[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 89 (Thursday, June 4, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3845-S3847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT AND THE ECONOMY
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the National
Defense Authorization Act. This is a bipartisan bill that will provide
our servicemembers with the funding they need to continue to keep our
country safe.
Over the last 5 months, we have had numerous senior military
officials, senior military officers, and foreign policy experts talk to
the Senate Armed Services Committee on which I serve about the
significant challenges that our country faces. The senior Senator from
Arizona talked about this very eloquently today on the floor about
ISIL, a resurgent Russia, North Korea with nuclear weapons, and this
NDAA bill that we are now debating on the floor focuses on addressing
these challenges. It also makes important modernizations to our
investments with regard to military weapons, cuts bureaucratic redtape
at the Pentagon, and ensures that our Armed Forces remain the most
agile and lethal in the world. It upholds our commitments to our
servicemembers, to their families, to military retirees, and to their
families.
It is remarkable that right now, as we debate this bill--this
critically important bill on the Senate floor--the
[[Page S3846]]
President of the United States has already come out and said he is
going to likely veto it if it is in its current form. He is going to
veto the NDAA. Think about that. One of the most important things we
are doing to take care of our troops, and the President is threatening
a veto. Now, during the markup of this bill, many Members on the other
side of the aisle--our colleagues--also threatened to work on the
amendments but to not vote for the bill. They were all going to vote
against the bill. But we stood firm--the chairman and other members of
the committee--and said: This is not the kind of bill we play politics
with. This is not the kind of bill we try to make political points on.
This is a bill that funds our troops, that funds the defense of our
Nation. Guess what happened. They got the message. Only four members of
the Senate Armed Services Committee voted against this bill. It was a
very bipartisan bill coming out of the committee, and I certainly hope,
when this bill passes the U.S. Senate and moves to conference with the
House and then moves to the President's desk, that he does not play
politics with our troops; that he removes his threat to veto one of the
most important pieces of legislation that we will work on this year.
I wish to thank the senior Senator from Arizona, the chairman of the
Armed Services Committee, for his critical leadership in ushering this
bill out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I had the distinct
honor of traveling with Senator McCain recently to Asia, including to
Vietnam, where his service has inspired countless millions of Americans
as well as the people of Vietnam. I saw that firsthand. It was
humbling. It was an honor to be there with him, Senator Reed, and
Senator Ernst on a trip I will certainly remember for a lifetime.
Now, we all took an oath a few months ago to pledge solemnly to
``defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic.'' We took that oath right here on this floor.
That is what the NDAA does. It gives our servicemembers what they need
to fight and defend our great Nation. That is why 53 NDAAs have
consecutively passed the Congress.
It hasn't been about partisanship. This bill has moved through the
Congress every year for over half a century because it is so important.
So again, I would say it would be remarkable if the President of the
United States would veto this, particularly given the threats that we
see to our Nation.
I want to talk about those rising threats and one of the biggest ones
that doesn't get enough attention. We have heard from the chairman of
the Senate Armed Services Committee and from both sides of the aisle
about what those threats are facing our Nation: ISIS, Iran, Russia,
China. These are rising threats, no doubt. But there is a rising threat
to our national security that almost never gets talked about, and in
some ways it is the biggest threat that our Nation faces.
I am talking about our economy. I am talking about the need for a
strong economy. Our economy is one of the most critical elements of our
national security. A strong robust economy is our best defense. We have
the greatest military in the world, no doubt--the most professional
military force in the world, no doubt. We have built this up over
decades. But we built this up and we have it because for decades we
have had a strong economy. For decades we have had the most innovative,
robust economy in the world.
A strong economy is our best weapon against those who would do us
harm. A strong economy means more peace, more security, and more
prosperity. When America is strong, when it is working, when it is
producing, when our economy is robust, the world is safer. Our strength
sends a signal to the world. It allows us to set the narrative, to set
the rules. It allows us to become the beacon that this country has been
for generations.
Right now, we don't have this critical component of our national
security, a strong economy. We do not have this. As a matter of fact,
our economy is getting weaker, not stronger. The verdict is in.
Economists from all across the country, of all political persuasions,
agree that the recovery from the last recession has been one of the
slowest economic recoveries this country has ever had. We have not had
a slower recovery in well over 50 years. The American Enterprise
Institute has called this recovery ``glacially and painfully slow by
historic standards.'' Even the Center for American Progress, a very
liberal think tank, has said that ``this has been a poor recovery in
every regard.''
That was last year. This year it is worse. The gross domestic
product, which is the value of everything this country produces, last
quarter shrank. Let me repeat that. We didn't grow. We didn't grow by 1
percent, 2 percent. The economy of the United States shrank by almost 1
percent. We contracted. It is the third time the economy has shrunk
since 2009.
We don't even have a recovery. We don't have a recovery. Right now we
have no growth. That means Americans have less money in their pockets.
It means wages haven't kept up with inflation. It means the gap between
the richest and the poorest is growing. We must get back to higher
growth rates. We must get back to traditional levels of American
growth. We must get back to an economy that makes us stronger globally
and produces hope and opportunity at home.
It wasn't too long ago that we expected in this country at least 4
percent annual GDP growth. That is a very normal, traditional level of
American growth. When President Reagan was in office, the average
growth rate was about 4.8 percent. During President Clinton and the
first term of President Bush it was 3.5 to 4 percent GDP growth.
(Mr. PERDUE assumed the Chair.)
My colleague from Louisiana, who was just presiding, wrote a recent
excellent article in the Wall Street Journal.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that article be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Wall Street Journal, Apr. 30, 2015]
Dismal Growth Needs the 3.5% Solution
The steps to spurring the economy include allowing oil exports and not
taxing repatriated overseas profits
(By Bill Cassidy and Louis Woodhill)
On Wednesday the Commerce Department announced that first-
quarter growth of gross domestic product was a dismal 0.2%.
Following fourth-quarter GDP growth in 2014 of an anemic
2.2%, the already sluggish economy has slowed almost to a
halt.
America is facing a harsh reality. The recovery that began
in 2009 is the weakest in postwar history. Millions have
dropped out of the labor force, frustrated by lack of
opportunity. Lower-income workers are underemployed, middle-
incomes have not advanced as in the past, and government
dependency has increased. As budget battles rage in Congress,
ignored is what really matters: rapid, sustained economic
growth.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the U.S.
economy will grow by a meager 2.3% over the next decade, and
its estimate has declined in the past six months. At this
growth rate, Americans face a future of stagnation,
inequality and despair.
Here's why: From 1790 to 2014, U.S. GDP in real dollars
grew at an average annual rate of 3.73%. Had America grown at
the CBO's ``economic speed limit'' of 2.3% for its entire
history, GDP would be $780 billion today instead of more than
$17 trillion. And GDP per capita would be $2,433, lower than
Papua New Guinea's.
Looked at differently, had GDP grown from 2001 to 2014 at
the 3.87% annual rate of 1993-2000, the federal government
would have had a $500 billion surplus in 2014 instead of a
$500 billion deficit. And that's with the same excessive
government spending.
The last time the federal budget balanced was 2001 when
there was a $128 billion surplus. This was not achieved with
spending cuts and tax increases; instead it came after four
years of rapid growth--4.45% on average from 1997 to 2000.
Helping fuel the economy was a capital-gains tax cut that
took effect on Jan. 1, 1997.
The low growth rate during the Obama administration,
averaging 1.36%, is not an accident. If the cost of
regulations are recognized as taxation by other means,
President Obama's first six years of taxes and regulations
(and threats of more of both) have undermined confidence
among entrepreneurs, small business owners, and the investors
that would back them with capital. For the first time in
memory, the number of business entities in America is
actually falling, according to the Census Bureau.
An example of what not to do is the EPA's proposed ozone
rule, which the National Association of Manufacturers
predicts will reduce GDP by $140 billion a year, destroy 1.4
million jobs per year and cost each household $830 per year.
All for health-benefits claims that public-health experts
find questionable.
It's important to be realistic about the future, but 2.3%
growth is fatalistic, not realistic.
[[Page S3847]]
President Obama and the Congress should be agreeing on what
it takes to achieve 3.5% growth. Looking at Social Security
Trustees' reports, 3.5% is the rate of growth required to
ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, with no
tax increases and no benefit cuts.
There are tangible steps we can take toward a pro-growth
economy. One step is to reform the uncompetitive corporate
tax code, as recommended by President Obama's Bipartisan Debt
Commission, among others, including the repatriation of
overseas profits without any additional taxation. Increase
oil and natural gas exports, which the National Association
of Manufacturers estimates would raise 2020 GDP by as much as
1%, while reducing unemployment by 0.5% due to an increase in
manufacturing jobs. Rein in the EPA's animus for fossil
fuels. Replace ObamaCare with a plan that lowers, rather than
raises, the cost of employment, and which does not
incentivize businesses to lay off low-wage workers or cut
their hours.
Congress should devise a plan for 3.5% economic growth.
This isn't wishful thinking. High growth is historically
normal for the United States. It is the present imperative,
it is the only way forward.
Mr. SULLIVAN. The title is ``Dismal Growth Needs the 3.5% Solution.''
He noted that from 1790 to 2014, almost the entire history of our great
Nation, this country grew annually at 3.7 percent GDP growth--3.7
percent. The Obama administration's annual growth rate has been 1.3
percent. Think about that--1.3 percent.
According to the former CBO Director, the difference between 2.5
percent and 3.5 percent growth--just 1 percent GDP growth difference--
will have a huge impact on American families. We would be able to
produce nationally 2.5 million more jobs and the average income in
terms of wages would be $9,000 higher--$9,000 higher. Think about what
you could do with that amount of money. Think about what American
families could do with that amount of money, just by going 1 percent
higher in our growth rate.
Our distinguished colleague from Pennsylvania recently mentioned that
in order to double the standard of living for a family--to double their
income--at 3 percent growth, you can do that in 24 years, or a
generation. That is why every generation of Americans has benefitted
and done better than the previous one, because we have grown at 3, 3.5,
4 percent growth rate. We are doubling our standard of living. At 1
percent growth, which is the Obama growth rate, it takes 72 years to
double your standard of living--72 years. That is the trajectory we are
on.
What is most disturbing about this is that this is a huge issue for
the country. You don't read about it in the press. Heck, last quarter
we shrunk. The economy of the United States, the greatest economy in
the world, shrunk, and there was barely a press report about it. It has
become what people are now referring to as the new normal. Traditional
levels of American growth at 3.5, 4 or 4.5 percent GDP growth--nope, in
the Obama era that is a thing of the past. We are in the new normal
era, with 1.5 percent GDP growth--maybe 2, if we are lucky.
We need to change that. We need to get the traditional levels of
American growth. What is most amazing is that the administration seems
to be just shrugging its shoulders. Oh, we contracted last quarter?
That is no big deal. A 1.5 percent to 2 percent GDP growth for the
entire Obama administration record--that is fine.
But it is a big deal, and it is not fine. We need to change this.
Since 2009, the White House has blamed everything from former George
W. Bush to the weather to climate change to Europe's health to growth
problems in Africa for these slow growth rates. But have you ever heard
the President say: It might be the policies of my own administration.
It might be the fact that we are overregulating every element of this
great economy of ours. They need to stop blaming and start fixing this
economy.
We need to get our country moving again. We have so many comparative
advantages to other countries--so many. We have the greatest
universities in the world right here in America--the greatest
universities in the world compared to any other country. We have
agriculture, farmers who feed the world. We have a high-tech sector
that is the envy of the world. We have a capital markets sector that
commercializes great ideas quicker than any place in the world. We have
natural resources--oil, gas, minerals--that are the envy of the world.
We are producing more natural gas than any place in the world right
now. We are producing more oil than Saudi Arabia right now because our
private sector has innovation, ingenuity, hard work. We have tremendous
advantages that almost any other country would envy.
What we need to do now is unleash this country's might, unleash the
great potential that is the American economy. We need to refuel
America. When we grow our economy, we will protect our country.
We need regulatory reform. Right now the cost of regulations to our
economy according to the President's own Small Business Administration
is close to $2 trillion a year. That is almost $15,000 per American
family. Think about that--$15,000 per family is keeping us down. We
need a competitive tax system. We need to unleash the might of our
private sector through cutting redtape and making sure that we are open
for business, not strangling businesses with redtape from Washington.
I want to emphasize these issues because we have been talking about
the NDAA, the national defense of our country, for the past few days on
the Senate floor, and we are going to be talking about these important
issues next week as well. And they are critical issues, but this is a
critical issue. If we can't grow our economy, if we can't get back to
traditional levels of American growth, we are going to continue to have
challenges. But if we can do this, if we can grow consistently by 4.5
or 5 percent in GDP growth, that is the best way to address our
challenges, our deficit, our $18 trillion debt, our national security
and the funding of our military. We need to focus more on the economy.
This administration has failed the American people on these issues.
We need to unleash the might of this great economy of ours, and we will
keep our country safe by doing so.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
____________________