[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13536-13539]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     BRING JOBS HOME ACT--Continued

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my 
remarks, Senators Coons, Sessions, Stabenow, and Walsh be permitted to 
speak for up to 5 minutes each prior to the cloture vote on S. 2569, 
with Senator Coons being the first to be recognized.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Delaware.


                        Partnership With Africa

  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I have never been more optimistic about 
Africa and about the potential for a U.S. partnership with Africa than 
I am today.
  Every year I host a conference in my home State of Delaware called 
``Opportunity: Africa'' that brings together Delawareans and Africans, 
leaders from across our country and from the continent interested in 
building and strengthening new ties. Every year it has grown in 
participation, in the scope of issues we have looked at, and in the 
number of Delaware businesses interested in the opportunities in this 
continent of 54 countries. At this past March's conference, President 
Clinton delivered the keynote.
  The hunger to build new relationships between business, government, 
the faith community, and those in the African diaspora is undeniable. 
What is required of us is to think anew and dedicate ourselves to 
building partnerships of mutuality and that last. In this Chamber that 
will mean passing a reauthorized African Growth and Opportunity Act 
that does more to encourage and facilitate real two-way trade than the 
current law and to take up and pass the bipartisan Power Africa law 
that will strengthen investment in infrastructure and in electricity 
across the continent.
  Next week it means coming together with Africa's government and 
business leaders to forge new relationships built on mutual respect and 
the opportunities we share.
  I urge my colleagues and my friends throughout the business community 
to seize this opportunity and focus on the bright future it could 
create. An Africa that trades with us, that can defend itself, that can 
secure itself, and that empowers its citizens is the Africa we see, and 
that is an Africa which we in the United States are uniquely suited to 
help its people build. We have already built a powerful foundation for 
partnership through our investments in public health and education, 
clean water, democracy, and good governance.
  After 50 years in the Peace Corp and more than a decade of PEPFAR--
President Bush's groundbreaking commitment to combating HIV and AIDS--
we are better regarded in Africa than in anywhere else in the world. 
From our universities, to our businesses, to our military training and 
partnerships, to the vibrant Africa diaspora community spread 
throughout this land, we have tools no other Nation has. The 
opportunity for progress is extraordinary. By helping to build a broad 
and sustainable middle class across this continent, American workers 
and businesses will have more people to sell their products to and more 
markets in which to invest. The more we partner with African 
businesses, the stronger they will become.
  Genuine partnerships such as this must be the foundation for our 
relationships with Africa going forward, and we have a lot to gain as 
well.
  As many have commented, in the last decade 6 out of 10 of the fastest 
growing economies in the world have been in Africa, and that number 
will only rise. Other countries have noticed the opportunity. China's 
exports to Africa, for instance, have outgrown ours 3 to 1 since 2000, 
and 5 years ago China eclipsed us as Africa's largest trading partner. 
So it is no surprise that since 2000, China has hosted five summits 
with African heads of state. Let's be clear, the Chinese, in seeking 
opportunities for this century, will not miss the ``next China.'' So we 
have a lot of ground to make up.
  It is also critical we recognize that we should not just mimic the 
ways in

[[Page 13537]]

which the Chinese are seeking opportunity in Africa. They bring a 
policy of nonintervention in domestic affairs. We bring American 
values--a focus on democracy, on governance, on human rights, as well 
as the attractiveness of our technology, our resources, and the 
relationship with our diaspora community.
  This week we have had remarkable opportunities for our President, our 
Secretary of State, and several of us from this Chamber to meet with 
young African leaders as part of a program that brought 500 inspiring 
young African leaders to Washington.
  Next week we will welcome more than 40 heads of state from across the 
continent--a summit that I hope signals the next big step in building 
strong and sustainable partnerships throughout the continent.
  President Obama, leaders from this Chamber, leaders from the Cabinet, 
and from across America's corporate community will join for 3 days to 
allow us to refocus our efforts on the continent, to seize this moment, 
and to move forward. It is my hope that this Chamber, this Congress, 
will take advantage of the opportunity to enact the African Growth and 
Opportunity Act on a longer reauthorization and to open it to truly 
balanced trade, and pass the bipartisan Power Africa Act to 
significantly improve our investment in infrastructure.
  The opportunities are limitless. It is my hope that we will but seize 
them.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.


                              Immigration

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, today's Wall Street Journal has an 
article that should send shivers through every Member of this body. The 
article reports on what the President is planning to do with regard to 
executive amnesty, using Executive orders to do that which Congress has 
refused to do.
  The article says this:

       For months, President Barack Obama said there were limits 
     to his power to protect people living illegally in the U.S. 
     from deportation. Now, he is considering broad action to 
     scale back deportations that could include work permits for 
     millions of people, according to lawmakers and immigration 
     advocates who have consulted with the White House.

  The President has been meeting regularly with immigration activists 
and he has been promising them things that he has no power to promise. 
He has promised them things that constitutionally he is not able to do, 
and this Congress needs to say no to that. We can do that by simply 
barring the expenditure of money in the future to execute such a 
scheme.
  Congressman Blackburn in the House has offered legislation, and 
Senator Cruz in the Senate has offered legislation, which would do just 
that. But it is not in the bill we are being asked to provide cloture 
on that will come up in a few minutes.
  The article goes on to say--just to stress the stark nature of what 
is being considered--

       The shift in White House thinking came after House 
     Republicans said they wouldn't take up immigration 
     legislation. . . .

  So the President is saying: I have legislation and the House will not 
pass it, therefore, I am going to do it myself. It is one of the most 
pathetic excuses for abuse of power by a court or a President that you 
can imagine. Congress considered his legislation. He promoted it 
strongly. Members of both parties have advocated for it. But the House 
considered it and rejected it. That is an action. That is a decision by 
the House of Representatives. The President has no power to go beyond 
that, and I think this Congress--this Senate--has a responsibility to 
speak to that question and to avoid an issue. The Wall Street Journal 
goes on to say:

       An announcement is expected soon after Labor Day, an 
     administration official said.

  They are going to announce this within weeks. The article goes on to 
say that it could involve 5 million people or more, and the President 
said himself he would ``fix as much of our immigration system as I can 
on my own, without Congress''--without Congress. I will just use my 
pen. I will just order my officers, who work for me, you know. The 
Border Patrol, the ICE officers, they work for me. I will just tell 
them to do A, B, and C. We will just not pay any attention to the fact 
that plain law, section 274 of the INA, says that a person in the 
country unlawfully is not entitled to work.
  Mr. President, how much time do I have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. SESSIONS. He will just do that on his own.
  So we are now being asked to move forward on legislation that 
provides no opportunity to even get a vote on this issue. Certainly its 
text does not fix this problem.
  Let me be plain, colleagues. There are times when we have to rise 
above politics. Maybe somebody believes in amnesty, and they would like 
to see this happen, but we cannot acquiesce in having the President 
unilaterally do so in an unlawful fashion.
  The truth is that the people who are refusing to bring language up of 
this kind and fix it--what they want is to see the President do this. 
They are for it, they are supporting it, and they have rejected any 
action, so far at least, to defend the rule of law, defend the Senate, 
defend the entire Congress's legitimate powers. It is just breathtaking 
to me.
  So let me again say, colleagues, we need to take action. This 
Congress needs to speak. We cannot allow Executive orders to be issued 
by a President who eradicates plain law. To do so is wrong. The 
American people are watching this. They are not going to be happy that 
the Congress did not take action. Expressions of concern among Senators 
are not enough. We need to bring this up.
  But Senator Reid, I predict, is not going to allow that to happen, 
and he is going to be supported by every Member of his Democratic 
Conference. And every Member of the Democratic Conference, every Member 
who supports him in this plan, will be, in fact, involved and 
supportive of the President's plan.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, first I would ask the Presiding Officer 
if he could notify me after I have spoken for 4 of my 5 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will be so notified.
  Ms. STABENOW. I thank the Presiding Officer.
  In a few moments we are going to be voting on a very fundamental 
principle and a very important bill that is literally about bringing 
jobs home to America. The question before us is, Are we going to begin 
to change the incentives in the Tax Code where instead of incentivizing 
jobs being shipped overseas, we are going to support our companies that 
are bringing jobs home?
  This is a no-brainer. I think anybody listening to this debate, 
anyone across America who is focused in, would say: Why were you not 
even just having a voice vote and everybody voting yes and then go on 
to the next tax policy, like inversion, that we need to be dealing with 
that will keep jobs in America?
  Unfortunately, we have had to go through a lot of procedures, motions 
to proceed. We are now having to go through a supermajority vote here 
to get to the final bill. I hope colleagues will join us in a 
bipartisan way to vote to get to the final vote on this bill so we can 
make it very clear we are on the side of American workers and American 
businesses.
  Here is what we have seen in the last few years, as shown on this 
chart. In the last decade we have lost 2.4 million jobs being shipped 
overseas. Now that, by the way, does not count the ones that are 
leaving on paper right now, which is a whole other story. That is 
something we need to be deeply concerned about and speaking out about 
and calling people out on it. But these are the jobs where they are 
packing up shop and moving overseas.
  To add insult to injury, not only does a worker lose their job, the 
community loses the factory or the business, but we as American 
taxpayers foot the bill for the move.

[[Page 13538]]

  Now, that is shocking. When you explain to people that is in the Tax 
Code--yes, when you pack up shop, you do all the moving, you ship your 
jobs overseas, you can write that off on your taxes and we all pay for 
it--they probably look at us like we are crazy. And they are right. We 
have been trying to close this now for the last few years. This is the 
opportunity in just a few moments to have that vote to get it done.
  What are we going to be voting on specifically? It is very simple: 
end the taxpayer subsidies that pay for moving costs of corporations to 
ship jobs overseas. On the other hand, if you want to bring your jobs 
home, we will gladly allow you to write off the costs of bringing jobs 
home. On top of that, we will give an additional 20-percent tax credit 
for the costs of moving production back to the United States.
  The good news is we actually have companies, for a variety of 
reasons, that are moving jobs home. We want to applaud them. There are 
a lot of reasons for that in a global economy: shipping costs, low 
natural gas costs that we want to keep low so we have affordable energy 
and we continue to bring manufacturing back. We have the most 
productive, skilled workforce in the world. There are a lot of reasons 
why companies now are bringing jobs home.
  But a lot of companies are right on the edge. They look at the Tax 
Code, and they are making decisions about whether they are going to 
move overseas or stay, whether they are going to bring jobs home. The 
bill we are voting on--and I want to thank Senator Walsh for his 
leadership. He has been a passionate advocate in talking about it from 
a Montana perspective. And the two great M States are involved here--
Montana and Michigan. We both understand deeply about the fact that you 
are not going to have a middle class unless you make things in America.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has now consumed approximately 4 
minutes.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, thank you very much.
  We have to make things and grow things, and this is about making sure 
it is in America when we make things and grow things so we have a 
middle class. But the reality is we have to start in the Tax Code by 
making it clear we are not going to incentivize moving your jobs 
overseas. We are not going to incentivize somebody packing up--and, by 
the way, oftentimes those workers end up having to train their 
replacement. We have many stories in Michigan where the replacement 
workers in another country are flown into our country and trained by 
our people, to take their jobs; and then, to add insult to injury, they 
pay for the move through the Tax Code. So it is very simple.
  I am going to turn to Senator Walsh to close off this debate. But we 
have a very simple message. If you want to bring your jobs home, we are 
all in. You can write off the cost of that move and we will give you an 
extra 20-percent tax cut. But if you want to ship your jobs overseas, 
you are on your own.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. WALSH. Madam President, I rise today to thank my Senate 
colleagues for joining with American workers and voting overwhelmingly 
to consider the Bring Jobs Home Act. I want to particularly thank my 
colleague from Michigan, Senator Stabenow, for her tremendous 
leadership and work on behalf of America's working families.
  The vote last week was a procedural vote, but it was an important 
signal that job creation here at home can be a bipartisan issue. I am a 
strong believer in reaching across the aisle to promote good ideas. We 
are not here to represent our parties, we are here to represent our 
constituents. I made a promise to Montanans that I will support good 
ideas from anyone and any party as long as they grow our economy and 
create jobs.
  Unfortunately, since I joined the Senate 5 months ago, what I have 
mostly seen in Washington is the opposite. What I have seen in 
Washington are people playing games. Washington is not broken because 
there are not good ideas out there; Washington is broken because not 
enough people reach across the aisle to find common ground. I have 
insisted from the start that the Bring Jobs Home Act is a bill that 
both Republicans and Democrats can get behind. We must not let partisan 
politics and gamesmanship jam up the process.
  The American economy is recovering from the long and deep recession. 
Many Americans are still out of work and are desperately seeking the 
stability and security that comes with a job and a reliable paycheck. I 
am committed to leveling the playing field for American workers.
  It is time for us to come together and show American workers we are 
fighting for them, for their jobs, for their families, and for a better 
economy.
  I have heard from some of my colleagues who have commented on the 
floor that we should only consider the Bring Jobs Home Act in the 
context of comprehensive tax reform. That is not good enough. The 
answer to disagreements is not to do nothing, the answer is to start 
with manageable, commonsense reforms that everyone can get behind.
  Montanans understand this. They know it is wrong that American 
workers subsidize corporations' decisions to pack up businesses in the 
United States and send our jobs packing. Imagine an American worker 
whose final task before being laid off is to help shut down operations 
so his job or her job can be sent overseas. That is baloney. If 
Congress cannot come together to end that subsidy, then we deserve the 
low approval ratings we are receiving.
  Millions of American jobs have been sent overseas in recent decades. 
Too many large corporations have opened factories in countries such as 
China or Mexico while closing factories right here in the United 
States. We need to do what we can to stem the tide and reward companies 
that bring jobs back to America.
  The Bring Jobs Home Act will help do that. My bill closes the 
loophole that some multinational corporations use to claim a tax 
deduction for the cost of moving jobs overseas. It also creates a new 
20-percent tax credit for companies that bring jobs back to the United 
States. These two parts complement each other. The first ends the 
incentive for shipping jobs overseas. The second encourages the return 
of jobs we have already lost.
  Our Tax Code should not reward outsourcing. What we need is more 
insourcing. Many companies are considering bringing jobs back home 
today. This is especially true in the manufacturing sector. The Bring 
Jobs Home Act could make a difference for some of those companies to 
reinvest in America and American workers. So today I urge my colleagues 
to stand with America's workers and pass this bill. Now is the time for 
leadership to embrace good ideas that help create jobs in Montana and 
all across America.
  I yield the floor.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on S. 2569, a bill to 
     provide an incentive for businesses to bring jobs back to 
     America.
         Harry Reid, John E. Walsh, Debbie Stabenow, Benjamin L. 
           Cardin, Barbara Boxer, Patrick J. Leahy, Kay R. Hagan, 
           Sheldon Whitehouse, Jack Reed, Christopher A. Coons, 
           Robert P. Casey, Jr., Bill Nelson, John D. Rockefeller 
           IV, Barbara A. Mikulski, Jeff Merkley, Mazie K. Hirono, 
           Tom Harkin.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S. 
2569, a bill to provide an incentive for businesses to bring jobs back 
to America, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.

[[Page 13539]]

  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. 
McCain), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 54, nays 42 as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 249 Leg.]

                                YEAS--54

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Hirono
     Johnson (SD)
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Walsh
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--42

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Begich
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Enzi
     Fischer
     Flake
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (WI)
     Kirk
     Lee
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Portman
     Risch
     Rubio
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Thune
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Cochran
     McCain
     Roberts
     Schatz
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote the yeas are 54, the nays are 42. 
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is rejected.


                             CLOTURE MOTION

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 488, S. 2648, a bill making emergency 
     supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2014, and for other purposes.
         Harry Reid, Barbara A. Mikulski, Benjamin L. Cardin, 
           Barbara Boxer, Patrick J. Leahy, Sheldon Whitehouse, 
           Jack Reed, Christopher A. Coons, Jeff Merkley, Debbie 
           Stabenow, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Bill Nelson, John D. 
           Rockefeller IV, Mazie K. Hirono, Tom Harkin, Bernard 
           Sanders, Richard Blumenthal.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to proceed to S. 2648, a bill making emergency supplemental 
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for 
other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rules.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. 
McCain), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote or to change their vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 63, nays 33, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 250 Leg.]

                                YEAS--63

     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Begich
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Isakson
     Johnson (SD)
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Levin
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Walsh
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--33

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Coats
     Coburn
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Enzi
     Fischer
     Flake
     Graham
     Hagan
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Johanns
     Johnson (WI)
     Kirk
     Landrieu
     Lee
     McConnell
     Moran
     Paul
     Portman
     Risch
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Thune
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Cochran
     McCain
     Roberts
     Schatz
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote the yeas are 63 and the nays are 
33. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.

                          ____________________