[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15102-15107]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
resume consideration of the Erickson nomination.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report the nomination.

       The bill clerk read the nomination of Ralph R. Erickson, of 
     North Dakota, to be United States Circuit Judge for the 
     Eighth Circuit.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.


                               Tax Reform

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, one of the Senate Republicans' most 
important priorities for the rest of this year is passing comprehensive 
tax reform. Why? Because comprehensive tax reform is perhaps the single 
most important thing we can do to get our economy back on the path to 
long-term health. Comprehensive tax reform done right will boost jobs. 
It will increase wages. It will provide much needed tax relief for 
middle-income taxpayers and families. It will help businesses reinvest 
in their operations, employees, and new products. And most importantly, 
it will help us achieve strong, consistent economic growth.
  Over the past few weeks, leaders from the House, Senate, and White 
House have been meeting to develop the framework for the tax reform 
bill we will take up later this year. This morning, they unveiled that 
framework. The framework supports Republicans' five principles for tax 
reform: providing tax relief for the middle class; increasing wages, 
jobs, and economic growth; keeping good-paying jobs here at home; 
increasing American competitiveness in the global economy; and 
simplifying the Tax Code.
  The framework released today emphasizes tax relief for the middle 
class.
  First and foremost, we are going to ensure that working families 
receive a much needed increase in take-home pay. Right now, 50 percent 
of families are living paycheck to paycheck, while one-third of people 
across this country say they are just $400 away from a financial 
crisis. That is not acceptable.
  Our tax reform plan will ensure that these families are no longer 
left behind. Our plan will increase the standard deduction, which will 
provide tax relief to those families who need it the most. It will also 
enhance the child tax credit, and I don't need to tell anyone that the 
important work of raising a family is getting more and more expensive. 
It is time for hard-working families to get a break with a larger child 
tax credit. Finally, we will be lowering the rates on middle-class 
families. By collapsing the seven income tax brackets to three, we will 
ensure that working families get to keep more of what they earn.
  Second, our tax plan will increase wages, jobs, and economic growth 
by lowering taxes and improving cost recovery for American businesses 
and job creators. The framework released today lays out a goal of a 20-
percent corporate tax rate. Right now, our corporate tax rate is the 
highest in the developed world. Our competitors pay an average rate of 
22.5 percent, while U.S. companies face a 35-percent tax rate. That is 
a big problem. Our uncompetitive tax rate has driven companies to move 
their headquarters and jobs overseas and led to wage stagnation and a 
lack of opportunity for American workers. Lowering the corporate rate 
will create jobs and increase wages for working families across the 
country.
  An equally important priority laid out in the framework is lower tax 
rates for small businesses, farms, and ranches. Like bigger businesses, 
small businesses--from partnerships to S corporations--currently face 
high tax rates, at times even exceeding those paid by large 
corporations. Lowering tax rates for these businesses and creating a 
new maximum passthrough rate will allow a business to reinvest more of 
its earnings in successful operations. In short, it will help these job 
creators thrive. The Republican tax plan will also allow for 
unprecedented

[[Page 15103]]

expensing. Allowing small businesses to recover their costs more 
quickly will free up capital and allow them to grow and to create jobs.
  The framework released today also shows how we are going to meet our 
goal of making America more competitive and keeping those good-paying 
jobs here at home. A key part of keeping good-paying jobs here at home 
is making the United States an attractive place to do business by 
reforming our outdated worldwide tax system. Having a worldwide tax 
system means that American companies pay U.S. taxes on the profit they 
make here at home as well as on some or all of the profit they make 
abroad, once they bring that money back to the United States. The 
problem with this is that American companies are already paying taxes 
to foreign governments on the money they make abroad. Then, when they 
bring that money home, they too often end up having to pay taxes again 
on part of those profits and at the highest tax rate in the 
industrialized world. It is no surprise that this discourages 
businesses from bringing their profits back to the United States to 
invest in their domestic operations, new jobs, and increased wages.
  Between 1983 and 2003, when the U.S. tax rate was much more 
competitive with those of other countries, there were 29 corporate 
inversions where U.S. companies moved abroad. Between 2003 and 2014, 
when other countries were dropping their corporate tax rates and 
shifting to territorial tax systems, there were 47 such inversions.
  Our tax plan addresses this drag on our economy by moving from our 
outdated worldwide tax system to a territorial tax system. By shifting 
to a territorial tax system here in the United States--a move, I might 
add, that is supported by Members of both parties--we will eliminate 
the double taxation that encourages companies to send their investments 
and their operations overseas. Combine that with a reduction in our 
high corporate tax rate, and we can provide a strong incentive for U.S. 
companies to invest their profits at home in American jobs and American 
workers instead of abroad.
  We will also simplify our Tax Code. Each year, Americans spend 2.6 
billion hours filling out complicated individual tax forms. Not only is 
this a drag on our economy, it is an annual frustration and burden for 
hard-working families. The goal of our tax reform plan is to let 
American families complete their taxes on something as simple as a 
postcard.
  Lower rates, fewer tax brackets, and a generally simplified code will 
end the complicated mess that too many families face every tax season.
  We will continue to develop the details of this framework in the 
coming weeks as we work toward a final draft of our comprehensive tax 
reform bill. I look forward to collaborating with my colleagues in the 
Senate Finance Committee as we work to put our country on the path 
toward long-term economic health and the jobs, increased wages, and 
opportunities that come along with it.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. WYDEN. I will be happy to.
  Mr. INHOFE. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of the 
remarks from my friend from Oregon, Senator Wyden, that I be recognized 
for such time as I shall consume.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Oregon.


                            Chronic Care Act

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, often late at night when the Senate passes 
a piece of legislation by unanimous consent, people often don't get a 
chance to understand what it really means, and usually there is a sense 
of, well, this maybe won't be the most important thing coming down the 
road, and everybody just said OK, and so it passed the Senate.
  Last night, the Senate took action on Medicare. At a time when 10,000 
people will turn 65 every day for years and years to come, Medicare is 
something millions of older people rely on, and their kids and 
grandkids make plans to make sure their grandparents are taken care of, 
but also they want to know what their future is going to be all about.
  What the Senate did last night--Democrats and Republicans coming 
together--is, in my view, transformational for seniors today and the 
beginning of an effort that is going to evolve in the days ahead for 
kids and their parents and their grandparents to, in effect, benefit 
from an updated Medicare guarantee that will stand the test of time for 
many years to come. The reason I say ``updated Medicare guarantee'' is 
that Medicare is not a voucher. It is not a piece of paper. It is not 
something you get and then, well, maybe it will do you some good, but 
if your healthcare costs go above your vouchers, you are going to get 
buried in costs. Medicare is a guarantee that vital services are going 
to be available to those over 65.
  Last night, all Senators voted to send to the House of 
Representatives a bipartisan effort that was years in the making to 
update the Medicare guarantee to start focusing on chronic illnesses, 
such as cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and Alzheimer's.
  Mr. President, I am going to make this a little bit personal. I am so 
grateful to Chairman Hatch, Senator Isakson, Senator Warner--the 
bipartisan group in the Senate that has been working on this.
  What I can tell the Senate tonight is that back when I was director 
of the Gray Panthers and ran the legal aid services for older people, 
Medicare was a very different program. Back in the 1970s when we were 
getting the Gray Panthers off the ground, it was a very different 
program than it is in 2017. Medicare really consisted of two parts. 
There was Part A. If a senior broke their ankle or needed surgery for a 
broken hip, they went to the hospital, and Medicare Part A would be 
there to cover a senior's surgery. If a senior had an awful bout of the 
flu, he or she visited the doctor and they used Part B. That is not 
Medicare in 2017. Medicare in 2017 is not primarily about treating the 
flu or a broken ankle. It is there for those conditions, and we are 
very glad that it is, but more than 90 percent of the Medicare dollars 
go to treat older people with two or more chronic conditions. I will 
tell you, until the Senate Finance Committee, on a bipartisan basis, 
began to deal with this problem--and fortunately, we had a couple of 
colleagues in the House who picked up on it as well--my sense is that, 
basically, both political parties had missed it. They really missed the 
fact that most of the Medicare dollars--90 percent--go to seniors who 
have two or more of these chronic conditions. They might, for example, 
deal with diabetes and heart problems.
  But today's seniors really face the kinds of conditions that didn't 
dominate the program back in the days when the Gray Panthers were 
getting off the ground. Today, seniors get their care in a variety of 
different ways. It is not just fee-for-service medicine. We have the 
Medicare Advantage Plan, Accountable Care Organizations, and other new 
systems under development.
  So keeping up with those changes--updating the Medicare guarantee--
ought to be a real priority for policymakers. That is why the Finance 
Committee has put so much effort over several years to get the bill 
that passed late last night across the finish line. There are still 
more steps before the policies reach the President's desk with strong 
bipartisan backing of the entire Senate. I am confident the job will 
get done.
  The CHRONIC Care Act means more care at home and less in 
institutions. It will expand the use of lifesaving technology. It 
places a stronger focus on primary care. It gives older people--however 
they get their Medicare--more tools and options to receive care 
specifically targeted to address chronic illnesses and to keep them 
healthy. These, in my view, are a whole set of building blocks that you 
have to set in place to update the Medicare guarantee. Still to come is 
ensuring that every older person with multiple chronic conditions has 
an advocate to help them navigate through the Byzantine healthcare 
system in America.
  I just want to highlight that point. If you have two or more of these 
chronic

[[Page 15104]]

conditions--I guess the physicians call them comorbidities--you can be 
drowning, especially if you are not part of a coordinated Medicare 
program or Medicare Advantage or something like that. You can just be 
drowning in forms and processes and procedures. Lots of times, over the 
years, I have gotten calls from a child who is a lawyer or an engineer 
and they said: Ron, help me out in trying to get through all of this 
maze of bureaucracy to try to get help for my parents. So I want it 
understood that what the Senate has done as of last night is an 
extraordinarily important beginning, but there is a lot more to do.
  I want to wrap up my comments on this subject and, then, turn briefly 
to one other, by handing out some very appropriate thank-yous. I think 
the Finance Committee has handled this bill, in my view, as a model to 
work on a bipartisan basis. I want to thank Chairman Hatch. He and I 
put together the bipartisan chronic care working group two years ago, 
and Senators Warner and Isakson did a first-rate job of leading it.
  There is an awful lot of sweat equity put in by staff. A lot of staff 
worked on these issues while they were dealing with weddings. We had 
three children born in the process, and there were job changes.
  Big thanks go to Karen Fisher, Hannah Hawkins, Kelsey Avery, Leigh 
Stuckhardt, Liz Jurinka, Beth Vrabel, and Matt Kazan on our team.
  Chairman Hatch and his team really stepped up to work with us and all 
the Senators: Jay Khosla, Brett Baker, Jen Kuskowski, Katie Meyer-
Simeon, and the chronic care lead, Erin Dempsey. Big thanks also go to 
Senators Warner and Isakson for lending us Marvin Figueroa and Jordan 
Bartolomeo.
  I close this portion of my remarks by saying that I think what 
happened last night--while certainly not something everybody is talking 
about this evening--is something that is going to be extraordinarily 
important in the years ahead. It is an issue that I know the President 
of the Senate and I have talked about--this whole question of 
healthcare and Medicare and the like. This was an important step to 
take and an important step we can build on. I hope the other body in 
the House will take action quickly.


          Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands Recovery Effort

  Mr. President, let me turn now to this question of the Puerto Rico 
disaster. It has now been a week since Hurricane Maria made landfall in 
Puerto Rico, and 3.5 million American citizens are living amidst a 
horrifying state of devastation. When I was chairman of the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over the affairs of 
Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and America's other territorial 
possessions, I got very involved in the economic issues on the island.
  But I come today to make a humanitarian plea to my friends and 
colleagues in the Senate. It is a plea not about economics. It is about 
people--fathers and mothers, children, grandparents, teachers, nurses, 
and thousands of veterans who served their communities and their 
country proudly. They are dealing with something that is almost 
unimaginable--this horrifying set of circumstances that they now find 
dominating their lives. The press accounts describe Puerto Rico as 
looking like a war zone. Millions of people on the island are without 
power, running water, and fuel. The few hospitals that are open--only 
20 for the entire island--struggle to care for the injured and the 
sick. Many doctors and first responders are unable to get to their 
workplaces because their lives, too, are thrown into chaos, and 911 
still doesn't work. Cell service and power are down. The airport in San 
Juan barely functions now, after days of being completely off the grid.
  It is almost impossible for us here in this city to imagine this. We 
have the basic infrastructure and health and safety that we take for 
granted every day. Only one word sums up the state of the islands--
demolished. It is almost impossible to gauge the full extent of the 
devastation. Nobody knows how many lives have been lost or how many 
homes and businesses have been damaged beyond repair, and how many 
lives have been shattered.
  What is known is that this disaster has affected the lives of every 
single one of the 3.5 million individuals living on the island and the 
millions more on U.S. mainland, who have had sleepless nights worrying 
about loved ones. This is a humanitarian crisis on American soil. It is 
past time to step up and provide immediate aid to help these 
Americans--not only for Puerto Rico but also for the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, which has also been clobbered by these storms. It is not just 
the right thing to do. It is the only thing to do.
  A few hours ago, I joined 35 of my colleagues in sending a letter to 
the President, and we requested a number of concrete actions. There are 
other additional steps in my view that are vital. So I want to just 
tick through some of them on the floor.
  First, the President has to issue a full disaster declaration for all 
of Puerto Rico, not just parts of it. Currently, 24 municipalities in 
Puerto Rico have yet to receive individual disaster assistance. This 
means that people who have lost their homes in these areas are 
ineligible for Federal assistance. This is unacceptable.
  Next, while the President rightfully revised his original disaster 
declaration so that the island will not have to split the cost of 
disaster relief with the Federal Government for 180 days, the President 
should continue this assistance until the island is back on its feet.
  The administration also needs to include funding and necessary 
emergency support for the Puerto Rico Medicaid Program in any emergency 
request. Medicaid in Puerto Rico doesn't work the way it does in the 50 
states, where it is a guarantee of care for vulnerable, low-income 
people. Puerto Rico's Medicaid Program is built on a block grant, which 
means that in times of crisis, resources might not be there when it is 
needed most. Even before the disasters, Puerto Rico was close to 
depleting its Medicaid supplemental funding. When it does, it will have 
nowhere to turn to pay for medical care for many of its most 
vulnerable.
  In my view, this is a perfect example of why block grants--as 
contemplated by the bill that we considered in the Finance Committee 
this week--Graham-Cassidy-Heller--and vital programs like Medicaid 
don't mix. It is a recipe for disaster.
  In addition, there are expired tax provisions unique and vital to 
Puerto Rico's economy, and they ought to be extended with any disaster 
relief package in order to give workers and businesses certainty and 
predictability. This includes tax incentives for producing goods in 
Puerto Rico and rebates for taxes on exported rum. In my view, if this 
is done properly and laid out in a proactive way, it will give 
predictability for the future and make a difference--an important 
difference to a lot of people on the job.
  It is also vital to get Puerto Rico's electric grid up and running 
and provide power generators in the meantime. This isn't simply a 
matter of recharging phones or turning televisions back on for news 
updates. Going without power is life-threatening. Perishable food goes 
bad. Those with diabetes can't refrigerate their insulin. Hospitals 
have a difficult time running essential medical equipment, like 
dialysis machines or heart monitors. Air conditioners are useless, 
which is especially dangerous for kids and seniors given the hot, humid 
temperatures and the limited supply of safe water.
  Another necessary step is to help ensure that Puerto Rico and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands receive assistance as quickly as possible, and that 
would include a short-term waiver of the Jones Act. The Jones Act is an 
important policy for ensuring a vibrant U.S. maritime industry and for 
our national defense. But in times of disaster it is more important to 
get supplies to the impacted areas as quickly as possible. The 
government has granted such a waiver in Houston and Florida, and it is, 
in my view, beyond comprehension that they haven't done the same thing 
for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
  Finally, the administration needs to mount a full-court press to 
rebuild the

[[Page 15105]]

islands' roads, ports, and airports. Once aid arrives, it is useless if 
you can't get it out to those who need it most.
  As several of my colleagues and I wrote to the President today, our 
military is uniquely qualified to help Puerto Rico meet some of its 
critical recovery needs. That includes construction battalions that can 
repair power and surface transportation infrastructure.
  I close by saying that the people of Puerto Rico and the Virgin 
Islands are desperate for our help. This situation is extreme. Congress 
and the administration need to act as soon as possible. The cleanup 
from Maria and Irma is just the beginning. The fact is that these 
megastorms, fueled by global warming, are going to keep coming, even 
after the power is restored and the storm damage from Maria and Irma is 
repaired. There is going to be a lot of work necessary to reverse years 
of struggle and build up Puerto Rico's economy and infrastructure.
  Coming to the aid of our fellow Americans at a time of crisis, in my 
view, is at the very core of being Americans. At home, I call it ``the 
Oregon way.'' Our natural disaster this summer was wildfires. Recently, 
I was out visiting fire camps that stretched from our northern border 
with Washington State to our southern border with California and many 
points in between. I met people helping Oregon fight fire from all over 
the United States. I met Floridians who were there the weekend Irma hit 
Florida. They were there to help Oregonians deal with fire, when they 
and their families were worried about what Irma was going to do to 
Florida.
  Colleagues, I close simply by way of saying that we should expect no 
less in our efforts here in the Senate to help our fellow Americans in 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The American people now have 
to be part of a mobilization to bring together the enormous resources 
in the Federal Government to help when disaster strikes. It is a matter 
of basic fairness and humanity to help protect and restore these 
American citizens and lands.
  I yield the floor.
  I thank the Senator from Oklahoma for his courtesy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Daines). The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, let me say to the Senator 
from Oregon that help is on its way. It is a very difficult thing 
because we don't have any idea how long this is going to last. When you 
stop to think about a land that is in the tropics not having 
electricity, it is something that is hard to imagination and to get 
arms around the devastation that takes place. I appreciate the fact 
that he has brought that up.


                       Work of the Administration

  Mr. President, when I watch the news, I can't help but see that the 
media is showing a kind of picture of Washington that really doesn't 
exist. The news would have the public believe that there is a lot of 
dysfunction in the administration, and nothing is getting done. But I 
can share some examples of how the government has been working to get 
America back in business.
  In my former life, I participated for some 20 years or longer in a 
free enterprise business. I was making money. I was losing money. I was 
hiring people, doing what I thought Americans were supposed to be 
doing. All that time, the major problem I had was the obstruction of 
the Federal Government. One of the reasons I actually ran in the first 
place was to try to save the free enterprise system. I never dreamed 
that we would end up with an administration--as well-meaning as the 
Obama administration was--that would be putting people out of business.
  During the last administration, the Obama administration, new rules 
were created that had no purpose but to hinder economic growth. In 
fact, President Obama is the first President since Hoover not to hit a 
3-percent GDP growth in any year of his Presidency.
  With every industry coming under scrutiny from every regulatory 
agency, President Obama added more regulations to the Federal Register 
than any other President in history. Businesses are complying with 
regulations, costing in the neighborhood of $2 trillion. You have to 
keep in mind that when you hear the businesses and corporations are 
paying this, it is not the businesses that are paying it. It is the 
public--the people who are out there, and they, through increased costs 
of goods and services or through taxes, are paying it.
  I heard an alarming figure the other day that some 65 percent of the 
people in America--this is a poll that is about a week old--are opposed 
to any stopping of regulations in corporations. Yet they are the very 
ones who are paying for this fun they are having.
  This administration has tried to do something about all the 
overregulation, all the rules that the previous administration had put 
in place. There are two ways you can do this. One is through Executive 
orders. People know what those are; that is, the President coming along 
and giving an Executive order that will undo damage that was done by a 
previous Executive order imposing a new rule on America. That has been 
taking place.
  At the same time, the other way of doing it is through a CRA 
resolution. Not many people know what a CRA resolution is. A CRA 
resolution is a Congressional Review Act resolution. It started about 
20 years ago and has never been used until this administration. What it 
does is say that if you have up to 30 Members of the Senate, you can 
get a CRA resolution against a rule that some administration has put in 
place in a certain time period. It is the way people who are elected to 
office, accountable to the people, can get things done and be 
answerable to the people, as opposed to an unelected bureaucrat who is 
out there imposing hardships and rules on the public.
  Actually, this administration came in, and they passed 14 
Congressional Review Act resolutions; that is, 14 in the first few 
weeks, actually. The savings from repeal of these 14 regulations were 
estimated to be $3.7 billion in costs and 4.2 million hours of 
paperwork, the most expensive of which--this is kind of interesting 
because I introduced a CRA resolution. It happens to be that mine was 
the first one to pass. So I had the first signing ceremony with our new 
President Trump during the initial days of his administration.
  The rule was imposed by the Obama administration. It was one that 
would force domestic oil and gas companies to release all of the 
information they had in formulating their estimates and their bids in 
competition with maybe China or other countries, and it was putting our 
domestic oil and gas companies at a competitive disadvantage. This was 
all part of the Obama war on fossil fuels. Everyone knows that fossil 
fuels are oil, coal, and gas, and this was an effort to do that. We 
introduced a resolution repealing that. It was a CRA resolution, and it 
was successful. We had our signing ceremony, and that was history.
  That is 1 of 45--some Executive orders--and 1 of 14 successful CRA 
resolutions. In addition to the CRA resolutions, President Trump has 
signed 45 Executive orders with the goal of reducing redtape and 
cutting back on harmful administrative redtape.
  Thanks to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle for changing 
the Senate rules because, with their help, President Trump and a 
Republican-led Senate have been able to confirm one of the most 
conservative Cabinets in history, and they have been working to 
implement the President's pro-business, pro-jobs, pro-economic growth 
policy.
  If you want to see the effect that this administration is having, you 
need only to look at the energy industry. Of course, that is to say 
nothing about the fact that we now have a great conservative judge. But 
when you look at the energy industry, it has been under attack for 8 
years.
  Within weeks after taking office, the Army Corps of Engineers under 
the Trump administration approved an easement for the Dakota Access 
Pipeline that had been withheld by the Obama administration because of 
nothing more than political pressure from the far left.
  The next month, the State Department issued a crossborder permit for

[[Page 15106]]

the Keystone Pipeline. Again, the permit had been withheld purely for 
political far-left reasons.
  Later the same month, the Department of the Interior lifted the coal 
leasing ban that the Obama administration had placed on Federal land. 
Federal lands have about 40 percent of the coal production in the 
United States, so that was just devastating to that industry. It was a 
killer.
  Another notable win for energy came just last week out of the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission; that is, FERC. FERC was without a forum 
from February until mid-August, creating a backlog and delaying $50 
million of energy infrastructure projects from moving forward. The new 
forum has quickly gone to work to address that backlog, improving 
pipelines and power agreements.
  However, a decision made last week has clearly sent a message that 
America's energy sector is open for business again. For years, New York 
State had been delaying consideration of water certifications that are 
required for FERC approval to allow construction of several federally 
approved pipelines.
  The Millennium Pipeline, in particular, would take natural gas 9 
miles from one pipeline to a natural gas-fired electric plant, 
providing clean, cheap, natural gas power in New York State. It was 
delayed and denied certification simply because, again, the radical 
left doesn't want it.
  Last week, FERC took the authority granted to them under the Clean 
Water Act to override New York State's denial of certification because 
New York had waived their authority under the law.
  Section 401 of the Clean Water Act says that if a State ``refuses to 
act on a request for a certification within a reasonable time period 
(which shall not exceed 1 year) after the receipt of such request, the 
certification requirements . . . shall be waived with respect to such 
Federal application.''
  With environmentalists increasingly urging States like New York, New 
Jersey, and Virginia to block pipelines by delaying or withholding 
otherwise valid certifications, these States are interfering with 
interstate commerce, a role that is clearly within the purview of the 
Federal Government.
  I applaud the administration for the progress they have made and the 
independent agencies for taking a stand against the gamesmanship of the 
radical left, environmentalist groups, and those who do their bidding 
by using loopholes and their official authority to block valid, 
compliant energy projects from safely transporting cheaper and cleaner 
energy across State lines.
  When the government works with industry, not against it, we start to 
see companies unleash investments across the country. In fact, the 
economy has picked up since Trump and his administration have come into 
office with the economy growing 3 percent in just the second quarter, 
which is the first full quarter under the administration, and the 
fastest pace of growth in 2 years, according to the website called CNN 
Money.
  Each nomination, confirmation, or policy directive of President Trump 
and the Republican-led Congress signals to the business community and 
American workers that America is open for business again.
  I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to address 
our energy industry's needs so that private investors can be utilized 
to deliver American products to American consumers around the world. 
Just this week, I introduced a bill to address the known bottleneck 
issues that add unnecessary delays in the FERC permitting process by 
identifying participating agencies early in the process and providing 
contract reviews and providing transparency. This is something that is 
just common sense.
  I thank very much Senator King and his staff for working with me and 
my staff on this legislation, and I hope my colleagues will join us in 
getting these reforms into law.
  I bring this up only because you would never know that this is 
progress that is being made in the economy through the Trump 
administration. Somehow that report has yet to get through.


                         Tribute to David Boren

  Mr. President, I have another thing in mind. A lot of people who have 
been around in this Senate for a while remember the name of David 
Boren. David Boren is from my State of Oklahoma. He was a Senator here 
for quite some period of time. He went on to be the president of 
Oklahoma University.
  I am kind of excited about recognizing him, especially because David 
Boren and I, in 1967--before any of you guys were born--were elected to 
the State legislature in the State of Oklahoma. This is kind of funny 
because, at that time, people thought of Oklahoma as being a red State. 
Let me tell you, it wasn't a red State then. We had a House of 
Representatives of 100 people, and only 7 of us were Republicans; the 
rest were Democrats.
  The way it is set up in the House of Representatives in Oklahoma--it 
is still true today, I believe--you have two members per desk. They 
would have two Democrats at one desk, two Republicans at one desk. 
Well, it came out uneven, so the only integrated desk was ours, that of 
David Boren, who was a Democrat, and I, who was a Republican.
  It is kind of interesting also that the first thing we did--keep in 
mind, this was right after we took office in January of 1967. We came 
to Washington. We thought we were really important at that time. We 
were going to testify before a committee. That committee was called the 
Environment and Public Works Committee. I don't remember his name, but 
he was a very popular Democrat from West Virginia. He was, I think, the 
chairman of that committee.
  I remember standing up and testifying before that as a junior Senator 
from the State of Oklahoma. I really thought I was something. I will 
tell my colleagues what I was testifying about. It was right after the 
Johnson administration, and I was protesting Lady Bird's Highway 
Beautification Act of 1965--taking private property away from people 
and all that.
  It is interesting because David Boren and I were testifying before 
that committee way back in January of 1967, and I ended up chairing 
that same committee just a few years later. So that was the beginning.
  Anyway, it was kind of interesting because David Boren being a 
Democrat and myself being a Republican and coming from a very strong, 
almost entirely Democratic State, we had an individual who is the--I 
can't remember his name--he was secretary of the treasury for the State 
of Oklahoma. So we started introducing the reforms. All the reforms in 
that decade were the product of David Boren, Democrat, and Republican 
Jim Inhofe. None of them ever passed, but we introduced all of these 
things.
  So we put together a plan. We had a Governor at that time--it is not 
necessary to mention his name. He was a corrupt Governor, and he ended 
up in the penitentiary. We put together a plan of how to get him out of 
office. I would run for Governor as a Republican, I would win my 
nomination, and he would run for Governor as a Democrat, and of course 
he most likely would lose--he was running against a very popular 
Democrat. Anyway, as it turned out, he won. Coming from a solid 
Democratic State, I can remember calling him up and saying: What do we 
do now? I think I was best advised to just go out of town until the 
campaign was over.
  Anyway, we spent time together, and we had a great time. David did a 
great job as the University of Oklahoma's president. He would actually 
teach classes. He always put students first. So he did a great job.
  I would say that it is fitting that he announced his retirement this 
year because this is his 50th year of public service, and he leaves a 
legacy of dedication and hard work and public service. His influence 
has shaped Oklahoma more than I think he ever thought he could. His 
daddy was Lyle Boren, who was a very popular Democratic House Member 
for a long period of time, and we all at that time became very close 
friends.
  I don't think there has been a man who loved Oklahoma more and served

[[Page 15107]]

our State more faithfully than David Boren.
  God bless you, David Boren. Enjoy your retirement.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________