Now to the floor of the u. S. Senate here on cspan2. The president pro tempore the senate will come to order. The chaplain, dr. Barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. The chaplain let us pray. Eternal savior, we thank you for the fellowship of your spirit and your consolations of love. May our lawmakers remember that you are their rock and refuge. Lord, speak peace to their hearts in these turbulent times, guiding them along the path of your wisdom. Reward their efforts with a joyful harvest, as they strive to build up and not tear down. Raise them above discord and division, helping them to Work Together to keep america strong. We are grateful for the favor you have given this nation and for surrounding us with the shield of your compassion mercy and love. Strong deliverer, accept our grateful praise. We pray in your mighty name. Amen. The president pro tempore please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. Mcconnell mr. President. The presiding officer the majority leader. Mr. Mcconnell the senate is taking the next critical step in passing the comprehensive fiscally responsible budget before us. Its pretty obvious that this is a good budget, and thats true whether youre looking at it from a fiscal per spick alternative or an perspective or an economic one. Take the fiscal side first. It reins in government spending. It protects Social Security. It complies fully with the previous spending caps while also providing for an increase for defense resources if a bipartisan agreement can be reached. In short, its a fiscally responsible budget that will help put the federal government on a path to balance. On the economic side, this budget can help our country realize better and more sustained Economic Growth, which is critical given the last decade of missed opportunities for the middle class. One way this budget can help our economy is by providing legislative tools to advance tax reform. As ive said many times before, tax reform represents the most important thing we can do today to get our economy reaching for its true potential. Tax reform is all about getting america going again and growing again. It aims to take more money out of washingtons pockets and put more money in middleclass pockets. And it represents a onceinageneration opportunity to replace a failing tax code that holds americans back with one that works for them. Passing this budget is critical to getting tax reform done so we can strengthen our economy after years of stagnation you happener the previous administration. I know members are eager to continue proposing amendments to this budget. Weve already adopted some good ideas yesterday. For instance, the senate adopted an amendment offered by senator heller to provide tax relief to American Families with children so they can have more money to make ends meet. We also adopted an amendment from senator collins to provide relief to Small Businesses which have been responsible for the creation of about twothirds of the net jobs in recent years. That is according to statistics from the Small Business administration. Both of these amendments reinforce the goals of the tax reform framework developed by the president , his team, and the tax writing committees here in congress. So today well consider more ideas from colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I want to particularly thank chairman enzi and members of the Senate Budget committee for their good work in getting us to this point. The budget they produced is important to our fiscal and our economic future, and i look forward to passing it soon. Mr. President , i suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call mr. Wyden mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden i ask unanimous consent, mr. President , to vacate the quorum call. The presiding officer without objection. Underrer the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. Morning business is closed. Under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of h. Con. Res. 71, which the clerk will report. The clerk calendar number 245, h. Con. Res. 71, concurrent resolution establishing the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2018, and so forth. The presiding officer under the previous order, the time until 11 45 will be equally divided between the managers or their designees. Mr. Wyden mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden i call up amendment 1302 as provided for under the previous order. The presiding officer the clerk will report. The clerk the senator from oregon, mr. Wyden, proposes an amendment numbered 1302 to amendment numbered 1116. After section 2002, insert the following mr. Wyden mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden thank you, mr. President. Mr. President and colleagues, later this morning, the senate will be voting on amendments that i am going to be offering to strike whats known as reconciliation instructions from the budget proposal. And the reason i will be focused this morning on that is that it is absolutely key that we pass this amendment in order to get bipartisan tax reform. The fact is reconciliation is an on ramp to the most partisan process around in the history of successful tax reform is working in a bipartisan way. Thats, for example, what the late president reagan worked to do in 1986 with a whole host of democrats, and they came up with a lot of very important, bold, progressive ideas. They chose, mr. President , to actually treat income from a wage the same way as you would treat income from investments. So to send in one fell swoop a message that working class people would get a fair shake, that the tax law wasnt about the 1 . Back then, it was about working class people, middle class drives 70 of the american economy. They werent talking about massive tax handouts to big corporations and the wealthy. They were talking about the fact that in our country, economic success is built around a thriving middle class, a middle class that can buy homes and cars, educate kids, and pay for seengz. And what troubles me so much about these reconciliation instructions, which would allow for a 1. 5 trillion net tax cut is its just the opposite of the kind of approach Ronald Reagan and democrats used in 1986. Its going to polarize us rather than bring us together. And i think its particularly important right now, mr. President , given the meeting that was held at the white house yesterday that i attended, along with a number of my democratic colleagues, colleagues on the finance committee, because at that meeting, democrats made it very clear to the president of the United States we think the tax code is broken. It is a broken, dysfunctional mess. And we described the letter that we have sent laying out our principles that tax reform focused not on the 1 , on the middle class and not savage medicare and medicaid and Social Security are essential retirement programs, and what was striking about the discussion is the president said i agree with you on all those things. He said tax cuts shouldnt go to people like me. I want help for the middle class and i dont want to cut medicare and Social Security. I made the point, mr. President , i said, unfortunately theres a big gap between the administrations rhetoric on this and the reality of what is really on paper, and thats why its so important that we strike these reconciliation instructions and make it clear from the getgo that were going to get tax reform right, that were not just going to kind of utter these soundbites and rhetorical speeches and as discussion go out from various Administration Officials and we actually focus on what its going to take to do bipartisan tax reform. The president agreed with the principles that democrats talked about yesterday, but its very, very different when you see it on paper. And i want to talk a little bit about what is actually on paper. First, the trump tax plan creates a massive new loophole, the grand canyon of all loopholes by twisting and abusing what is known as tax passthroughs. It used to be that the passthrough was for a store or restaurant or garage, you see them all over oregon and all over america. Those are the people that we ought to be working to the to give a boost to. Thats not whats on paper, mr. President. Whats on paper is very different and its very different than what the president said yesterday he wanted. For example, on paper is a new loophole that would allow tax cheats to selfdeclare pass throughs and pay a much lower rate. Its a tax change that is deeply slanted toward what i call the top of the top, not just the 1 , but the top of the top. 88 of the benefits of this kind of passthrough rate cut would go to those at the very top, according to recent analyses, the top 1 and those even more affluent. It opens the door for tax cheats to dodge paying into Social Security and medicare like every hardworking wage earner in america. This would leave a lot of those programs, and they are lifelines for working families, a lot worse off than they are today. And that too, mr. President , is something the president said he didnt want. Now, next, apropos again of the most affluent the president said he didnt want to help is the estate tax. Here theres a proposal in the administrations plan to abolish the estate tax. Lets make sure everybody understands who is affected by that. The tax today touches the estates worth more 11 million, 5. 5 million for single individuals. A tinily fraction of all the estates in the country, eliminating the state tax isnt a policy change or anything to do with helping the middle class. Its ten tirely about helping the entirely about helping the mega wealthy, exactly the people the president told us yesterday he didnt want to help. Now the finance Committee Democratic staff put out a report last week that looked at some of the worst schemes and dodges that are used by the mega wealthy to avoid paying estate taxes. Theres a could thage industry of crafty could the by engineering billiondollar tax shelters for the 1 . So the estate tax is already full of loopholes but this administration isnt interested in closing them even after the treasury secretary, mr. Mnuchin admitted just the other day that it goes mostly to the people at the very top. So theres a Common Thread in these proposals, theres a Common Thread in this debate, mr. President , thats driven by partisanship and reconciliation, which is why i want to strike those instructions. Whats actually on paper, not whats said in the speeches or soundbites and the like, whats on paper is the republican plan does enclose the most egregious loopholes, it enshrine them as permanent legislation in our tax law that the president said he wanted to do and it is not a tax recipe focused on the middle class. Now, one of the individuals that has been most out in front of the cameras selling the trump tax plan to the public is the treasury secretary. Now, a few weeks ago the secretary doubled down on the failed experiment that tax cuts pay for themselves. Now, forget the history that shows that isnt true. The secretary said, secretary mnuchin said, that the trump tax cuts wont just pay for themselves, theyll raise an additional 1 trillion in revenue on top of their own costs. The fact is, mr. President , there is no magical growth fairy, no unicorns that will somehow spring to life if this tax cut plan becomes law. But the secretary, secretary mnuchin, our treasury secretary, keeps going back to the unicorn, keeps going back to rainbow economics. What is striking, mr. President , is i asked the republican economists, the economists chosen by our friend and distinguished chairman orrin hatch who came before the finance committee the other day about whether tax cuts pay for themselves, and the republican economists chosen by the republicans on the finance committee, those republican economists acknowledged that tax cuts dont pay for themselves. And there have been some other whoppers about the republican plan, at least what is, again, written down on paper. Secretary mnuchin said its very hard not to give tax cuts to the wealthy with tax cuts to the middle class. That is one stunner of a statement. Its very hard not to give tax cuts to the wealthy, and in the same interview he delivered what sounded like a real ultimatum that if the congress doesnt pass this plan so tilted to the mega wealthy, oh, boy, its going to be tough times on wall street. So you have to appreciate the eye popping honesty, but the ideas behind what the treasury secretary is talking about on tax reform pretty much leave your jaw on the floor. If thats where the administration has trained its focus as for as far as tax reform is concerned, the middle class is in tough straits. In my judgment, this is another reason why the senate should reject using reconciliation for taxes and support my amendment. The fact is the congress has never used reconciliation to write a comprehensive tax reform bill. There is a template for comprehensive tax reform that has been proven to work, and i mentioned it already, the one initiated by president reagan, a big group of democrats, a culmination of years of bipartisan work. What we saw was real bipartisanship, mr. President , which i define as not taking each others bad ideas but taking each others good ideas. The bill was considered under regular order was debated in the finance committee and on the senate floor for months and was open to unlimited amendments and passed the senate by a vote of 973. Thats the kind of bipartisan process we would like to see. Democrats have made it clear, we made it clear again yesterday that we think the tax code is broken, that we heard the president s comments about how he wants to help the middle class and not the wealthy. He understands how strongly we feel about protecting Social Security, medicare, and medicaid, but the fact is, mr. President and this is the heart of the challenge theres a big gap right now between what the president says his priorities are and what is actually written down on paper. Thats the challenge and were not going to be able to address that challenge, in my view, by signing up for more partisanship for taking the most partisan route on tax reform. What we ought to be doing is saying that we all agree the tax code is broken, we all understand that the key is helping the middle class, not more handouts for the top of the top, the 1 , that were sensitive to longterm costs because we dont want to pass those off to our children, and doing that is best going to be accomplished by saying that as we move now to the actual consideration of tax reform, we reject partisan approaches like reconciliation, and we come together, i know we can do it, mr. President. The fact of the matter is what the president says when he speaks about this subject is in line with the principles in the democrats letter. What we talked about doesnt even go as far as what president reagan did in 1986. What is in the democrats letter tracks a bipartisan piece of legislation that several colleagues here have been part of, including one in the president s cabinet now. We can do bipartisan tax reform thats good for our country. We shouldnt make it a lot harder to accomplish that goal by including these partisan reconciliation instructions in the budget proposal. Thats why i urge my colleagues to support my amendment to strip these reconciliation instructions when we vote on my amendment later in the morning. Mr. President , with that, i yield the floor. Mr. Wyden mr. President , i note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call mr. Schumer i ask unanimous consent to use leader time. The presiding officer the senate is in a quorum call. Mr. Schumer i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Schumer i ask unanimous consent to use leader time. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Schumer well, mr. President , first on health care, my two good friends, senators alexander and murray, have constructed a good, fair, bipartisan agreement that gives us a way forward on health care. It will offer stability to the markets. It will help lower premiums. And weve seen President Trumps near constant equivocation on the agreement. We shouldnt let it impede the progress of this very important bipartisan compromise. Hes for the bill one day, against it the next. Thats not uncommon. The president sometimes is for and against something in the same sentence. We can only hope he comes around and grasps whats in the bill. The alexandermurray bill is not a bailout to the Insurance Companies at all. Its the opposite. Weve taken pains to ensure that Insurance Companies do not reap any benefits from this program. Thats what alexander and murray have done. They have had explicit provisions in the bill to ensure that the costsharing program does what its intended to do lower premiums, deductibles, and outofpocket costs for americans who can least afford them. I was reading an article this morning where they interviewed a retired manufacturing worker in pennsylvania who was upset by the president s decision. It seems like hes trying to hurt the middle class, the man said. He, President Trump, says hes going to make it better for everyone. How does a premium increase make it better . Thats the question the president should ask himself. Ending cost sharing hurts people, mr. President , not Insurance Companies. Restoring cost sharing will help people, not Insurance Companies. Senators alexander and murray have made sure of it. Ive worked ive talked to them about their language. Its good language. Wellintended that maybe we can make it better. If the president has a suggestion, we welcome it. But as it is, its pretty strong. Wellintentioned members on both sides i hope will sign their names on to this bill. It has significant support in my caucus. And if leader mcconnell put it on the floor of the senate, its pretty certain it would pass. So, id urge my republican colleagues to take a hard look at the bill and to cosponsor it. So many of my republican friends have said why cant we be more bipartisan .