[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 172 (Wednesday, October 25, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6777-S6778]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Tax Reform

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, Senate Republicans had a productive 
discussion with President Trump yesterday about our shared agenda. We 
were particularly focused on how to bring tax relief, economic growth, 
and jobs to the middle class through tax reform.
  It is clear we share a lot of the same goals. It is clear we are 
united in an effort to take more money out of Washington's pockets and 
put more in middle-class pockets. It is also clear we are all excited 
about this once-in-a-generation opportunity to get America going again 
and growing again.
  So we are watching our friends in the House with anticipation as they 
consider the comprehensive, responsible budget that cleared the Senate 
last week. We anticipate they will pass it by the end of the week. Once 
they do, we will have important legislative tools to move tax reform 
forward. That is something everyone can look forward to. More 
importantly, that is something the American people deserve, especially 
after so many years of an economy that failed to reach its potential--
an economy that, so often, failed them.
  Tax reform represents the single most important thing we can do today 
to get the economy reaching for its full potential. We are looking 
forward to taking the next steps very soon to get it done.
  Mr. President, on another matter, I would like to again commend 
President Trump for the outstanding judicial nominees he has sent us 
this year. So far, every nominee we have brought to the floor has been 
confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. In some cases, those 
majority votes have been bipartisan and massive, like 95 to 1, like 97 
to 0. Yet almost every time a judicial nominee is brought to the 
floor--even nominees with votes like these, nominees whom both parties 
support--Democrats throw up partisan procedural roadblocks. For what 
reason? Certainly, it is not to change the outcome. No. Like I said, in 
many cases, Democrats actually support the nominees. They are just 
wasting more of the Senate's time because they can. They are doing it 
again now. Let's take the two judicial nominees who are currently 
before the Senate.
  First, there is Scott Palk. After nearly two decades as a State and 
Federal

[[Page S6778]]

prosecutor, Mr. Palk has the legal skill and community support to excel 
as a U.S. district judge for the Western District of Oklahoma. The 
Senate Judiciary Committee approved his nomination by a large, 
bipartisan vote of 17 to 3.
  Then there is Trevor McFadden. Mr. McFadden's sterling record of 
public service makes him an ideal candidate for the U.S. District Court 
for the District of Columbia. Not a single Member--not one--of either 
party opposed him.
  These nominees should have sailed to confirmation yesterday. Instead, 
Democrats are forcing us to waste time so we can again arrive at the 
exact same conclusion, but simply later this week.
  This really has to stop.
  In President Obama's first year in office, Republicans forced this 
procedural hurdle for a single judicial nominee, and it was a 
controversial one.
  Let me say that again. In President Obama's first year in office, 
Republicans forced the procedural hurdle we have had to endure many 
times for one nominee, and that nominee was controversial.
  In President Trump's first year in office, Democrats have forced this 
procedural hurdle for every single judicial nominee except one, even if 
they actually supported him or her in the end. This is just the kind of 
partisan game that Americans are so sick of.
  President Trump should be commended for his strong judicial picks. 
The Senate is going to keep working hard to confirm them, and we are 
going to succeed. The only question is whether the Democrats are going 
to keep wasting more of the Senate's time getting there. I hope they 
won't. I hope they will end these pointless games so that the Senate 
can keep its time and focus where it belongs.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.