John Thune

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 23.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, anybody who knows me well knows that I say this a lot, and that is that agriculture is the lifeblood of South Dakota and the lifeblood of our country, and farmers and ranchers are hard at work every single day to feed America and the world. But what I hear lately from farmers and ranchers is not good. Agriculture producers across the country have faced strong headwinds in recent years--higher input costs, high interest rates, lower commodity prices--all leading to declining farm income year after year. Natural disasters have struck many of our farm regions, and the bird flu continues to ravage agriculture across the country. Of course, in the last few years, the Biden administration was hardly much help. It imposed burdensome regulations like WOTUS, or waters of the United States, that threatened to devastate the farm sector. The administration put expanding market access on the back burner while our agricultural trade deficit grew to record levels, and their profligate spending led to inflation that hit farmers and ranchers especially hard in the form of higher input costs. Meanwhile, Democrats here in Congress failed to prioritize a modernized farm bill to support agriculture through these challenges, and we are now more than a year past due for an updated farm bill. America's farmers and ranchers deserve better--much better. I expect things will be different under President Trump, and I know that farmers and ranchers will have a friend in Brooke Rollins, the President's choice for Secretary of Agriculture. Ms. Rollins grew up in the small, agricultural town of Glen Rose, TX. She spent summers working for her family on their farm in Minnesota, helping with their corn, potato, and soybean crops. She was a 4-H-er, an FFA State officer, and a barrel racer, and her four kids are keeping up her family's way of life by showing cattle in Texas. After studying agriculture development at Texas A&M, Ms. Rollins went to work for then-Governor Rick Perry, where she worked on agriculture policy. She then continued her ag work by building up a Texas think tank, empowering the voices of farmers, ranchers, and rural communities. Then she served in President Trump's first administration--first leading the Office of American Innovation and then on the Domestic Policy Council. Brooke Rollins is a policy wonk with a farmer's heart. She understands the needs of agriculture producers, and she knows how to deliver results. She promises to get right to work after she is confirmed on four key priorities: first, getting disaster and economic aid out the door and into the hands of farmers; second, getting the bird flu and other animal disease outbreaks under control; third, getting the farm bill done; and finally, revitalizing the U.S. Department of Agriculture to focus on its core mission and put America and American agriculture first. I am looking forward to working with Ms. Rollins on these key priorities. Under this Republican majority, delivering a modernized farm bill is a priority, and I am glad that Ms. Rollins has pledged to work with Congress on one of the top farm bill needs, which is strengthening the farm safety net--essential to keeping existing operations going--and encouraging the next generation of producers to get started. I was also pleased to hear Ms. Rollins acknowledge the need to improve the management of national forests. The Black Hills National Forest, among others across the country, has seen its timber industry decimated by bad management policies. So I look forward to working with the USDA, under Secretary Rollins, to provide relief from the dire situation in western South Dakota. I am encouraged as well that she will prioritize getting disaster and economic assistance out the door. Last year, many parts of the country suffered from natural disasters, including South Dakota. As I said, farmers and ranchers have suffered lower commodity prices and declining incomes. In December, Congress passed $31 billion in agricultural disaster and economic assistance, and we need to get that money into the hands of farmers and ranchers working to rebuild. Brooke Rollins understands the mission of the USDA. She understands the day-to-day needs of America's farmers, and she has the expertise to deliver results. I trust that she will put America's farmers and ranchers first as Secretary of Agriculture, and I look forward to working with her in this role. (The remarks of Mr. THUNE pertaining to the introduction of S. 587 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. THUNE. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, later today, I will introduce a bill to repeal the death tax. As I mentioned, as a resident of a rural State filled with family farms and ranches, I have made death tax repeal a priority for a long time, and I was proud to help secure a doubling of the death tax exemption in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This doubled exemption has provided certainty to a lot of farms and ranches and small businesses over the past 7 years, but the expanded exemption is expiring at the end of this year. It is my hope that we will not merely extend this exemption but that we will get rid of this fundamentally flawed tax once and for all. The death tax is fundamentally flawed both in theory and in practice. There should be a limit to how many times the government can tax you. The money you leave at your death has already been taxed by the government at least once, which makes the death tax double taxation, and the government isn't even profiting all that much from this double taxation. That is right. The death tax accounts for a teeny, tiny fraction of government revenue. In fact, there is reason to believe that the government would collect more in taxes if it got rid of the death tax entirely due to the economic growth and job creation that would stem from its elimination. So how is there any support left for this burdensome tax? That is a good question. For some, of course, heavy taxation is axiomatic. ``Do well,'' their thinking runs, ``and the government should come after you.'' Some think that you shouldn't be able to pass the results of hard work down to your children upon your death. Well, death tax proponents tend to talk as if the death tax only affects the extremely wealthy, but nothing, of course, could be further from the truth. The death tax can sweep up those who have very little in the bank--notably, family farms and ranches and family businesses. How? Well, farming and ranching is often a cash-poor business. A farmer might have substantial looking assets on paper, but the vast majority of that is land and farming equipment. Only a small fraction of it is money in the bank. On top of that, farmland can often be valued at a level that is inconsistent with its agricultural productivity value. A farmer might have land with a substantial value on paper, but the crop yield on that land could be worth far, far less. So what happens when a farmer or a rancher dies and his estate is subject to the tax? There is a very good chance that his liquid assets--in other words, the cash he has available in the bank--won't come close to covering the tax bill from the Federal Government, and the only alternative for his heirs may be to start selling off land or farm equipment to pay the tax. In some cases, they will be able to keep the farm, just a smaller version of it; in others, they may have to sell off the family farm entirely. The case is similar with family-owned businesses. The owner might appear to have substantial looking assets on paper, but only a small fraction of that may be money in the bank. The vast majority may be tied up in the business. Once again, when the Federal Government comes around, demanding a huge portion of this individual's taxable estate, there may not be anywhere close to enough money in the bank to pay the tax. To pay the Federal Government, the owner's descendants will have to sell off part or all of the family business. Now, family farms and ranches are the lifeblood of the rural communities in South Dakota. They are a source of jobs. They provide support for local businesses. They help build up local schools and local infrastructure. Losing a local farm can hit rural communities very, very hard, especially when that farm or ranch is bought up by an out-of-State business with few ties to the community and limited interest in building it up. It is not just those who actually get hit by the estate tax who suffer. A lot of family farms and ranches and family businesses spend a lot of time and money on estate planning to avoid being hit by this tax. That is time and money that could have gone into building their business, investing in new equipment, hiring new workers, and the list goes on. Some set aside capital to prepare for the death tax--capital that, again, could go into building up a farm or ranch or hiring new workers for the family business. As one of my Democrat colleagues, the senior Senator from Washington, said a while back: The estate tax is bad for businesses. It is bad for workers and new job creation. And it is bad for our communities who are watching their local, family-owned businesses get swallowed up by large corporations. As I said, we protected a lot more family farms and family businesses by doubling the death tax exemption in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act back in 2017, but we didn't protect them all. And those we did protect will lose those protections at the end of this year. It is time to end this punishing and burdensome tax once and for all. I want to thank my Republican colleagues who have joined me in sponsoring this legislation. I hope that 2025 will be the year that we permanently bid farewell to the death tax. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, later today, I will introduce a bill to repeal the death tax. As I mentioned, as a resident of a rural State filled with family farms and ranches, I have made death tax repeal a priority for a long time, and I was proud to help secure a doubling of the death tax exemption in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This doubled exemption has provided certainty to a lot of farms and ranches and small businesses over the past 7 years, but the expanded exemption is expiring at the end of this year. It is my hope that we will not merely extend this exemption but that we will get rid of this fundamentally flawed tax once and for all. The death tax is fundamentally flawed both in theory and in practice. There should be a limit to how many times the government can tax you. The money you leave at your death has already been taxed by the government at least once, which makes the death tax double taxation, and the government isn't even profiting all that much from this double taxation. That is right. The death tax accounts for a teeny, tiny fraction of government revenue. In fact, there is reason to believe that the government would collect more in taxes if it got rid of the death tax entirely due to the economic growth and job creation that would stem from its elimination. So how is there any support left for this burdensome tax? That is a good question. For some, of course, heavy taxation is axiomatic. ``Do well,'' their thinking runs, ``and the government should come after you.'' Some think that you shouldn't be able to pass the results of hard work down to your children upon your death. Well, death tax proponents tend to talk as if the death tax only affects the extremely wealthy, but nothing, of course, could be further from the truth. The death tax can sweep up those who have very little in the bank--notably, family farms and ranches and family businesses. How? Well, farming and ranching is often a cash-poor business. A farmer might have substantial looking assets on paper, but the vast majority of that is land and farming equipment. Only a small fraction of it is money in the bank. On top of that, farmland can often be valued at a level that is inconsistent with its agricultural productivity value. A farmer might have land with a substantial value on paper, but the crop yield on that land could be worth far, far less. So what happens when a farmer or a rancher dies and his estate is subject to the tax? There is a very good chance that his liquid assets--in other words, the cash he has available in the bank--won't come close to covering the tax bill from the Federal Government, and the only alternative for his heirs may be to start selling off land or farm equipment to pay the tax. In some cases, they will be able to keep the farm, just a smaller version of it; in others, they may have to sell off the family farm entirely. The case is similar with family-owned businesses. The owner might appear to have substantial looking assets on paper, but only a small fraction of that may be money in the bank. The vast majority may be tied up in the business. Once again, when the Federal Government comes around, demanding a huge portion of this individual's taxable estate, there may not be anywhere close to enough money in the bank to pay the tax. To pay the Federal Government, the owner's descendants will have to sell off part or all of the family business. Now, family farms and ranches are the lifeblood of the rural communities in South Dakota. They are a source of jobs. They provide support for local businesses. They help build up local schools and local infrastructure. Losing a local farm can hit rural communities very, very hard, especially when that farm or ranch is bought up by an out-of-State business with few ties to the community and limited interest in building it up. It is not just those who actually get hit by the estate tax who suffer. A lot of family farms and ranches and family businesses spend a lot of time and money on estate planning to avoid being hit by this tax. That is time and money that could have gone into building their business, investing in new equipment, hiring new workers, and the list goes on. Some set aside capital to prepare for the death tax--capital that, again, could go into building up a farm or ranch or hiring new workers for the family business. As one of my Democrat colleagues, the senior Senator from Washington, said a while back: The estate tax is bad for businesses. It is bad for workers and new job creation. And it is bad for our communities who are watching their local, family-owned businesses get swallowed up by large corporations. As I said, we protected a lot more family farms and family businesses by doubling the death tax exemption in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act back in 2017, but we didn't protect them all. And those we did protect will lose those protections at the end of this year. It is time to end this punishing and burdensome tax once and for all. I want to thank my Republican colleagues who have joined me in sponsoring this legislation. I hope that 2025 will be the year that we permanently bid farewell to the death tax. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, President Trump's border czar was at the Capitol yesterday to update Republican Senators on the progress the administration is making on arresting and deporting criminals here illegally. And it is difficult to believe some of the individuals they have arrested were still in the country--members of violent international gangs; individuals arrested for murder, for rape, for kidnapping, for drug trafficking, for sexual crimes involving children, and for human smuggling. Again, it is staggering to think that these criminals were out there on our Nation's streets. And our communities will be safer places without these individuals. Since day one of his administration, President Trump has been fulfilling his campaign promise to crack down on illegal immigration and secure our border. And it is good to see. Immigration is a key part of our country's story, and immigrants have made untold contributions to our country. But we need to ensure that immigration is done legally, for both the safety of our country and to preserve respect for the rule of law. The chaos of the last 4 years was unsustainable, and it was dangerous. We had 10 million individuals flood across our southern border. We had millions--millions--of undocumented individuals take up residence in our country, more than the population of a number of U.S. States. Law enforcement officials were overwhelmed, and officers were pulled off of essential work of guarding the border just to process the flood of migrants. Border cities and other cities across the United States struggled to deal with the influx. And all of this chaos was an invitation to terrorists, to smugglers, to drug cartels, and other dangerous individuals to enter our country. So I am tremendously proud and grateful for the incredible amount of work the President has done so far to make it clear that illegal migration will no longer be tolerated. There is a lot more work to do, and some of that is going to require Congress's help. Mr. Homan, President Trump's border czar, made clear to Senators yesterday that Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement are going to need additional resources to continue the good work they have been doing to secure our border and to get criminals off of our streets. We intend to deliver. Today, Senator Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, is kicking off the committee markup of a budget resolution that will lay the foundation for a transformational investment in border security and immigration enforcement and in our national defense. We will provide resources to increase the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents, expand detention space, facilitate deportations of dangerous individuals, and obtain the barriers and technology that we need to secure the border. Mr. President, for too long, our country has tolerated rampant illegal immigration. That ends now. I am grateful for everything the President is doing to protect our streets and uphold the law. And the Republican-led Congress will ensure that the administration has the resources needed to continue this important work.

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the Kennedy nomination.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business for debate only, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the postcloture time with respect to the Kennedy nomination expire at 10:30 a.m., Thursday, February 13. I further ask that, following disposition of the Kennedy nomination, the cloture motion with respect to the Rollins nomination be withdrawn and the Senate vote on confirmation of the Rollins nomination with no intervening action or debate; further, that following disposition of the Rollins nomination, the Senate resume consideration of the Lutnick nomination, and the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Lutnick nomination at 1:45 p.m.; and if cloture is invoked on the Lutnick nomination, that all time be considered expired, and the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Loeffler nomination; and if cloture is invoked on the Loeffler nomination, that all postcloture time be expired, and the Senate vote on confirmation of the Loeffler and Lutnick nominations at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Democratic leader no earlier than Tuesday, February 18.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 32 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. THUNE. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, February 13; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, and the Senate proceed to executive session to resume Executive Calendar No. 17 under the previous order; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Thursday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of my colleagues.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, this week, the Senate will consider the nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. President Trump has tapped Mr. Kennedy to lead the charge in making America healthy again--something that has been a concern of Mr. Kennedy's throughout his career. Mr. Kennedy promises to make HHS a collaborative, transparent, and science-driven Agency under his leadership. I will say that is good to hear. Many Americans' trust in health authorities has eroded in recent years, with the pandemic being a factor. A lot of Americans feel frustrated with confusing and sometimes contradictory guidance from government Agencies. And measures like requiring toddlers as young as 2 years old to wear masks indefinitely not only defy common sense, there was no scientific research to back it up. Our public health Agencies do critical work. I am a supporter of the research, and I am proud of the contributions they make to American leadership in medicine and innovation. But if we are going to make America healthy again, the Agencies doing this important work have to rebuild some trust with Americans. I was pleased to hear Mr. Kennedy pledge to increase transparency and accountability, including an unprecedented level of collaboration with Congress that allows for regular and robust oversight of his Agency's activities. I was also pleased that Mr. Kennedy acknowledged the importance of vaccines and the concerning reality that vaccine uptake in this country is decreasing. Mr. Kennedy has pledged that he will maintain the best vaccine standards, and he has committed to work within existing vaccine approval and monitoring systems and maintain the FDA's review standards. I look forward to Mr. Kennedy being a partner with Congress on some very important issues. He has brought attention to America's chronic disease epidemic. I am pleased that he wants to put a focus on chronic diseases that affect too many Americans and cost far too much in lives lost and dollars spent. I am also encouraged that he is committed to implementing President Trump's pro-life policies at HHS. President Trump has been one of the most pro-life Presidents we have ever had. Mr. Kennedy's Agency will be critical in protecting life and supporting mothers and babies. Mr. Kennedy is also committed to working with farmers and ranchers on policies that affect our food supply. America's farmers and ranchers are a valuable resource, and I look forward to working with him to ensure that the voice of South Dakota's agriculture producers is heard. I believe that Mr. Kennedy's collaborative approach to this job will help restore some of the trust in our public health Agencies that has been lost in recent years. I look forward to working with him on a number of issues as we restore that trust and work to make America healthy again.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, this week the Senate will be considering its 14th nominee for President Trump's Cabinet, Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence. Ms. Gabbard is a patriot. She is someone who is motivated by service, and she has been serving her country and community since she was 21 years old, when she was elected to the Hawaii State Legislature. Like many Americans of her generation, she felt called to serve her country after the attacks of September 11. After her first session in the Hawaii Legislature, she enlisted in the Army National Guard. The following year, she dropped her reelection campaign to volunteer to deploy to Iraq--the first of three deployments that she has made. It was after her second deployment-- now as an officer and platoon commander--that she set her sights on making an impact on national and global issues, eventually being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. Tulsi Gabbard has worn the uniform of our country for the last 22 years, leading American soldiers in some of the most dangerous parts of the world. She also served 8 years in Congress, including service on the Homeland Security, Foreign Affairs, and Armed Services Committees. By her own count, she has taken the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States at least eight times. As both a military officer and policymaker, Ms. Gabbard has been a consumer of intelligence. She knows that good decisions depend on having the best information, and she knows that the cost of bad information is measured in lives lost. In recent years, there have been some significant intelligence failures, and these failures aren't confined to one Agency or one part of the world. The intelligence community needs to refocus on its core mission: collecting intelligence and providing unbiased analysis of that information. That is what Tulsi Gabbard is committed to ensuring. If she is confirmed to be DNI, I believe she has the knowledge and leadership capabilities to get it done. I am also grateful that Ms. Gabbard has expressed a willingness to rightsize the Office of the DNI. When this position was created by Congress in the wake of 9/11, it was designed to be a sort of quarterback, if you will, for the intelligence community. It was designed to be a lean organization focused on coordination and ensuring all the elements of the intelligence community are communicating and working together toward a common purpose. But it quickly became much larger than intended, and it has become a bureaucracy unto itself. So I am glad that Ms. Gabbard plans to focus on identifying and eliminating redundancies and inefficiencies to restore the Office to what it was originally designed to be. I was also very pleased to hear Ms. Gabbard say at her hearing that section 702 is ``essential for our national security.'' This foreign intelligence collection program is the key tool used to identify threats to Americans at home and abroad. I was glad to hear Ms. Gabbard acknowledge its importance. I was also pleased that Ms. Gabbard intends to prosecute leakers to the full extent of the law. In a day and age when anything and everything ends up on the internet, it is essential that we have zero tolerance for those who deliberately compromise classified information, and we must safeguard our sensitive sources and intelligence collection methods. Madam President, Tulsi Gabbard is a patriotic American. She believes strongly in the mission with which she will be tasked: keeping America safe. And you don't have to take my word for it; take it from Americans who have served alongside Ms. Gabbard during her 22 years in uniform, from the people who have put their lives in her hands. One wrote: Her exceptional qualifications, coupled with a proven track record of leadership and unwavering commitment to safeguarding our national interests, render her the unequivocal choice for this critical position. From another: I know Tulsi will be fully committed to protecting ALL Americans during this pivotal moment in American history. Madam President, it sounds like what we need in a Director of National Intelligence. I look forward to confirming Ms. Gabbard this week. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business for debate only, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk due a second reading.

Mr. THUNE. In order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceeding.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, February 11; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume Executive Calendar No. 18; that all time during morning business, recess, adjournment, and leader remarks count postcloture; further, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow for weekly conference meetings.