[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8792-8794]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT AND THE ECONOMY

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the National 
Defense Authorization Act. This is a bipartisan bill that will provide 
our servicemembers with the funding they need to continue to keep our 
country safe.
  Over the last 5 months, we have had numerous senior military 
officials, senior military officers, and foreign policy experts talk to 
the Senate Armed Services Committee on which I serve about the 
significant challenges that our country faces. The senior Senator from 
Arizona talked about this very eloquently today on the floor about 
ISIL, a resurgent Russia, North Korea with nuclear weapons, and this 
NDAA bill that we are now debating on the floor focuses on addressing 
these challenges. It also makes important modernizations to our 
investments with regard to military weapons, cuts bureaucratic redtape 
at the Pentagon, and ensures that our Armed Forces remain the most 
agile and lethal in the world. It upholds our commitments to our 
servicemembers, to their families, to military retirees, and to their 
families.
  It is remarkable that right now, as we debate this bill--this 
critically important bill on the Senate floor--the President of the 
United States has already come out and said he is going to likely veto 
it if it is in its current form. He is going to veto the NDAA. Think 
about that. One of the most important things we are doing to take care 
of our troops, and the President is threatening a veto. Now, during the 
markup of this bill, many Members on the other side of the aisle--our 
colleagues--also threatened to work on the amendments but to not vote 
for the bill. They were all going to vote against the bill. But we 
stood firm--the chairman and other members of the committee--and said: 
This is not the kind of bill we play politics with. This is not the 
kind of bill we try to make political points on. This is a bill that 
funds our troops, that funds the defense of our Nation. Guess what 
happened. They got the message. Only four members of the Senate Armed 
Services Committee voted against this bill. It was a very bipartisan 
bill coming out of the committee, and I certainly hope, when this bill 
passes the U.S. Senate and moves to conference with the House and then 
moves to the President's desk, that he does not play politics with our 
troops; that he removes his threat to veto one of the most important 
pieces of legislation that we will work on this year.
  I wish to thank the senior Senator from Arizona, the chairman of the 
Armed Services Committee, for his critical leadership in ushering this 
bill out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I had the distinct 
honor of traveling with Senator McCain recently to Asia, including to 
Vietnam,

[[Page 8793]]

where his service has inspired countless millions of Americans as well 
as the people of Vietnam. I saw that firsthand. It was humbling. It was 
an honor to be there with him, Senator Reed, and Senator Ernst on a 
trip I will certainly remember for a lifetime.
  Now, we all took an oath a few months ago to pledge solemnly to 
``defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, 
foreign and domestic.'' We took that oath right here on this floor. 
That is what the NDAA does. It gives our servicemembers what they need 
to fight and defend our great Nation. That is why 53 NDAAs have 
consecutively passed the Congress.
  It hasn't been about partisanship. This bill has moved through the 
Congress every year for over half a century because it is so important. 
So again, I would say it would be remarkable if the President of the 
United States would veto this, particularly given the threats that we 
see to our Nation.
  I want to talk about those rising threats and one of the biggest ones 
that doesn't get enough attention. We have heard from the chairman of 
the Senate Armed Services Committee and from both sides of the aisle 
about what those threats are facing our Nation: ISIS, Iran, Russia, 
China. These are rising threats, no doubt. But there is a rising threat 
to our national security that almost never gets talked about, and in 
some ways it is the biggest threat that our Nation faces.
  I am talking about our economy. I am talking about the need for a 
strong economy. Our economy is one of the most critical elements of our 
national security. A strong robust economy is our best defense. We have 
the greatest military in the world, no doubt--the most professional 
military force in the world, no doubt. We have built this up over 
decades. But we built this up and we have it because for decades we 
have had a strong economy. For decades we have had the most innovative, 
robust economy in the world.
  A strong economy is our best weapon against those who would do us 
harm. A strong economy means more peace, more security, and more 
prosperity. When America is strong, when it is working, when it is 
producing, when our economy is robust, the world is safer. Our strength 
sends a signal to the world. It allows us to set the narrative, to set 
the rules. It allows us to become the beacon that this country has been 
for generations.
  Right now, we don't have this critical component of our national 
security, a strong economy. We do not have this. As a matter of fact, 
our economy is getting weaker, not stronger. The verdict is in. 
Economists from all across the country, of all political persuasions, 
agree that the recovery from the last recession has been one of the 
slowest economic recoveries this country has ever had. We have not had 
a slower recovery in well over 50 years. The American Enterprise 
Institute has called this recovery ``glacially and painfully slow by 
historic standards.'' Even the Center for American Progress, a very 
liberal think tank, has said that ``this has been a poor recovery in 
every regard.''
  That was last year. This year it is worse. The gross domestic 
product, which is the value of everything this country produces, last 
quarter shrank. Let me repeat that. We didn't grow. We didn't grow by 1 
percent, 2 percent. The economy of the United States shrank by almost 1 
percent. We contracted. It is the third time the economy has shrunk 
since 2009.
  We don't even have a recovery. We don't have a recovery. Right now we 
have no growth. That means Americans have less money in their pockets. 
It means wages haven't kept up with inflation. It means the gap between 
the richest and the poorest is growing. We must get back to higher 
growth rates. We must get back to traditional levels of American 
growth. We must get back to an economy that makes us stronger globally 
and produces hope and opportunity at home.
  It wasn't too long ago that we expected in this country at least 4 
percent annual GDP growth. That is a very normal, traditional level of 
American growth. When President Reagan was in office, the average 
growth rate was about 4.8 percent. During President Clinton and the 
first term of President Bush it was 3.5 to 4 percent GDP growth.
  (Mr. PERDUE assumed the Chair.)
  My colleague from Louisiana, who was just presiding, wrote a recent 
excellent article in the Wall Street Journal.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that article be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

             [From the Wall Street Journal, Apr. 30, 2015]

                 Dismal Growth Needs the 3.5% Solution


The steps to spurring the economy include allowing oil exports and not 
                  taxing repatriated overseas profits

                  (By Bill Cassidy and Louis Woodhill)

       On Wednesday the Commerce Department announced that first-
     quarter growth of gross domestic product was a dismal 0.2%. 
     Following fourth-quarter GDP growth in 2014 of an anemic 
     2.2%, the already sluggish economy has slowed almost to a 
     halt.
       America is facing a harsh reality. The recovery that began 
     in 2009 is the weakest in postwar history. Millions have 
     dropped out of the labor force, frustrated by lack of 
     opportunity. Lower-income workers are underemployed, middle-
     incomes have not advanced as in the past, and government 
     dependency has increased. As budget battles rage in Congress, 
     ignored is what really matters: rapid, sustained economic 
     growth.
       The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the U.S. 
     economy will grow by a meager 2.3% over the next decade, and 
     its estimate has declined in the past six months. At this 
     growth rate, Americans face a future of stagnation, 
     inequality and despair.
       Here's why: From 1790 to 2014, U.S. GDP in real dollars 
     grew at an average annual rate of 3.73%. Had America grown at 
     the CBO's ``economic speed limit'' of 2.3% for its entire 
     history, GDP would be $780 billion today instead of more than 
     $17 trillion. And GDP per capita would be $2,433, lower than 
     Papua New Guinea's.
       Looked at differently, had GDP grown from 2001 to 2014 at 
     the 3.87% annual rate of 1993-2000, the federal government 
     would have had a $500 billion surplus in 2014 instead of a 
     $500 billion deficit. And that's with the same excessive 
     government spending.
       The last time the federal budget balanced was 2001 when 
     there was a $128 billion surplus. This was not achieved with 
     spending cuts and tax increases; instead it came after four 
     years of rapid growth--4.45% on average from 1997 to 2000. 
     Helping fuel the economy was a capital-gains tax cut that 
     took effect on Jan. 1, 1997.
       The low growth rate during the Obama administration, 
     averaging 1.36%, is not an accident. If the cost of 
     regulations are recognized as taxation by other means, 
     President Obama's first six years of taxes and regulations 
     (and threats of more of both) have undermined confidence 
     among entrepreneurs, small business owners, and the investors 
     that would back them with capital. For the first time in 
     memory, the number of business entities in America is 
     actually falling, according to the Census Bureau.
       An example of what not to do is the EPA's proposed ozone 
     rule, which the National Association of Manufacturers 
     predicts will reduce GDP by $140 billion a year, destroy 1.4 
     million jobs per year and cost each household $830 per year. 
     All for health-benefits claims that public-health experts 
     find questionable.
       It's important to be realistic about the future, but 2.3% 
     growth is fatalistic, not realistic.
       President Obama and the Congress should be agreeing on what 
     it takes to achieve 3.5% growth. Looking at Social Security 
     Trustees' reports, 3.5% is the rate of growth required to 
     ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, with no 
     tax increases and no benefit cuts.
       There are tangible steps we can take toward a pro-growth 
     economy. One step is to reform the uncompetitive corporate 
     tax code, as recommended by President Obama's Bipartisan Debt 
     Commission, among others, including the repatriation of 
     overseas profits without any additional taxation. Increase 
     oil and natural gas exports, which the National Association 
     of Manufacturers estimates would raise 2020 GDP by as much as 
     1%, while reducing unemployment by 0.5% due to an increase in 
     manufacturing jobs. Rein in the EPA's animus for fossil 
     fuels. Replace ObamaCare with a plan that lowers, rather than 
     raises, the cost of employment, and which does not 
     incentivize businesses to lay off low-wage workers or cut 
     their hours.
       Congress should devise a plan for 3.5% economic growth. 
     This isn't wishful thinking. High growth is historically 
     normal for the United States. It is the present imperative, 
     it is the only way forward.
  Mr. SULLIVAN. The title is ``Dismal Growth Needs the 3.5% Solution.'' 
He noted that from 1790 to 2014, almost the entire history of our great 
Nation, this country grew annually at 3.7 percent GDP growth--3.7 
percent. The Obama

[[Page 8794]]

administration's annual growth rate has been 1.3 percent. Think about 
that--1.3 percent.
  According to the former CBO Director, the difference between 2.5 
percent and 3.5 percent growth--just 1 percent GDP growth difference--
will have a huge impact on American families. We would be able to 
produce nationally 2.5 million more jobs and the average income in 
terms of wages would be $9,000 higher--$9,000 higher. Think about what 
you could do with that amount of money. Think about what American 
families could do with that amount of money, just by going 1 percent 
higher in our growth rate.
  Our distinguished colleague from Pennsylvania recently mentioned that 
in order to double the standard of living for a family--to double their 
income--at 3 percent growth, you can do that in 24 years, or a 
generation. That is why every generation of Americans has benefitted 
and done better than the previous one, because we have grown at 3, 3.5, 
4 percent growth rate. We are doubling our standard of living. At 1 
percent growth, which is the Obama growth rate, it takes 72 years to 
double your standard of living--72 years. That is the trajectory we are 
on.
  What is most disturbing about this is that this is a huge issue for 
the country. You don't read about it in the press. Heck, last quarter 
we shrunk. The economy of the United States, the greatest economy in 
the world, shrunk, and there was barely a press report about it. It has 
become what people are now referring to as the new normal. Traditional 
levels of American growth at 3.5, 4 or 4.5 percent GDP growth--nope, in 
the Obama era that is a thing of the past. We are in the new normal 
era, with 1.5 percent GDP growth--maybe 2, if we are lucky.
  We need to change that. We need to get the traditional levels of 
American growth. What is most amazing is that the administration seems 
to be just shrugging its shoulders. Oh, we contracted last quarter? 
That is no big deal. A 1.5 percent to 2 percent GDP growth for the 
entire Obama administration record--that is fine.
  But it is a big deal, and it is not fine. We need to change this.
  Since 2009, the White House has blamed everything from former 
President George W. Bush to the weather to climate change to Europe's 
health to growth problems in Africa for these slow growth rates. But 
have you ever heard the President say: It might be the policies of my 
own administration. It might be the fact that we are overregulating 
every element of this great economy of ours. They need to stop blaming 
and start fixing this economy.
  We need to get our country moving again. We have so many comparative 
advantages to other countries--so many. We have the greatest 
universities in the world right here in America--the greatest 
universities in the world compared to any other country. We have 
agriculture, farmers who feed the world. We have a high-tech sector 
that is the envy of the world. We have a capital markets sector that 
commercializes great ideas quicker than any place in the world. We have 
natural resources--oil, gas, minerals--that are the envy of the world. 
We are producing more natural gas than any place in the world right 
now. We are producing more oil than Saudi Arabia right now because our 
private sector has innovation, ingenuity, hard work. We have tremendous 
advantages that almost any other country would envy.
  What we need to do now is unleash this country's might, unleash the 
great potential that is the American economy. We need to refuel 
America. When we grow our economy, we will protect our country.
  We need regulatory reform. Right now the cost of regulations to our 
economy according to the President's own Small Business Administration 
is close to $2 trillion a year. That is almost $15,000 per American 
family. Think about that--$15,000 per family is keeping us down. We 
need a competitive tax system. We need to unleash the might of our 
private sector through cutting redtape and making sure that we are open 
for business, not strangling businesses with redtape from Washington.
  I want to emphasize these issues because we have been talking about 
the NDAA, the national defense of our country, for the past few days on 
the Senate floor, and we are going to be talking about these important 
issues next week as well. And they are critical issues, but this is a 
critical issue. If we can't grow our economy, if we can't get back to 
traditional levels of American growth, we are going to continue to have 
challenges. But if we can do this, if we can grow consistently by 4.5 
or 5 percent in GDP growth, that is the best way to address our 
challenges, our deficit, our $18 trillion debt, our national security 
and the funding of our military. We need to focus more on the economy.
  This administration has failed the American people on these issues. 
We need to unleash the might of this great economy of ours, and we will 
keep our country safe by doing so.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________