[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 194 (Friday, December 16, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8697-S8699]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              THE ECONOMY

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, we are, as a nation, facing difficult 
financial times, and I for one believe it is true that the middle class 
in America is suffering economically to a degree that is unusual. It 
needs to be thought about, it needs to be addressed.
  I have a number of ideas about what we should do, and they don't 
include raising taxes and spreading the money around. I don't believe 
that is the right direction for the country to go. That is essentially 
the view of President Obama. As he says he is for the middle class, he 
taxes people at even higher levels and would do those kinds of 
government programs that he believes will work.
  At a most fundamental level, I am convinced the greatest thing we can 
do to strengthen America--strengthen us financially, strengthen job 
creation for the middle class--would be to do the things that allow 
growth in the private sector. There are a lot of things we can do that 
will not cost this Treasury a dime.
  Indeed, one of the greatest threats to the American economy is the 
debt that hangs over us like a cloud. It is inhibiting growth and 
investment and prosperity. We have to get this Nation on a sustainable 
path, not the unsustainable path we are on. I have been disappointed, 
frankly, at the leadership of the President. He has not understood 
this. He believes that the way to do it is through governmental 
borrowing, taxing, and spending. That is not the way to get out of this 
fix.
  One of the most dramatic things that are coming up before us today is 
the Keystone Pipeline. This is precisely the kind of project this 
Congress could take action on to ensure that it occurs because it will 
create lots of jobs, create wealth, make us more secure as a nation, 
and help bring down the cost of energy. Low-cost energy is the best 
possible way to create even more jobs in America. We compete in a 
global marketplace, and the extent to which our industries can have 
cheaper energy, they can hire more people, make more widgets, and pay 
more taxes to the U.S. Government and to States, cities, and counties.
  The construction of the Keystone Pipeline would run from Alberta, 
Canada, to Texas refineries along the gulf coast. It adds a number of 
miles of pipeline, although it will also use existing pipelines that 
are in place now. We have thousands of miles of pipelines around the 
United States. Building a pipeline is not unusual. We build them over 
and over again. Many pipelines run through our State, and they provide 
the low-cost energy that helps us to be competitive and create jobs.
  This construction project alone would add 20,000 American workers, 
high-paid American workers, jobs not funded by additional debt that we 
borrow to try to artificially create jobs. They are real construction 
jobs. Experts tell us it would likely lead to the creation of more than 
100,000 jobs overall. This is a significant number.
  In addition, as I said, it would make us more energy secure and make 
us more able to contain the growth in the price of fuel because it 
would provide a large, competitive source of fuel for America. When 
fully operational, the pipeline will transport 700,000 barrels a day. 
That is almost half of the amount of oil the United States currently 
imports from the entire Middle East. Mr. President, 700,000 barrels a 
day is almost exactly the amount of oil we import from Venezuela, and 
that is not a friendly country to us. Hugo Chavez and his team there 
are a dangerous threat to the hemisphere. Much of their wealth comes 
from the oil they sell to the United States. I am not saying that we 
cannot buy on the world market and that we should not buy from 
Venezuela, but why in the world would we deny ourselves the right to 
purchase 700,000 barrels a day from our friend, our fine trading 
partner, Canada, our neighbor?
  There is a strategic political interest of significance here too. How 
will the Canadians feel if we reject this pipeline when great effort, 
time, and years of investment and study have gone into it?
  This plan to build a pipeline is supported by a bipartisan coalition, 
Democrats and Republicans, including many Democratic Governors, such as 
Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, along with a number of Democratic 
Senators

[[Page S8698]]

and Congressmen. It is not a partisan issue. Seven Governors of States 
that will house the pipeline have come out to voice their support. Each 
State through which the pipeline will pass is supportive of the 
pipeline. Those encouraging the pipeline also include labor unions, 
such as the Teamsters, that together represent about 25 million 
workers. Remember, this is a jobs program that will create high-paying 
jobs, and many will be for union workers. Yet the President has blocked 
the pipeline construction for some time, deferring a decision now until 
after the next election. Many argue that it is not hard to conclude 
that this is a political decision and an attempt to avoid alienating 
the liberal anti-energy environmentalists or those who favor the 
pipeline, such as his union supporters.
  I don't know the politics of it. All I know is that I cannot find a 
single sound reason not to proceed. I know it would be tremendously 
economically beneficial to America. We must address the true, 
structural, long-term problems that are hammering our economy and 
middle-class workers in America, robbing them of opportunity.

  We had before the environmental committee a couple of days ago a 
witness from Alabama--Van Richey, the CEO at ACIPCO. This is a 100-
year-old company where the CEO/owner a number of years ago turned it 
over to the employees. Mr. Richey testified their number of employees 
has gone from 4,600 to 2,900, and that the pipe industry in America is 
down 30 percent--the entire pipe industry. Think about that. These are 
real jobs. These are people who built their lives around good-paying 
work at ACIPCO, and over a thousand of them are now not working. I 
don't know what they are doing. Hopefully, they found something, but it 
is unlikely to be the kind of solid manufacturing job they had. We must 
pursue reforms that make our economy stronger and more productive, 
restoring confidence and allowing for sustained economic job growth.
  Consider a few of the biggest challenges we face. One of them is the 
health care law. Promises were made. The President insisted it would 
reduce health care costs, but health insurance premiums have increased 
$2,200 per family since 2008. The Congressional Budget Office warned us 
this health care bill was not going to bring down costs, and, in fact, 
the bill has brought costs up. That is money out of the pockets of 
American families that they do not have now to spend in the marketplace 
because it has to be spent on their health insurance. We need to get 
the government out of dominating and regulating areas of the economy 
for which they have no experience or ability to operate in an effective 
way.
  Instead of allowing the production of American energy--energy from 
this country--the President has blocked commonsense energy production 
while sending stimulus dollars to favored green corporations that are 
not producing and are going bankrupt in serious numbers. A recent study 
found that almost 190,000 new jobs could be created next year if energy 
production in the Gulf of Mexico, where I live, returned to pre-
moratorium levels. Think about that. If we went back to the pre-
moratorium levels on production, it would add 190,000 jobs and bring in 
more American wealth. Instead of having to buy our oil from Canada or 
Venezuela, it would be our own, keeping our wealth at home and creating 
jobs at home.
  The moratorium was imposed after the oil spill. We had expert 
testimony in the environment committee there is a new device that has 
been prepared and is now ready to go that could be put over a blown-out 
well, such as the one we had, so that in a matter of days it would stop 
the leak. They eventually did that, using a cap. Instead of 90 or 100 
days, within a few days you could cut off a leak like that. It should 
have been there to begin with, in my opinion. It was a very significant 
failure of management not to have such a safety device. But it is now 
available.
  I also believe the permitorium--the inability to get permits--has 
cost us a lot of jobs. Now that the complete ban is over, you can get 
permits, but they have been slowed down dramatically, and huge rigs, 
capable of drilling in the deep gulf, have been moved to other places 
in the world and are not producing. It would have cost United States 
taxpayers virtually nothing to put an intensive effort into reviewing 
the dangers in the gulf, doing it quickly, and putting this industry 
back on track before so many of those production rigs moved abroad.
  Also burdensome, intrusive regulations have undermined job creation 
and hurt small businesses. The average number of rules costing the 
economy over $100 million pending during 2001 to 2006 was about 72. 
Under this administration, the average number is 130. In fact, over 
180,000 jobs will be lost each year from 2012 to 2020 as a result of 
four EPA rules that impact the regulatory structure of the electric 
industry. These are dramatic events.
  It would cost the Treasury of the United States not a dime to not 
follow through on these dramatic rules, one of which is the boiler MACT 
rule. I have never heard so much concern from my constituents over that 
rule. Hopefully, it will be part of the legislation that moves the 
payroll tax holiday. That legislation would also change the boiler MACT 
rule. That would be a tremendous relief for the American economy.
  The point is, these rules cost the economy, cost jobs, drive up our 
cost of production, and make it more difficult to be competitive in the 
world marketplace. We don't need that. Every single rule that is 
effective needs to be maintained; every single rule that is unnecessary 
and drives up cost should be eliminated. Yet we are still adding rule 
after rule, and it is costing jobs.
  President Obama has continued to ignore China's abusive currency 
devaluation process which undermines the rule of law and is decimating 
American manufacturing. I was pleased to work with my Democratic 
colleagues in the Senate to pass legislation that would require the 
government to respond to legitimate complaints of businesses that can 
prove they have been damaged by the deliberate manipulation of China's 
currency. You can't have a good trading relationship with a country 
that is cheating you; that is not playing by the rules. Are we going to 
sit by year after year and allow factory after factory to be closed 
because we are unwilling to confront this on some sort of religious, 
economic, free-trade theory because they sell us cheaper products? If 
they cause our businesses to lay off thousands of workers or to close 
down, should we thank them because we get a cheaper product? But how 
long will it be cheaper?
  I don't go for that. I think we need real leadership here. It 
wouldn't cost the Treasury a dime if we stood up and protected our 
workers on the world competitive stage; if we backed them up and 
ensured our businesses have fair trade. We would create jobs without 
adding to the debt. We would create jobs that pay more taxes and reduce 
the debt. This trade manipulation and unfairness does enormous damage 
to the middle class.
  The number of U.S. manufacturing sites fell from 397,000 in 2001 to 
344,000 in June of 2010. That is a real manufacturing decline. It is 
not inevitable. In fact, I am convinced we have a chance to have a 
renaissance in manufacturing in America. If we keep our energy costs 
down, if we don't have unnecessary regulations, and we create a tax 
policy that is good, I think we might surprise ourselves on how well we 
can bounce back. Because the cost of manufacturing in other countries 
is going up dramatically--and we now have, with our technology, our 
infrastructure, and our high machinery utilization--we can be 
competitive in areas we haven't been competitive in before.

  Manufacturing employment peaked at 19 million in 1979, with 11.7 
million in February of 2011. I don't think this country can be healthy 
and strong economically, I don't think it can have an effective 
presence strategically and militarily around the world if we don't have 
a manufacturing base. I don't see how it can happen. What are people 
going to do?
  They say we will go into the service industry. Well, how many people 
can make a computer? As a matter of fact, most of these technological 
advancements, such as our super TVs and computers, are made abroad. It 
is a competitive world, but we can be more competitive. We can take 
back some of that manufacturing, I am convinced.
  I also believe at a time of high unemployment we need to be sure the 
immigration laws of this country are enforced. The very idea we should 
relax

[[Page S8699]]

our laws and shouldn't insist they be enforced at a time when we have 
almost 9 percent unemployment makes no sense to me. We need to get 
American workers working, not imported workers taking jobs from 
Americans. It is that simple.
  We have to protect our legitimate national interest. If you want to 
have open borders, I am willing to discuss that and say we should have 
totally open borders. But if you don't--and no nation in the world 
does, to my knowledge--then you must create an immigration system that 
serves your national interest and creates jobs for American citizens 
wherever possible.
  America's $15 trillion debt is destroying jobs and confidence in the 
economy. The debt itself is the largest we have ever seen. The annual 
deficit is the largest we have ever seen. It dwarfs any deficits we 
have ever had before, and it is continuing year after year.
  President Bush, in his last year in office, had the biggest deficit 
he ever had--$450 billion. It was one of the largest deficits in the 
history of the Republic. President Obama's first year in office saw a 
$1.4 trillion deficit. It has been $1.3 trillion or more for the last 3 
years.
  This year, CBO was predicting the deficit would come in at a tad 
under $1 trillion--$970 billion. But if we pass this tax holiday, we 
will add $200 billion to the debt just like that. So next year, we will 
be at $1.1-plus trillion, if the Congressional Budget Office's 
projections are true.
  This is a serious matter. The debt is a threat to us. We have to quit 
running up the debt. We have to quit borrowing so we can spend. That is 
all this tax holiday is--the government borrowing the money so people 
don't pay into their pension plan--Social Security. I am uneasy about 
that. It weakens the moral component of Social Security and it clearly 
adds to our debt. Social Security is on an unsustainable course. This 
bill would do nothing to fix the unsustainable course of Social 
Security. It says we don't put in the money we have been putting in 
every year for the last 60 years, I suppose. How can that do anything 
but weaken Social Security? And it absolutely increases our debt and 
will show up on the score by the Congressional Budget Office.
  I am the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee. It is so 
painful; I would love to be able to support--and I won't say I won't 
support--this tax holiday. But it is not sound policy in the long run 
for America. We can't keep chasing after and borrowing money to spend, 
because the debt is so large. We now have a debt equal to 100 percent 
of GDP, our gross debt. We have never had anything like this before.
  So it is time, indeed, for a middle-class agenda, an agenda that 
helps and strengthens this country. We don't need more dishonest 
spending, politicians promising favor, promising to give people 
something the government doesn't have to give, spending money we don't 
have, to try to buy votes with it. We don't need any more of that. The 
net beneficiary of all this seems to have been the political class, not 
the middle class.
  So what do we need to do? A good, sound program means creating jobs 
through the private sector, putting a stop to crony capitalism and 
favoritism, producing more American energy, and making our government 
leaner and more productive. That is good for the economy: creating a 
long-term debt reduction plan so that every investor and businessperson 
and American citizen will say, well, we are on a path now that is 
sustainable, not on a path that is unsustainable--as every economist 
has told us; adopting a globally competitive Tax Code, a Tax Code that 
enhances investment in America, enhances expansion in job creation, not 
one that inhibits growth and job creation.
  We need to confront illegal immigration at the border and at the 
workplace and serve the national interests. We need to uphold the rules 
of law in trade and quit acquiescing to those who cheat and manipulate 
trade rules to their advantage. I don't believe we can sustain that 
over a long period of time. I do believe that has hammered jobs and 
manufacturing in America.
  We need to eliminate unwise and damaging regulations. Any burden 
placed on individual Americans or businesses in America that does not 
pay for itself in benefits should never be imposed. We have too much in 
that category. Finally, delivering to the good people of this country 
the honest and responsible government and budget they deserve.
  The sad fact is, we have now gone 961 days without a budget. I think 
that shows the irresponsibility of this Congress. I was disappointed 
when the Democratic leader in the Senate said it would be foolish to 
even attempt to bring up a budget this year, and he was not going to do 
it for the second year. This is really, really dangerous; a country 
that is suffering the greatest debt and deficits we have ever had, to 
not have a budget is utterly and totally unacceptable.
  I can't imagine a party wanting to be the leader of the Senate that 
will not even bring to the floor a budget, as required by statute, 
required by law. The House passed one. They passed a historic budget, a 
budget that would have altered the debt course of America, put us on a 
sound path. The Republican leadership in the House summoned their 
courage and produced a budget that would reduce spending, alter the 
taxes in America in a way that would create more growth, and brought it 
forward.
  So Senator Reid thought he was clever. He knew Democrats wouldn't 
vote for it because it would actually cut spending, and he brought it 
up so it could be voted down. But over 40 people voted for it.
  I brought up at the same time President Obama's budget--the most 
irresponsible budget ever submitted, one that would increase taxes but 
increase spending more and increase debt more than if we didn't have 
that budget. So I brought it up and said: Well, let's vote on the 
President's budget. Zero votes, 97 to 0, against that budget.
  We need to be sure the people who run this country understand that 
the American people are not happy with us. How can they be happy? We 
are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend. We are on an 
unsustainable debt course, and we don't even have a budget and refuse 
to bring up one. It is just unthinkable.
  We will end up in the last of this session heading into Christmas 
with some conglomerated-together, massive omnibus bill, a last-minute 
tax holiday bill, and somehow we will muddle forward and continue 
spending for the government so it will not close down. But all of this 
should have been done months ago. There is no reason it has to be held 
to the last minute except it gives the leader more power to manipulate, 
and it gives Members of Congress less opportunity to know what is in 
it. It gives the American people less opportunity to know what is in 
it.
  So I am not happy. I don't think the American people are. I think 
they are rightfully disappointed with us. Somehow we have to get this 
country on the right track. It will require tightening our belts. We 
cannot continue to borrow and spend at this rate.
  A lot of people are going to be disappointed that things they hoped 
to receive they will no longer be able to receive. But the country will 
not sink into the ocean. It will not. This country is strong. All we 
have to do is do what they are doing in New Jersey and doing in 
Alabama, beginning to do in some of the other States that have been 
deeply in debt, do what Senator Warner did as Governor of Virginia: 
manage the economy and balance the budget. I appreciate his leadership 
in the Senate to try to produce something worthwhile for the Nation.
  So we can do better, and we have to do better, and the American 
people are entitled to it.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________