Floor Statements

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 68.

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 66.

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 61.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, which are at the desk: S. Res. 155, S. Res. 156, and S. Res. 157.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, April 7; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date; the morning hour be deemed expired; the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; further, that notwithstanding rule XXII, at 5:30 p.m. the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 56, Elbridge Colby.

Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the provisions of S. Res. 155.

Mr. President, as early as today, we expect to take up a budget resolution that will lay the groundwork for delivering on the Republican agenda. This resolution is the first step toward a final bill to make permanent the tax relief we implemented in 2017

and deliver a transformational investment in our border, national and energy security--all accompanied by substantial savings measures and commonsense reforms to our government.

And at the prospect of this, Democrats are losing their minds. Their opposition to the 2017 tax relief, of course, is well known. Since the day the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed, and before, Democrats have attempted to mischaracterize--and some would say flatout lie--about this legislation.

In fact, the Washington Post Fact Checker has repeatedly issued three- and four-Pinocchio responses to Democrats' claims, which center around the falsehood that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was about handouts to corporations and billionaires.

The truth, of course, is not only did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes for every income group, but it was working families--working families--not the wealthy, who received the greatest proportional benefit.

Let me just repeat that: The truth is that not only did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut tax rates for every income group, but it was working families, and not the wealthy, who received the greatest proportional benefit. Those are the facts.

But, of course, the facts have not gotten in the way of Democrats continuing to claim that extending this tax relief is about handouts to billionaires.

The Democrats' latest hysteria is centered around the application of budget rules we will use for this week's budget resolution. They claim that using current policy baseline is somehow destroying Senate rules, even though the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, which governs this budget resolution, clearly states that it is the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee who determines the budget baseline used for budget resolutions.

The senior Senator from Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats, confirmed that it is the chairman's role in a 2022 report when he was chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. And, of course, Democrats themselves have previously advocated for the use of a current policy baseline. They basically invented it back in 1977, shortly after the Budget Act was enacted.

Chairman Muskie, a Democrat from Maine and chairman of the Budget Committee, used a current policy baseline in his budget resolution because he thought it represented a more realistic benchmark.

More recently, President Obama's fiscal year 2013 budget assumed $4.5 trillion of expiring tax cuts would be extended in the Democrat's baseline, matching current policy at the time.

Jump forward to the Biden administration's most recent budget, in which Democrats explained that:

Adjustments to the . . . baseline are needed to better

represent the deficit outlook under current policy and to

serve as a more appropriate benchmark against which to

measure policy changes.

So using the current policy baseline is not some bizarre new gimmick.

I should also note, of course, that the Senate Parliamentarian has deemed the Senate budget resolution, which uses the current policy baseline, in order and ready for floor consideration.

Democrats' sudden concern for saving money and protecting the character of the Senate is touching. Who would have guessed that the party that was so eager to tear down a fundamental Senate institution, mere months ago, by killing the Senate filibuster would suddenly develop such a passionate interest in defending the character of the Senate?

But their hysteria is misplaced.

I do understand that Democrats are uncomfortable with the idea of tax relief. When you think that government knows best and when your enthusiasm for new government programs is virtually unlimited, it is no surprise you would prefer to maximize the flow of taxpayer dollars to the government.

But Republicans believe, fundamentally, that Americans know best what to do with their money.

And so no matter how many times Democrats attempt to distort or outright lie about what we are trying to do here, Republicans intend to deliver a permanent extension of the tax relief that we passed in 2017.

Failing to extend this tax relief would result in a $2.6 trillion tax increase on those making less than $400,000 a year, as well as a $600 billion tax increase on small businesses.

A typical family of four making $80,000 a year would end up sending an additional $1,700 to the government next year--$1,700. I am quite sure they have better uses for that money than sending it to Uncle Sam.

I said ``make this tax relief permanent,'' and I do mean permanent. Senate Republicans are united with the President in viewing a temporary extension as unacceptable. Americans should not have to live in fear of a tax hike every few years. And small businesses, including family farms and ranches, like those in my home State of South Dakota, need certainty about the tax outlook so they can plan for the future. Making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent will ensure that Americans' take- home pay does not go down, and it will have significant economic benefits.

The National Federation of Independent Business reports that making the small business section 199A deduction permanent would result in the creation of an additional 1.2 million jobs annually, with that number climbing as the law goes on.

And the Tax Foundation reports that long-run gross domestic product would increase by a substantial 1.1 percent. That means more jobs and more opportunities for American workers and, interestingly enough, increasing Federal revenues, to the tune of about $3 trillion, which is the right way--the right way--by growing the economy.

When the economy is growing and expanding, people are working, they are making money, they are taking realizations, they are paying taxes. And do you know what? Government revenue goes up, not down, which is exactly what we experienced when we passed the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, 8 years ago now.

As I said earlier, it was working families, not the wealthy, who received the greatest proportional benefit from that Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and it is working families, not the wealthy, who will see the greatest proportional benefit for making this tax relief permanent.

We are here to make sure that hard-working Americans have more breathing room, to make sure that our economy is providing them with jobs and opportunities and that they are not facing lower paychecks next year.

I was proud to help draft the 2017 tax relief and put more money in American families' pockets, and I look forward to permanently extending it in the near future.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.