. the finance committee has the most rigorous standards for vetting nominees of any committee in this congress. having tax experts come in and evaluate tax returns with us. his diligence matched that geared he provided extensive supporting material for all of the attacks on him. including more than 3000 pages worth. he and his staff spent countless hours with senate finance committee members going over all of these allegations and all of these claimed failures to pay taxes.

he has gone further by not only divesting all of his business tides which is no small task. but by publicly committing that if there is any change in the law in the future on these policy arguments that he would comply with those changes in the law. let me state this again as clearly as it can be said. scott paid his taxes. he did not pay his taxes. experts have gone over his tax returns and he has complied prevailing interpretations of the tax code every time. the issue here is that the irs wants to change the interpretation of the tax code. the irs does not get to decide what our tax code says, congress does. congress has not made the

changes that the irs wants to see. even in the face of that, arguing that he should have done what the irs wanted them to do. in fact, they did not even say they wanted him to do it. taking the irs to court over this issue. he has said if the irs prevails and changes the tax code, the interpretation of the tax code, he will comply. with the argument that he has not complied with long-standing tax policy and interpretation is false. i do not know anybody that can go through a more rigorous standard and what we put him through in the finance committee as for the nominee, he has worked for the last three decades as one of the sharpest minds in the global finance industry. he has decades of academic professional leadership

experience. relevant to the position of treasury secretary. his performance at the committee was stellar. his background and training are tailor-made for this role. he has the demeanor and character to be an effective secretary. he has committed to restoring the prosperity and opportunity experience under president trump 's leadership had this includes ensuring that we had very over $4 trillion tax hike on the american people. if the tax cuts are about to expire. which he rightly described at his nomination hearing as a pass fail exercise. no question that he will extend these tax cuts. this is just a tax cap for rich billionaires. the reality is that the vast majority of it, the vast majority of this tax cut goes to everyday people.

two people making less than $400,000 a year. and the $400,000 is computed by $200,000 per individual. so a married couple could equal the $400,000 level. the vast majority of those tax cuts however go to people in the lower and middle income tax brackets. the tax cut that we are talking about gave tax cuts to every single solitary income cohort in the tax code in the greatest tax cuts went to those in the lower and middle income categories. it would be terrible if we did not extend these tax cuts. and yet he is attacked for saying he supports extending these tax cuts. it does not make sense. i look forward to working closely with him to make sure that we extend the policies that benefited americans of every

income bracket and enabled families and businesses to get ahead. i should also say that under this tax policy, when it was passed, the richest in america paid a greater percentage of the overall tax burden and they have before. attacked for wanting to extend these tax cuts that will hammer every single taxpaying american if they are allowed to expire. if qualifications, and i may add character are one of the tests for supporting a nominee, boating to confirm is one of the easiest that we could take geared in previous congresses, many of my republican colleagues and i have voted for candidates we consider to be qualified to serve as treasury secretary even when they were nominated by democratic residents and we disagreed with any of their policy positions.

his candidacy ought to enjoy similar bipartisan support and i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join with me in confirming his nomination. he is the right person for this job and i commend president trump and making such an excellent selection. thank you, madam president. >> senator from oregon. >> without objection. >> i have often worked with the senator in a positive way and i know that we will do that in the future. i just want to make sure that there is no confusion with respect to this medicare tax issue. we have had a number of nominees over the years who have actually dropped out and they have owed less money if he was complying with treasury rules. if he is confirmed, the day that

he is sworn in, he will be in violation of treasury policy. we will have established another double standard in the tax area that sends a message that if you are powerful, you can basically figure out a way to not pay if you are a firefighter and a teacher. continuing to urge opposition to the nominee. >> madam president can i ask unanimous consent for just 15 seconds. >> without objection. >> he went to the most rigorous evaluation of his tax returns at anybody in america has ever faced. he passed the entire test every time. he has paid the taxes. he ises owed under the united states government's tax code. >> also in the senate wisconsin senator spoke