Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I recognize Chase Glazier, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota.

Chase is a graduate of Custer High School in Custer, SD. Currently, he is attending South Dakota State University in Brookings, SD, where he is majoring in communications. Chase is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of his experience.

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

Mr. President, today I recognize Kyle McKee, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota.

Kyle is a graduate of Washington High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, he is attending the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA, where he is majoring in political science and chemistry. Kyle is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of his experience.

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

Mr. President, today I recognize Olivia Torbert, 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.

Olivia is a graduate of Washington High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, she is attending Georgetown University in Washington, DC, where she is majoring in international relations. Olivia is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of her experience.

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

Mr. President, today I recognize Dustin Wahl, an intern in my Washington, DC, office, for all of the hard work he has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota.

Dustin is a graduate of Sioux Falls Christian High School in Sioux Falls, SD. Currently, he is attending Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA, where he is majoring in politics and policy. Dustin is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of his experience.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the vote on the motion to invoke cloture occur at 1:45 p.m.; further, that the time until 1:45 p.m. be for debate only; finally, that if cloture is invoked, the McConnell amendment No. 809 be withdrawn and all postcloture time be expired and the Senate vote on the motion to concur in the House amendment with further amendment.

Mr. President, it is no surprise that Americans consistently rate jobs and the economy as top issues of concern.

A recent survey found that 50 percent of voters consider themselves to be living paycheck to paycheck, and about one-third of voters say they are just about $400 away from a financial crisis. That means a single, unexpected car repair or healthcare bill could easily put them in the middle of a financial emergency.

Too many Americans have seen their American dream dim in recent years. Hopes for a secure future have turned into worries about where the next rent or mortgage payment is coming from or whether it will be possible to save anything at all for retirement.

We don't have to resign ourselves to the status quo. We don't have to accept the long-term economic stagnation of the Obama administration as our economic future. We can get our economy going again, and we can set it up for strong growth for the long term. But that is going to require some work. It is going to require repealing burdensome and unnecessary government regulations that have slowed economic growth, and it is going to require reforming our complex, outdated Tax Code, which is increasingly strangling our economy.

The Tax Code might not be the first thing people think of when they think of economic growth, but it actually plays a huge role in every aspect of our economy. It helps determine how much money Americans have left over from their paychecks to save or invest or whether they can afford a car or a house. When it comes to businesses, it can be the key to determining whether a young business gets off the ground or an existing business has the money to grow and hire new employees.

Unfortunately, our current Tax Code is not helping our economy. It is doing the opposite. It limits Americans' opportunities. It punishes their success. It discourages investment and growth. It cripples small businesses. It encourages large businesses to send jobs overseas. It keeps our economy from reaching its full potential.

Reforming our Tax Code is an indispensable part of getting our economy back on the path to long-term health. Without comprehensive tax reform, the economic stagnation of the Obama years is likely to become the status quo going forward.

This fall, Republicans in the House and Senate are going to make comprehensive tax reform a priority, and any legislation we pass will be governed by five principles: First, any bill has to result in increased wages, jobs, and economic growth. Second, it must provide tax relief for the middle class. Third, it has to keep jobs here at home. Fourth, it has to increase American competitiveness in the global economy. Finally, it has to simplify the Tax Code.

Republicans will be talking a lot about these principles over the coming weeks, but today I would like to take just a few minutes to talk about the first of these principles: making sure that tax reform legislation increases wages, jobs, and economic growth.

Flattening wage growth has been a problem in the United States for decades. During the 8 years of the Obama administration, wage growth was almost nonexistent.

Economic growth was also weak throughout the Obama administration. During the last year of the Obama administration--years, I might add, after the recession ended--economic growth was averaging a dismal 1.5 percent. That is barely half of the growth needed for a healthy economy or for what we have seen historically in this country, going back to the end of World War II.

While things have been looking up a little bit lately, we still have a long way to go to get back on the right track. Things need to get better, and they need to get better faster. We want things to get better for the long term. During the Obama administration, there were periods of reasonable economic growth, but they were quickly followed by weak periods.

That is not good enough. We need to put our economy on a strong, healthy footing for the long term. What does the Tax Code have to do with all of this? How is it discouraging wage growth, job growth, and economic growth?

I want to talk about three big ways it is discouraging growth. To start with, tax rates on businesses, large and small, are too high. Our Nation has the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world-- at least 10 percentage points higher than the majority of our international competitors. Small businesses face tax rates that can range even higher--up to 44.6 percent for small businesses.

It doesn't take an economist to realize that high tax rates leave businesses with less money to invest, less money to spend on wages, less money to create new jobs, and less money to put back into new property or equipment for their businesses.

This situation is compounded when you are an American business with international competitors that are paying a lot less in taxes than you are. It is no surprise that U.S. businesses struggling to stay competitive in the global economy don't have a lot of resources to devote to creating new jobs and increasing wages.

On top of our high business tax rates, there is another major problem with our Tax Code that puts American businesses at a competitive disadvantage globally--our outdated worldwide tax system.

What does it mean to have a worldwide tax system? It means that American companies pay U.S. taxes on the profit they make here at home, as well as on any profit they make abroad once they bring that money home to the United States.

The problem with this is twofold. First, these companies are already paying taxes to foreign governments on the money they make abroad. Then, when they bring that money home, they end up having to pay taxes again on at least part of those profits and at the highest tax rate in the industrialized world. This discourages them from bringing their profits back to the United States to invest in their domestic operations. Instead, our Tax Code gives them a strong incentive to leave that money abroad and to invest in foreign workers and foreign economies.

The other problem is that most other major world economies have shifted from a worldwide tax system to what is known as a territorial tax system. In a territorial tax system, you pay taxes on the money that you earn where you make it and only there. You aren't taxed again when you bring money back to your home country.

Most of American companies' foreign competitors have been operating under a territorial tax system for years. So they are paying a lot less in taxes on the money they make abroad than American companies are. That leaves American companies at a disadvantage. These foreign companies can underbid American companies for new business simply because they don't have to add as much in taxes into the price of their products or services.

In addition to discouraging growth with high tax rates and with our outdated worldwide tax system, there is

another major way our Tax Code discourages growth, and that is by leaving small businesses with very little cash on hand.

I have mentioned the high tax rates that small businesses face, which already restrict their cash flow. The accounting rules in the Tax Code just compound that problem. Under current law, small and medium-sized corporations are often required to pay tax on income before they receive the cash, and they cannot deduct all of their expenses when they pay the invoices. It can take years or even decades for them to recover the cost of their investments in equipment and facilities.

For instance, right now the cost of a computer is recovered over 5 years and tractors, over 7 years, if you are in the ag sector of the economy, and commercial buildings, over 39 years.

The consequences of deducting investments over so many years is that businesses can be left extremely cash-poor in the meantime, and cash- poor businesses don't expand. They don't hire new workers, and they don't increase wages.

Any bill Republicans consider has to fix these elements in our Tax Code that are discouraging growth. It has to lower rates for businesses, both large and small. It has to shift our outdated worldwide tax system to a territorial tax system so that American businesses are not at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy and so that American businesses have an incentive to invest their profits at home in American jobs and American workers, instead of abroad. Any bill we consider has to address the cost-recovery rules that are keeping small businesses cash-poor, often for years at a time.

I have already introduced legislation to help startups and small to medium-sized businesses recover the cost of their investments faster. It is legislation that I hope will become part of the final bill that we consider in the Senate. I am looking forward to working with Chairman Hatch and my colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee as we work to draft the final bill.

The American people have had a rough few years, but economic worry doesn't have to become the status quo for the long term. American workers and job creators are as dynamic and creative as ever. We just need to clear the obstacles from their path, and comprehensive tax reform will allow us to do just that. I look forward to helping to bring the American people real relief this year.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

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

Mr. President, when polls ask Americans what issues are most important to them, one topic seems to score high every time: jobs and the economy. It is not surprising. The American people have had a rough time over the past few years.

The Obama years were characterized by long-term economic stagnation. Jobs and opportunities were few and far between. Wage growth was almost nonexistent, and yearly economic growth alternated between weak and woeful.

During the last year of the Obama administration--years, I might add, after the recession ended--economic growth averaged a dismal 1.5 percent. That is barely half of the growth needed for a healthy economy.

There have been some encouraging signs over the past few months. Economic growth for the second quarter of 2017 was stronger. We still have a way to go to get to where we need to be. Things still need to get better and better faster.

Another thing is, we want things to get better for the long term. During the Obama administration, there were periods of reasonable economic growth, but they were quickly followed by weak periods. That is not good enough. We need to put our economy on a strong, healthy footing for the long term.

How do we do this? How do we get back on the path to long-term economic health? One important thing we can do is reform our outdated, inefficient, and growth-stifling Tax Code.

The Tax Code might not be the first thing people think of when they think of economic growth, but it actually plays a huge rule in every aspect of our economy. It helps determine how much money you have left over to save or invest or whether you can afford a car or a house. When it comes to businesses, it can be the key to determining whether a young business gets off the ground or an existing business has the money to grow and to hire new workers.

Unfortunately, our current Tax Code is not helping our economy. Too often, American families find their opportunities limited by the size of the tax bill they owe to Uncle Sam. Large and small businesses alike find themselves struggling under heavy tax burdens that compromise their ability to grow and compete.

What does tax reform need to look like? On the individual side, of course, we need to lower income tax rates to put more money in Americans' pockets. American families should be the ones deciding how to spend their earnings and not Washington bureaucrats.

On the business side, there are two important things we can do that will have long-term benefits for economic growth: first, lower tax rates for all types of businesses--sole proprietorships, S corporations, limited liability companies, and corporations; and, second, accelerate the rate at which businesses can recover their investment costs to free up money for them to reinvest in their businesses, create new jobs, and increase wages.

When it comes to lowering business tax rates, there are several things we need to do. For starters, we need to lower our Nation's corporate tax rate. The United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. That puts American businesses at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy.

When American businesses are taxed at a far higher rate than their foreign competitors, it is likely to be the foreign, rather than the American, companies that expand and thrive.

It is not just our high corporate tax rate that puts American businesses at a competitive disadvantage. It is also our outdated worldwide tax system. If we want American businesses to stay competitive in the global economy, we need to move from a worldwide tax system to a territorial tax system.

The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Orrin Hatch, delivered a speech the other day explaining exactly why we need to move to a territorial system. I highly recommend reading his full speech, but I am going to take just a moment to highlight some of the points he made in that speech.

What does it mean to have a worldwide tax system? Under a worldwide tax system, American companies pay U.S. taxes on the profit they make here at home, as well as any profit they make abroad, once they bring that money back here home to the United States.

The problem with this is twofold. First, these companies are already paying taxes to foreign governments on the money they make abroad. While the current Tax Code gives them some credit for those foreign tax payments, they can still end up paying some U.S. taxes when they bring that money home, meaning they are being taxed twice on those profits.

This discourages companies from bringing their profits home to invest in their domestic operations in the United States. If the tax burden for bringing that money home is too great, they have a strong incentive to leave that money abroad and invest it in foreign workers and foreign economies.

The other problem is, most other major world economies have shifted from a worldwide tax system to a territorial tax system. In a territorial tax system, you pay taxes on the money you earn where you make it and only there. You aren't taxed again when you bring money back to your home country.

Most of American companies' foreign competitors have been operating under a territorial tax system for years so they are paying a lot less in taxes than American companies are. That leaves American companies at a competitive disadvantage.

These foreign companies can underbid American companies for new business simply because they don't have to add as much in taxes into the price of their products or services. By moving to a territorial tax system in the United States--a move that is supported, by the way, by Members of both parties--we can put American companies on an even footing with their global competitors.

With a territorial tax system and a lower corporate tax rate, we can provide a strong reason for companies to keep their operations in the United States and to bring their profits back home, instead of incentivizing companies to send their operations overseas the way they do now.

Improving the competitiveness of American companies and giving them a reason to invest their profits back home will have huge economic benefits, not only for American companies who are competing in the global marketplace but also for all the small- and medium-sized companies that form the supply chain here in the United States.

For every American company that operates in countries around the world, there are countless companies here at home that supply the raw material for the products that are sold abroad--businesses that handle the packaging and the shipping of those products and enterprises that supply support services like accounting and legal and payroll services.

The list goes on. America's global companies rely on a web of supporting businesses that spans the entire United States. As a result, when American companies are successful, so is the American economy.

Obviously, lowering corporate tax rates and moving to a territorial tax system will have the most impact on American companies with an international footprint. Tax reform also has to focus on that other engine of economic growth; that is, the American small business.

Like bigger businesses, small businesses currently face high tax rates, at times even exceeding those paid by large corporations. Lowering tax rates for small businesses has to be a part of any tax reform bill.

A dollar saved in lower tax rates is a dollar a small business owner can put back into the business to expand, to add another worker, or to give employees a raise. The other thing we can do for small businesses is to allow them to recover their investments in inventory, machinery, and the like faster.

Under current law, small- and medium-sized corporations are often required to use a method of accounting known as accrual accounting. Basically, what that means is, a business has to pay tax on income before it receives the cash and cannot deduct all of its expenses when it pays the invoice.

For investments in equipment and facilities, the delay in recovering the cost of the investment can be even longer. For instance, right now, the cost of a computer is recovered over 5 years; tractors, over 7 years; and commercial buildings, over 39 years.

For many businesses, this means it can be many years before that substantial investment can be fully deducted. That can leave a business extremely

cash poor. Cash-poor businesses don't expand, they don't hire new workers, and they don't increase wages.

Boosting small businesses' available cash by allowing them to recover their investments faster is one of the most important things we can do to help small businesses thrive.

I have actually introduced legislation that would do just that. My bill, which is called the INVEST Act, focuses on allowing new businesses to recover their startup costs more quickly and allowing existing small- and medium-sized businesses and farms and ranches to recover their investments faster, and in some cases deducting the acquisition costs immediately.

All of the tax reform priorities I have discussed today, and more, will be part of the final tax reform package that we develop in the U.S. Senate.

Members of the tax-writing committees, in both the Senate and the House, have spent years working out the best approach to tax reform. Both committees have redoubled their efforts this year, even as the Senate and the House took up a variety of different priorities.

Last week, leaders from the Senate, the House, and the administration announced that the Senate Finance Committee, of which I am a member, and the House Ways and Means Committee would begin putting together a final version of a tax reform package. Our goal is for the Senate and House to take up and pass the legislation sometime this fall.

I am looking forward to working with Chairman Hatch and all of my colleagues in the Senate Finance Committee to put together that final bill, because American families and businesses are counting on us to enact a tax system that works for them and not against them. That is what we intend to give them.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that quorum calls during consideration of the Wray nomination be charged equally to both sides.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I recognize George Eccarius, 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.

George is a graduate of St. Thomas More High School in Rapid City. Currently, he is attending the University of Oregon, where he is majoring in business. George is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of his experience.

I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to George Eccarius for all of

the fine work he has done and wish him continued success in the years to come.

Mr. President, today I recognize Hallie Shae, an intern in my Aberdeen, SD, office for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota.

Hallie is a graduate of Deuel High School in Clear Lake, SD. Currently, she is attending Northern State University, where she is majoring in sociology, with an emphasis in criminal justice. Hallie is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of her experience.

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

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I don't need to tell anyone why we are here. We are here because ObamaCare is fundamentally broken. That is clear. It is evident. Everybody knows that.

A combination of soaring premiums and rapidly decreasing insurer participation has left the law's centerpiece--the healthcare exchanges--literally on the brink of collapse. Insurers are fleeing. Nationwide, 141 insurers have registered to offer plans on the exchanges in 2018, which represents a 38-percent drop from 2017, and that is on top of a nearly 30-percent drop in insurer participation from 2016 to 2017.

If the trend of the past 2 years continues, the final number of insurers offering plans on the exchanges in 2018 is likely to be roughly half the number that offered plans in 2016--a year ago. At least 40 counties around the country are likely to have no ObamaCare insurer in 2018 and another 1,300-plus counties are likely to have just one choice of insurer.

President Obama once said that shopping on the exchanges would be like buying a TV on Amazon. For a lot of people next year, it is going to be like shopping for a TV on Amazon, if Amazon only offered one brand of TV. Of course, for some people it is going to be like shopping for a TV on Amazon only to discover that Amazon has no TVs at all.

Another thing ObamaCare was supposed to do was make health insurance more affordable. That hasn't worked too well. Premiums on the exchanges have soared and soared again. Between 2013 and 2017, the average individual market monthly premium in the healthcare.gov States increased by 105 percent. How many families in this country can afford to have their health insurance premium more than double in just 5 years--and there is no end in sight.

Here are some of the premium hikes insurers are proposing for 2018:

In Maryland, one insurer has proposed an average premium increase of 52 percent; an Iowa insurer is seeking an average 43.5-percent premium increase; a North Carolina insurer is pursuing an average 22.9-percent hike; a Virginia insurer is looking for an average rate increase of 38 percent; a Delaware insurer is looking for an average rate hike of 33.6 percent; a Maine insurer is seeking an average rate hike of 40 percent; and in New Mexico, one insurer is seeking a rate increase of nearly 80 percent.

Again, those are rate hikes for just 1 year. That is after years of dramatic premium increases on the exchanges. Suffering under ObamaCare isn't limited to high premiums and decreasing choices. There are the Americans who have lost their healthcare plans, and the Americans who have lost access to the doctors they liked, the huge deductibles that left some Americans unable to use their insurance, and the ObamaCare tax hikes that have hurt small businesses and driven up the cost of health insurance.

ObamaCare has failed. Americans are suffering. Doing nothing is not an option. Yesterday we moved forward to debate legislation to provide relief to the millions of Americans who have been hurt by ObamaCare. We are going to have a full debate and give people a chance to help shape the final bill.

I hope that at the end of the week, we will be able to pass a strong bill to start undoing the harm ObamaCare has caused. We owe the American people nothing less. We made a commitment to the American people; that if they elected us, we would do everything we could to give them relief from ObamaCare. It is time to make good on that promise.

Chances to do away with damaging government programs don't come around every day. Once you give the government power, it can be pretty hard to wrest it away. This week, we have the chance to start repealing a really bad government program. We need to take it. If we don't act to help the American people, no one will. Democrats have made it clear that if they were in power, they would be doubling down on ObamaCare's failures.

The head of the Democratic Party in the U.S. Senate openly stated single-payer healthcare is on the table for Democrats. A number of colleagues on the Democratic side have proposed that legislation. An analysis of one of our Democratic colleague's single-payer plan estimated that it would cost $32 trillion over 10 years. Well, that would require a tax hike so staggering the Washington Post pointed out that even the Senator who proposed it--an avowed Socialist--didn't offer anything close to what would be needed to pay for it.

We are the only hope Americans have of getting out from under ObamaCare's burdens. This week, we have a chance to pass legislation to finally provide them with relief. I heard my colleagues get up and talk about the impact the proposed legislation that is before us

would have on people across this country and American workers. I have to say, I talked to a lot of rank-and-file, hard-working South Dakotans and South Dakota families who have been hit so hard by these premium increases. I talked to families--a mom and dad with two kids who are paying more than $2,000 a month in premiums to get insurance in the individual marketplace.

In my State of South Dakota, premiums since 2013--the last 5 years-- have gone up 124 percent. They have literally doubled. Do you know what that means in South Dakota? That is almost a $3,600 increase in just the last 5 years. What average family who is trying to raise kids, trying to pay the bills, trying to save for retirement, trying to put something aside for college education, trying to pay the mortgage and the utility bill--how many families can put up with a healthcare bill that has gone up in the last 5 years by almost $3,600? That is a crisis. That is why we are here.

Our colleagues on the other side want to turn a deaf ear and blind eye to what is happening out there. We can't afford to do that because the status quo is unsustainable. There is absolutely no way the American people who are suffering under the harms caused by ObamaCare can continue to abide the status quo.

It is up to us to take the steps that are necessary to move us in a different direction, a better path that brings stability to the marketplace, that gives people more choices, more options, greater competition, and brings down premiums and deductibles and the costs that are driving family budgets through the roof.

What we have seen since ObamaCare has been implemented are higher costs, higher taxes, and fewer options. It is as simple as that. That is what we are up against, and that is why it is time for us to act. I hope when we conclude this process at the end of this week--and we have an opportunity for everybody to offer their amendments--we will move forward with the bill and fulfill our promise to the American people.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Abigail Kosiak. Abigail hails from Sioux Falls, SD, and is a rising junior at Utah State University.

While interning on the Commerce Committee, Abigail worked in the committee's front office, assisted the Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet Subcommittee and gave tours of the Capitol. She is a dedicated worker who was committed to getting the most out of her internship. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Abigail for all of the fine work she did for the Commerce Committee and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. President, today I recognize Devin Martin, one of my Washington, DC, interns, for all of the hard work he has done for me and my staff at the Senate Republican Conference.

Devin is a graduate of Huntley High School in Huntley, IL. Currently, he is attending the University of South Dakota in Vermillion, SD, where he is majoring in journalism and political science. Devin is a dedicated worker who has been committed to getting the most out of his experience.

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

Mr. President, today I recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Maci Burke. Maci hails from Chamberlain, SD, and is a rising sophomore at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

While interning on the Commerce Committee, Maci assisted the Surface Transportation Subcommittee. She is a dedicated worker who was committed to getting the most out of her internship. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Maci for all of the fine work she did for the committee and wish her continued success in the years to come.