[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 171 (Tuesday, October 24, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6721-S6730]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    BANKRUPTCY JUDGESHIP ACT OF 2017

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the House message to accompany H.R. 
2266, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       House message to accompany H.R. 2266, a bill to amend title 
     28 of the United States Code to authorize the appointment of 
     additional bankruptcy judges; and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       McConnell motion to concur in the amendment of the House to 
     the amendment of the Senate to the bill.
       McConnell motion to concur in the amendment of the House to 
     the amendment of the Senate to the bill, with McConnell 
     amendment No. 1568, to change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 1569 (to amendment No. 1568), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from California.
  Ms. HARRIS. Mr. President, I thank the minority leader, Senator 
Schumer, for his words of emphasis on the need to ensure that not only 
do our fellow Americans in Florida and Texas receive the relief they so 
dearly and sorely need but also that our fellow Americans in Puerto 
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well, receive the relief

[[Page S6722]]

they need and receive the priority they deserve.
  California has been devastated, frankly, by the wildfires that we 
have just experienced. Ten days ago, I was in Santa Rosa, CA, and 
witnessed firsthand the devastation that took place throughout that 
region and, in particular, in Coffey Park.
  I met with evacuees. I met with firefighters. I met with community 
leaders, elected leaders, and others who traveled to that area out of 
concern and with a desire to help. I met county supervisors, and for 
two of them in particular, Supervisors Gore and Gorin, their entire 
districts were on fire. One of the supervisors even lost her own home. 
Yet they were leading the charge in the recovery efforts and doing so 
in such a selfless way and with such courage.
  Entire communities were devastated, and people have lost everything 
and are still suffering to an incredible extent because of the loss 
they have experienced and the fact that they have not been resettled.
  My heart breaks, as I know all of us feel for the 42 people and their 
families whose lives were ended in these fires. There were 42 people in 
this region who lost their lives. In addition, more than 8,400 homes 
and buildings were destroyed. For example, in Santa Rosa, 5 percent of 
the entire housing stock is gone. Many of the folks in these 
neighborhoods are middle-class families--working families. They are 
plumbers and teachers and first responders who were barely able to meet 
their mortgage. The fires have scorched more than 245,000 acres, and 
100,000 Californians were forced to evacuate.
  I must tell you, I am in awe of the work of the firefighters and 
first responders who fought tirelessly day and night. I heard stories 
of firefighters who worked 80 hours straight to do the work of 
evacuation, ensuring that no lives were lost and no lives were in 
peril. I am in awe of their work.
  I met a firefighter. His first name is Paul, who, when I met him, was 
finally taking a moment of rest from the firefighting he had been 
doing. He was wearing sweatpants and a sweatshirt and flip-flops he 
borrowed from another firefighter because he lost his home and 
everything he had. Yet there he was on the frontlines fighting to make 
sure no other Californians, no other people faced the kind of 
devastation he faced.
  There were more than 11,000 total firefighters who went to the fire. 
Some were from other States and even other countries. They deserve our 
thanks. I stand here in the U.S. Senate to thank them for the work they 
did, coming to California and helping us deal with this crisis.
  First responders and medical professionals did important work as 
well. Fifty-one doctors from Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital who lost 
their homes and possessions still stayed overtime to help crowded 
emergency rooms full of patients. I am uplifted by what I know, and the 
world now sees, which is the character of Californians. People rushed 
to help the elderly in nursing homes evacuate. I heard the story of a 
doctor who used his motorcycle to save newborn babies from a neonatal 
unit.
  Now these folks need our help. Senator Feinstein and I will continue 
to demand FEMA resources, which include the need for housing, 
individual assistance, transportation, and water infrastructure. We 
need to make sure all Californians, regardless of status, can get help 
at the shelters.
  I spoke with DHS Acting Secretary Elaine Duke and confirmed that ICE 
will suspend immigration enforcement in the area until further notice. 
It is our belief, and it is our understanding as Californians, that 
notice will be clear as to when this effort will end, in terms of not 
enforcing immigration. We want to be clear when it is going to start so 
we can tell Californians because right now they are trusting DHS's word 
that this immigration enforcement has been suspended. We are told that 
FEMA, through Elaine Duke, will also support emergency packages that 
provide disaster relief for the hurricanes in Texas, Florida, Puerto 
Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
  California is resilient and will rebuild, but we need help. More than 
12,000 constituents have contacted our office, and we will continue to 
work with FEMA, HUD, the Small Business Administration, and the USDA to 
ensure that those affected in my State will get all the relief that is 
necessary.
  Congress needs to fund programs like community development block 
grants and section 8 housing to help provide affordable housing for 
low- and middle-class residents. They need the help to find affordable 
housing. California is facing an affordable housing crisis like many 
other States in our country, and this is something that has been 
highlighted by the devastation these various States and territories 
have experienced recently, but it is an ongoing issue we must deal 
with.
  We cannot stop there. We need larger supplemental emergency packages 
that include helping California. This has to be a long-term commitment. 
California is experiencing the worst fires in history, and they are 
becoming more frequent. In the 1980s, fires burned and wildfires burned 
under 25 acres, on average. Now typical wildfires will burn over 100 
acres. California's 2017 fire season has not yet ended, and it has 
already burned more acres than the average for the past 5 years. In 
Southern California, from Kern County to San Diego, red flag warnings 
are occurring as we speak. There are currently up to 55 mile-an-hour 
winds and warm, dry weather, with no humidity or very little humidity. 
These are the conditions that were at play during the most recent 
wildfire crisis.
  We must also look at the future and how we can prevent wildfires from 
reaching this magnitude as we go forward. We must pass the Wildfire 
Disaster Funding Act.
  Today, over half of the U.S. Forest Service budget is dedicated to 
combating wildfires, compared to just 13 percent of the budget in 1993. 
The wildfires are treated differently than floods or hurricanes. The 
Forest Service is not allowed to use general disaster relief funds at 
FEMA, and that makes no sense.
  Prevention is cheaper than reaction. The U.S. Forest Service 
estimated that there are 6.3 billion dead trees in the Western States. 
Removing them would improve safety by mitigating wildfires. Also, it 
would have an economic benefit and create jobs. There are certain 
bills, and the bill I mentioned, that will help achieve this because it 
will allow the Forest Service to dedicate part of the budget to forest 
management and not just reacting.
  We must listen to the experts. For example, CAL FIRE agrees. Too 
often, States are picking up the bill for prevention in forest 
management, and we should make it very clear that fires are not 
partisan. This bill I mentioned, the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act, is 
a bipartisan bill, and it should be inserted cleanly into the next 
supplemental emergency package.
  Finally, let's recognize the connection between these disasters and 
climate change. California is leading the way and preparing for 
increasing wildfires, but the Federal Government needs to do its part. 
Natural disasters from fires to hurricanes, to floods do not 
discriminate by region or by party. We must help each other when these 
travesties hit, but also we must prepare for the future.
  In closing, I would suggest and urge our colleagues to pass the 
supplemental bill and future emergency resources, ensure that Federal 
agencies deliver prompt help on the ground, and pass the Wildfire 
Disaster Funding Act.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, just as the Senator from California has 
outlined the needs of her State, having been hit by a natural disaster, 
so, too, natural disasters, not wildfires--although we have had plenty 
in Florida--but hurricanes have hit other States.
  Yesterday, this Senator spoke at length about the effects on a 
particular industry, the citrus industry. I showed pictures of 75 
percent to 90 percent of the fruit on the ground. This Senator made a 
unanimous consent request to include a bipartisan amendment to get 
money for agriculture, not just in Florida but Texas, Puerto Rico, the 
Virgin Islands, and the wildfires in California into the package--
specifically, about $3 billion for agriculture. The losses in Florida's 
agriculture are $2.5 billion, of which three-fourths of a billion is 
just losses to citrus growers.
  That is all the bad news because the unanimous consent request was 
rejected. The good news is, although the

[[Page S6723]]

White House rejected it, they made a promise to put it in a continuing 
supplemental emergency appropriations in November for all these natural 
disasters and get that funding in there for agriculture. Some of us on 
both sides of this aisle, in order to make sure that promise is kept, 
have put a hold on the nominee for Deputy Budget Director. I will take 
the White House at its word, and this ought to all be worked out in 
November. That was the subject of my address to the Senate yesterday, 
along with my colleague Senator Rubio from Florida, as we talked about 
the losses particularly to agriculture.
  Today I want to talk about how a month after the hurricane in Puerto 
Rico and 2 months after the hurricane in Florida, the aftermath is not 
going so swimmingly because people are not getting the assistance they 
need. Mind you, this is 2 months after the hurricanes. People lost all 
the food in their freezer because they didn't have any power. They are 
supposed to get assistance in order to be able to buy food. If you are 
living paycheck to paycheck and you don't have a paycheck, you don't 
have any money to buy food. Therefore, you should get financial 
assistance from FEMA and the USDA. Yet you ought to see the lines in 
Miami, in Orlando, in Tampa, and in Belle Glade, and then they are 
cutting off the lines. The people who are getting cut out are going 
without food. So we have a long way to go.
  The USDA's Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, called 
D-SNAP, is supposed to help all of our people recover from losses 
incurred by Irma by making short-term assistance available. It is 
especially important for families who are low income, who don't have 
income, or they are not getting a paycheck. Now they are saddled with 
unexpected repairs like a storm-damaged roof. They spent money 
evacuating or they lost wages during the storm, or they lost power and 
lost all the food in their freezer. Some people buy food in bulk 
because they can get it cheaper and store it in the freezer. Then, bam. 
It is all gone because there is no power.
  There were 50,000 people waiting at a center in South Florida, and 
many were turned away after waiting in the heat for hours and hours. 
The next day it was the same story in another city I didn't mention, 
Delray Beach. The people are getting desperate.
  I thank FEMA for everything it has done. I thank the Congress for 
doing the first supplemental in September that was intended originally 
for Harvey in Texas but along came Irma in Florida. I thank the 
Congress for the additional supplemental we just passed last night, but 
the administration of all these programs for assistance to people is 
not going so well.
  Let's take another example. You get on the phone and you call FEMA. 
You are supposed to get a FEMA representative, and you have to wait. If 
that is because FEMA needs more people on a short-term basis to handle 
the amount of calls, well, FEMA, let's get it going.
  What happens if you are calling because you need to have a FEMA 
representative come to your house to inspect your house so you can then 
get the necessary individual assistance to help you? You are waiting 
for assistance as to when a housing inspector can come and visit the 
home. Once you get through on the telephone, the last time we checked, 
the expected wait time to get a housing inspector is 45 days. That is 
too long for families to wait for an inspector to come because these 
Floridians are stuck living in damaged homes. Their homes have gotten 
wet, and, therefore, the mold and the mildew has built up, and they 
don't have any place else to go. They don't have any income to go down 
to one of the air-conditioned hotels, and they are still waiting for 
the FEMA inspector to come and inspect their home so they can get 
qualified to get the assistance that, in fact, they are due under the 
law. Our people can't access certain forms of FEMA assistance until the 
inspection is complete. I am told that FEMA has indeed increased the 
number of housing inspectors on the ground, but this process has to be 
expedited.

  This isn't the only delay that is causing a very serious threat to 
health and to safety in Florida. FEMA has been very slow to bring in 
manufactured homes, mobile homes. Why? Because a lot of people's homes 
and/or mobile homes were so damaged, they can't go back and live there, 
so they get temporary assistance. They go into, hopefully, some air-
conditioned place, such as an existing apartment complex or, per 
chance, a hotel. But what if you are in the Florida Keys? What if you 
are in the Keys, where there are not enough hotels and motels? In fact, 
there are not a lot of apartments.
  By the way, the service industry is necessary to revive the tourism 
industry in the Keys, as an example, because that is the lifeblood of 
the economy, and the service industry has no place in which to live 
because their trailers are history.
  I wish I had a picture here to show you of a mobile home park just 
north of Big Pine Key that I went to. There was not one mobile home 
that was upright. They were either all on their side, or they were 
upside down. It is not unusual because these are the Keys. The 
hurricane came right off the water, a category 4. But FEMA isn't 
getting those mobile homes, those manufactured homes, in as temporary 
assistance.
  Understand, the example I gave is of the Florida Keys. There is one 
way in and one way out. But you have to compensate for that. In the 
meantime, people are suffering, and people are hurting.
  The redtape should not stop anyone in this country from having a safe 
place to live. I urge FEMA to expedite the transporting of these units 
all over Florida, to Florida communities, and filling them up so that 
Floridians have a place to live that is safe and clean.
  I say to my friend from New Jersey, if what is going on in Florida 
isn't bad enough, what about Puerto Rico? Right now, more than a month 
after the hurricane, 80 percent of the island still doesn't have power. 
I didn't go into the urbanized parts of San Juan, although I was there 
and did look around; I flew into the mountains, into the little town of 
Utuado. For 2\1/2\ weeks, they were cut off. They didn't have a road to 
get up there for 2\1/2\ weeks.
  I say to my friend from Washington, in Puerto Rico, would you believe 
that over a month after the hurricane, 30 percent still do not have 
potable water? In Utuado, in the mountains, I saw them going up to a 
pipe to get water that was flowing down through the mountains. This 
wasn't necessarily potable water, but it was the only thing they had. 
They were lining up with their plastic jars and plastic buckets.
  Hospitals in Puerto Rico are rationing services. They are forgoing 
optional operations. They are making difficult decisions on 
prioritizing patients because of limited medication, and limited 
facilities, fuel, communications, and power. Dialysis centers are 
desperate to get clean enough water so that they can process the 
dialysis for kidney patients.
  Clearly, more needs to be done to help the people of Puerto Rico in 
addition to the people in Florida and all the other States.
  I urge my colleagues to remember the plight of Americans trying to 
put their lives together after a major disaster.
  We have heard the Senator from California make a plea about the 
wildfires. You have heard this Senator make a plea for Florida, Puerto 
Rico, and the Virgin Islands. We have heard the Texas delegation make a 
plea for Texas. We all have to come together in this time of need and 
pass a robust and comprehensive aid bill. We hope the White House will 
be true to its promise that the additional aid, particularly for 
agriculture, will be put in the November emergency supplement. There 
should be absolutely no ambiguity that the Federal Government intends 
to provide all the necessary assistance to make our people whole.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Thank you, Mr. President.
  As we speak, millions of Americans are working to put their lives 
back together after what has been an especially devastating series of 
disasters, from hurricanes that caused unprecedented flooding, which 
the Senator from Florida just spoke about, the catastrophic damage 
there, to deadly wildfires that have scorched communities across the 
West. From Santa Rosa to San Juan, there are countless families who 
need a hand up right now,

[[Page S6724]]

and we have to be there for them, including our fellow Americans in 
Puerto Rico, where a vast majority of families on the island are still 
without power or access to clean water, as we just heard.
  I am glad we will soon take up a relief package to send resources to 
help our neighbors in need, many of whom have lost everything. I am 
glad, as you will hear from many of our colleagues on the floor today, 
that this is not the end of our commitment to those affected by these 
recent disasters but, rather, a downpayment on what we know will be a 
very long road to recovery for many devastated regions. But I challenge 
my colleagues to do one better. Not only could we address the 
longstanding fisheries disaster that continues to cause hardship for 
the men and women of our fishing industry and our Tribal communities, 
we could also fix the flawed way this country fights wildfires.
  For far too long, the U.S. Forest Service has been forced to use up 
its budget fighting wildfires every season, only to have no funds left 
over to work on preventing them. This is a very dangerous cycle and a 
disservice to so many communities in the West. It has only gotten worse 
as climate change takes hold, which means our wildfires have grown more 
massive in size and intensity in recent years. I urge my colleagues to 
treat wildfires like the disaster they are.
  I hope we all take this moment to acknowledge all of our neighbors 
affected by disaster, even if they don't make the front page of the 
paper. Let's use this opportunity to get the policy right and help out 
all our neighbors in need.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I am grateful to be joining with a lot of 
my colleagues today to talk about the urgency and the importance of 
what has happened in the aftermath of horrific hurricanes--Hurricane 
Harvey more than 2 months ago and Hurricane Irma and Hurricane Maria 
over a month ago. They have wreaked havoc on millions of lives. They 
have destroyed billions of dollars of property. They have created pain, 
suffering, and loss--loss of life everywhere from Texas, to Florida, to 
Puerto Rico, to the U.S. Virgin Islands.
  Right now, too many of our citizens are still living in not just 
unacceptable conditions for an American, but they are really living on 
the brink of homelessness--food and water insecurity, scarcity, and 
facing the ravages of poverty, where you have lost everything and you 
are in a dependent state, dependent upon relief aid, dependent upon 
your neighbors.
  Thousands of families have lost everything, and I believe they have 
yet to receive the kind of support they deserve from their government. 
Governments were formed in this country. This Nation was founded on 
this ideal of common defense. It is literally written into our founding 
documents, this idea that we are coming together for the protection and 
the strength of our communities. Right now, we are not doing enough, 
and that is not the American way.
  I have seen it. During the storm that hit New Jersey, Superstorm 
Sandy, I still remember seeing us at our best, seeing neighbors open 
their homes, reaching out to one another. They were Americans standing 
up for Americans and not worrying about what their political parties 
were, not worrying about the risk there might be to themselves.
  In fact, I still remember, as the storm was still raging, driving 
around my city in an SUV, checking in. I was coming up a hill, and I 
got a call from the President of the United States checking in on 
Newark. As the hurricane was beginning to leave, as the superstorm was 
beginning to leave, I got a call right after that from Governor Chris 
Christie expressing the same empathy, the same concern, checking in to 
see how I was doing.
  I remember coming up on a hill, and just as I was finishing the last 
of those two conversations--talking to the most powerful person on the 
planet, the President, and the most powerful person in our State, the 
Governor; two different parties, two different backgrounds, but they 
are Americans--I remember coming up to a street corner where a massive 
tree had fallen, had torn down lines, and I saw a person in a raincoat 
standing there by the lines trying to wave me by to make sure my SUV 
didn't hit what could have been a live wire. I pulled the car over to 
the side in the wind and the rain, and I saw that it was an elderly man 
standing there in the streets feeling as if it was his obligation to 
protect his community. I stood there in the rain and looked at this 
elderly, African-American man who was standing there trying to protect 
people who were driving through and thought to myself: I talked to the 
most powerful guy in the country. I talked to the most powerful person 
in my State. But the true power that I saw was in an American who was 
working to take care of his community in a time of trial.
  That was the spirit that stayed with me and lifted me during this 
crisis when I was staying up day after day--seeing his commitment to 
his community.
  Martin Luther King said so eloquently that the ultimate measure of a 
man--and I would like to expand that and change that for a second--the 
ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in moments of 
comfort and convenience but where they stand at times of challenge and 
controversy. That is where we are right now.
  Tens of millions of us are very comfortable right now. This is a time 
of comfort and convenience for many. I got up this morning, I turned on 
my shower, and hot water came out. When I opened my fridge, there was 
food there. But how can we sit idly by while there is an urgency going 
on of epic proportions?
  Let me tell you about Puerto Rico. As my friend from Florida said, 80 
percent of their island remains without power. I saw firsthand what 1 
week without power did in my community. It literally led to the deaths 
of people--not the storm itself, but the lack of power was directly 
related to the deaths in the city of which I was mayor. There are 
people who don't have access to things we take for granted, whether it 
be a bank account or food. It was profoundly stated by my colleague 
that just access to clean water--right now, there are people who are 
falling ill and dying in Puerto Rico because of a lack of access to 
clean water. Sanitation systems, water, roads, bridges, electric 
grids--all of these urgently need Federal investment.

  One of my staffers has a son who is a medic in the Puerto Rico 
National Guard, and he has told her that people in hospitals have died. 
The loss of life, the loss of American lives--our fellow citizens have 
died because of their lack of access to electricity and the lack of 
access to oxygen.
  We are Americans. I know our character. I know our spirit. But right 
now, there are hundreds of thousands of people in our country who are 
suffering. They may not be proximate to us in geography; they may not 
be next to us in sight. But the spirit we need right now is the spirit 
of that man standing in the storm, watching over his neighbors, 
watching over people passing through, being there for their own.
  We have work to do. We have an urgency. Where children are suffering 
without the basics, where schools are closed, where crops have been 
destroyed, where access to food has been destroyed, we have work to do. 
So my sense of urgency right now is believing that, as a first step, we 
must have a comprehensive aid package--not just to help our fellow 
Americans in Florida and Texas where there are urgent crises still 
going on. The gravity of the pain and suffering in the Virgin Islands 
and in Puerto Rico right now is unimaginable for those of us who are 
not experiencing it, and it is unacceptable for us, as Americans, not 
to be there for our fellow citizens.
  We are just 5 days away from the fifth anniversary of the storm that 
hit New Jersey, and we have made great strides in New Jersey over the 
past 5 years. But the reality is that today in New Jersey, we are still 
recovering from that storm.
  This is going to be a long process, an urgent process. It is going to 
be a process that necessitates resilience, necessitates endurance, and 
necessitates persistence. But it starts with this body, the Congress of 
the United States of America, putting together an aid package that 
includes direct grant funding for rebuilding our country. For Puerto 
Rico and the Virgin Islands, it

[[Page S6725]]

must include making sure the island is strong enough. From 
telecommunications, to energy sources, to schools, we must make sure 
that the aid package includes all that is necessary for these islands 
to stand up again and get to work for the many months and years to come 
of rebuilding.
  I support my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I am encouraged 
by the spirit I encountered that night, having a Democratic President 
and Republican Governor call me as concerned Americans. But the spirit 
I call on tonight is that of the elderly Black guy on a street in a 
storm who said: The storms may howl; the rain may come; the water may 
rise. But when it comes to my country, I will stand for America and 
stand for Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria have 
left a path of destruction along the Texas gulf coast, Florida, and 
Puerto Rico. The damage caused by these storms will be felt for many 
years to come.
  This emergency supplemental is another step forward to recovery for 
the millions of Americans who call these places home. But I want to 
remind my colleagues that there is still an ongoing natural disaster in 
the West that is leaving families displaced, costing taxpayers billions 
of dollars, destroying structures, and taking human lives.
  As of today, 5,000 firefighters are still battling more than a 
quarter of a million acres of wildfires burning across the West.
  In my home State of Montana, despite an early snowfall, families this 
last weekend in Musselshell County were forced to evacuate after a fire 
ripped through a dry landscape and put their homes and livelihoods at 
risk.
  In California, more than 8,000 structures have been lost to wildfires 
this year alone, and with temperatures expected to be in the 90s all 
week, there doesn't seem to be any end in sight.
  Across the country, in total, fires have burned nearly 9 million 
acres--significantly more than the yearly average--and 1.2 million of 
those acres are in Montana. These fires have cost the taxpayers nearly 
$3 billion to date.
  Quite frankly, these wildfires have been devastating in Montana and 
in States across the West. It is critically important that we take 
quick action to mitigate the damage caused by these fires and get 
communities back on their feet.
  The funds in this emergency package will reimburse the Forest Service 
for the funds borrowed to fight wildfires. When the Forest Service has 
to borrow from its nonfire accounts to cover firefighting on the 
ground, we lose out on critical maintenance, mitigation, and 
restoration work. This funding will pay back those accounts and support 
the work needed to recover after a recordbreaking fire season. This 
funding can help restore the trails and roads that were lost in fires, 
as well as keep our fishing streams clean and clear from runoff this 
spring. It will get folks back in the woods, thinning, cutting, and 
removing debris. It can provide the Forest Service with the resources 
to quickly salvage the dead and dying trees that are still usable and 
get that timber into our local mills.
  Unfortunately, though, this bill fails to provide a long-term budget 
fix to pay to fight wildfires. Fire seasons are getting longer and more 
intense, which is quickly transforming the Forest Service from a forest 
management agency into a forest firefighting agency.
  Folks, our climate is changing. History is telling us that our fire 
seasons are becoming more intense and they are becoming longer. Longer 
fire seasons will mean more borrowing from the Forest Service to fight 
these wildfires. We need a long-term fix.
  Fires are burning a hole through the Forest Service budget, which too 
often leaves our forests unmanaged and at further risk for more 
catastrophic fires in the future. Money that should be used to curb the 
fire risks, maintain and improve forest health, research and develop 
better forest policies, and fund the work that must get done to make 
our forests more resilient is borrowed to fight wildfires. We must 
change the way we are paying for fighting wildfires.
  The bipartisan Wildfire Disaster Funding Act is one step toward that 
fix. We must keep pressing forward to get this bill signed into law. 
Then we need to adjust the disaster budget cap to make sure this is 
truly a long-term fix.
  As I said, this bill doesn't contain all of the answers we need to 
reduce wildfires, but it is no doubt a step in the right direction. It 
lets the Forest Service treat wildfires just like other natural 
disasters. This means more reliable support for forest management 
projects and emergency funding for catastrophic wildfire seasons.
  These important wildfire and forest resources, combined with 
providing the necessary FEMA, flood insurance, and food assistance to 
those displaced by hurricanes, will take us a major step forward after 
a series of devastating natural disasters. But I want to underscore 
that we aren't at the finish line yet, and I will work with Chairman 
Boozman on the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee to ensure 
that all Montanans and all Americans impacted by natural disasters 
aren't left waiting for Congress to act.
  Folks from both parties are going to have to work together to ensure 
that every community impacted by hurricanes, floods, and fires will 
have the resources to recover and turn the page. Americans directly 
impacted by these natural disasters continue to wake up each morning 
displaced, hungry, without power, and surrounded by destruction. 
Congress must remain diligent and ensure these communities have the 
support that they need and that they deserve.
  Finally, I will just say this: We are here today talking about the 
disaster funding bill. We are talking about the disaster funding bill 
because disasters are becoming more and more common. It is not going to 
change. We need to address the root cause of this, which is an ever-
changing climate. Until we do, we are going to continue to see taxpayer 
dollars go out the door for disasters year after year.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Strange). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       GAO Climate Change Report

  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to talk 
about a GAO report, or a Government Accountability Office report, that 
is being released today, which says that the cost and impact to the 
Federal Government of climate change is in the billions of dollars. In 
fact, it is in the hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 5 
years, and, over the next decade-plus, it is in the trillions of 
dollars.
  Why is this so astounding? It is astounding because we have not had 
the Government Accountability Office outline for us before what the 
impacts of climate costs the U.S. taxpayers, what it costs the Federal 
Government, and that we are paying an astronomical cost. Right now we 
are discussing the supplemental, and we can see the costs of the damage 
we have experienced from storms, damage from wildfires, and damages 
from other kinds of events and how much it costs the Federal 
Government. The GAO took the last 2 years to develop this report after 
receiving a letter from me and Senator Collins of Maine to say that we 
wanted to understand these costs.
  Why did we do this? The Senator from Maine and I have long been 
advocates of looking at issues of adaptation and mitigation. We can 
debate all we want about what people think the impacts are of climate 
and what drives it. What we are here today to say is that we know that 
it is costing billions of dollars, and, as stewards of the taxpayers' 
money, we ought to do a better job at adaptation and mitigation. That 
is why we sent the letter, and that is why, probably 7 or 8 years ago, 
she and I started working to try to encourage various agencies that are 
most impacted by this to do a better job at adaptation and mitigation.
  For us in the Pacific Northwest, we got to this point because we saw 
a shellfish industry almost devastated by the level of ocean 
acidification caused by changes in temperature. It was so

[[Page S6726]]

much so that we had to help the shellfish industry with science and 
research. If we wanted to keep a shellfish industry, we had to look at 
the science behind the seeding and do it at specific times when there 
was the right chemistry balance in the water. This incredible economy 
is enjoyed by so many Americans. The Washington shellfish industry that 
we have--five generations, six generations of families in that 
industry--was almost lost because of these changes.
  Also, as a State that has a great deal of hydropower and very cost-
efficient electricity, a 1-degree temperature change means a lot too in 
terms of snowpack--20 percent less snowpack. It means a lot to us for 
the challenges we face in keeping affordable electricity rates.
  When it comes to fire, we have certainly taken it on the chin with 
two unbelievable back-to-back fire years, with unfortunate loss of life 
and billions of dollars of economic loss impacting both the Federal 
Government and to local communities.
  What we are saying is that we can do better. We need to recognize 
these costs and the impact and do a better job of planning for them in 
the future. That is why one of the things that I have done with my 
colleagues--Senator Murray from Washington, Senators Risch and Crapo 
from Idaho, and Senators Merkley and Wyden from Oregon--was to 
introduce a bill to help reduce our risk when it comes to fire seasons 
and what we can do to better protect our communities. That is the kind 
of planning and adaptation that we think we need to address.
  Today's report cannot be ignored. It cannot be ignored that the 
Federal Government is going to have to spend this much money dealing 
with the impacts of climate. That is what the Government Accountability 
Office is saying. It says we need a better plan. We need to reduce 
costs. We need to look at these impacts and make sure that we as a 
nation are putting every resource into this. Otherwise, we really will 
be spending trillions of dollars.
  That trajectory is real. That is what the GAO report says--hundreds 
of billions of dollars now and trillions in the future, but if we would 
simply recognize these impacts and start addressing them by having 
agencies recognize climate and plan for it, both in terms of adaptation 
and mitigation, I guarantee you that we can save the taxpayers money.
  I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will heed this 
report. This report is saying that climate is impacting us, the Federal 
Government. It is costing us a great deal of money. I guarantee you 
that it is money we would rather have to focus on whatever issues my 
colleagues would like to focus on--whether it is education, job 
training, or any of the other issues that someone might want to 
address, such as healthcare. We cannot afford to continue to pay this 
kind of money while not dealing with climate.
  Impacts and costs are only going to accelerate. That is the scary 
thing. The GAO report says these numbers are going to increase for the 
future. Can we at least sit down at the table and talk about the ways--
just like on fire, just like on flooding, just like on drought--to plan 
strategies for how we can work together to mitigate these impacts? I 
guarantee you, if we don't, this bill is going to continue to rise and 
the conflicts are going to get worse.
  If you look at this year alone--even though I am saying it is $600 
billion over the next 5 to 10 years and trillions over the next 20--we 
will probably see $300 billion in economic impacts in Texas, Florida, 
and Puerto Rico.
  What is the conclusion I am drawing? I think the report is very 
clear. The research is very clear. One thing that is happening, as the 
climate changes, is that there are more intense weather events. These 
intense weather events are presenting challenges like we have never 
seen before. These challenges and the devastation that caused them are 
something that we need to take into consideration in the future.
  Certainly, we need better science. We shouldn't rely on the European 
weather agency to give us the best, most accurate information about 
storms and weather. We should do that ourselves. We should use the 
great research that is being done at the labs in Tennessee on climate 
and what we can do to best prepare our Nation. We need to come to the 
table when it comes to the issues of drought and plan for strategies 
that work and work successfully now, not wait another 20 years and have 
the cost be even more astronomical.
  I thank my colleague from Maine for joining this effort of getting 
this documentation by the Government Accountability Office. We need to 
take their accounting very seriously and start doing things that will 
help us reduce the risk, lower the cost, better protect our 
communities, and give the taxpayers a sense that we are not leaving 
them to devastation and storms every year but that we are coming up 
with better strategies to save lives and to save dollars.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague 
and friend Senator Cantwell to discuss a new GAO report on the cost of 
climate change.
  As our Nation begins to recover and rebuild from the devastation of 
Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and Nate, as well as from the wildfires 
that are sweeping across the West, we cannot ignore the impact of 
climate change on our public health, our environment, and our economy. 
Most of the past focus of the impact of climate change has been on 
public health and the environment--important to be sure--but there has 
not been nearly enough analysis of the consequences for our economy and 
for the Federal budget, in particular.
  In 2007, I first became interested in the cost of climate change when 
Senator Joe Lieberman and I headed the Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs Committee. We commissioned a report by the GAO to 
look at the fiscal risk of climate change for both the Flood Insurance 
Program and the Federal Crop Insurance Program. Our request was an 
attempt to sound the alarm that there were very significant fiscal 
consequences to the Federal Government for failing to take action.
  The report found that the Department of Agriculture and the 
Department of Homeland Security can and should do better jobs of 
assessing the fiscal impacts that unchecked global warming will have on 
the taxpayer-funded Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and the National 
Flood Insurance Program. In addition, the report revealed that 
insurance programs had not developed a long-term strategy to deal with 
the effects of global climate change, putting them far behind private 
insurers that have incorporated these risks into their overall 
assessments.
  According to a 2014 GAO report, the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency, FEMA, and the Risk Management Agency commissioned some climate 
change studies in order to better prepare for potential climate 
effects.
  To build upon this important work, 2 years ago, Senator Cantwell and 
I asked the GAO to conduct a comprehensive study on the costs and risks 
to the U.S. Government from climate change and to evaluate policy 
actions that could be taken by the Federal Government to address these 
financial consequences. After 2 years of indepth, nonpartisan analysis, 
the GAO publicly released the results of its findings this morning, and 
they are astonishing. The GAO estimates that, by the year 2039, climate 
change will cost U.S. taxpayers more than $1 trillion. In just this 
past year alone, the economic losses will, almost certainly, exceed 
$300 billion.
  In Maine, our economy is inextricably linked to the environment. We 
are experiencing a real change in sea life, which has serious 
implications for the livelihoods of many people in our State, including 
those who work in our iconic lobster industry. With warming waters, 
lobsters are migrating into deeper waters, which poses more risks to 
our lobstermen and lobersterwomen. Additionally, Casco Bay, which is 
where Portland is located, has experienced an invasion of green crabs, 
which are not native to Maine and are devastating some of our other sea 
life population. This change in the Maine waters could be detrimental 
to our State's economy.

[[Page S6727]]

  I am also very concerned about the excessively high rate of asthma in 
my State. According to public health physicians, this is due to air 
pollution that comes into our State. Now, Maine is not a coal-burning 
State, but the emissions from other States are causing the changes in 
sea life and are also contributing to the public health epidemic of a 
very high rate of asthma. The fact is, Maine is located at the end of 
our Nation's tailpipe, and we get emissions blown in from other States, 
which affects our economy and the health of our citizens.
  The Federal Government cannot afford the billions of dollars in 
additional funding that is going to be needed if we do not take into 
account and start acting on the serious consequences of climate change. 
Spending more than $300 billion each year, in response to severe 
weather events that are connected to warming waters and producing 
stronger hurricanes, is simply not a solution.
  I hope the release of this new GAO analysis will encourage all of us 
to think more broadly about this issue, take a harder look at the 
economic consequences of climate change, and then use this analysis to 
inform Federal policy. We need to support practices and policies that 
promote resilience and reduce risk and exposure to weather-related 
losses for the Federal Government, for States, and for local 
communities.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, soon the Senate will pass a supplemental 
appropriations bill that provides much needed relief for folks across 
the country who are recovering from hurricane and wildfire devastation. 
While some of these resources will impact Texans who are recovering 
from Hurricane Harvey, I stress that much more will be needed in my 
State.
  I will make one point abundantly clear, which is that Harvey has not 
been permanently handled in Texas. It is not over and done with, and it 
is not time to just move on. There was the storm, and now there is the 
storm after the storm.
  Nearly 2 months after the hurricane--the most extreme rain event in 
U.S. history--many Texans are still waiting for normalcy to return to 
their debris-littered lawns and their torn-up living rooms, to their 
daily routines, their workplaces, their children's schools. The waters 
may have receded, but their troubles have not.
  I have read, for example, about people having to wait 2, 3, or 4 
hours before they can actually even speak to Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, FEMA, representatives, who themselves are 
overwhelmed with requests that are related not only to Hurricane Harvey 
but to Hurricane Irma's devastation in Florida and to Maria's flooding 
in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Never before do I remember 
a series of natural disasters hitting our Nation in such quick 
succession.
  Yet I know, even as the inspectors are still evaluating damaged 
properties--moving as quickly as they can--FEMA is hiring hundreds of 
additional staff in the next few weeks to help with the backlog. I am 
hopeful this will help my fellow Texans, who have grown frustrated and 
discouraged by the procedural hurdles. As of Sunday, three shelters 
remain open in Texas, and over 60,000 people are living in hotels 
because their homes--reeking of mold--are still not ready, and they 
will not be for months.
  A teacher I heard about is living on a cot in her classroom while her 
house undergoes repairs. The mayor of Rockport, one of the most 
devastated communities along the gulf coast, has said that perhaps one-
third of the destroyed areas in his town may never be rebuilt. Hundreds 
of businesses have yet to reopen, and if they don't, it will make 
matters much tougher on local residents than they already are. The 
number of houses yet to be repaired is even larger than the number of 
businesses. The mayor of Port Aransas says that 75 percent of the homes 
in his community--three-quarters, just imagine--were severely damaged 
or destroyed. These are just a few of the reasons the situation demands 
ongoing attention, as well as the full extent of government resources.
  Last month Congress got started--that was before subsequent 
hurricanes occurred--and the first wave of disaster relief was $15.25 
billion. Then the House passed the second wave, a $36.5 billion 
disaster relief package to replenish FEMA's nearly depleted coffers and 
to address the National Flood Insurance Program, which should help pay 
some Texas claims.
  Here in the Senate, the cloture vote on this second wave was 
yesterday, and I am glad we moved to end debate. It is clear to me that 
Texas will need significant additional Federal assistance for our 
recovery efforts. As I have told folks back home, we don't expect to be 
treated any better than anyone else, but we are not going to be treated 
any worse.
  Last week, I spoke with President Trump and OMB Director Rick 
Mulvaney, and they made a commitment to me that there would be another 
funding request coming over in mid-November that would include Texas-
specific hurricane relief. I realize that the folks impacted by Irma 
and Maria are also reeling, as well, and we want to make sure that we 
are locking arms with all of our colleagues who represent the areas hit 
by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, and also those hit by the 
wildfires out West. We are working together.
  I appreciate the President's pledge, and I will continue to work with 
Senator Cruz and with Governor Abbott to make sure that Texas has what 
it needs, not only to make a full recovery but a timely one as well.


                               Tax Reform

  Mr. President, at lunch, the President of the United States will be 
joining us to discuss a different but very important topic, and that is 
Federal tax reform. We want to make sure that hard-working Americans 
get to keep more of what they earn in their paycheck and that we can 
help them improve their standard of living by reducing their tax 
burden.
  We passed a budget resolution last week that was step one to getting 
where we need to be. So I am excited the President is joining us today, 
and I look forward to hearing his ideas. It is important that we all 
pull together to accomplish this joint goal. We appreciate his 
engagement on the issue, which has been clear from day one.


                  Congressional Review Act Resolution

  Finally, Mr. President, I would like to bring up one additional 
matter that we will be voting on soon, and that is the repeal of the 
recent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule, which governs how 
community banks, among others, resolve disputes with consumers. This 
rule that the CFPB issued bans using arbitration. Arbitration is a 
widely accepted method of resolving disputes between consumers and 
banks and other financial institutions, and it actually increases the 
benefit that flows to the consumer, as opposed to the alternatives, 
which are class action lawsuits that enrich lawyers, whereas consumers 
get pennies on the dollar.
  The CFPB's own data shows that the rule would transfer hundreds of 
millions of dollars from businesses to plaintiffs' lawyers over the 
next 5 years. According to a recent Treasury report, the rule could 
generate 3,000 additional class action lawsuits over the next 5 years, 
costing businesses $500 million in defense fees alone and obviously 
enriching those who would benefit more than the consumers themselves; 
that is, their lawyers.
  The CFPB data itself shows that the vast majority of class action 
lawsuits delivered next to no relief to the class in question--
consumers. And the Treasury report found that the agency, the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau, failed to consider much less onerous 
alternatives, like increased disclosure or a more limited ban.
  I have been around long enough to remember that back in the eighties 
there was a movement called alternative dispute resolution, led by the 
Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, who pointed out that while 
access to courts was absolutely critical, unfortunately, because of the 
delay and expense of litigation, alternative dispute resolution 
mechanisms could actually benefit consumers more if they chose to 
resort to those alternative dispute mechanisms, and that is exactly 
what arbitration is. I believe that the CFPB has gone above and beyond 
its authority in eliminating this very meaningful way for consumers to 
get compensated when they get involved in disputes with their bank or 
other financial institutions, and there is no reason for us to enrich a 
class of lawyers who bring these lawsuits and see consumers end

[[Page S6728]]

up with pennies on the dollar, which is what the status quo would 
permit.
  Thankfully, we have the power of the Congressional Review Act to 
overturn the rule, as the House has already done. I urge my colleagues 
to repeal the CFPB arbitration rule so that we can get rid of this 
harmful regulation, which imposes obvious costs and offers invisible 
benefits.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I want to begin by paying tribute to 
the people of Puerto Rico, who have been through unimaginable 
disaster--a natural disaster not of their making and a financial 
disaster that is not any more their fault than the hurricane they have 
endured. They have persevered and, indeed, now are surviving and even 
thriving, despite the hurdles placed in their way by the humongous 
storm that destroyed parts of their island. In fact, even now, at least 
a quarter of their water is undrinkable, more than 80 percent of their 
electricity is down, many of their roads are unpassable, their schools 
are largely closed, and their island is paralyzed or, at least, largely 
paralyzed as far as economic progress and job creation are concerned.
  They don't deserve this fate. They are Americans. They fought in our 
wars. I have been privileged to spend time with the Borinqueneers and 
led the effort to award them a Congressional Gold Medal as a sign of 
their patriotism and their dedication to our country.
  They are not only Americans; they are patriotic Americans. So, too, 
are the first responders, military, and others from States around the 
country who have gone to Puerto Rico to help with relief. I want to 
recognize their courage, sacrifice, and service to our Nation.
  The National Guard from Connecticut has gone to the island to help 
with National Guard from at least 13 States. There are thousands of 
them now, and they are working with men and women on the ground from 
FEMA, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security 
generally, and our military. They deserve our thanks. Yet, for all that 
heroic work, this Nation is failing Puerto Rico. Americans are on the 
verge of failing fellow Americans.
  Puerto Rico has a population of about 3.4 million people, roughly the 
size of Connecticut. If the humanitarian crisis now ongoing in Puerto 
Rico had occurred in Connecticut, there would be an outcry and outrage 
of unprecedented proportion, comparable to a public surge of criticism 
unseen before. Yet the people of Puerto Rico endure this humanitarian 
crisis seemingly without response.
  The President of the United States gives himself a 10. I agree. He 
deserves a 10 if the grading scale is 1 to 100 because barely one-
tenth--in fact, less than one-tenth of what this Nation owes to Puerto 
Rico--has been done for them.
  I flew over the island of Puerto Rico in a Sikorsky Black Hawk during 
a recent bipartisan trip and saw out of the side of that Black Hawk the 
devastation and destruction I never thought I would see in America. 
Whole towns were flattened, homes razed to the ground, community 
centers destroyed, power lines dangling and down. I heard from the 
Corps of Engineers that there is no timetable to repair those lines, to 
restore electricity, which is the lifeblood of civilization and 
essential to bare economic functioning, let alone progress going 
forward, which is what the island needs. From what I hear, which 
families have told me, the shortages of food, water, and medicine 
persist. The hospitals depend on generators that are sometimes 
nonfunctional, and medicine is lacking in those hospitals.
  What is at stake in Puerto Rico is really our humanity. In the midst 
of this humanitarian crisis, what is challenged is our humanity, not 
just the legality or the protocols but our basic instinct to help 
fellow Americans when they need it.
  This Nation should not have a double standard for disaster relief. 
The Americans of Puerto Rico deserve what Connecticut would receive. I 
have stood in Connecticut with our Puerto Rican community. We are proud 
of the fact that we have more Puerto Ricans per capita than any other 
State in the country. That community has given back to Connecticut and 
has contributed to our quality of life. And we are proud of all of our 
Puerto Ricans who came from the island in past generations or recently. 
I stood with Gladys Rivera, who lived in Connecticut, went to Puerto 
Rico, and has just come back; with the Bermudez family, who have deep 
ties and family there and here; with Jason Ortiz, who is in charge of 
the Puerto Rican Agenda. And I could list many others. They have given 
me a picture of the humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico that speaks to 
my heart--families who continue to suffer and endure these hardships.
  The measure we are passing today is a tiny downpayment on what is 
needed for Puerto Rico. It is a short-term, very small sign of what we 
owe. It is a downpayment that must be followed by a much bigger long-
term commitment, a Marshall Plan that will enable the island to not 
just repair the power lines or the roads but to rebuild with different 
kinds of power--renewables and solar--and not be dependent on diesel or 
coal. It will enable them to build stronger, more resilient structures, 
whether homes or commercial buildings, that can withstand future 
hurricanes. What is needed in Puerto Rico is not just repair but true 
rebuilding and recovery--and not just the physical structures but the 
sense of financial stability and pride.
  So the pittance in this supplemental for Puerto Rico is the least we 
can do. In fact, it is less than the least we can do because it 
actually adds to the debt Puerto Rico now has. It adds $5 billion to 
the $74 billion that is owed by Puerto Rico. It does nothing about the 
bankruptcy of PREPA, the power company. It in no way alleviates the 
financial burdens of debt; in fact, it adds to it.
  Instinctively, we in this Chamber know we have an obligation to do 
more. There have been enough reports to fill this Record today about 
the courage of Puerto Rico and about the burdens it has to endure. We 
have seen and heard enough to know that a longer term plan is 
necessary, a Marshall Plan. Stronger leadership is necessary. 
Leadership has been lacking.
  I have proposed a disaster relief czar who can cut through the 
redtape and the bureaucratic lack of cohesion and get this job done, 
someone who can tell the Corps of Engineers what the deadlines are and 
bring together the leadership of Puerto Rico and give them the 
empowering authority in resources, not just in words.
  I also call for the CDC to be engaged more actively and effectively 
because Puerto Rico now faces a potential epidemic of mosquito-borne 
diseases: Dengue fever, Zika, chikungunya. The standing pools of water 
throughout the island--and I have seen them--pose a real public health 
threat at a time when the island is ill-equipped to deal with it.
  I have begun working with my colleagues on a longer term plan because 
this measure must be followed by stronger, more robust steps. The 
damage done to the island was in the range of $100 billion. That is a 
rough estimate. That $100 billion must not only be reinvested, it must 
be used to provide resilience--real investment, real rebuilding. That 
is what is necessary for Puerto Rico.
  I hope to return and visit again shortly, but in the meantime, the 
voices and faces of our fellow Americans there come to us clearly 
through my friends and neighbors in Connecticut who have joined with me 
in this call for real action and real rebuilding and real investment 
much more than this short-term downpayment which will shortchange the 
island if we do no more. It must be simply a first step that we owe our 
fellow Americans in Puerto Rico.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                               Tax Reform

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I don't need to tell anyone that middle-
class Americans have had a rough time in recent years. Stagnant wages 
and a lack

[[Page S6729]]

of opportunities have left many American families stretched thin. 
Sending the kids to college, a secure retirement, putting something 
away for a rainy day--for too many families, these hallmarks of the 
American dream have started to seem more and more doubtful.
  A recent survey found that 50 percent of people in this country 
consider themselves to be living paycheck to paycheck. And about one-
third of people in this country say they are just $400 away from a 
financial crisis. If anyone wants to know why we are taking up tax 
reform, this is why. We are taking up tax reform because it is not 
acceptable that 50 percent of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck 
and because it is not acceptable that one-third of voters are one 
unexpected car repair away from a financial crisis.
  How is tax reform going to help? For starters, our tax reform bill is 
going to make sure that hard-working Americans are taking home more 
money from every paycheck. We are going to cut income tax rates. We are 
going to double the standard deduction--the amount of Americans' income 
that is not subject to any income tax--and we are going to 
significantly increase the child tax credit. All these things mean that 
American families are going to see an increase in their take-home pay. 
They are going to get to keep more of their hard-earned money. We are 
also going to simplify and streamline the Tax Code so that it is easier 
for Americans to figure out what benefits they qualify for, so they 
don't have to spend a lot of time and money filling out their tax 
returns.
  But we are not going to stop with reforming the individual side of 
the Tax Code. Another key part of improving Americans' financial 
situation is reforming the business side of the Tax Code so that we can 
give Americans access to the kinds of jobs, wages, and opportunities 
that will set them up for a secure future.
  In order for individual Americans to thrive economically, we need 
American businesses to thrive. Thriving businesses create jobs. They 
provide opportunities, and they increase wages and invest in their 
workers.
  Right now, though, our Tax Code is not helping businesses thrive. 
Instead, it is strangling businesses large and small with high tax 
rates. Our Nation has the highest corporate tax rate in the 
industrialized world. It is at least 10 percentage points higher than 
the majority of our international competitors.
  It doesn't take an economist to realize that high tax rates leave 
businesses with less money to invest in their workers, with less money 
to spend on wages, and with less money to create new and better paying 
jobs. 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 American businesses that are struggling to 
stay competitive in the global economy don't have a lot of resources to 
devote to creating new jobs and increasing wages.
  A study from the White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates 
that reducing the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent 
would increase average household income by $4,000 annually. That is a 
significant pay raise for hard-working American families.
  Another study shows a similar pay increase. Boston University 
professor and well-known public finance expert Larry Kotlikoff recently 
issued a study that concluded that lowering the corporate tax rate from 
35 percent to 20 percent would increase household income by $3,500 per 
year on average. Specifically, the study concluded that depending on 
the year considered, the new Republican tax plan raises GDP by between 
3 and 5 percent and real wages by between 4 and 7 percent. This 
translates into roughly $3,500 annually, on average, per American 
household.
  On top of our high business tax rates, there is another major problem 
with our Tax Code that is decreasing American jobs, and that is our 
outdated worldwide tax system. What does it mean to have a worldwide 
tax system like we have here in the United States? It means that 
American companies pay U.S. taxes on the profits they make here at home 
as well as on part of the profits they make abroad once they bring that 
money back home to the United States.
  The problem with this is that most other major world economies have 
shifted from a worldwide tax system to what is called 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, like what happens here in the 
United States today.
  Most of American companies' foreign competitors have been operating 
under a territorial tax system for years. They are paying a lot less in 
taxes on the money they make abroad than American companies are, and 
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 the 
products or services they sell.
  When foreign companies beat out American companies for new business, 
it is not just American companies that suffer. It is American workers. 
That is why a key part of the Republicans' tax plan involves lowering 
our massive corporate tax rate and transitioning our tax system from a 
worldwide tax system, like we have in America today, to a territorial 
tax system, like all of our competitors have.
  By making American businesses more competitive in the global economy, 
we can improve the playing field for American workers. So 57 percent of 
the manufacturers that took part in a recent survey from the National 
Association of Manufacturers reported that they would be more likely to 
hire additional workers if comprehensive tax reform becomes law, and 52 
percent reported that they would be more likely to increase employee 
wages and benefits. That would be a tremendous, tremendous boost for 
American workers.
  Comprehensive tax reform will allow us to see the same kind of 
results in other industries.
  The other part of improving the playing field for American workers is 
lifting the tax burdens facing small businesses. Small businesses are 
incredibly important to new job creation. Like larger businesses, right 
now small businesses are being strangled by high tax rates and, at 
times, even exceeding those paid by some of the largest corporations in 
our country. Well, that can make it difficult for small businesses to 
even survive, much less thrive and grow their businesses. Every dollar 
that we save small businesses by lowering their tax rates is a dollar a 
small business owner can use to expand the business, add another 
worker, or give employees a raise.
  We can also help small businesses increase wages and create jobs by 
allowing them to recover their investments in things like inventory and 
machinery more quickly. Right now, it can take small businesses years, 
or in some cases even decades, to recover the cost of their investments 
in equipment and facilities. That can leave them extremely cash poor in 
the meantime. Cash-poor businesses don't expand, they don't hire new 
workers, and they don't increase wages.
  Allowing small businesses to recover their investments more quickly 
will mean more jobs and more opportunities for American workers.
  The American people had a rough few years, but economic stress 
doesn't have to become the status quo for the long term. We can start 
turning things around right now. Comprehensive tax reform along the 
lines of what is envisioned by the plan that has been put forward in 
the Republican framework will put more money in Americans' pockets. It 
will give Americans access to new jobs and more opportunities, and it 
will increase American families' wages.
  I look forward to passing our comprehensive tax reform bill in the 
near future and to giving the American people the relief they have been 
waiting for.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.


                  Congressional Review Act Resolution

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the Congressional 
Review Act resolution repealing the Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau's forced arbitration rule. At a time when millions of Americans 
are suffering the consequences of abusive practices by major financial 
institutions--including the massive consumer fraud by Wells

[[Page S6730]]

Fargo and the exposure of up to half of the national population's 
personal information due to inadequate cyber security by Equifax--it is 
simply wrong to give immunity to bad corporate actors against lawsuits 
by the very customers they harmed.
  I urge my colleagues to think about the millions of Americans who 
still don't know all the facts about whether they are victims of one of 
these or other major banking scandals. They deserve the chance to 
gather the facts and hold the responsible parties accountable. This 
anticonsumer resolution strips away those victims' constitutional first 
line of defense against lending fraud and permits corporations more 
opportunities to take advantage of consumers.
  We have known for years that forced arbitration clauses harm the 
financial security of those who are most vulnerable to lending scams. 
Companies slip these clauses into the fine print of contracts for 
everything from loan applications to purchases on a smartphone. Let's 
be clear. Even if every American had the time to read and understand 
the fine print of every contract they sign, most of these contracts by 
major financial institutions are one-sided, and the consumer has no 
power to bargain the terms in the fine print.
  With these in place, consumers who learn their bank or lender has 
overcharged or defrauded them also learn quickly that they have signed 
away their right to take the corporation to court. Instead, they must 
choose between dropping their claim or going it alone in an arbitration 
process that is clearly and notoriously stacked in favor of the 
corporation.
  Forced arbitration makes it easier for predatory lenders to avoid the 
consequences for taking advantage of consumers. This reality is even 
more outrageous when we consider the fact that predatory lenders view 
servicemembers, military families, and veterans as prime targets for 
financial scams. The CFPB has noted that servicemembers are attractive 
targets because, among other things, they are required to maintain good 
finances, their pay is consistent, they often relocate, and many are 
just starting to make significant financial decisions. The Department 
of Defense is also well aware that military bases draw predatory 
lenders selling bad or illegal loans, which is one reason why the 
Department of Defense recently issued new rules banning forced 
arbitration for many loans covered by the Military Lending Act. But 
these rules still don't cover the full range of financial products that 
may be used to take advantage of military consumers and their families. 
That is why I have worked for years with Senator Lindsey Graham on 
legislation to ban forced arbitration clauses that waive or limit 
rights under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The CFPB rule bans 
many of these and other forced arbitration clauses that 
disproportionately harm servicemembers and their families.
  While the CFPB has provided data to support the arbitration rule's 
positive effects for servicemembers, we should also listen to the 
servicemember community. Their strong support for this rule speaks 
volumes. The CFPB rule's supporters include the Military Coalition, 
which consists of 32 military advocacy groups, including the Veterans 
of Foreign Wars, and associations representing the interests of members 
of the Navy, Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps. Moreover, in August, 
the National Convention of the American Legion adopted a resolution 
opposing legislation to repeal the CFPB forced arbitration rule 
because, among other reasons, it ``is extremely unfair to bar 
servicemembers, veterans, and other consumers from joining together to 
enforce statutory and constitutional protections in court.'' Simply 
put, servicemembers and veterans don't want this CRA, and they are 
watching this vote closely.
  Mr. President, forced arbitration is the prime example of a rigged 
system whereby powerful corporations and interests play by different 
sets of rules than average Americans. When a normal person defrauds 
another person, that person is entitled to seek a resolution in court. 
It is wrong for us to allow major corporations to create their own 
justice system that serves their own interests at the expense of 
American consumers, families, servicemembers, and veterans.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution and to permit the CFPB 
arbitration rule to go into effect.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________