Those who are at the lower end of the economic scale, and i think thats appropriate. So its middleclass tax relief but heres how it works. The share of federal taxes paid in 2019, which is a year after this is implemented, it starts right away, by the way, so middleclass families are going to get that relief right away. Currently is in the red and then our proposals in the blue. If you make, again, zero to 20,000, its very unlikely that you have income Tax Liability. But some families do and the average is. 1 . If you make 20,000 to 50,000 a year, your share of federal taxes goes down from 4. 3 to 4. 1 , in our bill. If you make 50,000 to 100,000, your share of the federal taxes goes from 6. 9 to 6. 7 . If you make 100,000 or above, your share goes not down. It goes up. From 78. 7 to 78. 9 . The top percent of wage earners in this country, earners, top 10 pay approximately 70 of the income taxes right now. After our bill is passed and implemented, they will pay more than 70 . So it is a progressive tax cut in that sense that the benefit is focused more on middleclass families who really need the help. Thats what the legislation does. In addition to that, in responding to my colleagues who were talking about, gosh, you know, is there any Economic Growth that comes from this, yes, theres a lot of Economic Growth because the current code is so bad, its broken. And my colleague from oregon who is the Ranking Member agrees with that. He has a different solution as to how you get there. But he has been a leader on tax reform for that very reason. The current code is actually putting our workers at a disadvantage, making our families have to go through a very complicated process even to file their taxes. More than half of taxpayers now if they use a tax preparer, thats terrible. So this legislation does also provide Economic Growth by taking that tax code which has this perverse effect of actually telling u. S. Companies its better that they have workers overseas and take their investment overseas or even become a foreign company. 4,700 companies that are Foreign Companies today became Foreign Companies over the last 13 years because we didnt have this tax code in place. Thats based on an ernst young study. I encourage folks to take a look at it. It basically makes the point that because of a broken tax code, it is advantageous for u. S. Companies to take their jobs and investment overseas. That makes no sense. Foreign companies can pay a premium for u. S. Companies because of our tax code. We have the highest business tax rate in the industrialized world and we have an International System that encourages people to go overseas and keep their money overseas. Thats crazy. This proposal changes all that. It says lets get our rate down below the average of the other industrialized countries and then lets have an International System that encourages them to bring the money back and create more jobs here. In fact, mr. President , i will Say Something else. It also encourages for an investment in this country because if you are a foreign auto company and youve got a bunch in your state in tennessee and your decision is am i going to invest in japan where they might be headquartered, am i going to invest in china where they might have a factory or am i going to invest in the United States of america and maybe in tennessee, this bill will make it more advantageous for them to make their investment here and to create the jobs here because of the lower tax rate and because of the expensing when they go out to buy new equipment and technology to make their workers more productive. This is going to help American Companies a lot to be able to compete globally. It levels the playing field, which is very important and has been bipartisan up to now. Very bipartisan. We had a working group on this, five working groups, bipartisan working groups that were established two years ago that studied this issue and we came up with a solution that youve got to get the rate below the average and youve got to go to the kind of system were talking about. It was totally bipartisan. The democrats and republicans alike glead to it because it just makes so much sense for the American Worker. They are the ones getting the short end of the stick right now. They are the ones who are told you go out there and compete but do it with one hand tied behind your back. We need to give them the tools to be able to concealed and thats what this legislation does. And, yes, that is going to result in middleclass families getting benefits well beyond, in my view, the direct tax cuts we talked about earlier because its going to enable them to be able to get the higher wages and the better jobs. And thats why some economists have said its 4,000 a family. Some have said its more. Many democrats think its less. But there will be a benefit to these families. Remember these companies were talking about, the c corporations, they employ more than half of the American Private workforce. They are competing every day in these global marketplaces. We want them to win. We want our workers to win because we want them to be able to have higher wages and Better Benefits. We spent two decades with relatively weak Economic Growth and therefore relatively flat wages. In fact, on an inflation adjusted basis over the last 15 years there hasnt been new wage growth. There have been higher expenses, especially health care, and those health care costs, tuition costs for those who want to send their kids to school, or other costs food, energy those have all gone up. Wages have been flat. Thats a middleclass squeeze. And thats what this middleclass tax relief helps to address. And importantly, thats what this progrowth part helps to address because youre going to see higher wages and youre going to see Better Benefits if you give this kind of tax relief to the American Worker because youre going to see more investment. Youre going to see more productivety that comes from that and youre going to see higher wages. I believe that but what i believe isnt as important as what others believe. 137 economists, many of these are nationally known economists, have looked at the progrowth parts of this legislation, the parts im talking about that makes us competitive again, and they have said Economic Growth will accelerate if this legislation passes, leading to more jobs, higher wages, and a better standard of living for the American People. They say there will be a million new jobs in this country just because of this. I think thats really important, as important as the tax cuts are for the middle class and they are important. And again, those tax cuts primarily go to folks who are in the middle class, and thats appropriate. Equally important to me is to get this economy moving in a way that people can have the opportunity to get those higher wages and Better Benefits. The Congressional Budget Office did a study. It showed that 70 of the benefit of getting that Corporate Tax rate down is going to go to workers in terms of salaries and benefits. Some say its less than that. Some say its more than that. Kevin hasset says its more than that. The point is its going to help these workers and its about time that we help them. Mr. President , theres been a lot of discussion about the process here tonight, and i understand the frustration. And as a member of the United States senate, you know, sometimes i feel that frustration as well. But i will say that this legislation, h. R. 1, which is the vast majority of the papers that were held up a moment ago. This is the legislation that came out of committee. Its the vast majority of the pages, has been on this website called budget. Senate. Gov and been public since saturday, november 26. Its been out there awhile for members to look at. Every single one of these amendments that are part of the managers amendment was talked about tonight has been publicly filed. And i think thats good. We require members, you have to file an amendment and make it public. People can go on rpc. Senate. Gov and see all those amendments and i think thats appropriate. I would hope that as we go through this process tonight and we talk about this legislation, we can express our differences, which we will, but we can also stick to the facts, which is this does provide middleclass tax cuts. Again, those who said earlier theres no real tax cuts but then when it expires in ten years, these big tax cuts are gone. You cant have it both ways. There are tax cuts. Maybe people think there should be different kinds of tax cuts but theyre there. Second the Economic Growth element to this which to me is so important. Were not going to be able to have a growing economy and have opportunity and frankly be in a position as a country to be able to address some of our broader problems unless we have the growth and frankly the optimism that comes with that, and thats why i think the Economic Growth parts of this are equally important. Thats been bipartisan in the past. I hope it can be bipartisan in the future. I hope we will be able as a senate tonight to pass this legislation and continue to work on these issues. Not just in terms of tax reform but making our economy and our workers more competitive because that in the end is going to be the ability to give people the chance for themselves and their kids and grandkids to have a better life. Mr. President , i see my colleague from pennsylvania is on the floor, and i know my colleague from oregon may have another speaker. I would yield back my time at this time. The presiding officer who yields time . Mr. Portman mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from ohio. Mr. Portman my colleague from oregon has some other speakers. I ask unanimous consent that there now be 30 minutes equally divided for debate and with the majority leader being recognized at the conclusion of that time. The presiding officer without objection. The senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden im going to yield to my colleagues in a minute. I just think its important to make sure that the public understands exactly what some of the facts are behind the republican proposals because my colleague from ohio just talked about how the republican proposal is going to create many more jobs in the United States and certainly isnt going to keep the system which makes it attractive to do business overseas. Yet my understanding is all the previous versions, and we are going through the 500plus pages now, are based on territorial taxation. And i dont imagine too many folks in coffee shops are up on what territorial taxation is, but it is an express lane for shipping jobs overseas. And the fact is a number of the proposals earlier from the other side have made it more attractive to do business overseas than in the United States. Now, a couple of other points points. My colleague said that 70 of the Corporate Tax reduction would go to the workers. That is not what tom bartohld said. He said specifically he didnt see anything resembling that kind of benefit going directly to workers. He speaks a special language known as economics, but he made it clear he didnt envision anything like that. Now, two other points, and then i have a question for my colleague from maryland. We still do not have an anap sis in two analysis in two years. One, the cost of the bill, and two, what is going to be the fate of middleclass families with respect to this new proposal . What is it going to mean for their taxes and by what amounts . So if i could engage my colleague from ohio on this. What can we be told at this point are we going to get, if anything, with respect to an analysis of this particular bill, the 500plus pages . Will we be getting anything tonight before we vote . Mr. Portman to my friend from oregon the presiding officer the senator from ohio. Mr. Portman i thank the president. I was referring specifically to a c. B. O. Report earlier, and you talked about the joint commission on taxation that may have different views on that. That wasnt my belief i was expressing. It was me talking about a Congressional Budget Office report. My understanding tonight there will be the entire bill online, one, and, second, the analysis that is necessary to assure that it fits into the reconciliation instructions. Mr. Wyden what analysis would it be, for example, with respect to the bill, the bill we are going to vote on means for middleclass families . We have millions of middleclass folks who are trying to sort out what this means for them. We have just gotten a brandnew bill. So we would like to know what the new bill means with respect to the taxes paid by middleclass folks. Are they going to get ahead, or as we have seen in so much of the previous iterations, fall behind, particularly after 2027 . So will we get a new analysis on this new proposal that will well actually vote on with respect to what it means for middleclass families . Mr. Portman will the gentleman yield . Mr. Wyden of course. Mr. Portman the good news, you will be glad to hear, is that the middleclass cuts continue. You will see a 36 tax cut. If youre making 165,000 a year with two kids, you will get an 8 tax cut. Thats still in the legislation. Big change that we talked about earlier is that there is a deduction for property taxes. Its a 10,000 cap on that deduction. As you know, if you look at the entire salt, which is the state and local taxes and property taxes, about 50 of that benefit goes to families making over 200,000. This one is much more targeted at the middle class. I think it is fair to say to my friend from oregon you will see more middleclass tax relief from that and that will be something that will help the middleclass families. But theres no change in terms of the tax cuts because those brackets, the reduction in the tax rates, the doubling of the standard deduction and the child credit are in it. Mr. Wyden what i will say to my friend is that we dont have any evidence of that. My friend has made claims about his bill, but we dont have any evidence of it. In fact, the comment made by my colleague highlights my concern. What we have seen thus far for middleclass families after 2027, upwards of half of them would pay more in taxes. So i think rather than continue this, i would just ask my colleague to see if his side could produce an actual document, even a summary, of what this new bill is actually going to mean for middleclass families who are concerned on the base of the earlier versions about seeing their taxes go up, particularly after 2027. Now, one question for my colleague from maryland, because he has been talking about the state and local deduction which is enormously important to folks in my state, like my colleague as well. And my question is, when the first income tax was enacted in 1861, it was to finance the cost of the civil war and it included only one deduction at that time for state and local taxes and that was really composed to respect the states ability to make their own fiscal decisions. It was the first deduction more than a century ago. Does that seem like a special interest tax break compared to this list of more than 30 breaks that we have managed to excavate from various corners of k street . Mr. Cardin if my colleague would yield. Mr. Wyden i would. The presiding officer the senator from maryland. Mr. Cardin thank you. If you go over history as to how the income tax came about, it really was part of federalism. They needed the consent much the states. They had to change the constitution. It was a partnership with our states, and that is why from its inception, theres been respect for state and local taxation as a deduction from the federal income tax. This is not a special interest. This is government finance, how we finance government, and we finance government at the federal level, state level, and the local level. And if this bill becomes law, were violating it. Mr. President , if i could ask my friend from oregon to let me just have a minute more for two or three more points on this that i think is important, and that is there are effects that will take place as a result of the limitation of state and local taxes. There will be effects on the property values. That will affect the tax base of local government. It will affect, in this bill, Charitable Giving. Why do i say Charitable Giving as part of this . Because i was talking to the mayor of baltimore, mayor pew, she is depending upon private groups and their generosity to deal with the problems of baltimore. It will be much more difficult for private groups to be able to get charitable contributions if this bill becomes law. So theres an impact on this that will affect the state and local governments in addition to the elimination of state and local tax deduction. If there is one more point i could make. I respect my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the charge they show, but it does not include the effect of the increase in the estate tax. It does not take into consideration 13 Million People who no longer are going to have Health Insurance, thats not taken into consideration in the charge they are showing. It doesnt take into consideration the charge that the corporations profits that they will make as a result of these tax cuts will likely go to stock buyouts rather than helping the workers. Thats not reflected. So when you take a look at all of it, and we do have some analysis that has been done that is objective, middleclass taxpayers are at a disadvantage under this bim. I thank my friend bill. I thank my friend from oregon. Mr. Wyden i thank the senator from West Virginia and connecticut have been very patient. Lets yield time to the senator from West Virginia. The presiding officer the senator from West Virginia. Mr. Manchin mr. President , i