[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 20575-20578]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 A RECAP OF THE YEAR AND AN OUTLINE OF THE CHALLENGES OF THE YEAR AHEAD

  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, as I try to do every year, if time 
permits--this will be my seventh year in the U.S. Senate; sometimes our 
work here finishes in a different fashion, but if possible, I try to 
come on the last day of the legislative year and give a speech to kind 
of recap the year behind us and outline the challenges of the year 
ahead.
  For me, it was, obviously, an eventful year, a productive one, and I 
believe it has been one for this Chamber, as well, in what is a unique 
political environment in which politics today is practiced and covered 
in ways we have never seen before--almost like entertainment. 
Nevertheless, it was a year that we got a lot of good things done, and 
I wanted to highlight some of them in the hope that this gives us 
momentum into the new year.
  This has been my first experience with a new President--obviously, 
not just a new President but a new administration that brought with it 
a set of individuals in different positions, so I think for all of us 
it was a transition in that regard. It also was the beginning of a 
second term, which, at one time, I didn't know I was even going to 
pursue.
  In arriving here earlier this year and getting to work, we slowly but 
surely got going on a number of key priorities that we had been working 
on for a very long time. The first one that happened was the VA 
accountability bill. This was a bill that I had been working on for a 
number of years. It basically gave the Secretary of the VA the power to 
fire people at the VA who are not doing a good job. It is that simple. 
It is not anything more complicated than that. It made it easier to 
fire people who were not doing a good job. They still have due process 
to defend themselves.
  For the better part of 3 years, there were a lot of objections to 
that proposal from the previous administration and some of my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Then everything lined up 
this year. Senator Tester and Senator Isakson, who are the ranking 
member and chairman of that committee, came onboard and really helped 
to push this and to move it forward. It passed in both Chambers and was 
signed into law by the President. This was a substantial achievement.
  What is interesting about it is that because it was bipartisan, 
because there was cooperation, and because no one was fighting with 
anyone on it, it didn't get a lot of press coverage. But it happened, 
and people need to know about it.
  Does it make the VA perfect? No. Are there still challenges that need 
to be confronted? Absolutely. This is something that has to do with 
accountability and the ability to get rid of people who were not doing 
a good job. It is something that, for years, could not get done because 
someone always objected and found a way to stop it. Then it came 
together with people working across the aisle to make it happen. Today, 
it is the law. Today, there are people who were not doing a good job 
who are no longer employed at the VA, thanks to this. That is an 
important thing that people need to know.
  I always remind everyone that the overwhelming majority of people who 
work at the VA are doing a good job. The ones who are not are the ones 
we need to replace.
  The year went on, and I had an opportunity to interface and interact 
with the National Security Council and with the White House on two 
foreign policy issues that didn't really require legislation but that I 
am grateful and excited about having the opportunity to help craft.
  The first was the new direction on U.S. policy toward Cuba. The 
previous administration had basically changed our policies toward 
Cuba--opened it up to much fanfare and, quite frankly, a lot of 
editorial board excitement.
  It was the enlightened position, apparently, to argue that doing more 
trade with Cuba was going to somehow help Cuba transition to a 
democracy. But after 2\1/2\ years, it has become apparent that this 
change has done nothing other than flow more dollars into the hands of 
that regime and help them in their efforts to normalize.
  When President Trump was elected, one of the things he wanted to talk 
about was what we needed to do to change that relationship back to 
something that favored the Cuban people and not the Cuban regime. Those 
changes came about. They were announced earlier this year at an event 
in South Florida.
  To cut to the chase, what it does is this: It says that people can 
still travel to Cuba. Americans can still go to Cuba as part of a group 
or as an individual going to support the Cuban people. But if you go to 
Cuba, whether off a cruise ship, an airplane, or if you are there in 
support of the Cuban people, you have to spend your money at places 
that are owned by Cubans--by everyday Cuban people--not by the Cuban 
military, which is trying to create a monopoly.
  For the first time in the history of that tyranny, there is a U.S. 
policy that places individuals in Cuba--private individuals in Cuba--in 
a favored position in comparison to the military and the Castro 
government. I believe this law will slowly but surely pay dividends as 
it becomes abundantly clear to the small, independent, private sector 
in Cuba that the reason they are aren't growing--the reason they aren't 
attracting more customers--has nothing to do with U.S. policy. It is 
because their own government does not want to allow them to be able to 
grow their businesses.
  The Cuban Government feels threatened by private business, No. 1, 
because they are Communists and, No. 2, because they don't want people 
in Cuba to be able to support themselves. They want people to be 
dependent upon them; that is how they control politically.
  We will see what decision the Cuban Government makes in the months 
and years to come, but here it is abundantly clear that there are 
people--Americans--who, under our law, can travel to Cuba, can spend 
money in Cuba, and they will have to stay at an Airbnb or in a private 
home or even, if the Cuban Government allows it, a hotel that is owned 
by a private entity. Where they cannot stay is in places controlled by 
the Cuban military or companies controlled by the Cuban military.
  The second foreign policy issue that we were able to get involved in 
is another tragedy in our hemisphere; that is, what is happening in 
Venezuela. To cut to the chase, we have a tyrant who is afraid that he 
won't get reelected. He lost control of the National Assembly, which is 
their legislative body. His name is Nicolas Maduro. So what does he do? 
He basically figures out a way to create an alternative Congress called 
the Constituent Assembly, basically modeled after the fraudulent Cuban 
constituent assembly-like model. What it basically does is it 
guarantees that certain sectors in society have seats of 
representation. Instead of seats in Congress by a district or state, 
they are represented by different sectors, like labor, electricians, 
you name it.
  But here is the funny part about it: The only people who can run for 
it are the people they allow to run for it, and they also get to count 
the votes. As you can imagine, that fraudulent Constituent Assembly 
basically votes 100 percent in favor of whatever he wants, literally 
with very little dissent. It is not democratically elected. Meanwhile, 
the legitimate, democratically elected Congress, to use terms that we 
use here, has basically been intimidated and stripped of their power. 
Maduro doesn't allow them to be paid anymore; they don't staff anymore; 
all sorts of things of that nature.
  We encourage the President of the United States to pursue first 
individual sanctions. We encourage the President to grow the list of 
individuals in Venezuela who are sanctioned and no longer able to 
benefit from ill-found

[[Page 20576]]

gains here in the United States and ultimately to prevent them from 
continuing to do something they have been doing for far too long.
  For far too long, they have been stealing the oil from Venezuela. 
They are selling it in global markets at a discount. Then they use 
those--to use rough numbers, they take $1 million worth of oil and sell 
it for half a million dollars. Then they will take some of that half a 
million dollars and use it to pay the interest on the debt they already 
owe. Then the rest of that cash, they use for themselves, and they 
sprinkle a little bit of it to some of the elites around them just to 
keep them loyal to the regime. Those are the midlevel or high-level 
military officials who decide, well, things aren't great in Venezuela, 
but at least my family is better off than everybody else because we are 
loyal to the regime.
  The President moved to stop that. Today, U.S. entities can no longer 
trade in these fraudulent, illegal bonds that are stolen from the 
people of Venezuela. This is a tragic situation. This is not an 
embargo. This is not economic warfare, which is what Maduro calls it. 
This, basically, is preventing them from continuing to steal.
  I would add one more point to this. I encourage every one of you, if 
you can, to read an article in the New York Times that appeared last 
weekend, a pretty extensive series on starvation. Children are 
literally starving to death in Venezuela. Venezuela is the richest 
country in the hemisphere, the richest country in South America, in 
terms of being one of the most oil-rich countries in the world. 
Venezuela is a nation with a long history of stable economics and even 
the longest democratic tradition in South America. There are children 
starving. We see images that we normally associate with other 
continents at other times in our history--children starving to death in 
Venezuela. Meanwhile, he looks as though he weighs more than he ever 
has before, and all the people who surround him in his government are 
heavier, fatter than they have ever been before. People are starving 
because of that. It is not because of U.S. policy. It is not because of 
sanctions. There is no one in the world, other than his handful of 
cronies, who would argue that it has anything to do with sanctions. It 
is because of them, because in addition to being incompetent, they are 
criminals.
  The Venezuelan Government, from the top down and everywhere in 
between, is filled with narcotraffickers, with people who allow 
narcotraffickers from Mexico and from Colombia to fly into and use 
airports in Venezuela to traffic drugs. Just imagine for a moment, in 
this country, if our elected officials said to certain drug dealers: If 
you pay us, not only will the DEA not stop you from trafficking in 
drugs, but they will help you move it. That is what happens in 
Venezuela. Imagine for a moment if the Department of Defense went to 
drug dealers and said: If you pay us, not only will we allow your 
planes to fly, we will tell you what time to take off and we will 
escort you in our airspace. That is Venezuela--state-sponsored 
narcotrafficking at every level.
  By the way, they offer another service. If you don't pay them, they 
will tell you: Don't worry, we will arrest the rival drug dealer, but 
we will protect the ones who pay us.
  There are some very wealthy people in that government. In addition to 
corruption and stealing from the people of Venezuela, they are 
narcotraffickers. The Vice President of Venezuela is a narcotrafficker, 
sanctioned by the United States as a drug kingpin, and it goes on from 
there. The Vice President of the party, who controls their intelligence 
services--a thug by the name of Diosdado Cabello--is a drug trafficker. 
The nephews of the President of Venezuela, the nephews of his wife, the 
First Lady, were just convicted and sentenced last week, in a court in 
New York, for drug trafficking. By the way, in their testimony, it is 
all filled with evidence.
  I hope in the new year that we can find a way to continue to support 
the brave people of Venezuela and a better way forward. We would hope, 
by the way, that even in the Venezuelan Government, even in that 
fraudulent Constituent Assembly, we would hope that there are people 
there, like Hugo Chavez, who believed in the stuff he believed in--but 
they would have to see that this is a disaster, that this incompetent 
man is destroying their country and starving their children, and that 
there is no future in the direction they are headed. We hope this 
situation improves in the years to come.
  Senator Cardin was on the floor yesterday discussing this, and I want 
to reiterate that I hope that early next year, we can move on a bill 
that we introduced together called the Venezuelan Humanitarian 
Assistance and Defense of Democratic Governance Act of 2017. This helps 
address this problem. It puts in place a plan to help with this 
humanitarian crisis. We need a government that allows us to do it. But 
knowing that the United States, working with Canada, Mexico, Argentina, 
Colombia, Peru, Brazil, Spain, and the European Union--knowing that 
these countries are ready to step in and help might be an incentive for 
decent people still left in that government to step forward and begin a 
process of transition.
  It was an interesting year, and one more legislative initiative that 
we took on was the RACE for Children. It is a pediatric cancer 
initiative. There are not enough innovations in pediatric cancer when 
you compare it to adult cancer. This law requires pharmaceuticals to 
begin testing adult drugs on pediatric populations so that hopefully we 
can develop more pediatric medicines. I worked on that with Senator 
Bennet of Colorado. We got it passed and signed into law. Again, it is 
not something that got a lot of attention because it was bipartisan and 
not controversial, but it is important. We are proud of the good work 
we accomplished this year in that regard.
  We had hurricanes that impacted Florida not once but twice, first 
Hurricane Irma and then Hurricane Maria, which struck Puerto Rico and 
had an impact on Florida as well. Approximately 200,000 U.S. citizens 
from Puerto Rico have moved to Florida because there is no electricity, 
because the island had already been hit previously, and because it is 
facing a financial disaster, and now it got hit by the storm. We were 
very involved in helping there. In particular, we worked with Resident 
Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez, who is a true and dedicated public 
servant to the people of Puerto Rico, No. 1, in getting the right 
response. It took a little too long for the response to get going, but 
it finally started moving. But there is still so much to be done. The 
estimates are that it will be another 8 months before power is 
restored.
  A disaster like that is never good news, but for the first time at 
least in 7 years, I feel as though my colleagues know more about Puerto 
Rico than ever before. They understand the challenges it faces because 
of its unique status. They understand the preexisting challenges it 
faced before the storm, and they understand what lies ahead.
  I don't mean this disrespectfully, but there was a time when people 
sometimes would talk to me about Puerto Rico as though it were a 
foreign country. We have to remind them that these are U.S. citizens. 
On a per capita basis, they volunteer to serve in the Armed Forces as 
much as or more than anyone else in the United States.
  I hope that in the year to come we will redouble our efforts, 
particularly in disaster relief, to ensure that Puerto Rico doesn't 
just recover but is rebuilt stronger than ever so that we don't have to 
continue to revisit this in the future when the inevitable happens, 
because they will face a storm again.
  Of course, just a few days ago, we passed tax reform. Not everybody 
likes it, but I think more people will as they start to see its true 
implications. By March of this year, the overwhelming majority of 
Americans are going to notice that their paychecks are bigger than they 
were a year ago, and if they didn't get a raise, it will be solely 
based on tax reform. If I were king for a day, the law would look a 
little different. But we don't have kings in America; we have a 
constitutional republic in which making things better is

[[Page 20577]]

our goal. Sometimes if you get 70 or 80 percent of what you want, that 
is certainly a victory. Sometimes if you get 50 percent of what you 
want, that is a victory. Most change in America happens incrementally 
through our constitutional republic. Every now and then, we can take 
major steps forward.
  Here is the bottom line: America's Tax Code today is better than it 
was before this bill passed. Do I think we went a little too far in the 
direction of multinational corporations? Perhaps--not that it is going 
to hurt the economy. But I thought some of that could have been geared 
toward working families through a further expansion of the child tax 
credit. But over all, I do believe it will help grow our economy, and 
more importantly, I do believe it will leave more money in the hands of 
Americans to be able to spend it on their families. It is their money. 
It is not ours.
  The best way to look at it is, if I came here and said that I wanted 
to spend $2 trillion over the next 10 years--borrowed money--to give it 
to the government so the government could stimulate the economy, there 
would be a lot of support from the other side of the aisle and from the 
press. They would call it genius and enlightened for a Republican to 
think that way. But if we say we want to leave $1.5 to $2 trillion in 
the hands of the American people and the private sector so they can 
stimulate the economy instead, it is a disaster and it is 
irresponsible. It is just a philosophical difference of opinion.
  There is a role for government. We must fund it. We have to rebuild 
our military. We talked about disaster relief. There are important 
things for government to do. But by and large, a dollar spent by the 
private sector or by an individual family is going to generate more 
growth than a dollar spent by the government. We fund government not to 
grow the economy but to help sustain it and protect it and keep us safe 
and the food that we eat and the airplanes we travel on and certainly 
from threats foreign and domestic. Economic growth is a function of the 
private sector and of individuals, and tax reform helps to achieve it. 
That alone won't be enough.
  One of the singular challenges in America today that we must confront 
in the new year, hopefully, is the skills gap. It is not just a 
throwaway phrase; it is the fact that the best paying jobs, the ones 
that actually pay enough to raise a family and save for retirement--
those jobs require skills that our schools aren't teaching. Those jobs 
require skills that millions of Americans do not have. We have to 
change that. We have to make it easier not just to graduate people at 
18 years of age ready to work, we have to make it easier for people at 
45 to be able to go back to some sort of school and acquire the skills 
they need for a better paying job. That will lead to economic growth. 
That will help fill the 2 million to 3 million unfilled jobs that we 
cannot find people in this country with the right skills to fill. That 
is how people get a raise as a part of economic growth, and I hope the 
new year provides an opportunity for that.
  I would add that, in addition to that, the new year will provide us 
an opportunity to focus on infrastructure, which is critical. My State 
of Florida is particularly impacted by not just storms but sea level 
rise in coastal areas, and there are things we can do to mitigate 
against it. We need to restore the Everglades, and, of course, we need 
roads and bridges and to improve our infrastructure and airports. 
Hopefully, we can confront that as we work on infrastructure.
  Mr. President, 2018 will be a year that we will deal with the farm 
bill. I hope action will be taken to reform crop insurance, to ensure 
that my State's farmers are never in the position they were put in 
after Hurricane Irma, with neither a reliable safety net, nor a 
reliable commitment from the Federal Government to step in when Federal 
programs fail to meet disaster needs.
  Next year could be a water resources year, a water year. Again, it is 
an opportunity for us to do critical things for our infrastructure. In 
Florida, beach renourishment and intercoastal navigation projects are 
important not just to our way of life but to our tourism industry. 
There are harbor dredging projects with the expansion of the Panama 
Canal. It is important that these things get done next year. They won't 
get as much controversy or fanfare, but these are critical things that 
we can do.
  Another opportunity next year that we have heard some talk about is 
the ability to reform the social safety net. On that front, I would say 
that is an issue that I have pushed for for a very long time. But 
sometimes when you talk about reform, people think you are coming at it 
because you want to cut. For me, it is not so much about cutting; it is 
about improving the way we deliver the same services. How can we use 
the money we are already spending in the safety net but in a better 
way?
  I believe in the safety net. I actually don't believe free enterprise 
works unless we have one. People are not going to take risks, people 
are not going to strive if they think that if they fall, the 
consequences will be economic devastation. You have to have a safety 
net to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves--the 
permanently disabled, the elderly and the like--but you also have to 
have a safety net for people who have come upon tough times until they 
can get back on their feet and try again.
  But I fear--in fact, I realized long ago--that our safety net 
programs treat the symptoms of poverty, but they do not cure it. That 
is why I hope that if and when we tackle the social safety net--and I 
hope we will in 2018--it will not be so much about cutting as it will 
be about reorganizing and improving. Yes, we will take care of people 
in their emergent and immediate needs. But we will also make it easier 
for you to go back to school and get a degree or a technical 
certification so that you can find a job and never again rely on the 
government. If we do that for enough people, it will save us money 
because fewer people will be on the social safety net. But that should 
not be the reason we tackle it--not as a cost-saving exercise, but as a 
way to lift up more Americans.
  We are in a global competition, and our chief geopolitical competitor 
in the economic space in the 21st century will be China. China has over 
three times as many people as we do, and we have to compete against 
them. They have 1 billion, and we have 380 million or 400 million 
people. We are competing against an economy with three times as many 
people. We need everyone. We are not a nation that can afford 
economically to leave anyone behind, and we are a nation in which 
leaving anyone behind would be a betrayal of our founding principles. 
That is why I hope we will tackle it next year--if we tackle the social 
safety net--with job training programs.
  In a few moments, the Senate will hopefully take up and vote on the 
continuing resolution. I know everyone is anxious to return to their 
States and homes for the holiday. I will say that I am disappointed we 
are leaving here at the end of this year not having taken on a disaster 
relief bill that I know the people in Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico, 
and--with the wildfires--out West need. I believe we will confront it 
in the early part of next year, along with a permanent extension of the 
Children's Health Insurance Program and other matters.
  Next year will bring an opportunity, as well, to deal with things 
like immigration security, the opportunity to deal with young people 
brought to this country, through no fault of their own, by their 
parents who now find themselves here, illegally, in the country. I 
believe there is a real chance next year to provide them certainty and 
the ability to stay in this country for the future.
  All these things are there, and they will happen in the early part of 
the year. But, at least when it comes to disaster relief, it is 
disappointing that we won't be able to do that--largely for legislative 
strategic reasons, not for policy ones. But I am confident we will deal 
with it in the early part of next year.
  I actually think that in 2018, despite it being an election year, if 
we allow

[[Page 20578]]

the momentum that closed out this year to carry over to the new one, we 
will have a chance to do good things for our country.
  In the end, given our differences that exist in this country today, 
it is hard to imagine we will ever always agree that every idea is a 
good one, but I hope we can all agree that our job here is to make 
things better. Sometimes making things better means 1 step forward, and 
sometimes it means 50 steps forward. But as long as we are moving 
forward in a pattern of perpetual improvement, I think we should be 
proud of the work we are doing.
  I think, by and large, in 2017, despite the fits and starts, despite 
the controversies, despite the headlines every morning about the 
outrage of the day or questions in the afternoon that usually begin 
with ``How did you feel about the tweet on this or on that?''--despite 
all those distractions, I think 2017 will go down as a year of 
consequential improvement, where things happened in this Chamber and in 
this city that made America better, not worse. On that, I hope we can 
continue to work.
  I wish all the people of Florida, all my colleagues, all the people 
of this great country and around the world a happy Hanukkah, a merry 
Christmas, and a happy New Year. I look forward to working together and 
making things better in the year to come.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.

                          ____________________