[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 175 (Monday, October 30, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6864-S6865]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Tax Reform

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I came to the floor to talk about judges, 
and I will in just a moment because the majority leader has now filed 
for cloture--that is a process that will end up in an up-or-down vote--
on four distinguished nominees for the circuit court of appeals.
  Coming on the tail end of the remarks of the Democratic leader, I 
must say that sometimes I feel like Washington, DC, is a parallel 
universe that bears very little relation to the rest of the country or 
the rest of the world because to hear the Democratic leader talk about 
some tax plan being written in secret defies the facts. The facts are, 
this is going to be done in a very public sort of way.
  I expect that as soon as Wednesday, the House of Representatives will 
release their proposal and then, shortly thereafter, the Senate will 
likewise release its proposal that will then be amended and debated in 
the Senate Finance Committee just like the House bill will be debated 
and amended in the House Ways and Means Committee. These will be very 
public, and indeed they should be because they are going to touch on 
the ways that I believe we can unleash this sleeping giant of an 
economy, get the economy growing again, get businesses invested here in 
the United States, and higher wages and jobs for American families, 
from which all Americans will benefit, regardless of their tax bracket.
  I have read that some of our Democratic colleagues--we heard a little 
bit of this when the President invited the bipartisan Senate Finance 
Committee members over to the White House just a week or so ago. Some 
of our Democratic colleagues said: Well, we haven't been included in 
the process.
  Well, they made it clear that they don't want to be included, but I 
hope they will change their mind, and they will have that opportunity 
during the course of the Senate Finance Committee debate and amendment 
process. No one will be prohibited from offering an idea or debating an 
idea as we work through the process of a tax reform package that will, 
as I said, hopefully bring down the taxes for hard-working American 
families, let them keep more of what they earn, and, in the process, 
improve their standard of living.
  As we reform our business Tax Code--which, as President Obama pointed 
out in 2011, is literally a self-inflicted wound because we have the 
highest business tax rate in the world, which makes it more likely that 
businesses will want to invest abroad in jobs and their infrastructure, 
rather than invest here in America--we want to bring all of that back 
here so that investors will invest in jobs in America and so that 
manufacturers can proudly stamp what they make here in America: ``Made 
in America.'' That is what we are striving for.
  Again, I know our Democratic colleague, my friend, the Senator from 
New York, has a job to do on behalf of the Democrats. But it is, as I 
described at the outset, a parallel universe from what is actually 
happening. It does not bear any relationship to the reality that we 
have offered our Democratic colleagues to participate with us in 
growing the economy and giving hard-working American families the 
opportunity to keep more of what they earn and, thus, improve their 
standard of living.
  Mr. President, at times this Chamber is marked by a spirit of hard 
work, cordiality, and bipartisanship. Unfortunately, this is not one of 
those times. Since President Trump's inauguration, our Democratic 
colleagues have been needlessly obstructing the confirmation of 
extremely qualified nominees, and lately their focus has been on 
obstructing nominees for our Nation's Federal courts. But, certainly, 
their obstruction has been across the spectrum of nominees--slowing 
down nominees, forcing us to burn time, and then finally confirming 
nominees which they, by and large, will vote in favor of. This is done 
for no other purpose than to make it harder for the President, now that 
he has been elected, to get his team on the field and to serve the 
interests of the American people and the President's administration.
  Lately, as I pointed out, their focus has been on the Federal courts. 
The majority leader filed four nominations last Thursday, and we hope 
our Democratic colleagues will think better of dragging out the clock 
on what is already a certain outcome, which is confirmation of these 
four nominees. If they do, no one will be surprised.
  This year, the Democrats have thrown up every obstacle they can, 
requiring procedural votes, needless debates, and a lot of time burned 
here on the Senate clock, with no one on the floor talking about 
anything one way or the other. It is what we call quorum calls here, 
when America tunes into what is happening on the Senate floor and there 
is nothing happening, other than the clerk calling the roll from time 
to time. That is time we could be using for bipartisan legislation. But 
the goal here for our friends across the aisle is to cause us to burn 
the time, keep us from doing the people's work, and obstruct the 
President's nominees to the Federal bench and beyond.
  The irony here is that our Democratic colleagues have even obstructed 
judges originally nominated by President Obama, so they are not 
particularly picky in terms of the judges and the nominees they will 
obstruct. But all they have really accomplished so far is wasting the 
Senate's time and trying the patience of the American people, who know 
that there is more productive work to be done than simply having 
endless quorum calls and silence on the Senate floor while we burn the 
time on the clock in order to get these nominees confirmed.
  Our colleagues know that these tactics will not actually stop a 
nomination, but they insist on engaging in them anyway, to the 
detriment of everyone, including the American people. This year, they 
forced needless cloture votes on seven of eight district and circuit 
court nominees--more than in any other early Presidency--and they 
demanded that we use the full 30 hours of floor time per nominee, which 
Senate rules currently allow for. These are partisan roadblocks that 
never change the outcome. They are just dilly-dallying. They intend to 
grind this body's normal procedures to a snail's pace so that nothing 
much else gets done, and, oh, by the way, then they complain that not 
enough is being done. That is the tactic. That is the game plan.
  By way of comparison, during the first year of President Obama's 
Presidency, only once did Senate Republicans require a cloture vote on 
one of the President's nominees. In this Trump administration, Senate 
Democrats have forced cloture votes on all of the President's nominees 
except for one. This is all a game to waste time--and maybe a little 
bit for show.
  These tactics don't change the outcome--which is confirmation--
ironically, because of the even more cynical ploy adopted by Democrats 
under President Obama. The Senate used to require 60 votes for 
confirmation of judges. This permitted the minority to block judges who 
were truly out of the mainstream or who did not enjoy the support of 
their home State Senators. Senator Harry Reid, when he was majority 
leader--just a few years ago--changed all that. But it seems as though 
it backfired on him. He tore up the rule book when he invoked the so-
called nuclear option in November of 2013 and changed the Senate rules 
to jam through three nominees to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, 
eliminating the so-called filibuster because Democrats were upset that 
the DC Circuit was blocking regulatory overreach by the Obama 
administration.
  Now the filibuster is gone, and I hope that going forward, our 
Democratic colleagues will recall their previous actions as our caucus 
proceeds with filling these vacancies. It is good that these outcomes 
are not in doubt because these positions are too crucial to be left 
open any longer, even if it means we stay in session over the weekend 
or at night.
  On appellate nominations, we are going to move forward with four--
whether the Democrats cooperate or not--because these are nominees who 
are highly qualified, well-respected jurists and academics. They are 
the

[[Page S6865]]

Notre Dame law professor, Amy Barrett, nominated for the Seventh 
Circuit; Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen, nominated for the 
Sixth Circuit; Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison Eid, nominated to 
the Tenth Circuit--that is the seat vacated by Judge Neil Gorsuch, 
elevated now to the Supreme Court of the United States--and the 
University of Pennsylvania law professor, Stephanos Bibas, nominated 
for the Third Circuit.
  I look forward to talking in more detail about the high intellectual 
caliber and remarkable qualifications of these four nominees in the 
coming days. This is going to occupy the rest of this week. It is worth 
noting at the outset that the four include three of the most 
accomplished female lawyers in the United States.
  For now, the important thing to note is our determination to get this 
done. Under Republican leadership, we are working to deliver for the 
American people, and confirming judicial nominations is just one 
example.
  Today, the Senate is scheduled to confirm Trevor McFadden to the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Columbia. Mr. McFadden was voted out 
of the Senate Judiciary Committee--on which I serve--unanimously in 
July. He is Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division 
of the Department of Justice. He graduated from the University of 
Virginia School of Law and has extensive experience in law enforcement. 
This is someone who was voted unanimously out of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, yet Senate Democrats are denying him a voice vote or other 
expedited process--again, forcing us to burn the clock just to get his 
nomination voted on.
  Last week, though, we confirmed Scott Palk of the U.S. District Court 
for the Western District of Oklahoma, despite the same sorts of games. 
Mr. Palk was originally nominated to the same seat by President Obama 
in 2015, so one would have thought that our Democratic colleagues would 
relent and ditch their procedural gimmicks. But no, they didn't, even 
for a judge originally nominated by President Obama. Fortunately, it 
didn't matter because Mr. Palk ultimately was confirmed by a 
substantial margin of 79 to 16. So why the delay? Why the obstruction? 
Why the foot-dragging if 79 Senators, on a bipartisan basis, are going 
to confirm the nomination?
  I, for one, would like to commend the President on his sterling 
picks, not only of the recent district and circuit court nominees but 
also of a judge I mentioned a little bit earlier, now Supreme Court 
Justice Neil Gorsuch. To date, four of President Trump's appellate 
nominees have already been confirmed: two for the Sixth Circuit, one 
for the Eleventh, and one for the Eighth, respectively. This is an 
excellent addition to our Nation's Federal judiciary. All of them, I 
believe, will faithfully interpret the Constitution. They know their 
job is to say what the law is, not what they believe that it ought to 
be.
  The majority leader has been unyielding in his goal of moving forward 
a productive schedule for the good of the country here in the Senate 
and moving as swiftly as our rules allow. Stall tactics will not work. 
They will not prevent us from moving forward with these nominees and 
confirming them before the week's end. You can count on it.
  I yield the floor.
  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. NELSON. 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.