Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I come to the floor as a former chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee of the Senate to talk about the issue of the Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act--the package before us today to be discussed and voted on within the next hour.

I know we are going to be hearing from the current chairman, Senator Hoeven. We are going to be hearing from Senator Moran, Senator Flake, and others. I would like to associate my remarks with those I know they will make, specifically, those of the chairman and my other colleagues, and emphasize the need to recognize and respect Tribal sovereignty.

As Senator Moran will explain shortly, this legislation seeks to fix the National Labor Relations Board's 2004 decision to treat Tribal government employers and tribally owned businesses as private entities, not as sovereign governments.

They are sovereign governments.

The National Labor Relations Board's decision, I think, is the wrong decision. It increased uncertainty for Tribes, as Tribes suddenly faced regulation from a body that failed to recognize their government-to- government relationship. I think it was a complete mistake by the National Labor Relations Board, which is why I am proudly here to support the legislation we are discussing here today.

Suddenly, as a result of this ruling, these Tribal businesses became commercial entities. These businesses provide critical services on Tribal lands and in their communities. I believe the National Labor Relations Board's decision--and the litigation that inevitably followed--has only increased uncertainty in Indian Country and is in direct opposition to the entire notion of Tribal sovereignty.

Indian Tribes have a right to sovereignty. We must work to ensure there is true parity between governments. We must actively respect the government-to-government relationship.

Over the last many years, Congress has worked to address policies that have been detrimental to Tribes, including those affecting Tribal sovereignty. That is why we are here today to vote on this important piece of legislation. Tribal sovereignty allows Tribes to govern themselves, to regulate Tribal businesses, and to provide essential services for Tribal members.

As we consider this package before us today, I want to commend Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and others for working together to move this important legislation through the Senate.

This package is no different. Senator McCain and Senator Flake have worked for many years to resolve the White Mountain Apache water settlement issues. I see Senator Flake is here to discuss those issues. Senator Heinrich and Senator Udall recognize the need for greater certainty in land management through the Santa Clara long-term lease. Senator Moran has been a great leader on this issue. That is why I am proud to be standing with him today.

I would urge all of my colleagues to join Chairman Hoeven, Senator Moran, and our committee in providing the parity for Tribal governments as they govern their future.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the Senate will vote on cloture on the nomination of Andrew Wheeler to be the Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Deputy Administrator is critical in developing and implementing policies that fulfill the EPA's mission of protecting America's water, land, air, and communities.

He is the right person for the job. He has spent 25 years working in environmental policy. In that time, he has served as a career employee of the EPA; a staff director on the Hill for the committee I now chair, the Environment and Public Works Committee; and, most recently, as a consultant in the energy policy space.

Andrew Wheeler is well qualified to fill this critically important job. I urge all Senators to support the nomination.

Mr. President, I am here with my colleague from Oklahoma to speak in favor of Andrew Wheeler. I support Andrew Wheeler to serve as the Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

During the previous administration, the Environmental Protection Agency issued burdensome regulations that harmed American workers and American communities. Since President Trump took office 15 months ago, the EPA has rolled back many of these punishing regulations, including the so-called Clean Power Plan and the waters of the United States, or the WOTUS, rule.

Under President Trump and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, this Agency is now working for commonsense environmental policies--policies that don't harm the American economy and don't punish American families.

Administrator Pruitt needs his full team at the Environmental Protection Agency in order to accomplish these goals. So today, the Senate is going to consider the nomination of Andrew Wheeler to be Deputy Administrator of the EPA. The Deputy Administrator is critical in developing and implementing the policies that fulfill the EPA's mission of protecting human health and the environment.

Mr. Wheeler is very well qualified for the position. He spent over 25 years working in environmental policies. At that time, he served as a career employee at the EPA, working as an environmental protection specialist. This experience makes him uniquely qualified to serve in the role of Deputy Administrator.

He has spent over a decade here on Capitol Hill, shaping environmental law. He served as the staff director of the Senate Environment and Public Works Air Subcommittee from 1997 to 2003. This was followed by another 6 years as a Republican staff director and chief counsel for the full committee, 2003 to 2009. Most recently, Mr. Wheeler has been a consultant for a variety of energy and environmental clients.

Andrew Wheeler's commitment to sound environmental policies has received recognition from across the aisle as well. The ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee said this of Mr. Wheeler:

I think having worked in the agency, he actually cares

about the environment; the air that we breathe; the water we

drink; the planet on which we live.

Stuart Spencer, the president of the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies, said this of Mr. Wheeler:

Mr. Wheeler has exemplified excellence in his professional

endeavors, in his previous government service and private

sector experience. In short, he is keenly qualified to hit

the ground running at EPA.

I agree. His nomination has garnered the support of a broad base of organizations, including the National Association of Manufacturers, the United Mine Workers of America, and the Chamber of Commerce.

Andrew Wheeler is well qualified to fill this critically important role at the EPA. He is the right person to serve as

Deputy Administrator of the EPA, and I urge every Senator to support this nomination.

With that, I recognize my colleague and friend from Oklahoma, who has been a mentor to me on the committee, the former chairman of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, Jim Inhofe.

Mr. President, I come to the floor as we, as Americans, continue to see the regular reminders that the world is a very dangerous place. The horrendous reports out of Syria over the weekend show us there are leaders in the world who will test the rules that define civilized nations. They will exploit any crack that they see in our resolve.

President Trump has consistently responded to these kinds of challenges by showing that he is resolute and that he is unshakable. He has a foreign policy that always puts America first. To continue to do this, the President needs to have a full national security team on the job and working for America. The Secretary of State is a very important part of that team.

Tomorrow, the Foreign Relations Committee is scheduled to have a hearing on Mike Pompeo's nomination to do this very important job. Mike Pompeo understands that if we want safety and security at home, we need a world that is peaceful and stable. I expect he is going to talk about all of these things at the confirmation hearing, and I look forward to his testimony.

We have all heard about Mike Pompeo's impressive qualifications for the job to which he has been nominated--first in his class at West Point; Harvard Law School; a Member of Congress; and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. He has the integrity, and he has the experience to serve as America's Secretary of State. As a former Member of Congress, he certainly understands how policy decisions get made and the key importance of congressional oversight. As head of the CIA, he clearly understands the crucial role that the intelligence community plays in preserving America's national security. As a soldier, he understands the consequences of decisions that get made in Washington,

Mr. President, earlier this week, the Senate voted to confirm Kevin McAleenan to be the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. This is a national security job. It is the person in charge of making sure America has secure borders. He was approved unanimously by the Senate Finance Committee that voted on it before it came to the floor.

In spite of that unanimous vote, the Democrats in this body still delayed this nominee from taking office for as long as they could. They forced the majority to file cloture on it. We had the vote last week, then we had to wait to do it, spend the time, and in the end, 30 Democrats--the Democrats who demanded we hold a cloture vote, delay the vote--voted in favor of his confirmation. This had nothing to do with his qualifications for the office. They just wanted to delay and obstruct. That is what we are dealing with here.

Forcing a cloture vote on a noncontroversial executive nominee used to be extremely rare--hardly ever happened. There were 15 people confirmed after a cloture vote at this point for the previous four Presidents combined. So if you take a look at the previous four Presidents--Obama, Clinton, both Bushes--a total of 15 votes were taken, requiring cloture in each of those Presidencies, total.

What about President Trump? Fifty people--50, 5-0--have been confirmed only after deliberate delay by the Democrats, forcing us to waste time on cloture votes. That doesn't even count people who were nominated to be judges. We are just talking about Presidential appointments in the executive branch. This delay is unproductive, and it is unprecedented.

Democrats are insisting on cloture votes because there is a Senate rule that allows for up to 30 hours of debate on Presidential nominees after we have had that vote. In reality, very little of this time is actually spent on debating the nominees or their credentials to serve in the office for which they have been nominated.

It is a pattern of ongoing obstruction the Democrats have been following since the very first day of the Trump administration. That is right. Since the very first day, Inauguration Day last year, Republicans wanted to vote on Mike Pompeo's nomination to be head of the Central Intelligence Agency, an important key position in any President's Cabinet, but we already had the debate in the Foreign Relations Committee. We could have had a debate on the floor that evening, but no. A small number of Democrats blocked it and forced us to have first a cloture vote and delay moving forward, delaying the process from day one--Inauguration Day--of the administration.

How much of the 30 hours did the Democrats actually spend debating this person's qualifications to be head of the CIA? Less than 2 hours. They wasted 30 hours of the whole time; only 2 hours was used in debate. That is how long the Democrats spent on this floor giving their reasons why they wanted to vote against the nominee. It had nothing to do with Mr. Pompeo; it was just so Democrats could waste 3 more days, allowing nothing else to happen, blocking other activities in the Senate. The rules allow the Democrats to stall, and they took full advantage of the rules.

It is time, in my opinion, to end this partisan spectacle. We have 78 more nominees for various jobs who have made it through their committee hearings and are waiting for a vote on this floor. Most of these people have bipartisan support. They can be and will be confirmed easily. The administration has to waste time to get their team in place. Democrats aren't using the rules for debate. They are not using the rules for deliberation. It is only for delay.

It wasn't and hasn't always been this way, and there is no reason it should continue this way. The Senate had a different standard for executive branch nominations a few years ago. In 2013 and 2014, the rules said that we would have a full 30 hours of debate only for Cabinet Secretaries; for all other executive branch Presidential appointees, only 8 hours of debate. But today we allow 30 hours on every nomination, and Democrats have shown that, in most cases, it is far too much time.

We need a fair debate on every nomination. The procedure from 2013 and 2014 was fair. The way Democrats are wasting time today to keep us from doing work is not fair. It is time to return to the rules for debating nominations that the Senate used 4 years ago.

The rules that we used in 2013 and 2014 were the result of a compromise. Democrats controlled the Senate at the time, and a Democrat was making the nominations; that was President Obama. Republicans agreed to a fair time limit on the amount of debate. There was a bipartisan group who worked on this compromise--four Republicans, four Democrats--and I was one of the four Republicans who were part of that group. Senator Schumer, who is now the Democratic leader, was part of that group as well. There was overwhelming support for these changes on both sides of the aisle. It is time to change the Senate rules and go back to that process that Senator Schumer supported in 2013 and in 2014 when Democrats were in the majority.

Today, Democrats deliberately delay in ways that limit us to a couple of nominations in a typical week. If we go back to the 2014 standard, we could clear multiple nominations in a single day.

We should have this process back in place by the time we take up Mike Pompeo's nomination to be Secretary of State when we get back in April.

The world is a dangerous place. We have serious concerns about Russia, Iran, China, and important trade issues that we need to be working on. The President will be meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. America needs to have a full slate of people helping the President on these issues, and we need them to be the correct, very talented people that a President needs.

We are fortunate to have Mike Pompeo as the likely nominee to be Secretary of State. He is the right person for the job. He knows the issues. He knows the people. He has the intelligence. He has the integrity. He has the experience for the job.

We will be having confirmation hearings in the Foreign Relations Committee in April. Let's have a hearing, a fair debate, and then let's vote. Let's not have any of these continued stalling tactics and this pointless obstruction that Democrats have engaged in ever since the first day President Trump took office.

Mike Pompeo's nomination to be Secretary of State will still get 30 hours of debate, and after that, we will need to confirm a new CIA Director. Last year, we allowed 30 hours of debate on that nomination, and Democrats used only 2 of the 30. Under the compromise rules that I think we should return to, we would allow up to 8 hours of debate. It is clearly enough--more than most people would think would be needed.

We have more than 100 other qualified people who have been voted on and approved by the appropriate Senate committee, and they are waiting to do important jobs. With all of the threats that our country is facing around the world, it is time for Democrats in the Senate to stop wasting time and stop abusing the rules. It is time for Democrats to join Republicans and the President to do all we can to keep America prosperous, safe, and secure.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Tori for her hard work as an intern in my Washington, DC, office. I recognize her efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming.

Tori is a native of Yellowstone National Park. She is a graduate of the University of Wyoming, where she studied international studies and criminal justice. She has demonstrated a strong work ethic, which has made her an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of her work is reflected in her great efforts over the last several months.

I want to thank Tori for the dedication she has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have her as part of our team. I know she will have continued success with all of her future endeavors. I wish her all my best on her next journey.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, this week we are debating an important piece of legislation that is going to streamline and simplify government regulations. We are going to make it easier and cheaper for families to get access to loans from their local banks. This legislation is good for communities, and it is good for the American economy.

This is just the latest action we have taken in Congress over the past year to help give the American economy a boost. The economy is responding, and the American people are doing better because of it.

Here is a headline from the New York Times on Friday: ``The Economy is Looking Awfully Strong.'' That is the headline in the New York Times--``The Economy is Looking Awfully Strong.'' This article was about the jobs report that came out last week. It said that the report ``can be summed up in four words: The economy is humming.''

The U.S. economy has already created over 552,000 new jobs in just the first 2 months of this year--over half a million new jobs in the first 2 months of this year. There are half a million more people working today compared to when Republicans passed this tax relief law. If we want to go back a little, there are more than 3 million new jobs since President Trump was elected in November of 2016. That is a real number to look at. That is the moment when people said they had enough of slow-growth policies from the Democrats in Washington and elected Donald Trump President. That is the moment when businesses realized things were going to be different with Republicans in charge.

More people are working now. And do you know what else? They are being paid more. According to the Commerce Department, the take-home pay of working people in America increased by $40 billion in January. They say it is directly because of the tax relief law that Republicans passed last December.

More than 4 million workers are also getting a bonus or a pay increase. Four hundred companies have said that is because taxes went down. They are sharing the savings with their workers. These are people who work at Home Depot, Lowe's, Walmart, Starbucks, and other businesses that have familiar names all across America. They are also people who work in smaller businesses, like the Jonah Bank in Wyoming, at branches in Casper and in Cheyenne. It is not a nationally known bank, but it is very important in our State and in our communities. Some people who are getting bonuses work at places like Taco John's. That is another business that is important to the people of Wyoming. When I was in the State senate, Taco John's was a place I went regularly to eat lunch. It is one of many Taco John's facilities around the State of Wyoming and around the West. Republicans cut taxes, and working Americans are seeing more money in their paychecks as a result.

This is what we see in terms of confidence. This new survey came out recently where they talked with the heads of midsized companies all around America, and this is what they say: 89 percent of the business leaders are confident in the U.S. economy and the economy's prospects for the year. U.S. economic confidence soars--in 2016, 39 percent; in 2017, 80 percent; and in 2018, now 89 percent. The American people realize we have now beaten back 8 years of bad policies from Democrats in Washington. As soon as President Trump took office, we saw confidence soar, and I don't know that it has ever been higher.

Americans are feeling better about the U.S. economy. They are also feeling better about their own personal situations. That is the key-- people's own personal situations. That is certainly the case in my home State of Wyoming.

The polling company Gallup looked at overall economic confidence State by State. They found that Wyoming is the most confident State in the country when it comes to America's economy. Attitudes about the economy turned positive immediately after Donald Trump was elected President in 2016. You could feel it. You could feel the confidence. You could feel the optimism. You could feel the positiveness in the people of Wyoming. People living in 43 out of the 50 States now have a positive view of the economy, and Wyoming, of course, is No. 1.

People I talk to at home--I was in Cody, WY, this past weekend, as well as in Sheridan and Riverton and Casper and around the State talking to people in various communities. The people I talked to about the economy will tell you it is because businesses are hiring again. People are doing better. They see their take-home pay going up. They see their taxes going down. They see that Republican policies are making their lives better. They see that Republican policies are also making the economy stronger. They see that Republican policies are making it easier for people to achieve their dreams and to enjoy their lives. It comes from tax relief. It comes from cutting regulations, as we are doing this week.

What are the Democrats offering? Well, last week, the Democratic leader came to the floor and said he wants to raise taxes by $1 trillion. That is what the leader of the Democratic Party said on the floor of the Senate last week. He wants to raise taxes by $1 trillion. Is he serious? A trillion dollars? Raising taxes? Taking away from people the tax cuts they have just started to enjoy?

More people have jobs. The economy is humming. The New York Times says the economy is humming. Ninety percent of working Americans have increases in their take-home pay. That is because of the tax cuts this body passed. Democrats want to reverse it all. That is what we hear on the floor of the Senate. They want to take back the money. They want to roll back the progress we have made. That is their plan--raise taxes. That is what we hear from the Democrats.

Senator Schumer came to the floor of the Senate, and he said: ``There are much better uses for the money.'' That is what he said on the floor of the Senate. That is what the Washington Democrats always say. They have better uses for the money than the American people do. They have a better idea, they always say, about how to use somebody else's money. They want higher taxes. They want more Washington spending because they think they know best. They don't think the money should go to pay increases or bonuses for working Americans. Really? They think it should go to Washington? I think American families know how to spend their paychecks better than any Washington Democrat ever will.

Democrats say they want to use this $1 trillion in new taxes to pay for infrastructure. We all know that America's infrastructure--our roads, our bridges,

our dams, our waterways--are in desperate need of attention, but as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I can tell you that I am committed to improving this situation by working with the President and working on both sides of the aisle. If Democrats want to talk about a robust and fiscally responsible infrastructure plan that is going to help the American economy, then I am ready to have that conversation, but if all they want to do is talk about raising taxes on American families, they are wasting their breath.

There is a very big difference between Republicans and Democrats in Congress: Republicans want the American people to keep more of their hard-earned money. Democrats want Washington to take more of people's money. Republicans want new policies that grow the economy, create jobs, and inspire confidence in a brighter future. Democrats want the same old tax-and-spend policies that have failed for years. Their policies have led to slow growth, stagnant wages, and a terrible lack of confidence in our economy.

Republicans promised that our ideas will do better, and the results from the tax cuts and the tax relief speak for themselves. The economy is strong. Confidence is off the charts.

The American people deserve this chance to have a brighter future. That is what Republicans are offering, and that is also what Republicans are delivering.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, over the next couple of weeks, Congress is going to need to finalize government appropriations for the remainder of this year. Among the things that some people are talking about is including money for a couple of ObamaCare programs. One of them is money for the so-called cost-sharing reduction payments. Funding for these payments was never appropriated by Congress. The Obama administration paid the insurance companies anyway. President Trump stopped these illegal payments last October. Now, some people in Congress are talking about funding them again.

We all know that ObamaCare has been a disaster for millions and millions of families all across the country. We know that for the people who live in States that use the Federal healthcare.gov exchange, average premiums have doubled since the law took effect. Certainly Wyoming is one of those States that experienced it; I heard about it in Clark County just last week. We know it. We hear about it in letters from the people who write to us. No matter where they are from in the State of Wyoming, we continue to hear about the costs going up. I am sure there is a similar situation in the State of Arkansas, the Presiding Officer's State, as well.

According to Gallup, the number of uninsured people actually increased last year by 3 million. Many people are finding that they just can't afford to have ObamaCare insurance. It is especially hard for hard-working families who don't qualify for subsidies under the healthcare law. So we know there is a problem, and we know we have to do something to help people who are struggling in ObamaCare markets.

If people are going to discuss using this government spending law to spend more money on the collapsing ObamaCare markets, there are other things we should be discussing as well. We should discuss finding a real solution to rising healthcare costs--one that doesn't just continue the unworkable, unaffordable, and, frankly, unfair system that ObamaCare created. We should discuss actually giving people more freedom and more flexibility to choose a healthcare plan that is right for them.

I am introducing a bill today to do just that. My legislation will build on a step that President Trump and the Trump administration took last month. The administration reversed a last-minute Obama-era policy that had all but killed short-term health plans. These are less expensive health plans that are free from the expensive and intrusive and burdensome regulations that ObamaCare placed on other insurers, so they are a much more affordable option for many Americans who have been priced out of ObamaCare.

President Trump is on the right path with this new rule. It is absolutely the right decision. He is giving people back an option so they can decide for themselves if it is a right choice for them. I think we should go a step further, and that is why I am introducing this legislation. We should go a step further in the omnibus spending bill. We should make this more affordable choice permanent. Making it permanent protects people. It protects people so a future administration doesn't do what President Obama did and try to wipe out choices for Americans.

This legislation I am introducing today gives people a choice to have these plans for not just 90 days--which was allowed at the end of the Obama administration--but for a full 364 days. So it is up to a year.

It also makes sure people can then renew these plans, if they want to, so it can become their permanent insurance, free from the mandates of the Obama healthcare law. It protects them from being dropped if they are sick. Remember, that was one of the biggest promises of ObamaCare that was broken. President Obama said: If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Almost immediately, people found out it wasn't true at all. In fact, it was called by some of the press the ``Lie of the Year.''

In 2013 alone, there were 4.7 million Americans who got letters from their insurance companies telling them that their insurance plan had been canceled. Under my proposal, people with these short-term plans wouldn't have to worry about getting a cancellation letter. They would be protected from their insurance company, and they would be protected from Washington, DC.

States are much better suited than Washington to regulate their insurance markets in ways that work best for the citizens of their State. These simple changes in my legislation will help give people back--help give to them--the freedom ObamaCare took away. That is what we are looking at, the need for freedom for the American people. We can essentially give people an escape hatch to get out of the ObamaCare plan entirely. We can give them the freedom to choose the coverage that works for them and works best for their families.

That is the right way to bring down healthcare costs for Americans: Give them options, give them choices, give them freedom, not make them buy a one-size-fits-all government plan.

People living in more than half of America's counties have only one choice of insurance in the ObamaCare exchange--only one--half of the counties in the country. It is not a choice. They don't have options. It is a monopoly.

The left-leaning Urban Institute estimates that 4.2 million Americans would enroll in short-term plans next year if we just let them keep their plan as long as a year. That is the kind of pent-up demand that is out there for these more affordable, more flexible plans with much more freedom.

Just the one change could make a difference in the lives of 4 million Americans. My legislation does just that, and it has other benefits as well.

I think it would be an attractive option for many more Americans, but a lot of Democrats in Washington don't want to talk about options. No. They know ObamaCare markets are collapsing; they don't seem to care. They know costs are soaring out of control; it doesn't seem to concern as many as it should. They know middle-class families are being squeezed the hardest by these rising ObamaCare premiums. Their answer? We have heard it. We have heard it on the floor of the Senate: Try to push everyone--everyone in America, want it or not, everyone in America--into a single, government-run insurance plan that looks a lot like Medicaid. That is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing and what I am proposing today.

What the Democrats are proposing is more of the same failed idea that caused Americans so many problems under ObamaCare: government control.

If there is going to be talk of propping up the ObamaCare markets during the omnibus spending bill, then we should also be talking about helping people get out of the ObamaCare markets. Give them the freedom, give them the escape hatch.

We should protect people who want health insurance but who don't want ObamaCare health insurance. They know what works best for them and their families, and we should trust the American people to know what is best for them and their families. We should give people the freedom and the flexibility to make those decisions for themselves, and we should give them more opportunities to escape from the disastrous, destructive, and extremely expensive ObamaCare markets.

Mr. President, over the next couple of weeks, Congress is going to need to finalize government appropriations for the remainder of this year. Among the things that some people are talking about is including money for a couple of ObamaCare programs. One of them is money for the so-called cost-sharing reduction payments. Funding for these payments was never appropriated by Congress. The Obama administration paid the insurance companies anyway. President Trump stopped these illegal payments last October. Now, some people in Congress are talking about funding them again.

We all know that ObamaCare has been a disaster for millions and millions of families all across the country. We know that for the people who live in States that use the Federal healthcare.gov exchange, average premiums have doubled since the law took effect. Certainly Wyoming is one of those States that experienced it; I heard about it in Clark County just last week. We know it. We hear about it in letters from the people who write to us. No matter where they are from in the State of Wyoming, we continue to hear about the costs going up. I am sure there is a similar situation in the State of Arkansas, the Presiding Officer's State, as well.

According to Gallup, the number of uninsured people actually increased last year by 3 million. Many people are finding that they just can't afford to have ObamaCare insurance. It is especially hard for hard-working families who don't qualify for subsidies under the healthcare law. So we know there is a problem, and we know we have to do something to help people who are struggling in ObamaCare markets.

If people are going to discuss using this government spending law to spend more money on the collapsing ObamaCare markets, there are other things we should be discussing as well. We should discuss finding a real solution to rising healthcare costs--one that doesn't just continue the unworkable, unaffordable, and, frankly, unfair system that ObamaCare created. We should discuss actually giving people more freedom and more flexibility to choose a healthcare plan that is right for them.

I am introducing a bill today to do just that. My legislation will build on a step that President Trump and the Trump administration took last month. The administration reversed a last-minute Obama-era policy that had all but killed short-term health plans. These are less expensive health plans that are free from the expensive and intrusive and burdensome regulations that ObamaCare placed on other insurers, so they are a much more affordable option for many Americans who have been priced out of ObamaCare.

President Trump is on the right path with this new rule. It is absolutely the right decision. He is giving people back an option so they can decide for themselves if it is a right choice for them. I think we should go a step further, and that is why I am introducing this legislation. We should go a step further in the omnibus spending bill. We should make this more affordable choice permanent. Making it permanent protects people. It protects people so a future administration doesn't do what President Obama did and try to wipe out choices for Americans.

This legislation I am introducing today gives people a choice to have these plans for not just 90 days--which was allowed at the end of the Obama administration--but for a full 364 days. So it is up to a year.

It also makes sure people can then renew these plans, if they want to, so it can become their permanent insurance, free from the mandates of the Obama healthcare law. It protects them from being dropped if they are sick. Remember, that was one of the biggest promises of ObamaCare that was broken. President Obama said: If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Almost immediately, people found out it wasn't true at all. In fact, it was called by some of the press the ``Lie of the Year.''

In 2013 alone, there were 4.7 million Americans who got letters from their insurance companies telling them that their insurance plan had been canceled. Under my proposal, people with these short-term plans wouldn't have to worry about getting a cancellation letter. They would be protected from their insurance company, and they would be protected from Washington, DC.

States are much better suited than Washington to regulate their insurance markets in ways that work best for the citizens of their State. These simple changes in my legislation will help give people back--help give to them--the freedom ObamaCare took away. That is what we are looking at, the need for freedom for the American people. We can essentially give people an escape hatch to get out of the ObamaCare plan entirely. We can give them the freedom to choose the coverage that works for them and works best for their families.

That is the right way to bring down healthcare costs for Americans: Give them options, give them choices, give them freedom, not make them buy a one-size-fits-all government plan.

People living in more than half of America's counties have only one choice of insurance in the ObamaCare exchange--only one--half of the counties in the country. It is not a choice. They don't have options. It is a monopoly.

The left-leaning Urban Institute estimates that 4.2 million Americans would enroll in short-term plans next year if we just let them keep their plan as long as a year. That is the kind of pent-up demand that is out there for these more affordable, more flexible plans with much more freedom.

Just the one change could make a difference in the lives of 4 million Americans. My legislation does just that, and it has other benefits as well.

I think it would be an attractive option for many more Americans, but a lot of Democrats in Washington don't want to talk about options. No. They know ObamaCare markets are collapsing; they don't seem to care. They know costs are soaring out of control; it doesn't seem to concern as many as it should. They know middle-class families are being squeezed the hardest by these rising ObamaCare premiums. Their answer? We have heard it. We have heard it on the floor of the Senate: Try to push everyone--everyone in America, want it or not, everyone in America--into a single, government-run insurance plan that looks a lot like Medicaid. That is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing and what I am proposing today.

What the Democrats are proposing is more of the same failed idea that caused Americans so many problems under ObamaCare: government control.

If there is going to be talk of propping up the ObamaCare markets during the omnibus spending bill, then we should also be talking about helping people get out of the ObamaCare markets. Give them the freedom, give them the escape hatch.

We should protect people who want health insurance but who don't want ObamaCare health insurance. They know what works best for them and their families, and we should trust the American people to know what is best for them and their families. We should give people the freedom and the flexibility to make those decisions for themselves, and we should give them more opportunities to escape from the disastrous, destructive, and extremely expensive ObamaCare markets.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I have been coming to the floor to talk about the many ways the tax relief law has helped people all across America.

Last week, there were even more examples. One thing we saw was the ``Economic Report of the President'' that came out last Wednesday. This is a report from the top economists at the White House. According to the report, the tax relief law that we have passed and signed into law is going to raise

the average wages for working families across this country by over $4,000 in the long run. That is a huge raise. This report said that more than 4 million workers are also getting one-time cash bonuses and other benefits. These one-time cash bonuses mean a great deal to American families. It says that so far, over $2 billion in cash bonuses have been given.

Today in Wyoming, we heard another great report that Taco John's--an establishment at which I frequently ate lunch when I was in the Wyoming Legislature, as did so many members of the Wyoming Legislature. They are providing bonuses for employees. That is another case in point. The reason they say they are doing it is the tax relief tax cut benefits that people all across the country are receiving as a result of the tax law we passed.

If you remember, a lot of Democrats predicted gloom and doom if we were to pass this piece of legislation. Nancy Pelosi actually said it was Armageddon. She said it was the end of the world. Well, with all of these workers getting bigger paychecks and more take-home pay, Democrats have now started to panic. Nancy Pelosi said all the benefits people are getting under the tax law are ``crumbs.'' That is what she called them, but that is not what people across the State of Wyoming are calling them.

I received a note the other day from a man who said he heard all the rhetoric from Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. He said: ``Here is what the crumbs mean to a fellow working in Casper, Wyoming.'' He said that the first thing he noticed was that his take-home pay was higher in his latest paycheck. He figures that the tax cut works out to about a 2- percent raise for him. He and his wife decided to put that money straight into his retirement savings plan and invest it. He figures that over time, as those investments grow, it could add up to an extra $97,000 by the time he is ready to retire. He said: ``A few crumbs over time really do matter.''

There was a second part of his story about what the Republican tax relief means for him and his family, and that is the bonus. Because of the tax cuts, his employer gave him a bonus of $1,500. He said: ``I plan to enjoy the summer just a little bit more with this surprise income.'' He said he is investing the tax cut in his retirement, and he is investing the bonus in creating additional memories with his family today. He said that it means they are going to take an extra camping trip to Yellowstone this summer. They will enjoy ``a few more cookouts with families and friends this summer to savor the memories that this tax reform is providing.''

That is what it means for people across the country--memories, family activities, vacation, and a better retirement--all of those things because of the tax law and tax relief passed for the American people. They are going to do things they like doing, everything from going on vacation to going out for ice cream.

Tax reform has been very good for people in Casper, WY. It is good for his family. He wrote to tell me about it. It is good for the local businesses that he will be supporting, where he will be spending his money, traveling around the State, going on vacation, camping trips, cookouts, and making memories. They are not crumbs.

I don't know why Democrats who voted against the tax cuts even came to Washington in the first place. I do know that Republicans came here with a purpose--a purpose to give families more opportunities to invest in their futures like this man is doing.

There was another new survey that came out last week. They talked with heads of companies across America, and they talked about the confidence index that we are seeing nationwide. That is because of the tax relief law. The survey found that 89 percent of these business leaders are confident in the U.S. economy's prospects this year. It is at an alltime high.

Look at 2016--the last year of the Obama administration--and 2017 and 2018. That is an enormous jump from the 39 percent that business leaders were feeling in terms of confidence back in 2016. It is even bigger than last year, when 80 percent said they were confident. The reason for the jump is simple. When we look at what has changed since 2016, there were a couple of very big things.

First is the way that Republicans have been cutting back on Washington's burdensome, punishing, and destructive regulations. It is going to save Americans a lot of money and a lot of time.

The second thing that happened is that Republicans in Congress passed the tax relief law. That is why millions of Americans are getting a pay raise. That is why Americans are more confident about our economy. The business leaders are right. They should be confident about the state of America's economy because Republicans are just getting started.

Our economy should have been growing much more quickly ever since the recession ended almost 9 years ago, but it didn't during the last administration because the politics and the policies of the Democrats in Washington held our economy back. Now we have Republican policies, and the economy is much stronger. America's economy grew by just 1.8 percent in 2016. That is tepid growth compared to what we expect and what we are used to. Last year, it grew by 2.5 percent. We added 2.2 million jobs in 2017. Confidence is soaring.

Democrats don't want to hear about it. They don't want to talk about it. They don't want to hear from their constituents who are getting a raise and getting more money in their paychecks. They consider it crumbs. They almost appear to be rooting for the economy to stall. Some may want the economy to look more like it did when they were in charge.

The American people are going to look at what the Democrats did and realize that what the Republicans did made a huge difference in their lives. People are going to look at the fact that every Democrat in the Senate voted against the tax cuts. Then people are going to look at what Republicans have done and what it means for people's take-home pay. That is why Republicans are here. It is what we promised to do. That is what we are going to continue to do.

Mr. President, it seems as though just about every day we get more good news about the tax relief law that Republicans passed. This week, the news is getting even better for a lot of people all across the country.

By the end of this month, 90 percent of workers across the country will see more money in their take-home paychecks. It doesn't matter where they are. They can be in Meeteetse, WY, and they will see an increase in their paychecks this week. That is because this Thursday, February 15, is the deadline for employers to start using the new IRS tax withholding tables. The IRS tells employers how much money to withhold from people's paychecks so that their taxes work out pretty close at the end of the year. That is the way it is set up. Well, the IRS looked at the new tax law and saw that people are going to be paying lower taxes at the end of the year, so they put out the new tax tables. They told businesses to adjust how much money to withhold from a person's paycheck and to do it by February 15, tomorrow. For 90 percent of Americans, this tax amount is going to be lower, which means their paychecks are going to be larger. A tax cut is the same as a raise. That is what we are seeing all across the country--people getting a raise in their pay.

Some people have already gotten a paycheck with the new, higher wages. Others are going to get it very soon. The website Yahoo Finance crunched the numbers. They found that a typical worker making $60,000 a year will get an extra $112 in their paychecks every month because of the tax law. That is over $1,300 for the year. To me, that is very good news for American workers.

I was at home in Wyoming this past weekend, traveling around the State, and I am hearing about it in all the different communities I go to. People are saying: This has been better for me and my family personally.

On top of this, a lot of workers are getting special bonuses and raises because of the tax law. So not only are they getting more money because of the fact that the tax rates have been lowered, additionally, they are getting more money because they have gotten a raise or a bonus. It seems there are about 4 million hard-working Americans who are getting bonuses of hundreds or even thousands of dollars as a result of the new tax reform law. They are also getting extra money in their retirement plans. They are getting higher starting wages. We are seeing many places increasing the starting wages, some up to $15 an hour. More than 300 companies have said they are increasing all of these kinds of compensations as a direct result of the tax law.

In my home State of Wyoming, people across the State are getting bonuses--bonuses. These are people who work at Home Depot, Lowe's, Walmart, Starbucks, Wells Fargo, and other businesses that have familiar names to people across the country. They are also people who are working in smaller businesses, like the Jonah Bank in Wyoming. It has branches in Casper and in Cheyenne. It is not a nationally known bank, but it is very important in our State and in our communities. Every employee of this bank is getting a $1,000 bonus. The bank is also increasing its giving in the communities in which it has branches. Workers benefit, and the community benefits.

That is what happens when we change the tax law so Washington gets less and taxpayers get to keep more. That is why I voted for this tax law--to give the kind of tax relief that made these bonuses and these pay raises possible. It is good for Wyoming, and it is good for people all across the country.

It is interesting--it is even good for people in States whose Senators voted against the tax law. Ninety percent of people across the country are seeing the benefits no matter which State they are from.

There is a business in Grand Rapids, MI, called the Mill Steel Company. They said last week that they are giving an extra $1,000 to their workers because of the tax law that every Republican voted for and every Democrat voted against. Now, 400 people at that company are getting a bonus.

Michigan has two Democratic Senators. They both voted against the tax relief law. It still led to $1,000 bonuses for these 400 workers. What do the Senators have to say about it now? Are they proud that they voted against the tax law? Are they glad they said no to these sorts of raises that made it possible for people in their home States to get the bonuses?

We know what Nancy Pelosi thinks. She went out and first she talked about how the tax law was Armageddon, and then she said it was the end of the world. Most recently, she said all the benefits people are getting under the tax law, in her words, are just ``crumbs.'' ``Crumbs,'' she said. For her, it may be different, but for a lot of Americans, a $1,000 bonus--certainly for the people in my home State of Wyoming--is much more than crumbs. An extra $1,300--I talked about the worker earlier--in that paycheck is much more than crumbs. For a person with a starting wage of $15 an hour, that is more than crumbs.

It is bad enough Democrats tried to keep people from getting the extra money--Democrats voted against it because they didn't want people to get the extra money, it seems to me. It is hard to believe they would continue this way and take pride in voting against it, but they did. Now it seems like Democrats want to insult people by saying what they are seeing and what their benefits are, are resulting in crumbs. It is completely unfair, and I think it is disrespectful to the American people.

These are just some of the cash benefits workers are getting from the tax law. Republicans predicted, during the debate over this law, there would be other benefits as well. We said businesses would pay less in taxes, and some of them would be able to additionally cut prices for consumers--let people buy things more cheaply.

Americans are starting to see this prediction come true as well. One of the first places they are seeing it is in their utility bills. Gas, electric, and water utilities are cutting their rates because their taxes are going down under the law. In Vermont, the State's only natural gas utility company is cutting rates by more than 5 percent because of the tax law. Both of the Senators from Vermont voted against the law, but it is the law Republicans passed that caused these rates to go down. In fact, people living in at least 23 States and the District of Columbia are going to be paying lower utility bills because of the tax relief law. Another 26 States are looking into cutting rates. Rates are going down in California, Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut--States where every Democratic Senator voted against the tax law.

What do these Democratic Senators have to say now? Are they proud of the fact they voted against the tax cuts that made it possible for people to have lower utility bills in their States? When people's monthly bills get cut, it is like a pay hike--more money in their own pockets. They have more money to either save or to spend on other things or to invest.

The owner of a gym in Cincinnati, OH, spoke with his local television station about what tax relief means for him. He said:

When people have that extra money to spend, they spend it.

Some save it.

They go out to eat. They buy gym memberships. And they

enjoy themselves.

People have that extra money to spend now, today, because of the tax law Republicans passed. They have the extra money despite every Democrat in this body voting against tax relief. Every one of them said no. They all voted no. Democrats who voted no to tax relief for American families essentially voted yes to keep the extra money in Washington so they can decide how to spend it.

I have much more faith in people at home in Wyoming deciding how to spend their money than any faith I have in Washington, DC. For so many Americans, every dollar helps, and they are not crumbs. Democrats may not know the difference, but the American families do. People in every State of this country know the difference.

The American people understand what Republicans did with this tax law. They are seeing more money in their paychecks, more take-home pay, more money to decide what to spend and what to invest and what to save. They know Republicans promised to cut people's taxes. People know Republicans delivered on the promise. They know the benefits they have gotten already, and they are confident the economy will continue to grow stronger day by day.

People across the country also know the fact that every Democrat voted against this law, voted against giving them a tax break, voted against allowing them to keep more of their hard-earned money. The American people know who took their side, who voted for the American public versus who said no. Hard-working Americans asked us to do a job for them. Republicans are doing the job; Democrats in Washington certainly are not. Republicans are going to keep doing that job for the American people--a job we have promised and a job which we have delivered.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.