[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 193 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7338-S7340]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          REPUBLICAN TAX PLAN

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this week many things will happen in 
Washington, but the focus in the Senate Chamber later in the week will 
be the Republican tax plan. It is a plan that has come upon us really 
quickly--in a matter of weeks--and it literally will affect the economy 
of the United States and virtually every taxpayer. There is hardly a 
measure we can entertain that has such broad and far-reaching impact on 
the future of this country and its economy.
  What we are trying to do now is to analyze this plan. It has been put 
on a fast schedule. I can guarantee, as I stand here, that because of 
this hurry-up approach on tax reform, when it is all said and done, if 
anything is enacted into law, we can look back with regret for not 
having taken the time to do this carefully, not having measured the 
impact of any tax changes on individuals, families, and the economy, 
and, certainly, on our national debt.
  So far we have a plan that was considered and passed by the House of 
Representatives, also on a fast schedule, and one in the Senate as 
well. The one in the Senate will be up for consideration this week. It 
is going to be a procedure, which was established in the Senate years 
ago, called reconciliation. For the outsider, it is a long word, which, 
by Senate definition, means that a simple majority vote is all that is 
necessary to pass this measure. It will not be subject to the 
traditional filibuster in the Senate nor to the need for 60 votes, as 
in most instances.
  It was designed, in its inception, to be a way to reduce the budget 
deficit. Ironically, what we will see happen with the proposed Senate 
tax plan is an increase of our national debt instead of a reduction. 
But that seems to be the intent of the sponsors, and it is what we will 
consider.
  We took a look at some of the proposals in the Senate Republican 
plan. It is no secret that this plan would bankroll massive tax cuts 
for the wealthiest people in America and the largest corporations, and 
it would raise taxes on middle-income families. If that seems like 
contrary thinking to what most Americans were looking for, it is.
  Time and again we are told that the average American needs a helping 
hand. I certainly understand that in Illinois and across the Nation. 
This tax plan by the Republicans will not help working families. At 
best, it gives them a temporary tax cut, which later ends up as a tax 
increase.
  However, if you happen to be among the wealthiest of Americans, there 
is good news in the Republican plan. There will be substantial tax cuts 
in permanent law. So the help for working families is temporary, the 
help for wealthy families is permanent, and the help for corporations 
is permanent.
  To put it in perspective from the corporate point of view, we can 
understand those who argue that lowering taxes on businesses will 
incentivize them to expand their businesses. Yet there are a couple of 
things we have to acknowledge. As a percentage of the gross domestic 
product, corporate profits in America have never been higher. As a 
percentage of gross domestic product, corporate taxes paid have never 
been lower. Profits are at their highest, taxes are at their lowest, 
and the Republicans come to us and say: Well, clearly, what we need to 
do is to cut corporate taxes again. I disagree.
  I asked Secretary Mnuchin at a hearing: Shouldn't our goal be to not 
only have a growing economy but to have more fairness in the economy 
for working families who continue to put in the hours and put in the 
work and watch their own wealth and their own income really fall behind 
against the expenses they face? Well, he agreed with my conclusion, but 
he couldn't explain how the Republican tax plan would meet that goal. I 
don't think it does.
  I do not exaggerate when I say that this is a tax cut by the 
Republicans for the wealthiest. The nonpartisan Joint Committee on 
Taxation analysis of the Republican bill shows that by 2027, as 
corporations are enjoying a huge tax cut, on average, taxpayers who 
earn less than $75,000 a year will see their taxes go up under the 
Republican plan.
  You think: Oh, that must have been a press release from the 
Democratic National Committee. No, it was an analysis by the Joint 
Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan group that we turn to in order to 
measure the impact of tax legislation. It is not the wealthy taxpayers, 
not a few taxpayers, not a couple of unfortunate exceptions; on 
average, taxpayers at every income bracket earning less than $75,000 
would see their taxes increase under the Republican plan.
  How would the wealthy fair? Well, it is no surprise that under the 
Republican plan, the largest tax cuts under the bill go to the 
wealthiest households. I get a lot of letters and emails, telephone 
calls and contacts. There aren't a lot of rich people calling me and 
saying: We need a tax break, Senator. They are not asking for it. But 
they don't have to ask for it when the Republicans are writing a tax 
bill.
  As Republicans throw huge tax breaks to the wealthiest 1 percent of 
Americans, here is what they do: They eliminate the alternative minimum 
tax, they lower the top income tax bracket, and they double the 
exemption for the estate tax. They go straight after a deduction that 
helps one-third of all taxpayers lower their taxes--the State and local 
tax deduction. They cut that, but they give these tax breaks to people 
who are already millionaires many times over.
  The Republican plan would eliminate the State and local tax 
deduction--a deduction that helps millions of middle-income families 
avoid being taxed twice on their hard-earned income--once at the State 
and local level and again at the Federal level. The State of Illinois 
is an example--and most other States--where people pay a State income 
tax. Currently, taxpayers can deduct that State income tax paid from 
any Federal tax liability. The premise is simple: You shouldn't be 
taxed on a tax. The Republicans turn that upside down. They would tax 
the tax you paid at the State and local level.
  Eliminating this vital deduction makes it more expensive for families 
to fund local services such as schools, police departments, fire 
departments, and local roads and bridges. In my State, which has the 
fifth highest number of taxpayers claiming this deduction, nearly 2 
million Illinoisans would no longer be able to claim more than $24 
billion in State and local tax deductions, as they did in 2015.
  So what is the Republican motivation for eliminating this deduction 
that is so important for middle-income families? Well, that is how they 
pay for the tax cuts for those at the highest income levels, and that 
is how they help the largest corporations cut their tax bills.
  This is wrong. If there was ever a question about who the Republicans 
are writing this plan for, look no further than the changes made during 
the committee session when they decided that they wouldn't stop at 
merely raising taxes on millions of middle-income families in order to 
pay for permanent corporate tax cuts, but they also were willing to 
raise families' health insurance premiums. It is not bad enough that 
tax bills are going to go up for most middle-income families. Under the 
Republican plan, they have devised a way to increase health insurance 
premiums at the same time. What a breakthrough.
  Republicans can't help themselves. Even in the face of opposition 
from the American people, hospitals, patients, nurses, seniors, and 
faith leaders, their tax bill would pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest 
1 percent by repealing part of the Affordable Care Act.
  This change alone means that 13 million Americans will lose their 
health insurance, and it means that the health insurance premiums paid 
by many others will increase by at least 10 percent a year--perfect. 
Not only are they going to raise taxes on working families, but they 
are going to raise the cost of health insurance for those buying 
policies and eliminate health insurance protection for 13 million 
Americans. Thirteen million Americans lose their health insurance, and 
millions more see their premiums spike--all to give corporations and 
the wealthiest people in America a tax cut.

[[Page S7339]]

  To my Republican colleagues I ask: When is it enough? Haven't we 
helped the wealthy enough? At least for a day or two, shouldn't we 
focus on middle-income families?
  Sadly, the threat to working families doesn't stop with a hike to 
their tax bill. In order to find even more money to fund tax cuts for 
corporations and the highest earners in America, Republicans agreed to 
add $1.5 trillion to the national deficit--$1.5 trillion. How many 
times have we heard Members of Congress--usually on the Republican side 
of the aisle--come to the floor and pose for holy pictures when it 
comes to the national debt? Well, they certainly have a lot of sermons 
to deliver when they have a Democratic President, but they suffer from 
political amnesia when they have a Republican President. Now they are 
going to add $1.5 trillion to the national debt to give tax breaks to 
wealthy people and big corporations.
  I have served in this body for many years. I have heard lecture after 
lecture from Republicans, until they are red in the face, about the 
importance of fiscal responsibility. I have listened to my Republican 
colleagues speak at length about the need for spending offsets. They 
wanted spending offsets for food stamps for hungry Americans. They 
wanted spending offsets for Hurricane Sandy victims when the hurricane 
hit the New York, New Jersey area. They wanted offsets for Meals on 
Wheels for seniors.
  Where are these deficit hawks now? The Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget, Mr. Mulvaney, who made a name for himself while 
in Congress railing against increasing the debt ceiling, is now 
advocating for the Republican tax plan saying: ``We need to have new 
deficits.'' Spare me.
  I have heard the calls from Majority Leader McConnell, who once 
asked: ``At what point do we anticipate getting serious here about 
doing something about deficit and debt?'' Those are the words of 
Senator McConnell.
  To that Senator and my Republican colleagues I say: How about now?
  So-called fiscally conservative Republicans are hiding behind widely 
debunked economic growth projections and the so-called ``dynamic 
scoring,'' arguing that what looks like a $1.5 trillion increase to the 
deficit will not actually be one.
  The appropriately named ``Laffer Curve'' suggested that if you cut 
taxes on the wealthy, everybody gets well. It didn't work then, when he 
proposed it. It hasn't worked since, and it will not work now. Yet the 
Republicans find this as the only refuge for their increase to the 
deficit.
  Over the weekend, however, it was announced that the Joint Committee 
on Taxation wouldn't have the time to produce a so-called dynamic score 
for the bill before the Senate.
  So let me understand this. Not only did Republicans vote to explode 
the deficit, but now they don't want to wait to see whether their weak 
defense for this fiscally irresponsible plan will actually work? This 
is hypocrisy. Maybe it is because Republicans know, as well as the 
American people, just how hollow their promises are on junk economics.
  Do you want a preview of what dynamic scoring will hold? Last week 
the Penn-Wharton Budget Model released an analysis that shows that the 
Senate bill would fail the Republicans' own test, even when using their 
so-called dynamic scoring. Make no mistake, once this happens, 
Republicans will waste no time in making up the difference by calling 
for devastating cuts to America's vital programs.
  The Republican budget even spells this out for us--where they are 
going to turn when their approach falls apart. Here is how they are 
going to do it. They are going to do it on the backs of hard-working 
Americans, with more than $1 trillion of cuts in Medicaid, and--hang on 
tight--$470 billion worth of cuts in Medicare.
  The harmful impact to seniors and low- and middle-income families and 
some of the Nation's most vulnerable from these budgetary cuts 
apparently justify to them the $1.5 trillion deficit hole they are 
going to create with this tax plan helping the wealthiest people in 
America.
  Under our current law, known as the pay-as-you-go law, harmful cuts 
could start as soon as January, if this bill is passed.
  Republicans are determined to have a ``win'' before the end of the 
year. That is because if you were suffering from insomnia and following 
the Senate business over the course of last year, you have to wonder 
why we were here. In the course of the year, two things happened of any 
moment. No. 1, there was filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and I 
will save my analysis of that for another day. No. 2, there was the 
passage of the Defense authorization bill. That is it--two things, 1 
year.

  So the Republicans, before we leave for the so-called holiday recess, 
want to have a feather in their cap. They want to be able to point to 
the fact that they have actually passed something. They are saying to 
their Members that this is a life-or-death proposal: We have to pass 
this or we will not be able to point to hardly anything that we did 
during the course of 1 year under Republican control of the Senate. 
That is why they are determined to do this, and do it quickly.
  The Republicans' irresponsible deficit spending under this plan will 
trigger $150 billion in automatic cuts to mandatory spending each year 
for the next decade. It includes regular cuts to Medicare.
  To my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you just can't have 
it both ways. You can't claim to be fiscally responsible and then vote 
for a plan that includes billions of dollars in budget gimmicks that 
would explode the deficit by up to $1.5 trillion over the first 10 
years and beyond, even with this great dynamic scoring theory that you 
are trying to sell. You can't claim to make a tax plan that prioritizes 
small business and then spend hundreds of billions of dollars giving 
huge multinational corporations--already enjoying record profits--a 
massive tax cut as well.
  I might add that the Republican tax bill creates incentives--
incentives for American corporations to move overseas, to take American 
jobs overseas. Why in the world would we create a tax code incentive 
for that to happen?
  You can't choose to make the corporate tax cuts permanent at the 
expense of protecting working Americans and then still claim that this 
plan is going to help those same families. It is based on nothing more 
than a wink and a promise to extend half a trillion dollars in middle-
income tax cuts that no one wants to pay for.
  You can't pretend to be above special interest and then include a 
provision in this tax bill--in the tax bill--that would open drilling 
leases for 800,000 acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge--one of 
America's last pristine, untouched wilderness places, home to more than 
200 wildlife species, and deserving of preservation.
  I have come to the floor over the course of many years in debate 
about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Senator Ted Stevens used to 
sit in that chair, and he couldn't wait until I finished my speech. He 
would stand up and say: The Senator from Illinois--he would point at 
me--doesn't even know where the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is. He 
has never been there. He has no idea what is going on up there. So he 
should not stand up on the floor and say things that he can't back up 
with his own personal experience and knowledge.
  What I did at that point was that I decided I was going to call his 
bluff. So I picked up and went up to the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge. I took a bush plane in and camped out overnight in the refuge. 
I trekked around. I took a look for myself so that I could back up some 
of the things I said on the floor.
  We were right on the Canning River. You could look across the river 
at parts of the Refuge that were managed by the State of Alaska. On 
this side of the river where we camped, it was managed as a national 
wildlife refuge. There was a dramatic difference. Roadways had been 
built on the State side but not on the Federal side. We had a pristine 
refuge area. The net result was really beautiful and impressive.
  I couldn't wait to get back to the floor to debate Senator Stevens 
since I had been there. I came back for the next debate. He never 
raised the question again about whether I had been there. So I didn't 
get to give the speech on the floor.
  To give up all of this land to drill for oil at a time when we are 
saying to the Middle East that we don't need their oil as much as we 
have in the past, to

[[Page S7340]]

drill for gas when fracking is finding natural gas in areas all over 
the continental United States hardly makes sense. It certainly doesn't 
if you have ever been there and seen this beautiful piece of real 
estate.
  I think the American people know what the Republicans had in mind 
with this plan. It really does help their deep-pocketed donors. Some 
Republicans in the House have been very open about this. One New York 
Republican Congressman said: Our donor said don't come back unless you 
give me a tax break. He is very honest about that, but, as far as I am 
concerned, that shouldn't be the motivation for passing tax reform.
  One of the Republican donors I referred to--and I quote him 
directly--said: ``My donors are basically saying, `Get it done or don't 
ever call me again.''' Another one said: ``Financial contributions will 
stop'' if the Republican tax plan doesn't pass. Thank goodness for 
their honesty and candor.
  There are special interests that will do well under this Republican 
plan, and wealthy people as well, but I think it is time for us to look 
at this plan, look at it clearly, and understand the negative impacts 
it is going to have on working Americans.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________