[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 193 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7340-S7341]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          REPUBLICAN TAX PLAN

  Mr. SCHUMER. On the Republican tax bill, we are only a few days away 
from a final vote, but from all reports, the Republicans are still 
debating significant changes to the text of the bill. Some are angling 
for a change to the passthrough provisions, feeling that a gargantuan 
new tax loophole for many high-income individuals needs to be widened 
even further. Right now, it is reported that 70 percent of these 
passthroughs go to the top 1 percent. The changes that are being 
proposed would make it even worse.
  Help small business, yes. Don't open a giant loophole for wealthy 
hedge funds, big-shot law firms, and lobbyists. We don't need that.
  Others are rightly worried about the impact this bill would have on 
the deficit and debt. What I would remind my Republican colleagues is 
that, with any more changes, it is virtually certain you will be voting 
on a bill without any expert analysis of its impacts; you will be 
voting without any estimate of whether it will grow or shrink the 
economy; you will be voting without a good sense of the long-term 
impacts of the changes you are making to the Tax Code.
  Certainly, 1 week of markup in the Finance Committee, with only one 
expert witness, is not a satisfactory process, particularly considering 
the changing nature of this bill. Changing the Tax Code in broad brush 
is a difficult thing. There are so many unintended consequences.
  If our Republican colleagues should pass this bill and it becomes 
law--and I hope it won't--week after week, we are going to find new 
things in this bill--some intended, some not intended. The people who 
voted for it are going to regret it. The public will ask: Why didn't 
you know? With a tax bill, it is impossible to know all these things 
unless you let it sit out there in the Sun and bake so that people, 
experts from around the country--there are tens of thousands of tax 
lawyers paid to figure out ways around our Tax Code and help the 
wealthy, who are their clients. Unless you examine the bill carefully 
in sunlight, unless you have a lot of hearings, unless you hear from 
all kinds of witnesses, the result is usually quite bad for America, 
with so many unintended consequences.
  Our Republican colleagues, in their rush to get a bill done, are 
legislating in an irresponsible way, especially when it comes to 
something as important and complex as the Tax Code. If the product were 
a great one, that would be one thing. We all know this is not a great 
product. We don't even hear our Republican colleagues bragging about 
this product, with a few exceptions. Everyone says this could be 
better, that could be better.
  Every independent analysis has shown that the tax bill will end up 
raising taxes on millions of middle-class families, despite the early 
intentions of the President and Republican leaders. The Tax Policy 
Center estimates that 60 percent of middle-class families will see a 
tax increase--60 percent of middle-class families will see a tax 
increase--by the time the bill is fully implemented, while folks making 
over $1 million a year would get an average tax cut of over $40,000.
  Some would say: Well, they are making more money; they should get a 
bigger tax break. No. I would like to take every dollar of that $40,000 
a millionaire gets and give it to the middle class. They are the ones 
who need the help, not the wealthy people. They are the ones who buy 
the products and keep the economy humming. They are the ones who, 
throughout the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, created the best economy 
America has ever had, not just the few millionaires. It is astounding.
  If the President and Republicans in Congress set out to pass a 
middle-class tax cut, as they claim--if that is where they set out, 
this bill completely misses the mark. Meanwhile, the big winners--big 
corporations, the very wealthy--are doing great already. Estates worth 
over $11 million get a tax break? Why is that? Why is that, when 
average middle-class people are struggling? Corporations get a 
permanent reduction in their rates, while individual tax breaks expire 
after a few years. The bill would even open up drilling in the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge because this tax bill wouldn't be complete 
unless they help Big Oil too.
  All of this to saddle the next generation of Americans with larger 
deficits, even larger debt--something many of my friends on the other 
side of the aisle have labored against their whole

[[Page S7341]]

careers. We have heard so many speeches from the other side about 
deficit reduction. I think my colleagues were sincere. Why are they 
abandoning it now?
  Every one of our colleagues knows that we could do a lot better job 
in a tax bill at reducing the deficit than we have here. From the very 
beginning, Democrats have told our Republican colleagues that we want 
to work with them on tax reform, we want to lower taxes on the middle 
class, we want to reduce burdens on small businesses, we want to erase 
the incentives that send jobs overseas and bring jobs back home, and we 
want to do all these things in a way that doesn't add to the deficit.
  From the very beginning, Republicans have said to us: We are not 
interested in working with you. We are going to draft it ourselves and 
use reconciliation so we don't need your votes, and you can vote for 
our bill if you want.
  That is not bipartisanship, what the Republican leadership has done.
  I know there are some Republicans on the other side who wish we could 
work together. Well, we can. Today at 11 a.m., I think more than a 
dozen--certainly a large number of Democrats went to the Press Gallery 
and said: We want to work with our Republican colleagues to create a 
better bill.
  They came and visited me last night. I encouraged them to do it. This 
leader--this leader--is not going to stand in the way of bipartisan 
reform that meets the goals we have talked about: helping the middle 
class, reducing the deficit, not unduly or in any way aiding the 1 
percent.
  Bipartisanship and compromise are very possible on tax reform. It is 
an issue crying out for a bipartisan solution. There are a lot of areas 
in which we agree. We have to work to find a middle ground that is 
acceptable to both parties. I daresay it would be a better bill for the 
American middle-class than the one we are looking at right now.

                          ____________________