Floor Statements

Madam President, on a final matter, yesterday, the White House hosted a ``Made in America'' showcase, featuring products that were manufactured in each State, including from Stoneware & Co., in my home State, which makes the famous Louisville stoneware kitchen and dining sets.

Well, talking about reviving American manufacturing is nothing new in this town. In his 2013 State of the Union Address, President Obama insisted that ``our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing.''

Every few years, it seemed our Democratic friends over in the House would hold yet another press conference to talk about getting manufacturing moving. So rhetoric was not in short supply during the Obama era. What was harder to come by were actual results. On President Obama's watch, on net, our country lost more than 300,000 manufacturing jobs.

Year after year, Democratic policies led to insufficient, sluggish, and uneven economic growth that left much of the country behind. Eight years of this so-called recovery couldn't even get us back to the same number of manufacturing jobs that we had when President Obama first took his oath of office.

There are a number of reasons why. Yet here is one thing we heard loud and clear from U.S. manufacturers: High taxes, heavy regulations, and other Democratic policies put the wind squarely in their faces. Back in 2013, more than 75 percent of U.S. manufacturers said a hostile climate due to taxes and regulations was a major business obstacle.

What about the present? What about now?

This united Republican government has put an end to one burdensome regulation after another. We cut through the redtape that held back small businesses, local lenders, and manufacturers. We overhauled the Tax Code, leaving families with more to spend and invest and leaving job creators with more flexibility to compete and win.

What were the results?

Less than 2 years into the new administration, an all-time high of 95.1 percent of U.S. manufacturers have a positive outlook. Now fewer than one in five says a hostile business climate due to things like taxes and regulations is a top obstacle, and more than two-thirds are planning to hire this year. These aren't just numbers; this is real life.

At Jamison Door in Hagerstown, MD, tax reform made possible a 400- percent increase in plant size.

In my home State of Kentucky, it is estimated that more than 1,000 construction jobs will be needed to help build a new aluminum rolling mill for Braidy Industries. Over the next 7 years, tax reform is expected to save the company--listen to this--$150 million, which will help to support this investment and the 600 permanent new jobs the company estimates it will create in the Commonwealth.

So let's sum it up. Republican policies have helped generate the very outcomes Democrats claim they wanted. American manufacturing is thriving on our watch, but now Democrats aren't cheering. In fact, they have tried to block most of the policies that have helped this happen.

They voted against tax reform--every Democrat in the House and the Senate. They have protested regulatory reform every step of the way. They want to go right back to their old ways--repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, raise taxes, and pile on more crushing regulations.

We are not going to let that happen because we agree that manufacturing growth is vital for American prosperity, and unlike our friends across the aisle, we have the ideas and the policies to help make that goal into reality.

Mr. President, today the Senate will vote to confirm Robert Wilkie, President Trump's outstanding choice to serve as the next Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

The job is an incredibly important one. As Secretary, Mr. Wilkie will be tasked with fulfilling our Nation's commitments to veterans and their families, expanding their access to care, and improving accountability at the VA.

Millions of American veterans rely on the VA--day in and day out--for healthcare, employment resources, counseling, and a host of other services they need and have certainly earned.

It is fortunate, then, that Mr. Wilkie's impressive career of public service demonstrates he is well prepared to advance the agency's vital missions.

Robert Wilkie grew up the son of an Army artillery officer. He carried on the tradition of service as an officer in the U.S. Air Force Reserve. In addition to uniformed service, Mr. Wilkie has amassed more- than two decades of experience as a civil servant. He has served at the Department of Defense, at the National Security Council, and here on Capitol Hill.

Throughout the years, he has built a reputation as a thoughtful analyst and a skilled manager. Both these skills will serve him well at the helm of an an agency that employs nearly 400,000 people to meet the needs of millions more.

I know I speak for so many of my colleagues when I say that the Senate looks forward to working closely with the next Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

Already in 2018, guided by the leadership of Chairman Isakson, this body has taken decisive action to better fulfill our Nation's promises to veterans and their families.

In May, the Senate voted, by a wide bipartisan margin, to pass the VA MISSION Act, which was designed to ensure that the services on which our Nation's heroes rely are flexible and accessible enough to meet their needs.

The omnibus spending measure passed earlier this year included a record level of support for VA programs.

In Robert Wilkie, the President has chosen a partner with whom this body can work side by side to continue advancing the interests of our Nation's veterans, including more than 300,000 in my home State of Kentucky.

I look forward to doing just that. I urge each of my colleagues to join me in voting today to confirm this qualified nominee.

Madam President, the Senate is continuing our productive summer. This week we have been focused on confirming more of the President's qualified nominees. After his confirmation yesterday, Andrew Oldham, of Texas, will now bring his impressive credentials and years of distinguished service to his new role on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Today, we are considering the nomination of Ryan Bounds to serve on the Ninth Circuit. Each of these nominees has been selected by the President and his team for their credentials, reputations, and commitment to the rule of law. Each has been thoroughly examined by our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee.

Ryan Bounds is no exception. He has earned degrees from Stanford and Yale. He clerked for the very Ninth Circuit judge he has been nominated to succeed. For the past 14 years, he has distinguished himself as a public servant at the Department of Justice and in his current role as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for Oregon.

Along the way, he has earned the respect and recognition of legal professionals from across the country and the political spectrum. Forty-six of his colleagues in the District of Oregon describe his ``admirable work ethic,'' ``keen judgment,'' and ``masterful writing'' as ``skills that colleagues and opponents alike seek to emulate.''

In a letter to our Senate colleagues from Oregon, criminal defense attorneys who have litigated against Mr. Bounds testified to his ``fairness,'' ``diligence,'' and ``legal acumen.''

They write:

He has shown time and time again that he is a man of his

word. . . . He is an excellent lawyer and would make an

outstanding judge.

A number of law professors from across the country seem to agree. They remind us about the standards to which this body is charged with holding judicial nominees--fairness, impartiality, intellectual rigor. To sum it up, in the words of one legal peer, ``Ryan has all of this, and more.''

So I look forward to voting to confirm this excellent nominee, and I urge all of my colleagues to join me.

Madam President, speaking of excellent nominees, I would like to speak for a moment about President Trump's outstanding

choice for the Supreme Court, Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

This week, even more of our colleagues have had an opportunity to meet with Judge Kavanaugh. I am sure they will agree that it is hard not to come away impressed--the academic achievement, the judicial credentials, the esteem of his peers and fellow legal professionals.

Of course, that hasn't stopped the far-left special interest groups from grasping at straws and trying to smear this nominee any way they can. They don't seem to care whether it is honest or not. They don't seem to care whether it is accurate or not.

The latest made-up controversy is an attempt this week to make hay out of comments Judge Kavanaugh made about the long ago expired independent counsel statute. But, once again, there is no ``there'' there, whatsoever.

Here are the facts. Judge Kavanaugh's apparent concerns about the independent counsel law appear in line with mainstream views that have been widely held on both sides of the political aisle--views that were, in fact, strongly held by many of my Democratic colleagues, at least until there was an opportunity to try to make political hay.

Congress chose to let the statute expire back in 1999, based in large part on constitutional concerns.

Let me say that again. The Congress, in 1999, on a bipartisan basis, decided to let the independent counsel statute expire.

My colleague, the senior Senator from Illinois, the assistant Democratic leader in the Senate right now, explained this well when he was fighting any attempt to renew the statute. Here is what he said in 1999 about the independent counsel: ``Unchecked, unbridled, unrestrained, and unaccountable.''

My friend from Illinois punctuated his enthusiasm for the demise of the independent counsel law by saying: ``I would like to say to Judge Starr and all of the other counsels, your days are numbered.''

I agreed with him about the independent counsel statute. A number of us, in both parties, saw it the very same way. So we happily allowed the law to expire.

This has nothing to do with special counsels. That is different from the independent counsel. The day the independent counsel statute expired, the day we actually finished with the impeachment trial of President Clinton in the Senate, Senator Chris Dodd from Connecticut and I went upstairs and had a press conference, stating that we agreed that the independent counsel statute ought to be allowed to expire, and it did. That has nothing to do with any special counsels or any tools that are currently in place for elected officials to be held accountable. This has nothing to do with any investigations that are in the headlines today.

What Judge Kavanaugh was talking about is a law that has not existed for two decades and which the Supreme Court upheld with only a single dissenting vote. One of the dissenters in the case that upheld the independent counsel statute was Justice Scalia.

The irony or hypocrisy is that our Democratic colleagues are now criticizing Judge Kavanaugh because he may hold the same views on this subject that they did, at least until Judge Kavanaugh was nominated. It is a view that was shared and acted upon by Members of this body on both sides of the aisle, as I have explained.

So it is another day, another off-base attack.

Here is how Newsweek dismissed this tempest in a teapot: ``Law experts told Newsweek that Kavanaugh's view on independent counsels has nothing to do with special counsels or Mueller's probe and, in fact, the two types of federal investigations are completely different.''

Yet again, the far-left special interest groups that are desperate to deny Judge Kavanaugh fair treatment are hoping the media will buy their latest made-up charge.

Do you remember the outrage when it was learned that Judge Kavanaugh enjoys baseball? My goodness--shocking.

Well, I am proud the President has chosen a nominee who is as strong as Judge Kavanaugh. We should put aside these unfair attacks and misrepresentations and give his nomination the fair treatment it deserves.

Madam President, on a final matter, this week I discussed a number of converging reports that highlight the strength of this economy for middle-class families and job creators.

U.S. retail sales just increased for the fifth consecutive month. Earlier this year, consumer confidence hit its highest level since 2000. More than a million new jobs have already been created in 2018. There are more job openings than job seekers for the first time in 15 years. Over 95 percent of U.S. manufacturers are reporting confidence in their companies' outlook--an all-time high.

Just this morning, there was this announcement from the Department of Labor: In the second week of July, new claims for unemployment benefits fell to their lowest level--listen to this--since 1969.

All of these favorable trends are interrelated. Jay Powell, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, testified before our colleagues on the Banking Committee this week that ``robust job gains, rising after-tax incomes, and optimism among households have lifted consumer spending this month.''

To put it even more simply, American employers are doing better. So American workers are doing better. So American families are doing better. So American businesses are doing better. This is how a vibrant, growing economy works. This is what happens when Washington, DC, swallows up less of the American people's money in taxes, when it imposes fewer heavy-handed regulations that make it hard to do business, and when it gets the bureaucracy's foot off the brake of our economy.

This is among the best--quite possibly the best--of economic moments for jobs and opportunity that Americans have seen in recent memory.

The policies of this united Republican government helped to bring it about, and they are helping to sustain it.

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Tax cuts appear to be propelling robust consumer demand.

Many households are experiencing less withholding from their

paychecks thanks to the tax overhaul.

According to a recent survey, fewer than one in five American manufacturers now say an unfavorable climate due to things like taxes and regulations is a primary obstacle to their businesses. Back in 2013, during the Obama economy, more than two-thirds of the manufacturers said that. Two-thirds said it was a problem in 2013, and only one in five considers it a problem now.

All across the country, as job creators of all sizes have announced worker bonuses, pay raises, and business expansions, many say loud and clear that tax reform is what made it possible.

The American people voted. Republicans kept our promises. Now middle- class families are seeing the effects of the pro-growth policies they asked for in 2016, and the whole world has seen what the American people can accomplish when their government gets off their backs.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding Senate rule XXII, postcloture time on the Bounds nomination expire at 1:45 p.m. today; further, that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that following disposition of the Bounds nomination, the Senate resume legislative session and proceed to the immediate consideration of a Schumer resolution that is at the desk; further, that the Senate immediately vote on the resolution; that if agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

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 Bounds nomination be vitiated.

For the information of all Senators, the nomination will be withdrawn.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following leader remarks on Monday, July 23, the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 1000. I ask consent that the time until 5:30 p.m. be equally divided in the usual form and that following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; that no further motions be in order; and that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of the Wilkie nomination, the Senate resume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of H.R. 6147.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 p.m., Monday, July 23; 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, and morning business be closed. I ask that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Sullivan.

Mr. President, this week the Senate continues to confirm impressive nominees whom President Trump has asked to serve our country. We have confirmed two Assistant Secretaries to the Department of Education, Scott Stump and James Blew. We have confirmed a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, Randal Quarles. Now we will turn to the judiciary and consider nominees to the Fifth Circuit and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

First is Andrew Oldham of Texas, the President's choice for the Fifth Circuit. Mr. Oldham has impressed the legal community in his years of public service, most recently as general counsel to the Governor of Texas.

Mr. Oldham has degrees from the University of Virginia, Cambridge, and Harvard Law. He clerked on both the DC Circuit Court and the Supreme Court. He carries the highest possible rating from the American Bar Association, ``unanimously well-qualified.''

He comes highly recommended by peers and colleagues from across the political spectrum. Judith Zaffirini is a Texas State senator. She is a Democrat. She wrote the Judiciary Committee to support Mr. Oldham's nomination ``confidently, enthusiastically, and without reservation.'' She and the nominee have worked together on a number of important subjects. Through them all, she explains, ``Mr. Oldham reflected the ideal qualities of a judge . . . open-minded, fair . . . thoughtful and analytical.''

Lisa Blatt is a skilled litigator who argues frequently before the Supreme Court. She is also a Democrat. She wrote the committee too. Her letter describes Mr. Oldham as ``a great listener'' with ``a brilliant legal mind, [and] a wonderful sense of humor and collegiality.''

Her conclusion? He would ``make a superb judge.''

What about Mr. Oldham's own words? If confirmed, he explained to our colleagues during his hearing, he will ``uphold the rights of all litigants--big or little--equally, and apply the law to all fairly.''

He understands his responsibility, clearly. I look forward to confirming this nominee, and I urge each of our colleagues to join me.

Mr. President, on another matter, it has been a year and a half since Republican majorities took their seats in Congress and a Republican President was sworn in. In 2016, the American people made it clear it was time to try something new. They were tired of a so-called recovery that focused overwhelmingly on big, wealthy metropolitan areas. They had seen enough of tax hikes and top-down regulations that held their communities back. They turned to Republicans to deliver a pro-growth, pro-opportunity agenda to create better conditions for working families, job creators, and entrepreneurs to rise together.

Eighteen months later, the results could not be clearer. Today, more people say it is a good time to find a job than at almost any point since the turn of the millennium. U.S. manufacturers are more confident than ever about the future of their businesses.

Here is a story from yesterday's Financial Times: ``US retail sales rise for fifth straight month in June.'' This is a good sign for Americans all across the board. It shows our economy is healthy. It shows that families feel they have enough breathing room to

make purchases, which of course then benefit the companies and workers who produce what they are buying. Of course, it is especially good for the 42 million Americans whose jobs are supported by the retail industry.

According to industry data, more than 6 in 10 Americans work in retail at some point in their career, so this continued prosperity is really significant. There is little question that tax reform is to thank for a significant portion of this progress.

For one thing, our middle-class tax cuts are directly boosting families' discretionary income. As the Wall Street Journal reported this week, ``many households are experiencing less withholding from their paychecks thanks to the tax overhaul.''

Analysts also point to the business side of tax reform, which is letting more U.S. employers expand and hire. That means more jobs for American workers, which means more income for American families, which means more money in the cash registers of American small businesses. The virtuous cycle goes on.

The American people and most fair observers are marveling at what our economy is delivering to workers and middle-class families, but I am starting to think our Democratic colleagues may have forgotten what a successful economic agenda looks like because even in the face of headline after headline and testimony after testimony from job creators we represent, they try to brush off this impressive growth as nothing serious, and they advocate for repealing or undoing the Republican policies that are helping to make it happen.

Fortunately, Republicans know full well how to cut taxes, trim back regulations, and get Washington out of the American people's way. It is just what we have done. It is just what we will continue to do.

Mr. President, in April, the Democratic leader and I announced the reestablishment of the Senate NATO Observer Group. Senators Tillis and Shaheen, both Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, were named cochairs. We have asked for the following Senators to participate: Barrasso, Rubio, Gardner, Ernst, Rounds, Merkley, Coons, King, Booker and Van Hollen.