tv U.S. Senate Sen. Chuck Schumer John Cornyn on Tax Reform Bill CFPB... CSPAN November 28, 2017 7:48am-8:20am EST
reserve chair and live at 10:00 eastern on c-span and the senate budget committee reviews its tax reform bill at 2:30 on c-span3, the senate health committee considers nomination of donald trump's picked to replace tom prices health and human services secretary, live coverage and 9:30 eastern on c-span3, the house takes up a bill requiring members of congress and staff to take anti-harassment and antidiscrimination training, live coverage of congress on the c-span networks online at c-span.org or the free c-span radio apps. >> senate minority leader chuck schumer and majority whip texas republican john cornyn spoke about the gop tax bill in the leadership of the consumer financial protection bureau following the resignation of richard cordray. remarks on the senate floor are
30 minutes. >> thank you. madam president, i welcome you, senator from texas, after thanksgiving break, i have my parents, 94 and 89, with all children and grandchildren, and this and that. i would like to be thankful, blessed to have my mom and dad, happy about it. now we are back. precious little time to do it. funding for the government expires this friday. 800,000 dreamers wait to hear they can live and work in the only country they have ever known. 9 million children reauthorizing the health insurance program and millions more waiting to restore funding for community health centers, the most cost-effective and
only healthcare lots of people can get. we need to funds cost-sharing programs that have pocket costs for low income americans because the administration refuses to do so. texas, louisiana, puerto rico, the us virgin islands are desperately in need of additional aid to recover from the natural disasters god brought on them and the debt ceiling must be raised again and in short order. we need to come to agreement on these issues and quickly. to that end the foreign leaders will meet with the president tomorrow. hopefully we can make progress on an agreement covering time sensitive keep the government running is working for the american people. we could be working on all these issues this week but instead the majority is
pursuing a partisan tax plan. since the republicans released their first draft of the tax bill a few weeks ago we have one week of markup in the senate finance committee, and aside from the testimony of one representative of the joint committee of taxation the senate hasn't heard for any and all hearing room. and changing lives dramatically. the bill is likely to change drastically again on the floor of the senate, with little time for senators of either party to grapple with the consequences, and the tax committee, the full analysis of the economic impact
of the bill until after the bill was voted on. is that backwards or what? the republican tax bill will affect every taxpayer and business in america and my colleagues won't know many of its impact before they vote on it. two things about the bill seem certain. first, it will raise taxes on millions of middle-class families in every state of the union. second it will explode the deficit. every independent analysis of the senate tax bill shows that millions of families making $200,000 a year will pay more, not less in taxes under the plan. the most recent analysis shows 60% of middle-class families, 155,000, with the attacks increase at the end of the day,
most middle-class families by the time the 10 year window is up will see a tax increase, 60% according to the tax policy center. middle-class people are struggling, they get a small, small decrease in taxes or an increase, folks making over $1 million a year will get an average tax cut of $40,000, more than many americans make in a whole year. the tax breaks for individuals all expire, tax breaks for massive corporations are permanent. because the individual mandate is repealed the tax bill would cause 13 million fewer americans to have health insurance. meanwhile, couples with over $11 million get a tax break. the bill is terrible for the country. it is a massive transfer of wealth to the already wealthy. it will exacerbate any quality,
set the middle-class back at the worst possible time. at the same time it would increase the deficit by $1.5 trillion at the very least. some of my republican friends are saying future congresses will extend the middle-class tax break. that would increase the deficit even more significantly, you can't have it both ways. the bill socks it to the middle-class or blows a giant hole in the deficit. a silanes charybdis, no one wants either. the text will give you that awful choice. the republican friends say the text will unleash such economic growth tax cuts will pay for themselves in the deficit will evaporate. it is curious to me that those same republicans are rushing the bill so fast through the joint committee on tax that integrate have time to assess the economic impact. they are afraid of what it will say. they know it will say nothing
close to what our republican optimists are predicting. of warming to a former economist, quote, there is good reason to expect the estimate of current legislation will show less unflattering growth affects. you have to wonder, are republicans afraid the experts will fund republican promises of economic growth, will they find the republican promises of economic growth are pure fantasy? it sure seems that way. the majority shouldn't be ramming through such an ill-conceived backward bill, shouldn't be breaking the traditions of this body, busting the deficit, hurting millions of middle-class families when there is so much potential agreement between our two parties on tax reform. we can come up with a good bipartisan bill not with her reconciliation but regular order and be prouder for it.
we democrats want to lower middle-class taxes, democrats want to reduce the burden on small businesses, we want to encourage companies to locate jobs here instead of shipping them overseas and do all these things in a deficit neutral way. those thoughts have a majority on each side of the aisle. a shame the republican leadership has chosen reconciliation which means no regular order, no hearings, no sunlight and no democratic and put into the bill. if republicans turn their backs on the deeply flawed approach and i plead with a handful who haven't committed yet, we can work together on bipartisan tax reform that delivers real relief for everyone in the middle-class. finally on the matter of the director is a bishop of the consumer financial protection
bureau there should be the acting director of the agency, the process for succession laid out in dodd-frank is clear, leandra english, not mcilvain income is acting director of the cf beatty. let me underscore that point. i was involved when dodd-frank was written. the clear intention of congress was to establish a clear line of succession, separate and apart from the federal vacancies act. i remember. i was there. the language in question was in part of the house version of dodd-frank but we included it in the senate version for an explicit purpose. we wanted them to be an independent agency free from political considerations of the white house, free of the influence of lobbyists who would not like the consumers were finally protected in the financial area. we wanted a watchdog whose only
job was to look out for consumers. that was the whole structure of the bill, the reason it has such a unique structure, to shield it from an administration, whoever it would be, that would be influenced by lobbyists. that is why we expertly stipulated the director wasn't available the acting director should be the highest ranking member of the cft be. not whoever the white house believes is in their political interests. by attempting to install mister mulvaney as the director the trump administration is ignoring the established proper legal order of succession that we purposely put in place in order to put a fox in charge of the henhouse. mister mulvaney has throughout his career criticize the mission and purpose of the cfpb. the man the president chose for director of the agency called it a sick, sad joke. he doesn't believe in the agency. he would prefer that it doesn't
exist. that is not speculation. those are mick mulvaney's own words in 2015. he said i don't like the fact that the cfpb exists. the only reason, the only reason the trump administration would put mister mulvaney forward for this position would be so that he can rock the agency from the inside was a clear pattern in this administration. rather than trying to scrap agency the administration doesn't like, the tactic that would never fly with congress or the american people who know how important these agencies are, the administration puts in charge people who will undermine them, to head the environment protection agency, the trump administration shows an industry advocate who is against just about every advance of clean-air and clean water act. to head the department of energy, the trump administration nominated someone who calls for the abolishment. to head the ex-bank which
that person will take charge of the agency is confirmed. weber is nominated must have demonstrated record standing up on behalf of consumers. former director cordray, leander english fit that mold. mick mulvaney does not. to the interim, the law established under dodd-frank dictates that ms. english is the acting director of the cfpb.
the white house should abandon any efforts to circumvent that succession process. i yield the floor, madam president. >> madam president?
>> senator from texas. >> madam president, my friend the senator from new york is my friend and we work together on a number of occasions but i must disagree with a number of things he said today here first of all, the consumer financial protection bureau was a partisan creation i democrats during the obama administration that had virtually no republican support. what they did is they created a modern day emperor, someone aiming from congressional oversight and appropriations process. and now that mr. cortright is leaving following the election of a republican president, they're taking a section to the fact this president president e
authority under the law to appoint his successor. and instead insisting that somebody chosen by mr. cordray, this modern day financial emperor, should be able to make a choice and enforce it on this administration when clearly this administration was elected to office in part in response to the overreach of the previous obama administration. this this is a perfect example w nimble my colleague can be with the facts. because the fact is he comes here and complains about the fact that this tax bill that we will be taking up is not partisan enough for him when, in fact, senate democrats have made it clear they don't want to do anything that would give any credit to this administration or the republican majority. and basically rather than taking
the opportunity to find common ground and govern, they essentially have taken up the resistance. leaving the results of the election last november basically unresolved in there might at least even though the american people have clearly moved on and expect this administration that was elected to office along with the republican majority in the house and the senate to actually govern. i remember days and times after we had elections we actually figured out we needed to govern and were not focused then on the next campaign but apparently our colleagues across the aisle have simply forgotten that. that's the bad news. the good news is it's not too late for them to change their ways and to join us and bring historic tax reform to the american people. this week we will be considering the senate subversion voted out of the senate finance committee last thursday night of our tax
cut and jobs act which is a first major overhaul of our nation's tax code in more than 30 years. cut tax rates across the board reducing the burden on american job creators and middle-class families alike. under our proposal it's been estimated that folks back in my home state of texas will see more than 76,000 new jobs created. after-tax incomes for middle-class families should rise by nearly $2600. that may be chump change here inside the beltway, our friends across the aisle return their nose up and say who would want to do this for $2600 additional tax savings each year? i can tell you my 28 million constituents in texas don't believe that $2600 in tax savings for a family of four is chump change. they think of that as ways to increase their take-home pay, improve their standard of living, prepare for retirement,
health their children go to college. that's what that means to them. this bill will also reduce the tax burden on small business, businesses, put american companies auto level playing field with their foreign competitors. ultimately growing our economy here at home. ironically we heard some of the same old tired rhetoric and the finance committee where we're talking about corporate giveaways and things like that. only to remind our colleagues on the senate finance committee that they themselves had proposed similar tax cuts for american businesses so that they could get more competitive in an international economy, global economy. in fact, we had to remind them after they derided this idea that we would want to be more competitive in the global economy that it was barack obama in 2011 called for democrats and republicans to come together to cut the corporate tax rate because it was the highest one
in the world. and it was causing businesses to invest abroad, indeed, to lead the united states to set up their headquarters abroad just to avoid the highest tax rate in the civilized world. there's been a lot of this information and misinformation out there, which i would like to take the opportunity to correct on a couple of accounts. one major reform include the latest version of a taxi from bill as appeal of obamacare's individual mandate. make no mistake, the individual mandate penalty is literally a tax on low income americans. it's a tax because chief justice roberts of the united states supreme court called it a tax. democrats have made two arguments. first, the repealing this mandate is a tax increase, only in the parallel universe known as washington d.c. woodcutting
the tax be called a tax increase. and second, they said the repeal kicks people off their insurance coverage. which is demonstrably not true. but let's start with the first argument. the repeal some of represents a tax increase on the poor. it's a pretty strange thing to say that eliminating a financial obligations simultaneously entails an additional fiscal burden. in other words, a tax schedule a tax increase. only here in the parallel universe of washington, d.c. does that, could that possibly be true. it defies all logic. what actually happens under our plan is that certain low income individuals get a tax cut, if they voluntarily decide not to buy obamacare coverage they would receive an additional tax cut because they will no longer be penalized by their own government for failing to buy insurance policy that they can't
afford. it's worth noting in 2015 that 80% of the people paying the obamacare individual mandate tax made less than $50,000 each year. 80% made 80% made less than 50,000. there were 6.7 million people in 2015 alone that paid this additional mandate tax because they couldn't afford to purchase the government mandated coverage. the mandate is repealed these folks are more money to spend and the will benefit from income tax rate reductions in addition. now, if our colleagues across the aisle would work with us, the same people would be able to find more affordable coverage than suited to need rather than have to buy one-size-fits-all policy that's pricing them out of the market, but that's
another story. the second ridiculous argument is one you may recall the minority leader saying shortly before thanksgiving, he made this statement that we're taking 13 million people off of their health insurance, but that's just not true. and it doesn't tell the whole story. first of all no one is being kicked off other health insurance coverage. instead, people will no longer be fined by their own government for not buying government approved health insurance. and that space on the correct view that people shouldn't be coerced by their very own government to buy something they may not want and can't afford. like i said any more rational world republicans and democrats have worked together to come up with an alternative that would provide people with more choices at a better price. democrats might say well, what about premiums, within not thee of the mandate is limited?
if people drop out of the market because of this problem? well, this is one of the problem created by the affordable care act at its very beginning. but the issue of rising premiums is significant. a recent proposal offered by the senior senator from maine ms. collins along with senators alexander and mary would attempt to stabilize the health insurance marketplace. it would reduce the risk for insurance companies by providing funds to insurers for high risk enrollees. there bipartisan stabilization proposal would appropriate money for something called cost-sharing reduction subsidies, and these themes could provide short-term certainty to insurers and prevent premiums from rising. in fact, premiums would go down. it's been scored by the congressional budget office as reducing the deficit by $3.8 billion over the next ten
years. that's why this proposal deserves our serious consideration and hope we will turn to it following our debate and vote on the senate tax reform bill. after our part of the repeal of amended there are other parts of the plan that i would like to highlight. one of the impulses of the popular myth that certain provisions of our proposal are just disguised corporate welfare. i alluded to that a minute ago, the hypocrisy of some of our democratic colleagues claiming this is corporate welfare or give away when they themselves supported a similar provision in previous proposals. this claim is completely and a liberally misleading. as the "wall street journal" pointed out last week, the irony is this bill would do more to stop corporate taxi gaming than anything done on the obama administration during the previous eight years. first if we cut corporate taxes the incentive for companies to gain the system of capital income and intellectual property
abroad is reduced. the bill institutes a territorial system that also includes so-called base erosion rules. these are safeguards against abuse that prevent companies from shifting domestic income through for the phillies to lower tax jurisdiction and then bring your profits home without paying taxes. our simple would oppose an effective 10% rate on intangible property of u.s. multinational that's held overseas. that's on a one-time basis. in returns companies would be up to repatriate their future income from those places tax-free. in other words, they would be taxed once rather than twice. this lower rate would help prevent the erosion of our corporate tax base. so will other provisions regarding patents, intellectual property which will prevent the flight of this intellectual property abroad and will entice foreign companies to move the pads to the united states along
with the associated economic activity and jobs. in some as i said earlier this bill changes incentives, making it less likely that businesses will try to gain the system and of capital to foreign lower tax jurisdictions. madam president, we need to look at this proposal as a whole not just one provision in isolation. because you can't judge the merits of the plan without considering it as a whole. two days ago we got a letter from nine world-class experts on tax policy and economics and thy sent a letter to treasury secretary steven mnuchin. in that letter they praised the plans object is to enhance the prospects of both increased economic growth and household incomes, more take-home pay. but not only that, they said based on their analysis our plan is likely to achieve those objectives, too. signatories included former
treasury secretary as well as a former director of the congressional budget office and distinguished economists from harvard, columbia and stanford. i think they would all agree with the byline which is the senate bill cuts taxes for every income group that it will increase economic growth and keep jobs and american companies here at home. all while making america more competitive. those that argue otherwise i think are resigned to the status quo, which is a stagnant economy, characterized by slow growth in wages that will never rise. that's what we've had the last 11 years, madam president, and under no circumstances should we stand by idly and permit it to continue. historically, the u.s. is seen growth of the economy hover around 3% since world war ii people right now it's roughly 1.9%. what that slow economic growth means is less jobs, lower wages
and less competitiveness for the u.s. in the global economy. if we get back to 3% growth or higher we can begin to solve multiple problems at once. for example, we could do something about our lackluster defense spending. i know something that the chairman of the senate armed services committee, senator mccain and others including people like me and the presiding officer kerry an awful lot about. we have simply tried again and again to cash the peace dividend when there is no peace. when in the words of general james clapper, former head of the director of national intelligence he said the threat, the array of threats is more profound than he seen in 50 years in the intelligence service of the united states. so we can't, we can't spend the amount of money we need to keep
america safe to fight our nation's wars and to defend our shores here at home unless we meet that need. and we can't do it when our economy doesn't grow. not only will economic opportunities increase for americans of all stripes will also have additional revenue to address our national debt. if what you get our economy going again we can actually pay down that debt. but this debt is not a product of tax cuts and defense spending as some would lead you to believe. it's a symptom of our inability to pass entitlement reform. in other words, we have a spending problem. we don't have an inadequate taxing problem. indeed, , during the eight years of the obama administration when the national debt doubled, i didn't hear one peep out of our colleagues across the aisle on the national debt. it's refreshing to hear them that they're concerned about that once again but we had a partial answer to that, which is
getting the economy going again so that the treasury will increase its returns and we can begin to pay down some of those deficits and debt. but to regain our standing in the world we need to get our financial house in order. the first step is to pass reform package which will show our seriousness and determination and jumpstarting our economy as a way to address our fiscal challenges. i hope our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting the senate subversion of this bill. because america's future prosperity partially depends on our ability to get this done. what kind of country do we want? well, one that is vibrant and dynamic and full of energy, or do we want one that simply putters along? a lot is on the line this week as we debate and vote on the senate tax reform bill.
madam president, i would ask unanimous consent to include the end of my remarks the letter referred to from the nine prominent economists that was published today in the wall street, actually november 26, 4:08 p.m. in the "wall street journal" called how taxi from lift the economy. >> without objection. >> i yield the floor. >> house-senate panel examines ways to solidify the student aid application process watch live coverage from the health, education, labor and pensions committee starting at 10 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. on c-span the president federal reserve chair nominee jerome powell testified at his confirmation hearing. you will take questions from members of the senate banking committee live at tinian eastern on c-span here in the afternoon the senate budget committee works on combining tax reform legislation with a bill to open the arctic national wildlife refuge to expanded oil and gas
drilling. live coverage begins at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3. you can watch all of these earrings online at c-span.org and use the free c-span radio app. >> president trump held an event at the oval office honoring the native american code talkers of world war ii. code talker peter mcdonald gave the introduction. [inaudible conversations]