Of the committee resumes its meaning for the purpose of consider the budget resolution for fiscal year 2018. In ordering it reported. A business corpus present. I will forgo an Opening Statement but want to point out we will begin the consideration of amendments. I like to remind senators that as a result of using the new five day rule in which the resolution was provided to the offices last week, only timely filed amendments will be ordered. I want to thank both for following that court rule. Thank you for your cooperation forgiving. Members will be recognized for three minutes to explain the amendment, a member post will be given to minutes in opposition. When we have decided on the time will have one minute evenly divided prior to the votes. As has been the practice all amendments other than complete substitutes have to be fully offset over the total years. Amendments we know they are no senate amendments. Its considered to be a privilege matter we consulted on amendments offered to ensure they do not risk and danger the privileged status of the resolution. If advise it would threaten and i will rule it out of order. Our Committee Rules to now offer proxies. Members will be present when votes take place. I recognize member schedules will have conflicts so work with Ranking Member to find convenient times for the votes. We have a vote at 145 this afternoon. Im having planning on having this recess for lunch and to vote at approximately 130 and hopefully be back by 230. In prior budget markets hall recognized members will stack those on amendments throughout the day. So well consider to proceed for the resolution to amendment. Its before the committee. Senator sanders, do you have an amendment. I do mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. As i think everybody doe knows,i believe in the people on our side believe that the budget being brought forth is one of the most unfair and destructive budgets ever proposed in the modern history of the country. It provides incredible tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country while it makes trillions of dollars in cuts to the needs of working people in terms of healthcare, medicaid, medicare, education of our mental protection. And in terms of programs that many people desperately need. Space on the robin hood principle in reverse. It takes from working people to give to millionaires and billionaires. During the coast of the debate we have excellent amendments that would address the Serious Problems of the republican budget. I will call up the First Amendment and that sanders limit number one. Is simple and straightforward, would establish a 60 boat vote budget point of order to prevent the top 1 of americans, people doing phenomenally well from receiving any future tax cuts. This is at a time of massive wealth and income inequality blessing we should be doing is providing hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to billionaires who dont need it. Today, the United States has more income and wealth inequality than any time since late 1920s. Incredibly the top one tenth of 1 owns is much wealth as the bottom 90 . Twenty individuals in america on us much wealth as the bottom half of our people. According to a recent study the top 1 now owns 39 of the nations wealth while the bottom 60 on just 3 . Since the wall street crash a decade ago, 52 has gone to the top 1 . This amendment is simple. Says that a time when the rich are getting richer, while so many people are struggling when we have a 20 trilliondollar National Debt, the last thing we should be doing is giving trillions of dollars of tax breaks to the 1 . So mr. Chairman i hope very much i hope we can pass this amendment. The Koch Brothers are the second wealthiest family in america, the trump family, multibillionaire trent family do not need tax breaks. You need to help them working families in the middle class, not the people on top. Thank you mr. Chairman. I oppose this amendment. The top 1 that are so often vilified at these Committee Meetings earn about 20 of the income earned in america and they fit pay 40 of all taxes paid in america. The purpose of this amendment would be to ensure the tax reform must ensure a prohibition that the people who pay 40 of income taxes must like it benefit. Thats the wrong goal. Heres what the goals are of tax reform as i understand them. Number one, lower the burden on middleincome families. Number two, to further elevate the standard of living of all americans by making it as competitive as possible. That will include things like addressing the high tax rates that even some of our democratic colleagues have advocated for. If you do properly its possible that somebody who is pain and that 40 of all income taxes might have some benefit. I dont think the American People are so resentful that they will forgo a higher standard of living and pay raise if they found out there someone whos wealthier than they are that might have a savings. I think the goal should be maximize Economic Growth, lower the burden on middleclass families, and not establish that 40 of income taxes paid have to be off the table. Will never be able to accomplish the more important goals. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. Time has expired on the amendment. There three minutes equally divided. My time has expired for the amendment, the amendment is laid aside. Consideration will resume and if requested a recorded vote taken at the agreedupon set time. The next memo will be offered by senator kennedy. Thank you mr. Chairman. My amendment would establish a Deficit Neutral Reserve Fund to implement work for you claimants and all means tested that our welfare programs. It will not include Social Security or workmens comp. , but let me explain why think everybody should support this amendment. The American People are the most generous people in the world. We spend well over 1 trillion a year in state local programs helping those americans who are less fortunate than we are. In our country if youre hungry, we feed you, if youre homeless we house you, if youre too poor to be sick will pay for your dr. And im very proud of that principle, separates us from a lot of other countries in our universe. But, we all know that in order to maintain these programs to help those less fortunate they have to maintain fiscal integrity. The best way to maintain fiscal integrity is to help people who need that help get into a position where they dont need the help. After all those programs are meant to be bridges that parking lots. Its been my experience that the best social program is a job. Im not talking about throwing people on the cold, the Free Enterprise system in my experience has done more to lift people out of poverty than any social Program Government has ever imposed. Im not talking about requiring work from people who cant work. What i have in mind is saying to our fellow americans that if youre between the ages of 18 and 55, if you dont have any children and if you not disable, then in order to receive your benefits we would require you to work 20 hours a week and will help you get a job or go back to school for 20 hours a week or do Community Service for 20 hours a week. Im not talking about a mother with a sick child, im not talking about asking granddad to leave the nursing home. Im talking about helping folks get back on their feet. I think for that reason is something we can agree upon. That is that every american should have the opportunity to know the dignity of work and the dignity of being selfsufficient. And thats what my amendment would do. Senator kay. Im an offer a sidebyside on this, i agree with what senator kennedy said. The idea is to get people to work. Thats a goal. Twentyfive years ago i was governor we did a welfare reform program. During that time we reduce our roles by him staff. When we did it was not by arbitrary requirements but by providing supports necessary to help people to get a job. So it wasnt cliff, it was a rant. While we offered was better training, education, childcare and some support on healthcare. Thats what help you get back into the workforce. I proposed an amendment that said lets look at increased job training, childcare and Health Coverage that will make real the impulse behind your amendment. I dont think its necessarily consistent. Its just say lets look at the approaches. What you say is work requirement and i say its a king amendment number four. Is there any more time left . If hes offering his amendment has another minute. Perhaps the first time in World History that the senator doesnt need the extra minute. Thank you. I just wanted to offer some information and agree with the senator an illustration. We put in opportunities for people to work who are able to do that in terms of the snap program and understanding 80 goes to children, seniors and people with disabilities in our country. 80 is helping those who are not in a position to do this, because of the support senator king is talking about weve seen innovative work been done in states. I think weve seen a proven record. Will have time to respond to my friend. You two minutes. I remember when your governor, your fine governor let me try to explain gently why think my ways better. What i am proposing in this amendment was proposed by president clinton with respect to and it has worked, it has worked in every state, its worked because president clinton didnt approach it by being hardhearted, the purpose wasnt to throw anybody out in the cold, the purpose was to help people understand the dignity of being selfsufficient. Now, some people respond well to reason when they see the light, others need to feel the heat. My son is in the latter category. What i am proposing is a rule that just says if you want to access these programs in a healthy and dont have children and a relatively young, then you have to either work 20 hours a week, will help you get a job, look at the Labor Participation rate, if you dont want to work thats cool you have to go back to school. If you dont want to do that you do Community Service. It worked, president clintons idea worked we auto extended to all federal programs. Will proceed to the next amendment which is sanders memo number two. I call up sanders memo number two, this amendment is simple, straightforward, it simply creates a budget point. Medicaid or Social Security. As i think we know the republican budget provides 80 according to various studies 80 of the tax breaks will go to the top 1 . Thats 1. 9 trillion in tax breaks over ten years going to the top 1 . But this also makes massive cuts to medicaid, 1 trillion throwing 15 Million People off the Health Insurance they have in a massive cuts to medicare, 473 billion. Interestingly mr. Chairman, think everybody here remembers that when donald trump ran for president one of the tenants of his campaign was that he was a different type of republican and he was not going to cut Social Security, medicare and medicaid. On april 18, 2015 said and i quote, every republican wants to do big numbers Social Security, they wanted on medicare and medicaid we can to that. Its not fair to the people that have been painted for years. Now all of a sudden they want to be cut. So, you have a man running for president telling the American People snack and a cut Social Security, medicare and medicaid, we have a budget now that provides a trillion dollar cut medicaid and 473 billiondollar cut medicare. Mr. Chairman, the American People and the polls are clear. They do not want to see these important Healthcare Programs cut. 86 of republicans want to maintain or increase funding, with 95 of democrats also wanted to grow the program. The American People are united, they do not want to see Social Security card, that i want to say medicare cut or medicaid cut and thats a reason why trump got as many votes as he did. I would hope my republican colleagues will respect the wishes of their president. And make it clear that we will not support cuts to Social Security, medicare and medicaid. Thank you. Thank you. I do have to mention that creation of such a point of orders outside the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee, is the jurisdiction of the finance committee, and therefore its not part of the budget resolution. Language that exceeds that is not in order to come to Social Security, the Budget Committee is already out of that discussion. And if this provision since its extended to medicare medicaid, it will force it to be done through regular order. It provides reconciliation instruction to the Senate Finance committee to begin work on drafting fundamental tax reform. The work will focus on changes to the tax code not changes to Social Security, medicare medicaid. Any changes to these programs have to follow the regular order that already contains the hurdle on the floor for processing any such legislation. Says the path toward progrowth tax reform which will generate additional Economic Growth. One of the best way to support any reforms that congress can undertake in the future. I oppose the amendment and time has expired. Theres one minute left i guess. I like to put but push back on the work cut. To me cut his yearoveryear reduction rate of spending. Nursing reduction in the rate of growth. I heard during the debate that work in the medicaid. Over the next ten years obama care spending was telling 5. 6 trillion. Under here cassidy would be fivepoint less than 4 . It always increase. 2008 we spent 200 billion in medicaid. Were not cutting anything, were trying to reduce the rate of growth. Time is expired for debate on the amendment. Its latest side. Consideration will resume and if requested or rick courted a vote taken at the time. Thank you very much. This amendment would strike from the budget the most partisan process in washington, d. C. Using reconciliation, particularly for something where history shows successful tax reform needs to be bipartisan. This budget allows for at least a 1. 5 trillion tax cut that goes disproportionately to folks at the top and jamming it through. I listen to my friend talk about his concerns and i couldnt agree more. To add insult to injury, a vast colleagues to look at section 4111 which essentially means you could have no score on the bill at all before you vote, which once again seems inconsistent but senator simple sites have said senator corker yesterday, theyre concerned about. The reality is, we have gotten testimony in the finance committee that there is no magical growth very. Republican economists said that taxes dont pay for themselves. Yet stephen nation said the trump proposal would generate 2 trillion with the growth. Senator coates and i will we wrote our bipartisan bill we assumed that behavior does matter. A good bipartisan bill will generate revenue. Theres no way it will generate 2 trillion with. Its a particular mistake to use this process when this provision makes unprecedented changes like changing the passthrough provision which was set up for restaurants and grudges and cleaning services into a glide path for the wealthiest people to turn ordinary income into low rate is this income and avoid paying Social Security payroll taxes. So, help bill recognize the storied history of successful tax reform is to be bipartisan. I hope youll support this amendment that strikes reconciliation because its all about taxes in this budget and also about fairness. Things like the passthrough provision creates a grand canyon size loophole for folks at the top. I think its doing insults what pastors ought to be about which is helping our Small Businesses. Two minutes in opposition. Thank you. Lets be clear about what this purposes. Its to give her democratic colleagues veto power over tax reform. Fiftytwo republican senators, if we didnt have something so our Democratic People would like veto power. Theyve helpfully told us of when they are going to veto in the letter they circulated the summer were 45 senators sign stating among other things like quote, will not support any tax reform plan that includes tax cuts for the top 1 . Which takes us back to the argument of the First Amendment. So we are told in writing that our colleagues will veto any tax reform plan that has any relief for anyone in the category that pays 40 of all the taxes. Thats wrong goal. It puts a constraint for Economic Growth. Our goals are to ensure middleclass tax relief to maximize Economic Growth. What the budget read solicitous is establish a 51 boat threshold. Theres nothing about that that precludes will have a market. Any democrat can offer an amendment, they can participate fully when we get to the floor will have an open debate and by the way, we have other examples where the senate accepted to about thresholds including the confirmation anomalies. So mr. Chairman, i would urge colleagues to vote against this. Mr. Chairman, just to make a historical point that theres no inconsistency between bipartisan and reconciliation. The 2001 tax bill that we worked on was done during reconciliation. We had told democrat votes. I yield the floor. The consideration will resume mr. Chairman, i filed an amendment mark sanders number 11 and i ask unanimous consent that senator harris be listed as the primary sponsor that senator harris be recognized to offer the amendment. Thank you mr. Chairman. Th