Mike Crapo

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representative Mike Simpson, I congratulate Frank A. La Marca, who is retiring from leading employee training for Idaho Environmental Coalition LLC, IEC, which supports the environmental cleanup mission at the Idaho National Laboratory, INL, Site. Effective training of employees is a fundamental part of the success of any workforce. It is especially critical in the nuclear sector where employees cannot falter in meeting safety requirements to ensure not only their personal safety, but also the safety of the public and surrounding natural resources. As senior manager of site training for Fluor and IEC for the past 7 years and in this position for CH2M- Washington Group Idaho, CH2M-WG, the 7 years prior, Frank La Marca has been responsible for ensuring compliance with U.S. Department of Energy, DOE, Nuclear Facility Training requirements at all Idaho Cleanup Project INL Site projects. This is certainly an enormous and essential responsibility. Before serving in this position, he was responsible for hiring and providing human resource services for more than 700 employees in three organizations for CH2M-WG. His list of completed courses, certifications, and program proficiencies is extensive. Frank's career objective has been to ``lead a team of professionals that will strive for new challenges in order to make a company successful in fulfilling their goals while providing opportunities for personal growth,'' and he can retire knowing he has more than met this respectable goal. Frank's years of instruction and mentorship has, no doubt, played a key part in helping employees at the INL Site safely meet strategic milestones, such as the completion of the transfer of all spent nuclear fuel from wet to dry storage more than 9 months ahead of the 1995 Idaho Settlement Agreement milestone. The connections Frank has made with people and the objectives he has advanced while carrying out crucial work will leave a lasting legacy. We would like to thank Frank for his commitment to enabling so many Idahoans to do indispensable work that has accelerated the cleanup at the INL and, in the process, protected Idaho's citizens. Congratulations on your remarkable career. We wish you all the best in your well-earned retirement.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, the Inflation Reduction Act, IRA, contained a provision for the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, to spend $15 million to deliver a report to Congress on an IRS-run and maintained ``Direct eFile'' tax return system. This was not a bipartisan provision. In fact, not one Republican Senator or Representative supported the IRA, and none had an opportunity to vote on this specific provision. The report, released on May 16, 2023, was supposed to address the cost of such a system and the safeguards to protect taxpayers, surveys of taxpayer opinions and findings of an ``independent third party'' on the overall feasibility, approach, schedule, cost, organizational design and IRS capacity to deliver such a Direct eFile tax return system. It fell far short of these requirements and was conducted by third parties who had previously expressed a desire for the IRS to make such an undertaking. Beyond these flaws, the report simultaneously announced that the IRS had already built functioning multilingual, mobile friendly, tax preparation and filing software. However, the Inflation Reduction Act only authorized the IRS to spend funds on a report, not the building of the prototype system. The implementation of this provision by the Biden administration has clearly violated Congress's statutory direction. Worse, the decision by the administration to build and publicly launch such a Direct eFile system by January 2024, all without congressional authority, and using report and IRA funds further violates the IRA and exceeds the IRS's statutory authority. The IRS has publicly indicated it began the diversion of report funds to the building of the software as early as December 2022, but the software development using report funds was not disclosed to the public or the Senate until May 16, 2023. This is particularly disappointing and completely without justification. IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel appeared before the Senate Finance Committee on April 19, 2023. In response to specific questions by both the majority and minority about the report and the IRS's intentions, he not only failed to disclose the building of this software and the diversion of report funds for this purpose, but also stated that the IRS had not yet decided to act, when the facts strongly suggest that it had. These responses do not build the trust he will need to obtain bipartisan support from committee members. The Fiscal Responsibility Act contains a provision rescinding certain IRA funds for the IRS, including unspent funds on the report provision. An honest and forthright accounting from the IRS with respect to its actions here is essential, including when expenditures were made and if payments were being made in advance of the work being accomplished. Such accountability is a top priority. With respect to the Direct eFile system, the IRS has provided no evidence it has authority to create such a system, and, indeed, the evidence strongly indicates it does not. The IRS must immediately disclose to the Finance Committee and American people the statutory provisions it has relied upon to authorize the administration's grand foray into becoming a tax preparation company, blurring lines that should not be crossed. In doing so, the IRS will also have to explain how it has not violated case law prohibiting study provisions authorized by Congress from being converted by administrative agencies into implementation decisions, as well as those addressing instances where the IRS has been found to have unilaterally acted beyond its statutory authority. Make no mistake: Congress has the final say on the ability of the IRS to build and field a Direct eFile program that puts the IRS--the tax collector and enforcer--in the business of tax preparation. Beyond this clearly being Congress's prerogative, many policy reasons weigh against the IRS action, including the intractable conflict of interest of the IRS being tax return preparer, adviser, collector, enforcer, and, in many cases, adjudicator. It is particularly poignant in the context of a bill that attempts to rein in excessive Federal spending to address an Agency action that will assuredly result in billions in future, and ongoing, expenses to the Federal fisc. We must return to regular order and let Congress express itself, rather than be ignored by an Agency intent on overstepping its bounds.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I pay tribute to Mike Quickel, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee's policy director, who is leaving Congress after more than 25 years of devoted service. One of the things that eases our jobs in the Senate is knowing we have solid people working steadily and earnestly beside us on behalf of the great people we represent. Idaho and our country have had that for decades with Mike Quickel. Since 2000, when he came to work in my office, after working more than a year as staff assistant for the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, he has consistently supported Idahoans and the important work we do here in the Senate on behalf of the American people. After little more than a year of serving as a legislative correspondent, Mike was quickly promoted to serve as my tax and budget adviser, and he has generally served in this capacity through multiple positions since. As senior policy adviser, he staffed my positions on the Senate Finance and Budget Committees. His responsibilities included developing well-defined strategies for various tax legislative efforts. He also helped lead the bipartisan Senate Finance Committee Task Force on Savings and Investment. The task force crafted retirement savings proposals that were later enacted into law as part of the SECURE Act in 2019. Every American worker should have the opportunity to save for a secure retirement, and Mike's work on this legislation has helped make it easier for Americans to do so. His steadiness, dependability, and strong grasp of policy and its practical effects also saw him tasked with critical, but under the radar, responsibilities like editing constituent response letters. I always have known I can count on him for the small and big tasks at hand. He proved this when he helped develop fiscal reform and debt reduction proposals when I served on the bipartisan Simpson/Bowles Commission in 2010. I cannot mention that commission without also noting that our country would now be on better fiscal footing if Congress had fully enacted the fiscal reforms Mike worked on more than a decade ago. But, back on point, when I began leading the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs as ranking member and chairman, Mike came with me and served as policy director for the committee. During this time, he worked tirelessly on drafting and negotiating the historic enactment of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, TCJA. This law, which is probably the achievement he is most proud of during his time in the Senate, lowered tax rates for all Americans, ensured American job-creators could better compete and bring jobs back to our country and led to the strongest economy in many of our lifetimes prior to the pandemic. He also successfully led bipartisan efforts to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank in 2019, as well as Senate confirmation of its chairman and board members. The Export-Import Bank had operated without congressional authorization and a Senate-confirmed chairman for several years, and Mike was instrumental in fixing this lapse. Additionally, he supported the successful bipartisan enactment in 2018 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act. This law has enabled financial institutions to better serve their customers and communities, while maintaining safety and soundness and important consumer protections. When I became ranking member of Senate Finance in 2021, I once again asked Mike to come with me and serve as policy director for the committee. Throughout this time, he has continued to dependably and professionally contribute to consequential legislation and policy initiatives, including his work to strengthen retirement security through the enactment of the SECURE 2.0 law in December 2022. This law expanded opportunities for Americans to increase their retirement savings and improve workers' long-term financial well-being. He has also been instrumental in successfully protecting the TCJA from attempts to undo its tax reform benefits. In addition to his policy expertise and keen knowledge of the Senate, Mike has helped and supported others. He has mentored countless young staffers and even set up annual Thanksgiving dinners for staff, many of whom were far away from home during the holidays. He is known as being loyal to everyone he has worked with over the years. Mike has been a steady, unassuming, and strong influence in the Senate. He is quiet but thorough. When I think of Mike, I think of God's instruction in the Bible verse James 1:19-20. He is truly quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger. He listens carefully before framing the task or problem to fix that is weighed against his significant experience, knowledge, and know-how. He listens and reasons first and then acts prudently and never impulsively. This has been invaluable, as he has helped shape tax, retirement and economic policy that has had far-reaching benefits for our country. It will take a great deal of time to get used to not having Mike as a central part of my staff, but I wish him all the best. He has more than earned more time with his lovely family--wife Meg and son Davey--that I am hopeful his departure from Washington, DC, will afford him. Thank you, Mike, for your 25 years of dedicated, sound, and measured service to our country.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the rollcall begin immediately.

Mr. CRAPO. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I pay tribute to Jeff Wrase, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee's deputy staff director and chief economist, who recently left the committee after more than 11 years of service. For more than 20 years, Jeff served in what many consider to be the ``wonkiest'' committees in Congress: the Senate Finance, Banking, and Budget Committees, the Joint Economic Committee, and the House Budget Committee. Jeff's strong background in economics and career in academics made him a natural fit for each committee, with a unique skill set for thoroughly briefing and advising members on everything from macroeconomics, to international finance, to Federal debt management. As a member of the Finance, Banking, and Budget Committees, I have had the opportunity to work closely with Jeff on many issues for more than a decade. When I became ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee at the onset of the 117th Congress, I knew I needed Jeff Wrase on my team. This decision proved invaluable over the next 2 years, as Jeff spent much of his time fighting to protect the pro- growth tax and regulatory changes that had been implemented by the Finance Committee in recent years. Jeff was instrumental in reducing the scope and damage posed by multiple tax-and-spend packages proposed during the 117th Congress. From arguing before the Senate Parliamentarian about arcane budget rules or helping to educate members or the American people about pitfall-laden policy proposals, Jeff immersed himself in each issue, asking the tough, smart questions about the feasibility, purpose, and practicality of each proposal. He crafted several important pieces of legislation to protect hard-working taxpayers, usually countering edicts and government overreach from the executive branch. One provision would have stricken a directive included in the American Rescue Plan Act that forbids States from using relief funds to provide any form of tax relief. Jeff picked apart the vague, unenforceable nature of the legislation, noting its interference in a State's ability to provide tax relief to citizens to reduce the burden on hard-working families. It was a strong argument, as several lower courts have agreed. Another Jeff-authored provision proved powerful in pushing back on Internal Revenue Service--IRS--overreach. When the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was being debated, a key funding mechanism was to provide the IRS with a bloated, $80 billion 10-year budget to squeeze more money out of American taxpayers to finance Green New Deal priorities. Jeff knew the estimated revenue from additional enforcement would have to include taxpayers making less than $400,000 per year, thus breaking a campaign pledge from the Biden administration to not ``raise taxes one penny on anyone earning less than $400,000 a year.'' Congress's nonpartisan scorekeepers confirmed that individuals making under that amount would be swept up in new audits, and Jeff crafted legislation to prevent the IRS from using any new funding to increase audits on anyone under that threshold. While the legislation did not pass in a Democrat- controlled Senate, it sent a clear message that the President's pledge was bound to be broken. One last example: Jeff may be single-handedly responsible for preventing the IRS from being able to snoop into the bank accounts of every American. Democrats proposed a new bank monitoring scheme to help track inflows and outflows on financial accounts, collecting more data on taxpayers in yet another effort to squeeze more funds out of them. Jeff helped to shine a spotlight on this idea before it could ever even become legislative language. Thanks to an aggressive educational campaign, Americans rightly rejected the idea before it could ever become law. Even while Jeff was fighting these reconciliation battles, he managed to simultaneously perform diligent oversight of the executive branch, Departments, and Agencies within the committee's jurisdiction, from the Social Security Administration to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service. Jeff never missed a deadline, and each Agency knew it, whether it was the issuance of the Social Security Trustees Report, the President's budget, or responding to a letter by the requested deadline. Jeff's Senate career stretches beyond the tumultuous years of the 117th Congress, with many accomplishments to count. In 2009, Jeff was working on the Senate Banking Committee when then-President Obama and Senate Democrats undertook an effort to overhaul the U.S. financial regulatory system--or what later became known as the Dodd-Frank Act. During Senate negotiations, Obama administration officials, the Federal Reserve, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation--FDIC--launched an all-out campaign for blanket bailout authority that would have allowed them to bail out large financial institutions and insert greater Federal control over our Nation's private financial system. Jeff worked to ensure that provisions in Dodd-Frank covering section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act did not allow unfettered bailout authority for unelected government officials, but instead provided a role for Congress and its elected officials if ever the Federal Reserve and others in government acted to battle ``unusual and exigent circumstances'' and required the Fed to be accountable for whatever emergency activities it pursued during such circumstances. Having those provisions in the Federal Reserve Act to provide a role for Congress and to provide transparency in government turned out to be very valuable when the Fed was called to react to the economic shutdowns accompanying the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2015, after years of short-term funding patches, Jeff worked to secure critical long-term funding for a bipartisan multiyear highway bill, the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, providing much- needed stability and certainty to our country's highway and transit programs. That same year, he developed legislative strategy and text for the Social Security provisions of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, which included the most significant changes to Social Security in more than 30 years. When the coronavirus pandemic shook the world in early 2020, the Senate Finance Committee not only led on tax and health policy responses, but also key provisions to help those who were suddenly out of work, largely due to factors beyond their control. Jeff was instrumental in developing policy to provide much-needed temporary support for American workers impacted by the pandemic. Creating a temporary enhanced unemployment program that could be implemented quickly--and work across all 50 States--was no small feat. Jeff's work on the unemployment provisions included in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act provided a lifeline to the self-employed, gig workers and other Americans who could not work due to the coronavirus. Jeff remained engaged in implementation and oversight of these provisions in ensuing years, making sure the government acted as a good steward of taxpayer dollars. The Finance Committee also has jurisdiction over the Federal debt limit, and Jeff has been directly involved in some of the toughest debt ceiling battles over the years. From 2011-2012, Jeff was the chief economist for the Budget Committee and the Finance Committee and successfully helped to prevent the United States from going over a ``fiscal cliff'' in 2013. While each effort by Congress to increase the debt limit involves contemplating staggeringly higher and higher numbers, Jeff was committed to pushing every administration to be more transparent and provide greater consultation with Congress about their debt management approaches. As conversations about how the United States will continue to pay its bills on time and how we should budget for the future, dominate the halls of Congress, I expect Jeff is experiencing a bit of deja vu. Unfortunately, for Jeff, we know where to find him. Perhaps most consequential in Jeff's Finance Committee career is passage of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the most comprehensive tax overhaul in more than 30 years. This tax reform package delivered on Republicans' promise of creating and advancing pro-growth policies that lift the economy and build a better future for the American people. It created a tax code based in simplicity and fairness. It lowered rates across the board for all Americans. It ensured businesses of all sizes could better compete, bringing jobs and investment back to our shores. Prior to the pandemic, we were experiencing the strongest economy in many of our lifetimes, in no small part due to this landmark legislation. Jeff played an instrumental role in coordinating between the Budget and Finance Committees while this package came together, and I am not sure we would have succeeded without his prowess using Microsoft Excel, which was--and remains--a mystery to many of his colleagues. Sincerely, because of Jeff and many other's tireless efforts, tax reform did a lot of good for a great number of people throughout the country. Jeff has been described by many as ``an institution,'' not just of the Finance Committee, but of the Senate. He is well-liked and respected by colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and those who have worked with him can attest to his indispensable mentorship, good humor, and friendship. He will be missed in the halls of the Senate, but fortunately, he has not gone far. I thank him for his outstanding counsel and guidance and wish him all the best.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I congratulate the Idaho Environmental Coalition that currently manages cleanup operations at the Idaho National Laboratory, INL, Site and Department of Energy, DOE, Office of Nuclear Energy contractor Battelle Energy Alliance for completing the transfer of all spent nuclear fuel from wet to dry storage more than 9 months ahead of the 1995 Idaho Settlement Agreement milestone. This is the culmination of more than two decades of work by DOE and many partners and contractors. It further reinforces DOE's commitment to meeting its agreements with the State and following through on its promises to the citizens of Idaho. Importantly, the completion of the wet-to-dry project ahead of schedule means risks are reduced, security is improved, and the environment is better protected earlier, rather than later. Dry spent nuclear fuel storage is considered safer than wet storage, as it reduces proliferation concerns and potential risk to area natural resources. Dry storage of spent nuclear fuel also better prepares it for transport to long-term storage when a permanent repository becomes available. DOE has now met more than 90 percent of the Idaho Settlement Agreement milestones and more than 97 percent of all regulatory milestones with the State of Idaho. The completion of the wet-to-dry project frees up cleanup resources to further advance the next stages of the nuclear fuels mission. Thank you to all those involved in this momentous achievement, especially the exceptional and highly skilled employees involved in this project, for advancing and accelerating the cleanup at the INL and protecting Idaho's citizens.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch, Representative Mike Simpson and Representative Russ Fulcher, we honor Idaho's community colleges in recognition of Community College Month and commend them for contributing to the success of Idahoans. The designation of April as Community College Month by the American Association of Community Colleges and the Association of Community College Trustees provides an opportunity to acknowledge the important role Idaho's community colleges have in enhancing Idahoans' quality of life and contributing to Idaho's economic growth. Idaho's community colleges prepare young people and adults throughout our great State for postsecondary education, successful careers, and productive lives. We are fortunate to have community colleges working hard to fuel the ingenuity and skill to advance students to Idaho's 4- year institutions and provide dual enrollment opportunities for students pursuing advanced learning while in high school. According to statistics from the Idaho State Board of Education, nearly 142,000 dual credits were earned at our 2-year institutions in fiscal year 2022, meaning community colleges are giving Idaho high school students considerable opportunities to kickstart their higher educations. They also help keep pace with an ever-changing job market as they help grow the skills needed to prepare students to meet the requirements of progressing in Idaho's workforce. The Idaho State Board of Education found a notable 75 percent of graduates from 2-year institutions are employed in Idaho 1 year after graduation, and Idaho residents with an associate's degree earn $41,197 more than those without a degree. Our State is brimming with innovators and cutting-edge businesses. Community colleges are central partners in our communities fostering ideas and helping to meet the needs of area students and small businesses. Thank you to Idaho's community colleges for the important role they play in fueling Idaho achievement and growth.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I congratulate Karen Roetter, who is retiring as my regional director in my Coeur d'Alene office. Karen's humor, optimism, and dedication are hallmarks of who she is and will be greatly missed. Karen graduated from the University of Idaho in 1979, with a teaching degree, and began teaching at Canfield Middle School in Coeur d'Alene, where she taught social studies and physical education and coached girls volleyball. Karen is a deeply devoted wife, mother, and grandmother to her beautiful family. After 5 years of teaching, she left teaching to stay home with her and her husband Matt's three daughters: Katie, Andrea, and Tara. Katie and her husband James have a son, Jackson. Andrea is married to Blake, and they have two children, Layne and Hudson. Tara is married to Shea and has three children, Ensley, Ebbet and Ellers. In 1997, Karen took a part-time job with then-U.S. Representative Helen Chenoweth, before she, thankfully, came to work for me in 2000, doing casework part-time. In 2007, she began working for me full-time and was promoted to regional director for the Coeur d'Alene office. In the nearly 23 years Karen has served the people of Idaho as a valued member of my staff, one of the many projects she has worked on has been our annual academy nominations. Her passion for this effort shows in the time and attention she devotes to educating about these opportunities and identifying and promoting the Idaho students ready and willing to attend our country's military academies. The commitment shown by the students and the fact they also have a desire to serve their country makes them her kindred spirits. Additionally, north Idaho, with the decades of cleanup at the Bunker Hill Superfund Site and the history of mining and milling in the Silver Valley, has had no shortage of land use and natural resources challenges. Karen has faced them with warmth, curiosity and a willingness to listen and help the rightly concerned people of the affected communities. Karen, thank you for your hard work on behalf of Idahoans, and congratulations on your retirement. I have greatly enjoyed our conversations and valued your dedication to addressing the needs of north Idaho. You have also been a wonderful example of grace to all of us while facing life's most difficult challenges. On a lighter side, many members of the staff have you to thank for introducing them to huckleberry milkshakes. May retirement provide you ample time with the family you love so dearly, including shuttling your grandchildren to activities and the gardening you enjoy. I wish you all the best.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representative Russ Fulcher, we thank Dan Dinning for serving as Boundary County commissioner for more than 20 years. Dan Dinning began his service as Boundary County commissioner in 2001 and, throughout, worked steadily to strengthen his community. A native of Boundary County who attended the University of Idaho, Commissioner Dinning has been the longest serving commissioner for his county. This comes as no surprise, given his deep commitment to his hometown, Bonners Ferry, Boundary County, and Idaho. Dan is extremely hard working, and we are told there has rarely been a meeting in Boundary County that Dan did not attend. This dedication is also apparent in the remarkable number of State and community groups he has served in and led. This includes the Governor's appointment of Commissioner Dinning to serve on the Idaho Roadless Rule Commission. Dan served on the Selkirk-Cabinet Yaak Grizzly Bear Conservation Subcommittee; multiple committees for the Idaho Association of Counties; served as chair for the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Panhandle Basin Advisory Group; and so much more. Natural resources issues in north Idaho, like in many parts of Idaho and the West, tend to be very controversial, and Commissioner Dinning has not shied away from those challenges. When meetings grew contentious, Dan was always a calm voice reminding attendees that we all care about the same things, just disagree on possible solutions. He rarely is the first one to speak. Rather, he listens first and then makes thoughtful comments. These productive characteristics have been instrumental in his leadership in starting and sustaining the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative, KVRI. KVRI changed the tone of natural resource conversations, and tensions eased as the community saw what collaboration can accomplish. In preparing this tribute, there was no shortage of great thoughts and stories that have been shared about Dan Dinning. They include a touching moment shared by Patty Perry about a trip to Washington, DC, when Dan was adamant about visiting the Vietnam Memorial Wall. His reason was to find a family's son's name on the wall and create a rubbing to bring home to them in Boundary County, since they would never get to see it. Patty recalled that, of course, it brought tears and was a reflection of the kind of guy Dan is. Dan is a man of high moral character, a salt of the earth, family man devoted to his community. Of all his achievements, we hear that he would cite his family as his greatest accomplishment. He and his wife Mary have three children, Lisa, Brian and Kevin; two granddaughters; and three grandsons. Thank you, Dan, for your service to your beloved community, county, and the entire State of Idaho. We look forward to continuing to hear your stories and you sharing your deeply valued thoughts and perspective with us on how to continue to strengthen our great State.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I honor Alex Irby, of Orofino, ID, for his many years of natural resources and collaborative work in the Clearwater Basin of Idaho. More than 14 years ago, Alex Irby and Dale Harris asked for my help with setting up and supporting the Clearwater Basin Collaborative, CBC. They love this wonderful part of Idaho and put their hard work into pulling together a collaborative effort to resolve natural resources challenges in the area. Alex even dedicated 10 years to serving as cochair of the CBC. The focus of the collaborative was to support the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests to get work done on the ground and save the local sawmills in the area. We launched the CBC in May of 2008, and the CBC has had an important role in furthering discussions about the management of the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests and achieved much-needed restoration of landscapes, including water quality improvements, which are also providing a supply of raw materials to our local mills. The accomplishments of the CBC and the fact it is still going strong today is due in large part to the forethought and commitment of Alex Irby, the Nez Perce Tribe, and the other partners in the collaborative effort. Alex brought his decades of natural resources experience to the collaborative table. In 1959, at the age of 16, Alex started fighting fires for the Clearwater-Potlatch Timber Protection Association, C- PTPA, with roots in Idaho stretching back more than 100 years. Alex worked for C-PTPA for 26 years. He also worked for Konkolville Lumber Company from 1984 to 2000, and he served as an Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner for 8 years, starting in 1999. After his service to the Idaho Fish and Game Commission ended in 2007, Alex served as the Idaho Fish and Game Representative to the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board, with his position ending in 2014. His other contributions to the natural resources sector include his service with his local soil and water conservation district and rural fire district. Alex is also a founder of PLAY, Public Lands Access Year-Round, started in 1999 to work with public land managers, to help ensure more roads and trails remain open for continued motorized access for off highway vehicles. To this day, Alex is out cutting trail and hunting in the Clearwater Basin. He has a wealth of knowledge and history of the area and backs the responsibility of taking care of our public lands with hard work and know-how. He is willing to work with anyone who is a team player. Thank you, Alex Irby, for your remarkable contributions of your time and talents to improving and sustaining an amazing part of our great State and country.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I honor the Idaho Hometown Hero Awards for highlighting the spirit of philanthropy in communities across our great State of Idaho. The award pays tribute to commitment to improving communities across Idaho, while continuing to preserve and promote the richness of our State and create a better world for all of us in the future. Doctors Fahim and Naeem Rahim, of Pocatello, ID, established the Idaho Hometown Hero medal in 2011 to spotlight Idahoans who are extraordinarily dedicated to hard work, self-improvement, and community service. The Hometown Hero Award's mission statement focuses on recognizing those who: ``Exemplify a life dedicated to the Idaho way of hard work, self-improvement, and community service. Embody the spirit of philanthropy while showing remarkable commitment in both their personal and professional lives to improving communities across the State of Idaho. Preserve, celebrate, and promote the richness of history, tradition, and values of our great state while working to create a better world for all of us in the future by the work they do today. Share gifts with the community to boost recognition of the great State of Idaho.'' The Hometown Hero Medal highlights that Idaho is an incredible place, but it is the people of Idaho who make it a great State. I could not agree more. Thank you to the Rahims, the award's committee members, the volunteers, and other organizations for drawing attention to good works in our communities.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, as Americans who value the freedoms protected by our country's servicemembers, we must meet our responsibility to those who sacrificed so much for our country. To do this, we must continue to seek answers for families of America's prisoners of war, POWs, and missing in action, MIA. In honor of the observation of National POW/MIA Recognition Day this September 16, 2022, I join in raising awareness about the more than 81,500 Americans the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, DPAA, reports remain missing from past conflicts. Thank you to the members of the POW*MIA Awareness Rally Corp. of Pocatello, ID, and others across our country for keeping a spotlight on the need to bring all missing American servicemembers home. Roughly 360 servicemembers from Idaho are among those who remain missing. The vast majority, 328, of Idaho's missing servicemembers were lost during their service in World War II, while 23 Idahoans were lost serving in the Korean War, and one Idahoan was lost during service in the Cold War. The remaining eight Idahoans went missing while serving in the Vietnam war. Some years ago, then-POW*MIA Awareness Corp. director Hiedi Young shared biographies she prepared of those eight Idahoans at a rally I attended. The biographies are a thoughtful reminder of the ongoing price of our freedom, and I share them here again today to highlight the ever-growing need to bring them and their fellow servicemembers home. It has now been more than 50 years since these Idahoans were lost in service to our country. Lieutenant Roderick L. Mayer, United States Navy of Lewiston, has been missing since October 17, 1965, in North Vietnam. Lt. Mayer was a pilot of a fighter jet that was shot down. He and his co-pilot ejected from their aircraft. Based on testimony of his co-pilot, it is believed that he ``died of severe wounds from ejection.'' Status: ``Presumptive Finding of Death, Body Not Recovered.'' Ensign Hal T. Hollingsworth, United States Navy of Grace, has been missing since January 16, 1966, in South Vietnam. Hollingsworth was the co-pilot of an aircraft that while airborne had mechanical difficulties and crashed at sea. Status: ``Killed in Action, Body Not Recovered.'' Staff Sargent William B. Hunt, United States Army of Sandpoint, has been missing since November 4, 1966, in South Vietnam. Hunt was lifted into battle to help evacuate wounded. He voluntarily left the aircraft to help reinforce remaining troops on the ground. The Viet Cong attacked the position the unit was maintaining and after 2 days of heavy fighting Hunt was gravely wounded. Status: ``Presumptive Finding of Death, Body Not Recovered.'' Captain Curtis R. Bohlscheid, United States Marine Corps of Pocatello, has been missing since June 11, 1967, in South Vietnam. Bohlscheid was the pilot of a helicopter which crashed into a steep ravine on a mission to insert a seven- man Marine Force Recon team on the battlefield. Status: ``Killed in Action, Body Not Recovered'' First Lieutenant William E. Lemmons, United States Army of Pocatello, has been missing since June 18, 1967, in South Vietnam. Lemmons was aboard a helicopter on a visual recon mission. The helicopter was declared missing and after extensive searches no trace of the aircraft or its crew was found. Status: ``Missing in Action.'' Captain Jon K. Bodahl, United States Air Force of Boise, has been missing since November 12, 1969, in Laos. Bodahl was the pilot of an aircraft on a recovery mission that was shot down. His aircraft was found during search and rescue operations, but there was no trace of him. Status: ``Missing in Action.'' Warrant Officer Jon M. Sparks, United States Army of Carey, has been missing since March 19, 1971, in Laos. Sparks was the co-pilot of a helicopter covering a downed helicopter during a rescue effort. The aircraft was shot down and due to heavy fire a search and rescue mission could not be conducted. It is unknown what his fate was. Status: ``Missing in Action'' Captain Gregg N. Hollinger, United States Army of Paul, has been missing since December 14, 1971, in South Vietnam. Hollinger was on an administrative mission aboard an aircraft that experienced an in-flight emergency and lost contact with ground control. Extensive searches were conducted for the next three days, over water and the adjacent shore area, but no trace of the aircraft or personnel was ever found. It was later determined the aircraft was lost at sea and the crew and passengers died. Status: ``Killed in Action, Body Not Recovered.'' My prayers are with their families as the challenging work continues to get needed answers and bring our country's servicemembers home. The POW/MIA Accounting community's 2022 poster commemorating National POW/ MIA Recognition Day simply states, ``THEIR Sacrifice/OUR Pledge.'' Yes, America's responsibility to our servicemembers must be met. May presumptions be replaced with facts, as our country's bravest are brought home to the families and communities who love them and long for their return.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I yield myself 30 minutes from the bill time.

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I would like to start my remarks by going back to nearly the very beginning of this Congress, when we were debating what was called the American Rescue Plan. We were told then by our colleagues on the other side that this was going to save the country: $1.9 trillion of debt-financed spending, they said, was going to fix everybody's concerns in the United States. Where are we today? A 9.1-percent consumer price inflation, which we told them was coming; gas prices doubling; economic stagnation; GDP contracted by nine-tenths of a percent in the second quarter. We are now arguing over semantics about what is a recession. Sixty-five percent of the people in this country think we are already in a recession, and more than 80 percent of the country think our economy is on the wrong track. The nonpartisan Penn Wharton Budget Model has made a comment about what we are looking at today, but what are we being told today? Another rescue plan, only this time they call it the Inflation Reduction Act. The Penn Wharton Budget Model says this bill will, if anything, raise inflation in the first few years of this budget, with a small and significant negative effect later in this decade. That same model concludes that there is ``low confidence that the legislation will have any impact on inflation.'' But it does have an impact on all of us and our economy. It does nothing to bring the economy out of stagnation and recession, but rather the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 gives us higher taxes, more spending, higher prices, and an army of IRS agents. Let's talk about the taxes first. Hundreds of billions of dollars are raised through taxes, around 350 to 400 billion. There is a new book minimum tax on corporations. There is a new tax on stock buybacks. There is, believe this or not, a new tax on gasoline--on oil and gas production and refineries--at the very time when our President has shut down production of oil and gas on our interior and offshore and has stopped the Keystone XL Pipeline, basically freezing America's production and driving us from a state of energy independence to a state of energy dependence, where we have to ask our friends and often our enemies across the globe to increase their gas production to help us deal with our prices at the pump. And this book minimum tax, everybody in America knows that corporations don't bear the burden of the taxes we put on them. Who does? Workers, consumers, and owners. A recent National Bureau of Economic Research study estimates that 31 percent of these taxes will be borne by consumers via price hikes-- price hikes at a time when we are dealing with record inflation. Thirty-eight percent is borne by workers by way of lower wages or less employment, and 31 percent is borne by owners. Now, my colleagues are very quick to say: Well, this is just rich people and rich companies that are tax cheaters. The owners of the corporations, though, are primarily people in America who have retired and are leaning on a pension or who have not yet retired or are trying to save money for their retirement by putting their money into 401(k) programs or other investment programs. That is who bears the burden of these taxes. We just asked the Joint Tax Committee to tell us who bears these burdens? Who will bear the burden of these tax hikes? They told us, as the chart here shows, in 2023, that taxes will be increased by $16.7 billion on American taxpayers earning less than $200,000. In 2023, another 14.1 billion will come from taxpayers earning between $200,000 and $500,000. And by 2031, when the new green energy credits and subsidies provide an even greater benefit to those in America with higher incomes, those earning below $400,000 are projected to bear as much as two-thirds of the burden of the additional tax revenues collected in that year. That is what we are being offered as a solution to the crisis that we are now in in our economy. And as I will discuss later, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has recently confirmed that a significant portion of the revenue that the IRS supersized funding they are claiming will be coming from audits that they are going to be taking will come out of taxpayers earning less than $400,000. So in response to this data that we have been able to show about their very tax proposals in this bill, the Democrats, surprisingly, have claimed that this Joint Tax Committee analysis isn't valid because it didn't include the effects of their spending that they were putting into the bill. Now, that is a novel idea. It is OK to raise taxes, and it is OK to put more tax burden on people making more than $400,000 because we are going to be sending some subsidies to some of them. So we asked the Joint Tax Commission to include those subsidies in its analysis, which they did. The analysis they gave us back incorporated the ObamaCare subsidies and shows that the burdens of the proposed tax increases in the Democrats' reckless bill will be so substantial and so widespread throughout all income categories--I repeat, all income categories--that no amount of temporary healthcare credits or even the subsidies that this bill gives for $80,000 luxury SUVs will overcome the tax increase burdens that will be overwhelmingly felt by lower and middle-income- class Americans. Few, if any, Americans will get a net reduction in the burden that they will bear from the taxes and subsidies provided in this bill. And for any that do, it will only be temporary. The vast majority will still bear the burden of these taxes. The book minimum tax does not close loopholes. You often hear that from my colleagues on the other side as well. It raises taxes on U.S. companies by hundreds of billions of dollars, and it would not prevent all companies from paying zero tax. Instead, it would let some of the companies preferred by the Democrats continue to avoid their taxes by using not loopholes but legitimate provisions for research and development tax credits and other kinds of tax credits that are intended to incentivize the conduct of those companies. The Joint Tax Committee has already estimated that half of the burden of the book minimum tax will fall on manufacturers. In other words--well, let me go into what 252 trade associations and chambers of commerce from across the country said when they realized that close to half of this burden will fall on manufacturers. This is from those trade associations that jointly--252 of them-- wrote to Congress: Enacting the proposed Corporate Book Minimum Tax would be the antithesis of sound tax policy and administration. Its introduction would be neither simple nor administrable and would pose a competitive disadvantage to U.S.-headquartered businesses while increasing the incidence of unrelieved double taxation. It would also have a detrimental effect on the quality of financial reporting. The Business Roundtable said: [T]he proposed book minimum tax would, among other things, suppress domestic investment-- Remember that, ``suppress domestic investment''-- when increased investment is needed to spur a strong recovery in our economy. This tax hike would also undermine the competitiveness of America's exporters. Even with a carve-out for accelerated appreciation, there remain many unresolved problems with the design and structure of this minimum tax that make it a poor revenue option. So let's go to the next one that they raise: stock buybacks. Once again, my colleagues on the other side are quick to attack any company that does a stock buyback, saying that they are just trying to make owners of their stock who are rich tax cheaters even more wealthy. I have already explained that the owners of that stock are the vast majority of Americans who are retired or who are working for retirement or who are trying to invest a little bit to try to get ahead. Despite the claims that these are loopholes, they are doubling down on proposing a $74 billion tax on U.S. companies. Democrats want to create a third layer of tax on American companies, which will have the harshest impact on seniors and other savers. The Wall Street Journal in a recent editorial explained: Companies use buybacks to return cash to shareholders for which they don't have a better use. Shareholders who sell shares back to . . . [companies] can invest the proceeds elsewhere. That beats letting the cash sit on corporate books earning interest while CEOs get complacent or decide to buy a business they don't really want or understand how to run. Buybacks aren't tax free: Owners who sell shares back to the company realize a taxable gain. Any boost in the share price contributes to a higher taxable gain for remaining owners when they sell their shares in the future. Why not pay dividends instead? Companies and shareholders might prefer buybacks in some instances, such as the company is disbursing a one-time lump sum or shifting the balance of equity and debt on its books. For the economy overall, buybacks have the effect of distributing capital specifically to those owners who choose to participate because they believe they have a more productive use for it. Capital flows from companies that don't need it to companies that do. Democrats are telling companies: If you return value to your retirees or to retirees in the country or if you return value to people's investment in 401(k) plans or the pension plans, then you will pay a punitive tax. The majority of American households have direct or indirect ownership of corporate stock via pensions, 401(k) plans, or other saving vehicles. Here are some interesting statistics about the Americans who will bear the burden of this tax: Eighty to one hundred million Americans have a 401(k) plan, 46.4 million households have an individual retirement account, and half of the Generation Zers and millennials are invested in stocks. Seniors are especially dependent on investment income. The Association of Mature American Citizens reports that 68 percent of workers between the ages of 55 and 64 were active participants in a retirement plan to save for their golden years and that, on average, 40 percent of seniors' net worth is held in stocks and mutual funds invested over and above those retirement accounts. Companies also rely on investments by individuals and institutions like pension funds to finance their operations. Successful companies use this capital to generate profits, which are then used for expansion, for research and development, for hiring and for benefits, and for investment in communities. Companies may also choose to pay down their debt or return excess funds to shareholders. Restricting stock buybacks could force companies to sit on cash or waste it on low-potential projects, both of which limit our economic growth and prosperity. The Tax Foundation points out: A large body of evidence supports the idea that companies generally only consider stock buybacks when they have exhausted their investment opportunities and met their other obligations, meaning it is residual cash flow that is used for buybacks. In fact, stock buybacks can supplement capital investments, as they can help reallocate capital from old, established firms to new and innovative firms. This unvetted stock buybacks tax is a crippling tax that reduces retirement security for Americans. So let's go to the next tax that they propose, and this one is the one that I said was just a little difficult to understand--the superfund tax and methane fee. Now, I understand why they call it the superfund tax because it is a 16.4-percent increase on oil and gas production in the United States. According to the Energy Information Agency, regular gasoline prices have risen $1.94 per gallon since President Biden was inaugurated, an increase of over 80 percent. Americans are still paying, on average, more than $4 a gallon for gas, and many can still remember the $5-a- gallon gas. The price for utility gas service is up by almost 40 percent. These prices occur because President Biden shut down domestic energy production, including through permitting delays and canceling pipelines like the Keystone XL Pipeline. Now--again, unbelievably--the President's Democrat allies in Congress are doubling down with a methane tax and higher royalties on petroleum, reimposing and increasing by nearly 70 percent the Superfund tax on refiners of crude oil, importers of petroleum products, and crude oil exporters, costing almost $12 billion over 10 years that will ultimately be borne by American motorists. And Americans know that. In addition, higher taxes diminish the ability to improve domestic supplies of oil by making capital investments cost prohibitive at a time when the U.S. has already lost 1 million barrels a day of refining capacity compared to before President Biden's unwise restriction of fossil fuel production in the United States. On the methane fee, the American Gas Association says: New fees or taxes on energy companies will raise costs for customers-- Americans understand this. He continues: [C]reating a burden that will fall most heavily on lower- income Americans. . . . based on similar proposals introduced earlier this Congress, we estimate that the fee could amount to tens of billions of dollars annually. These major new costs most likely will result in higher bills for natural gas customers, including families, small businesses, and power generators. Any increase in low-income households' energy costs could prove devastating. The bottom line on taxes is that millions of Americans will bear the burden of these tax hikes. Some of my colleagues have claimed that those tax hikes are worth the supposed benefit. But let's look at those benefits. Drug price reform is one they refer to. The largest source of supposed savings in the Democrats' bill is a system of bureaucratic drug price controls that will lead to: higher launch prices, stifled growth, gutted domestic manufacturing jobs, and aiding foreign adversaries like China; higher launch prices for new medications, triggering financial strain at the pharmacy counter, as confirmed by the Congressional Budget Office; hundreds of thousands of American job losses, particularly in domestic manufacturing, which is already getting hit by the new book minimum tax, with some estimates projecting as many as 800,000 job losses; a competitive edge for the Chinese Communist Party, which has singled out biomedical innovation as a pillar of its industrial policy strategy and could ultimately supplant the United States as the global life sciences leader, with a profound amount of national security implications; an unprecedented expansion of the DC Federal health bureaucracy, financed with a staggering $3 billion in new administrative spending as the Federal Government takes even greater control over another segment of our healthcare economy. This bureaucracy would also have unbridled new government price- setting authorities with permanent prohibitions on even judicial and administrative review and with initial implementation shielded from basic notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements; fewer new treatments and cures, with the University of Chicago analysis estimating 135 fewer new drugs approved between now and 2039, resulting from an 18.5 percent reduction in innovative research and development. There would be less funding for cancer R&D. Today, nearly 50 percent of the FDA pipeline is comprised of new cancer treatments. However, according to the same economists at the University of Chicago, the drug price controls would reduce funding for cancer R&D by nearly $18.1 billion, over 9 times the amount of funding proposed for President Biden's Cancer Moonshot--so much for the President's Cancer Moonshot. There would be dangerous new mechanisms for compelling total compliance with Federal Government mandates, with potential applications across all sectors of the economy, including: an escalating noncompliance penalty of up to 95 percent on all gross sales levied every day for failure to meet any terms of the government's price-setting program--negotiation in name only--rendering any new Federal mandate, however sweeping, an offer you can't refuse. Even late paperwork would trigger this crippling, catastrophic penalty, which has a tax-exclusive rate of up to 1,900 percent. It is negotiation in name only. As a messaging gimmick, the Democrats have framed their government price-setting program as ``negotiation,'' but their legislation tells a far different story. Under their proposed program, the Secretary has absolute, unilateral, uninhibited price-setting authority--with no floor--enabling a price of $1 for even the most innovative new drugs. Manufacturers have no choice but to comply and to provide indefinite access to their products at the Secretary-dictated price, regardless of how unfair. They cannot walk away from the negotiating table or withdraw selected products from the Medicare market, even if the Secretary sets an economically untenable price, stripping even small businesses of any leverage. Judicial and administrative review of key decisions, including the price setting itself, are permanently prohibited. The bill completely disregards the rest of the prescription drug supply chain, targeting manufacturers while doing nothing to address other key players or to improve oversight and transparency. There is a better way. It is called the Lower Costs, More Cures Act. Senate Republicans have developed a commonsense alternative, based on more than two dozen solutions, aimed at providing relief at the pharmacy counter while ensuring long-term access to lifesaving new treatments and cures. Among other provisions--virtually all of which are based on proposals with bipartisan support--the Lower Costs, More Cures Act would reform the Part D benefit to reduce seniors' cost-sharing burden and incentivize plans to negotiate the best deals possible for enrollees. It would create a hard cap on the annual out-of-pocket spending for all seniors under Medicare Part D. It would increase Part D plan choices for seniors by enabling sponsors to offer additional plans with incentives for options that pass a greater share of the discounts directly to their beneficiaries at the pharmacy counter. It would permanently extend a Trump administration program providing Part D enrollees with access to plan options that cap out-of-pocket monthly insulin costs at $35 or less. It would permanently allow high-deductible health plans to offer predeductible coverage for preventive services, including insulin. It would establish a chief pharmaceutical negotiator to combat foreign freeloading, ensuring the best trade deals achievable for American consumers and job creators. It would strengthen consumer-oriented oversight through more useful cost comparison tools, price transparency measures, and robust reporting requirements for stakeholders across the drug supply chain, including pharmacy benefit managers. It would facilitate value-based arrangements where private and public sector payers can pay based on patient outcomes, driving better results for patients at a lower cost. And it would restructure payments for drugs administered in the doctor's office or hospital outpatient department to encourage physicians to deliver cost-effective treatment options when clinically appropriate. These are the kinds of solutions that our prescription drug pricing system requires, not an arbitrary and offensive Federal price-fixing program. Now, let's move on, finally, to the IRS funding for an army of auditors. This bill proposes $80 billion in new spending in mandatory appropriations to the IRS. Let me give that a little perspective. The annual budget of the IRS is only about $12.6 billion. So it is nearly six times the annual budget of the current IRS. Of this, $45.6 billion is for enforcement purposes. That is more than 57 percent--almost 60 percent of this $80 billion is for enforcement purposes--and I will get to that in a minute--$25.3 billion for operations and support; only $4.8 billion for improving their business systems and bringing themselves into the 21st century with their technology so they can communicate with taxpayers; and only $3.2 billion for taxpayer services. Some estimate that this part of the chart--the $46 billion for an army of auditors--will allow us to hire as many as 87,000 new auditors. That would make the IRS one of the largest Federal Agencies--larger than the Pentagon, larger than the State Department, larger than the FBI, and larger than the Border Patrol--all of them combined. According to the Congressional Research Service, the Democrats' reckless IRS funding increase would raise enforcement funding by nearly 70 percent above what the IRS is currently projected to get. Increased audits for the middle-class, for small businesses, and those making less than $400,000 are inevitable and unavoidable under this act. How will this money be used? Well, interestingly, the White House-- after we started pointing this out, the White House and even the IRS Commissioner have said they won't use all this money for auditing people who make less than $400,000. And my colleagues just continue to say they won't do it. Multiple studies show, however, that in order to raise the money they are requiring to be raised under this bill from audits--around $200 billion of more tax revenue from Americans by auditing them--they have nowhere else to look. Last year, the IRS announced that it plans to ramp up audits of small businesses by 50 percent this year. Why did they announce that? Because that is where they need to look to collect all of this new tax revenue that they want to get. So I asked the nonpartisan Joint Tax Committee to estimate where most of this tax gap lies. Where is this trillion dollars of tax gap that my colleagues on the other side say is all coming from ``big'' tax cheats? The IRS looked at the data and determined that out of all the revenue projected to be raised from underreported income, 40 to 57 percent could come from taxpayers making $50,000 or less; 65 to 78 percent could come from taxpayers making $100,000 or less; and 78 to 90 percent could come from those making less than $200,000. Only around 4 to 9 percent could come from those making over $500,000. That is what the data shows. That is why the IRS announced a 50-percent increase in audits for small businesses, and that is why it is impossible for the Democrats' claims that they want to not have audits of people under $400,000 cannot be honored. You know, in their bill in response to this criticism, they included a sentence that said, Nothing in this bill is ``intended''--focus on that word--nothing in this bill is intended to increase taxes on those making less than $400,000. Why did they use the word ``intended''? Because they know that that is not what they want to have happen, but it is what will have to happen, and they are not willing to use a stronger word. I have asked them--and I will ask them in an amendment on this floor--to say that none of this money can be used to audit taxpayers making less than $400,000 a year. Let's see how they vote on that amendment. Why couldn't they just say that this money ``shall not'' increase taxes on people making under $400,000 per year? Why couldn't they say that these funds ``cannot'' be utilized to audit taxpayers making less than $400,000 per year? Because they know they can't say that and claim the amount of revenue that they want to spend unless they audit those making less than $400,000 per year. The fact is, the tax cap isn't just millionaires or billionaires or oligarchs or whatever the term of the attack is today. Referring to all tax gaps and misreporting--that everybody who has not accurately reported their income is a ``tax cheat''--is misdirection. It calls all of these people who make less than $400,000 who are simply having trouble with this complex Internal Revenue Code a tax cheat. That is unfair. We have examined the IRS's own data on how successful it is in having the courts sustain--sustain its claims that these folks in the $400,000-or-less category and other categories are cheating on their taxes. Over the past 20 years, the IRS has had a less than 47-percent success rate and a less than 45-percent success rate over the last 10 years. In other words, the IRS more often asserts that these deficiencies exist than the courts agree with. That is hardly evidence for a multitude of tax cheats, but it is firm evidence that innocent taxpayers are often subjected to unnecessary and inappropriate scrutiny. We can be sure they will be with 87,000 new auditors--again, making the IRS larger than all of those other Agencies that I talked about. By the way, folks may remember just a short time back when the proposal also included language that would let the IRS get into the bank accounts and monitor the transactions of the deposits and withdrawals of all Americans. Well, let me say it better--all Americans who had more than $10,000 worth of transactions in a year, which is, essentially, almost all Americans. Now, admittedly, that language isn't in this bill yet, but the broad authority that is given to the Internal Revenue Service with this $80 billion of supersizing will undoubtedly result in rules and regulations issued by the IRS to achieve that objective. They just knew that they couldn't put it in statute because they would be rejected immediately by the American people. I encourage the American people to see past this and to reject this legislation. It is too many taxes, too much spending, and too big of a burden on the American people across all income categories. We don't want to supersize our Internal Revenue Service, and--go back to that very first statistic I gave you--it is not even going to have a statistically significant impact on inflation. If anything, the taxes will drive prices up. I encourage all of my colleagues to reject this reckless bill. With that, I yield my time.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I call up my amendment, No. 5404, and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, my amendment will guard against squeezing middle-class taxpayers. Supersized IRS funding will squeeze billions from the middle-class workers and small businesses through ramped-up audits. My colleagues on the other side and the President all say that that is not intended by the bill, and, in fact, the bill itself says that is not intended. But this is not enforceable language, and everyone knows that the targeted money in the bill cannot be achieved unless the middle class--people with incomes under $400,000--are hit with a wave of new audits. We also know that the Congressional Budget Office will score that, showing that there is no way to accomplish the objectives of this bill unless you audit the middle class. My bill simply puts in some teeth behind what is admitted by everyone to be the intention of the legislation, to say that none of the new IRS funding may be used to audit those earning below $400,000. If my amendment is not adopted, billions in taxes will be squeezed out of taxpayers earning below $400,000, according to the CBO, including middle-income workers and small businesses.

Mr. CRAPO. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I appreciate my colleagues' commitment to this issue and to their constituents. As you know, this legislation has been before us for some time now, and there is controversy over it. This bill would retroactively reinstate pension benefits for a small subset of participants whose pensions have already been transferred to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or PBGC. That would create a precedent that other plans would follow. The PBGC exists specifically to cover pension benefits if a plan is terminated. So we should let the system work. This system does not require taxpayer dollars for a bailout or for whatever one would like to call it. That is part of the reason for the objection. We also have an obligation to be deliberate in how we spend taxpayer money. Before we inject more money into the system, we should explore the implications of this bill, which brings me to my final point. The Finance Committee has not held a hearing--not a single hearing, let alone a markup--on this bill. The Finance Committee exists to examine proposals such as this and to provide all Senators an opportunity to weigh in. I am willing to work with my chairman, Senator Wyden, on this and with Senator Brown and with Senator Portman and other Senators who are interested in the issue so we can see if there is a need and a way that we can address this issue specifically without creating a precedent that would deal with the rest of the entire system that has been put together to address terminated plans. Because of the need for us to have regular-order deliberation and consideration of this legislation, I must, today, object.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I honor Jared Don Ricker, of Caldwell, ID, who passed away unexpectedly on June 12, 2022, at the far too young age of 42. He is deeply missed by his family and many friends and remembered as a wonderful man, great father, kind listener, and fun companion. I came to know of Jared through two of his three brothers, Bryan and Cameron, who have both served as members of my staff. Bryan represented me as a regional director for southwest Idaho. Cameron is chief clerk of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, a position he served in when I was chairman of the committee. I extend my deep condolences to Jared's many loved ones, who include his wife Brianna Lynn and four children: Jackson Don, Brice Laney, Campbell Zoe, and Collins Bree. My prayers for God's comfort are also with Jared's parents, Don and Peggy, as they mourn the loss of their son, Jared's other brother, Chase, and Jared's many other family members and friends. Jared, who was born on February 8, 1980, and graduated from Nampa High School, was a fellow Eagle Scout. He shared this proud achievement with his son, Jackson. Jared also served a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Columbus, OH. After returning from his mission, he met and married the love of his life Bri, and they made a beautiful family together. He earned his associate degree in multimedia and worked with his employer of 15 years, Iliad Media Group, as the IT director and supporting engineer. Jared shared his love and laughs generously with his family, friends, coworkers, and all those who were blessed to be a part of his life. He was a fun-loving and deeply caring father, husband, son, brother, uncle, son-in-law, brother-in-law, and friend. He loved his children dearly, their passions and talents, and he loved serving others, sharing the gospel and making connections. His obituary movingly notes, ``He showed his love by filling your soul and your belly . . . Jared almost always had a smile on his face. Everyone was a friend to him. He left anyone he met a better person.'' Those who knew him recall his kindness, generosity, and humor. Jared is remembered as a great listener with a heart of gold. We are so fortunate to have had Jared's light glow so brightly in our world. My heart goes out to all those who loved him, as we honor his life, mourn his loss, and cherish his loving memory.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch, Representative Mike Simpson and Representative Russ Fulcher, we congratulate Pat Kole on his well-earned retirement from serving as vice president, legal and government affairs of the Idaho Potato Commission. Pat has been a steady hand at the helm of the Idaho Potato Commission, IPC, promoting the iconic Idaho potatoes for more than 25 years. Serving as the IPC's vice president, legal and government affairs, Pat has managed Federal, State, and local government affairs for the IPC, directed its trademark-licensing program, directed its research and education program, and supervised its IT needs. His work has included litigating certification mark cases, registering certification marks in many jurisdictions, testifying before the U.S. Congress and advocating for public policy supporting Idaho potato producers' ability to grow this central agricultural product and feed consumers at home and around the world. To say Pat has gone the extra mile to support Idaho potato production is an understatement, considering in 2005 he ran the Marine Corps Marathon as a representative of the IPC and to help promote the importance of complex carbohydrates, such as those found in Idaho potatoes. Pat, who earned his undergraduate degree at the University of Michigan and law degree from the University of Denver, has practiced law for more than 40 years. His experience, calm, persistence, and ability to dig into the crux of the problem have been instrumental in facing the challenges that have undoubtedly arisen over the years. This includes his thoughtful advocacy for measured approaches to help with the eradication of the pale cyst nematode, assist producers, and regain markets. More recently, Pat provided critical assistance and advocacy for the needs of Idaho's potato producers as relief efforts were considered for the historic agricultural disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout, Pat's efforts and those of the Idaho potato producers he works with and supports have helped fortify the Idaho potato as a standout symbol of Idaho and U.S. agriculture. It is no surprise Pat has received recognitions for his attentive work. This includes Pat being named The Packer's 2022 Potato Person for All Seasons. Pat is known as someone who always does his homework and who carefully thinks through the details. That has made him and instrumental partner to us as we work on Federal policy affecting the potato industry. We always know that when Pat raises an issue, he does so with scrupulous grounding, and we know we get a straight and accurate response when we reach out to him for guidance. When policy questions arise that we know will affect the potato industry, Pat is the first we call. Thank you, Pat, for being such a trusted advocate for the Idaho potato industry all these years and your decades of service to the Gem State. Congratulations, again, on your retirement.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to remember and honor James K. Jackson, specialist in International Trade and Finance in the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division of the Congressional Research Service, CRS. James passed away on February 17, 2022, after a serious illness. He had a distinguished career of more than 35 years at CRS, serving Congress on international trade and economic policy issues. James exemplified the very best of CRS during his decades of direct support for Congress. He achieved a remarkable record of accomplishment through his work for Members and congressional staff. James played a vital role in Congress' consideration of important legislation and was well known for his authoritative analysis of critical international economic and policy issues before Congress, including on foreign investment and reform of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States--CFIUS--when I chaired the Senate Banking Committee. He also was intricately involved in major trade policy legislation and debates before the Senate Finance Committee, including its work on understanding the economic effects of U.S. trade agreements before Congress. My senior staff used to tell me that they had James on speed dial during the major reform of the CFIUS process during 2017-2018, a testament to James' expertise and assistance on this major legislation. There are many more examples of James' authoritative, nonpartisan, and objective expertise and analysis for Congress. In addition to being an expert on foreign investment and related policies, James had deep knowledge of the United States' role in the global economy and most recently was the lead CRS expert on the global effects of COVID-19, writing and consulting extensively for Congress on this issue. He had deep expertise in international economics and trade and was gifted in explaining complicated economic issues in a way that those without an economics background could understand. During the 2008-2009 global financial crisis, James played a key role in helping Congress to understand the deep interconnected nature of the crisis and its financial and economic underpinnings at work in major economies. His work in explaining the economics of trade and trade agreements was invaluable, especially during the Senate Finance Committee's consideration of major free trade agreements. The breadth and depth of James' international economic policy expertise will be truly missed as Congress continues its work on these important issues. I offer my sincere condolences to James' family, friends, and his colleagues at CRS during this difficult time and hope they may take comfort in the knowledge of his indelible contribution to the work of Congress on international trade and economic policy.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I yield back all time.