[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 182 (Wednesday, November 8, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7073-S7074]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Republican Tax Plan

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, over the past decade, the American 
economy has generated enormous wealth for wealth holders but, 
painfully, less work and less pay--fewer good-paying jobs--for workers. 
Average folks are having a harder time keeping up with the ever-rising 
costs as the rich get richer and corporate stocks soar.
  Our economy would surely benefit from the kind of tax reform that 
gives small businesses and working Americans a break, while asking the 
wealthiest among us to pay their fair share. ``Their share'' doesn't 
mean they are doing something illegal; it simply means that as wealth 
goes up and so much money agglomerates to the top, for the good of the 
society, the wealthiest should pay more.
  Unfortunately, the Republican Party has decided to pursue a partisan 
tax bill that would spin our economy even further out of whack, 
lavishing tax giveaways on the wealthy and corporate America, while 
raising taxes on millions of middle-class families over 10 years.
  A New York Times analysis found that next year, the House Republican 
tax plan would cause taxes to go up on one-third of all middle-class 
families. Those are families who make--I believe it is between $56,000 
and $150,000. One out of three in that middle-class, upper middle-class 
group is going to pay more in taxes, while those at the highest end get 
huge breaks. By 2026, taxes would go up on nearly half of all middle-
class families.
  I want to salute someone I almost never agree with--Senator Cruz. At 
least yesterday, he had the courage of his convictions to say that no 
middle-class person should pay more, even in New York and California. 
But that is not the case with this bill. Large numbers of people 
throughout the country will pay more. Large numbers of middle-class 
people and people struggling to the middle class will pay more.
  So when Speaker Ryan says that under the House plan ``Everyone enjoys 
a tax cut all across the board,'' as he did yesterday, he is fibbing. I 
really want to use the ``L'' word, but to be nice, I won't. But Speaker 
Ryan, explain to us how you can say with a straight face: ``Everyone 
enjoys a tax cut all across the board.''
  Every independent analysis and the more honest Republicans say that 
some middle-class people--a good number of middle-class people--get a 
tax increase. So Speaker Ryan, take it back. Start telling the truth 
about your bill. We know you are under pressure, but you have always 
been an honorable man, and this tax bill is tying you into a pretzel 
when it comes to telling the truth about it.
  Look at what is done here. The personal exemption, which benefits 
large families, is gone. Yes, the standard deduction doubles, but if 
you have four, five, six children, you still pay more, even before they 
start whacking your State and local deductibility or your college loan 
deductibility or your healthcare deductibility.
  Stunningly, the deduction for catastrophically high medical expenses 
is also gone, meaning that among the hardest hit under this plan would 
be some of the most vulnerable taxpayers. Eight million Americans 
deduct their out-of-pocket medical expenses because they are over 10 
percent of their income. They plan their finances around this 
deduction. These families have someone with a chronic condition--maybe 
an elderly parent who has Alzheimer's, maybe a family with a young kid 
who has cancer.
  I met a lady at the airport yesterday. Her name was Bridget. I didn't 
know who she was. She came over to me pleading. There was sadness in 
her eyes. She said: My son needs an orphan drug. It is very expensive. 
If I can't deduct the expenses, I don't know what I

[[Page S7074]]

am going to do. I won't be able to afford the drug. How can our 
Republican colleagues be so heartless and cruel? I know that you want 
to reduce taxes on corporations, but why do you have to do it at 
Bridget's expense?
  Of course, the House bill takes an ax to State and local 
deductibility, a bedrock middle-class deduction that affects nearly 
every State but hits high tax States, like Virginia, the hardest.
  Any House Republican who watched the returns in the Virginia 
elections last night must be shaken by the overwhelming Democratic 
turnout in suburban areas. According to pollsters, the No. 1 issue was 
healthcare, and this deduction goes. But overall, suburban Virginia 
said no to the Republican way. Suburban families will be the ones hit 
hardest by the elimination of State and local deductions in States like 
Virginia but also in Washington, New Jersey, California, Illinois, 
Minnesota, and Colorado.
  Just last night, we learned from reporting that the Senate bill is 
likely to go even further regarding the State and local deduction--full 
repeal. There are some from my State in New York saying: Well, we have 
a compromise. A, the compromise still eliminates three-fourths of the 
deduction, but, B, that compromise is going bye-bye. The Senate is 
going to get rid of it. You can be sure it won't come back in a 
conference committee.
  So I say to my House colleagues, particularly those from suburban 
districts: Stop the elimination of the State and local deduction now 
before it is too late. If it happens and you vote yes on this bill, you 
will be to blame. There is no way to duck and cover behind the SALT 
compromise any longer because the SALT tax writers have made clear that 
they want to repeal it entirely in the Senate. Because of the stricter 
Senate budget rules, the Senate language is likely to win out over the 
House language.
  Make no mistake about it, a full repeal of the State and local 
deduction is coming down the pike one way or the other. Voting to 
advance the GOP bill is a vote to fully repeal State and local 
deductibility. I say to my Republican friends from all those suburban 
districts where a high percentage of people use the State and local 
deduction: If you think the results in Virginia and New Jersey were 
terrible for you, wait until you pass a bill that raises taxes on large 
swaths of middle-class families in your district.
  The debate over the State and local deduction is illustrative of the 
central problem my Republican friends have with their tax bill. Every 
time you pull in one direction and change something to solve a problem, 
you have to push in another direction, and you end up creating a new 
one. It is like pushing on a balloon.
  Just this morning, Speaker Ryan said the phaseout of middle-class 
deductions would never happen. They are only there to ``game the Senate 
rules.'' Well, if there is no phaseout, the real cost of the bill will 
be much higher. I say to my Senate friends who have talked about making 
sure we don't let the deficit go out of control that Ryan is saying we 
are going to let the deficit go out of control and game the Senate 
rules because the phaseout of middle-class deductions will not happen. 
If there is no real phaseout, the real cost of the bill will be much 
higher. It is a tough pill to swallow to anyone in this setting on the 
Republican side who believes in deficit reduction and who believes 
about $1.5 trillion--their rule--is about as high as you can go.
  All of this is because our Republican colleagues are rushing this 
bill through. Something like this takes care. It takes hearings. It 
takes discussion. It takes experts. It takes affected groups all 
weighing in. That takes a while. That is how it is supposed to work. 
That is how the Founding Fathers wanted it to work. That is how we did 
it with the last successful major tax reform bill in 1986. I was there, 
and I know.
  To rush a bill of this magnitude through the Congress in a span of a 
few weeks, with only one party doing the work, is reckless, it is 
irresponsible, and it will lead to a very bad result. It is why our 
Republican colleagues have such problems.
  I repeat my plea to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. 
Take a step back and consider doing tax reform the right way--
bipartisan, through the committees, input from both sides. We have 
shown, as in healthcare, when we try, we can work together. The Senator 
from New Hampshire is on the floor. She was one of the leaders in that.
  Earlier this year, we came to a good budget deal. Senators Alexander 
and Murray put together a reasonable compromise on healthcare. We can 
do it again on tax reform. We Democrats want to do real reform, but our 
Republican friends must abandon this partisan, secretive, reckless 
process that will lead to no good for them and for the country and come 
to the table with Democrats.
  One final point on the matter, Republicans repeatedly promised that 
the $1.5 trillion reduction in the corporate tax rate proposed by the 
Ryan-McConnell tax plan will lead the average American family to 
receive a $4,000 raise. Yet corporate profits are already at record 
highs. Wages are relatively stagnant. So color us skeptical that 
showering corporations with new tax brackets that will result in them 
having even more money will end up creating higher wages for workers. 
Far more likely what it will create is another round of stock buybacks 
and dividends, which, by and large, benefit corporate CEOs and the 
wealthy.
  You don't have to take it from me. David Marberger is the executive 
vice president and CFO--chief financial officer--of Conagra, which I 
believe is a major Fortune 500 company. Here is what he told his 
shareholders this fall, the CFO of Conagra: ``In terms of if there is a 
corporate tax reduction and there's more cash, we bounce back to our 
capital allocation''--more stock buybacks.
  Republicans think a corporate tax cut without guardrails would boost 
wages, and we disagree. Later this morning, Democrats will urge our 
Republican colleagues to put their money where their mouth is and prove 
us wrong. We will be offering an amendment that would snap back taxes 
to the old corporate rate if corporations actually fail to boost their 
workers' wages. It is that simple. Put your money where your mouth is. 
The only thing you are hanging your hat on, on this bill, which so 
hurts so many middle-class people is, well, everyone will get a big 
wage increase because we are reducing the corporate rate. We challenge 
you to accept our amendment. If the wages don't go up, the corporate 
decrease in taxes is repealed.
  We are simply telling Republicans, don't write checks to corporations 
that their employees can't cash. If Republicans fail to support this 
amendment, they will confirm that their tax bill is a farce. They 
really don't believe it, when it comes to boosting wages for working 
Americans.
  Mr. President, one final word on the nomination of Mr. Robb to the 
NLRB. The NLRB protects workers' rights to form or join unions, bargain 
collectively with their employers, and act concertedly for mutual aid 
or protection. It is not clear to me, from reviewing Mr. Robb's 
background, that he believes in the mission of the agency.
  In his experience as a labor and employment lawyer, he has defended 
companies against workers' unfair labor practice allegations, age and 
sex discrimination charges, class action age claims, and wage claims. 
The website of Mr. Robb's law firm brags about his efforts to delay and 
defeat union organizing at the Millstone Power Station in Connecticut. 
He was the lead counsel on the notorious Reagan-era case, which 
decertified the air traffic controllers' union. That resulted in 
President Reagan firing 11,000 traffic controllers and barring them 
from Federal service.
  The general counsel for the NLRB sets the priority cases and 
determines when to bring charges against employers. It is a crucial 
role. Peter Robb's record shows he is not up to this job, and he will 
not defend workers in an agency designed to defend workers.
  I will be voting no and urge my colleagues to do the same.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.