[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12484-12485]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               TAX REFORM

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, now, on taxes, another matter. Yesterday, 
my friend the majority leader brought down the curtain on bipartisan 
tax reform before a discussion between our two parties could even 
start, dismissing the prospect of Democratic input, promising the 
Republicans would again use reconciliation to lock us out of the 
process, repeating the same mistake they did with healthcare.
  Leader McConnell's announcement just came a few hours after 45 
Members of the Democratic caucus sent him a letter saying we were open 
to bipartisan discussions on tax reform. We had three simple, 
straightforward principles. Let me read the Democratic principles on 
tax reform: First, don't cut taxes for the 1 percent--the top 1 
percent. They are doing fine. God bless them.
  Second, don't increase the debt and deficit, something many of my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been talking about for a 
long time.
  Third, negotiate in a fair and open process, not reconciliation but 
hearings, amendments, the things that have made America great and have 
brought this Senate the acclaim over the decades it has had.
  Now, I would like to know which of these principles the majority 
leader does not agree with. I would like to know. Is he closing the 
door on bipartisanship because he so dearly wants to cut taxes on the 
top 1 percent? The wealthy are doing great right now--God bless them--
but they don't need another tax break while middle-class families and 
working Americans are struggling just to make ends meet. Many of us on 
this side of the aisle suspect that to some, that is the No. 1 
motivation--not tax reform, not close loopholes, not clean up the 
system but give that top 1 percent a huge tax break to please so many 
like the Koch brothers.
  Again, I would ask the leader: Are you closing the door on 
bipartisanship simply because you want to cut taxes on the top 1 
percent or maybe the leader is closing the door on bipartisanship 
because he has a fervent desire to blow up the deficit? That sure 
doesn't sound like something Republicans have been interested in over 
the years--they have been spending lots of time, with good reason, 
deficit scolding and debt scolding--or is my friend from Kentucky, our 
majority leader, closing the door on bipartisanship because he thinks 
reconciliation, which means you exclude the Democrats from the get-go, 
is a good process because he doesn't want to have hearings, because he 
doesn't want amendments, and maybe it is the same reason on healthcare? 
Maybe they are ashamed of their proposal. I would like to see somebody 
on the floor

[[Page 12485]]

get up and say: We believe in tax cuts--on the Republican side get up 
on the floor and say: We believe in tax cuts for the top 1 percent. 
That is why we want to do this.
  But, no, they want to hide it, cloak it, give a crumb to the middle 
class, and say: See, we are helping you.
  We all know that what happens after we have a big deficit, they come 
back and say: Now, let's cut Social Security, now let's cut Medicare 
because we don't have the money. We don't have the money because they 
cut taxes on the rich, the very wealthy.
  I don't know which of these three principles the majority leader is 
against, but when he closed the door on Democrats--when we sent him 
this letter which simply outlined our principles, that is all we wanted 
to do, give him notice we agree on these three things, at least on our 
side--which one or all of them made him close the door?
  We Democrats hoped we could work together on tax reform, but the 
majority leader has drawn down the curtain before the play has even 
begun. Republicans will spend the entire first year of this Congress 
trying to pass their agenda on reconciliation, a process that 
deliberately excludes Democrats, excludes hearings, excludes 
amendments, with no shred of bipartisan input. Just like with 
healthcare, I believe it will be another dead-end road for Republicans.
  I tell my friend the majority leader--I quote his speech in 2014, 
entitled ``Restoring the Senate.'' I truly believe--I truly believe 
that Leader McConnell believes in the institution of the Senate, and he 
has shown examples of that most recently when he said we don't want to 
change the rules, despite President Trump pushing to do that, but here 
is what he said in 2014:

       When the Senate is allowed to work the way it was designed 
     to, it arrives at a result acceptable to people all along the 
     political spectrum. But if it's an assembly line for one 
     party's partisan legislative agenda, [it creates] instability 
     and strife rather than good, stable law.

  Those are the majority leader's words. Well, if you believe that, my 
dear friend from Kentucky, then why are you instituting reconciliation, 
the exclusionary process, before we even begin the debate? And why--
might the American people ask--haven't you learned the lesson of 
healthcare that that process doesn't work?
  The American people want to see us work together. We may not always 
succeed. It may not be easy. It is hard work, but we ought to try. This 
assembly line of partisan legislation--no Democratic input, no 
hearings, no amendments--is not what any of us want to see. It is not 
what the American people are calling out for, and it will not produce 
good, stable law.
  Again, I would ask the majority leader to reconsider these three 
principles probably supported by 80 percent of the American people. Why 
aren't our Republicans supporting them? Why are they running away from 
them?

                          ____________________