[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.
____________________