Floor Statements

Madam President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, July 17; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, and the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of Treaties Calendar No. 2, Treaty Document No. 112-1.

Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Sasse).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. President, today I recognize Adam Miller, an intern in my Rapid City, SD, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks.

Adam is a graduate of Canton High School in Canton, SD. Currently, he is attending Black Hills State University in Spearfish, SD, where he is double majoring in political science and history. He is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of his internship experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Adam for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, the Democratic Party's motto this year might as well be ``Free Stuff''--free

healthcare, free college, free debt relief, free childcare, and free income. The problem, of course, is that the old adage ``There is no such thing as a free lunch'' is 100 percent true.

Healthcare has to be paid for by someone. College has to be paid for by someone. Democrats, of course, think they should all be paid for-- and often controlled--by the government, but what they don't like to talk about as much is that the government has to get its money from somewhere, and that somewhere is the American people.

If you ask Democrats how they are going to pay for all of this free stuff, what they will say is, they will tax the rich. The problem is, there simply aren't enough people to even come close to paying for the Democrats' free programs and expansive policy proposals.

Every year, Forbes magazine reports the combined net worth of the 400 richest people in the United States, but if you took every penny from every one of those people, it would be a tiny drop in the bucket next to the cost of the Democrats' proposals.

Free healthcare alone--and these are my conservative estimates--would cost $32 trillion over 10 years. Taking every penny from the richest people in the United States wouldn't even cover 1 year of that proposal. In fact, you could take every penny from every billionaire in the entire world, and it would still only cover roughly 28 percent or less than 3 years of Democrats' Medicare for All proposal.

That is just free healthcare. That is not the Green New Deal or guaranteed income or free childcare or anything else. What if we move away from billionaires? How about millionaires--even millionaires? What if we taxed every household in the United States making more than $200,000 at a 100-percent rate for 10 years? Well, we would still barely have enough to cover free healthcare, much less Democrats' other proposals.

Let's look at one of the Democrats', what I would say, relatively smaller proposals, and that is student loan forgiveness and free college. No one can deny that student loan debt is a problem in this country. Many graduates emerge with tens of thousands of dollars' worth of debt that they struggle to repay, and it burdens them for years. It is a growing problem. Ways to alleviate this burden and encourage more affordable education are conversations we need to have, but the free college and debt elimination solutions offered by two leading Democratic Senators are no solutions at all.

The U.S. Government is not swimming in money. We are deeply in debt, and we already need to shore up existing programs, like Social Security and Medicare, both of which are on shaky financial footing.

Paying for a college education for millions of Americans is not something the government can easily afford. The Senator from Vermont's plan for free college and student loan forgiveness would cost approximately $2.2 trillion over 10 years. That may not sound like much when compared to Democrats' budget-busting plan for government-run healthcare, but it is still a lot of money.

The entire Federal budget for 2019 is less than $5 trillion, and that is supposing the Senator from Vermont's proposal comes in on budget, which seems unlikely. For one thing, when you offer something for free, demand for it generally increases.

The Senator from Vermont is making his estimate based on today's numbers, but what happens when demand skyrockets? The Federal Government can be on the hook for far more than the Senator estimates, and these proposals would do anything but incentivize colleges and universities to lower the cost of tuition.

Both the Senators who have proposed free college and debt elimination plans this year have said they will pay for it. The Senator from Vermont would impose a financial transactions tax, while the Senator from Massachusetts would impose what she calls an ultramillionaire's tax on the very wealthy, but as one Wall Street Journal editor highlights in a recent column, this is unlikely to cover the costs:

Financial-transaction taxes chronically underperform

estimates of the revenue they'll generate, and wealth taxes

are so ineffective that even France scrapped its version in

despair in 2017. Much heavier middle-class taxation is what

feeds European social-welfare States.

It goes on to say: And ``much heavier middle-class taxation'' is likely to be the end result of Democratic proposals, like free college and student loan forgiveness.

Even leaving aside the cost, let's talk about the merits of the Democrats' proposals--for starters, the sheer unfairness of these plans. Let's suppose one of these proposals becomes law. Now, suppose you are someone who has lived frugally for years, and you have just finished paying off $30,000 in student loans. You are not going to get a penny back from the Democrats. Meanwhile, someone who has just incurred that $30,000 in debt is going to get it completely wiped out. There is no need to live frugally or think about paying off the debt you have freely incurred; the debt will just be gone.

Then there is the fact that Democratic proposals for free college and debt forgiveness are not going to solve the education debt problem.

The director of the Education Policy Program at New America--not a conservative think tank, by the way--recently published a column in the New York Times, where he noted that the proposals for free public college from the Senator from Vermont and the Senator from Massachusetts would ``not eliminate future student debt--not even close. That's because most student loan debt isn't taken out to attend undergraduate programs at public colleges and universities. Most loans are used for private colleges, for-profit colleges, and most of all, graduate school.''

As the column points out, that is not something that free public undergraduate education will fix. In fact, the column notes: ``The day after Senator Sanders `hits the reset button,' as he put it in the news conference, the national student debt odometer would begin rapidly spinning again.''

So what can be done to help those struggling with student loan debt? What can we do to help while still maintaining fiscal responsibility and preserving a respect for honoring the commitments you have made? One Democratic Senator and I have a proposal that could definitely help. The senior Senator from Virginia and I reintroduced our Employer Participation in Repayment Act earlier this year. Our legislation would amend the Educational Assistance Program to permit employers to make tax-free payments on their employees' student loans. Right now, employers can contribute to their employees' tuition if their employees are currently taking classes, but they can't help employees with education debts they have already incurred. Our bill would allow them to help with employees' already-existing student loan debt.

This would be a win-win situation. It would be a win for employees who would get help paying off their student loans, and it would be a win for employers which would have a new option for attracting and retaining talented workers. Our bill would not be a silver bullet, but it would certainly help ease the pain of paying back student loans for a number of young Americans.

I also look forward to seeing other efforts to help alleviate the burden of student loan debt in a feasible and fiscally responsible way. I know Republicans on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee are working on legislation to make it easier to pay back student loans.

Another big thing we can do is to make sure that graduates have access to good-paying jobs. Thanks to Republican economic policies over the past 2 years, our economy is thriving, good jobs are being created, and wages are rising at the strongest pace in a decade. All of that can go a long way toward enabling people to pay off their debt, and Republicans are committed to building on the economic success that we are experiencing and expanding opportunities even further.

``Free College'' makes a great bumper sticker, but it doesn't make very good policy. We need to address the problem of student debt without weighing down the economy or hard-working Americans with massive new government spending and massive new taxes. The Employer Participation in Repayment Act is a step in the right direction, and I hope to see it receive a vote in the very near future.

I yield the floor.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. President, we just heard the Democratic leader talking about the issue of healthcare and attacking the President and Republicans for not being supportive of protections for preexisting conditions, and I can tell you that is just not true. I can't think of a single Republican who doesn't believe we ought to provide protection for people with preexisting conditions.

Democrats have not acknowledged that ObamaCare has failed, and I think we can all see the evidence of that. We have seen skyrocketing premiums, copays, out-of-pocket costs, deductibles--all of those things have gone through the roof for a lot of people, particularly in the individual market--as well as a reduction in the number of choices and options. Fewer options and higher costs have been the legacy of ObamaCare, so the Democrats know it has to be replaced. The reason they know it and you can tell it has to be replaced is that they are already out there talking about a proposal--a completely one-size-fits-all, government-run, national approach to taking over people's healthcare in this country called Medicare for All, at a cost of $32 trillion, which I will come back to in just a moment.

The President and his administration have also acknowledged that ObamaCare has failed because of the skyrocketing costs and fewer choices and have chosen to try to get that repealed through the courts. Either way, we are going to be having a discussion about healthcare here and about what is the best system moving forward.

Republicans, of course, as I mentioned, believe we have to protect people with preexisting conditions. Whatever follows in ObamaCare's wake, I think there is agreement on both sides of the aisle--both Republicans and Democrats--that preexisting conditions will be covered.

So let's just take that political argument off the table because that is all it is. It is nothing more, nothing less, nothing else than a political argument made by Democrats when they know full well that Republicans are on the record in support of protecting people with preexisting conditions.

The question is, What will we replace it with? We believe, obviously, that there is a much better approach that gives people more choices, more options, and creates more competition in the marketplace, which would put downward pressure on prices.

The Democrats, as I said, have endorsed and are supporting a $32 trillion government takeover of the healthcare system in this country, which will put enormous costs on the backs of working people in this country. I will come back to that in just a moment.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) would have voted ``yea.''

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. President, today I recognize Meredith Benson, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks.

Meredith is a graduate of Lincoln High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, she is attending Creighton University in Omaha, NE, where she is double majoring in chemistry and Spanish. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Meredith for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. President, today I recognize Audrey Cope, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks.

Audrey is a graduate of St. Thomas More High School in Rapid City, SD. Currently, she is attending Augustana University in Sioux Falls, SD, where she is double majoring in government and international affairs and French and minoring in political philosophy. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Audrey for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. President, today I recognize Ryder Fuhrman, an intern in my Aberdeen, SD, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks.

Ryder is a graduate of Warner High School in Warner, SD. Currently, he is attending Northern State University in Aberdeen, where he is majoring in political science and minoring in economics and legal studies. He is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of his internship experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Ryder for all of the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. President, today I recognize Kiera Leddy, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several weeks.

Kiera is a recent graduate of Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, OK, having earned a degree in agricultural communications. This fall, Kiera plans to attend Drake University Law School in Des Moines, IA. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Kiera for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.