[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 31, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5646-S5647]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



        Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024

  Madam President, on another matter, yesterday, the Senate notched a 
major bipartisan victory by processing a package of bills to keep kids 
safe online. Members of both sides of the aisle celebrated the return 
to good, old-fashioned legislating. But, unfortunately, that was short 
lived. We know the majority leader has teed up another yet-designed-to-
fail vote tomorrow before gaveling out for the month of August. In 
other words, we have maybe 2 days or maybe 1 day, at the most, that we 
will actually be in session, until September some time. And, then, we 
are only scheduled to be in session about 3 weeks out of that month and 
out all of October.
  So even though we have almost 100 days until the election, we have 
just a handful of days which the majority leader has scheduled us to be 
in session.
  Why he would decide, after 6 months, to put a tax bill on the floor, 
knowing we would be leaving the next day, is beyond me. It does not 
strike me as a serious effort to legislate.
  In addition, as the Presiding Officer knows, the House Ways and Means 
Committee had a chance to weigh in on this. The Senate Finance 
Committee, on which we both serve, has not had an opportunity to even 
shape this piece of legislation at all.
  The chairman of the Finance Committee declined to have a markup of 
the bill in the Finance Committee, which I think would have enhanced 
the chances that we ultimately would get a bill approved by both 
Chambers and on the President's desk.
  But these designed-to-fail votes--or show votes, as you might call 
them--have become a familiar exercise in the Chamber. Over the last few 
months, the majority leader has scheduled show votes on bills that were 
guaranteed to fail but maybe provided a talking point or two on the 
campaign trail.
  The Senate has held show votes--and by that, I mean votes that are 
not designed to pass, legislation that has not been processed through 
the committees--to try to build consensus to see if we can get a major 
or supermajority of the Senate behind them. The majority leader has 
scheduled these show votes on bills relating to the border, to 
contraception, to abortion, to in vitro fertilization, and, now, tax 
policy--all designed-to-fail show votes, not serious legislating.
  At the beginning of this year, the House passed the bill I referred 
to a moment ago that made significant changes to America's tax system. 
It was negotiated by the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, our 
Democratic colleague, Ron Wyden, and the head of the House Ways and 
Means Committee Jason Smith, a Republican.
  They released the framework of this agreement in mid-January. The 
Ways and Means Committee immediately scheduled hearings and a markup. 
And by the end of January, this bill was passed--and passed with broad, 
bipartisan support, admittedly.
  Given the partisanship that often grips Congress advancing a 
bipartisan tax bill is no small feat, but they only got it half of the 
way there. They have cleared the House; but we are the Senate, and we 
have our ability and, frankly, the need, if you are going to build 
bipartisan consensus, to be able to shape that legislation here in this 
body, starting on the Finance Committee.
  The Senate is not a rubberstamp. It was never intended to be, and it 
isn't today.
  Members of both Chambers have a responsibility to evaluate and shape 
legislation before it goes to the President's desk. But you don't put a 
major tax bill on the floor--after waiting 6 months--the day before we 
are supposed to break for August and with very little time left between 
now and the election.
  Republicans and Democrats alike would like to see some changes to 
this bill; but, of course, if we were to get on the bill, I am 
confident the majority leader, because there isn't much time, would 
simply prohibit any real debate and amendment process and then try to 
jam this bill through the Senate.
  There are a number of things I would like to see addressed in the 
bill. I voiced my concerns about the watered-down work requirement for 
the child tax credit which would allow parents with zero earnings for 
the year to be eligible for a refundable tax credit. In other words, 
able-bodied individuals should be working and contributing to the 
welfare of their family and should not receive means-tested benefits 
when, in fact, the reason why they have no income is because they chose 
not to work. We cannot provide monetary incentives for able-bodied 
workers to stay out of the job market.
  Some of our Democratic colleagues have announced their opposition to 
this bill because of the pro-jobs tax reforms. But the bottom line is 
this: Members of both sides of the aisle oppose this bill for various 
reasons. And there is one easy way to address those concerns: move the 
bill through the committee process, where we can shape the bill in both 
Chambers, and then bring it to the floor and allow for debate and an 
open-amendment process.
  We know how to do this. That is the way the Senate should operate. 
And it is the way it used to operate.
  The Wyden-Smith tax bill passed the House in late January. So why did 
the majority leader wait until August 1 to bring the bill to the floor, 
knowing we would be breaking for the rest of the summer the next day?
  Right after the House passed this legislation, I asked Senator 
Wyden--the chairman of the Finance Committee--to schedule a markup, but 
he refused. He showed no interest in giving Senators a voice in this 
legislation.
  Well, I don't know about anybody else, but I didn't come to the 
Senate to be a spectator while this legislation moved across the Senate 
floor. I expect to represent the 30 million people that I have the 
honor of representing on each and every piece of legislation that comes 
across the floor of the Senate--or through the committees of 
jurisdiction.
  At any time in the last 6 months, the chairman of the Finance 
Committee could have scheduled a Finance Committee markup to allow 
Members to try to improve the bill, but he simply refused. And the 
majority leader could have made this a priority for floor consideration 
by scheduling a vote in February or March or maybe April or maybe May 
or June, but he didn't. When did he schedule the vote? For tomorrow, 
August 1.
  He knows that is not adequate time for us to do what we would need to 
do in order to represent our constituents in the way that they have 
come to expect and the way they deserve. He could have carved out a 
little bit of floor time that otherwise has been used to vote on some 
of the nominations, but he didn't.
  Over and over again, he has refused to move this legislation through 
the regular order of the Senate and then sat on the bill intentionally 
for 6 months and waited until the final hour before a 5-week recess to 
bring it to the floor.
  That is why we call this a show vote: It is not for real. But in 
light of the runup to the election, this will be, I assume, a campaign 
talking point that Democrats will try to use to bludgeon their 
Republican opponents.
  In case there is any confusion, the rushed vote on the Wyden-Smith 
tax bill is not an honest attempt to pass legislation. Well, all this 
boils down to the fact that Democrats are offering two options on a 
bill that has not even been the subject of a hearing or a markup here 
in the Senate. Take it or leave it--those are the options that we are 
presented. I will vote to leave it--leave it to next year when we 
know--as President Biden has said, he wants all of these tax provisions 
that expire next year to expire, which will be a $3-trillion tax 
increase on the American people; and 62 percent of taxpayers will see a 
tax increase.
  So we will revisit all of these matters next year. And we believe we 
can come up with a better product, one which will better serve American 
families and better help jump-start our economy once again.
  Given the fact that the Senate needs to complete things like paying 
the bills, appropriations, the Defense authorization bill, the farm 
bill--all of which need to be done before the end of this year--I don't 
see any window for wide-ranging debate on this topic. And it doesn't 
deserve a short shrift.
  So I hope we will, next year, revisit this topic. And I can guarantee 
that we will have the kind of debate I am talking about if Senator 
Crapo becomes

[[Page S5647]]

the chairman of the Finance Committee and we have a new majority come 
January.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.