John Thune

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, irrespective of how the Presidential election came out last November, we would be having a conversation about how to fix ObamaCare. There are many reasons for that, but most importantly is that it has just skyrocketed costs for people in this country. Premiums have gone through the roof, deductibles have increased, copays have increased, and out-of-pocket costs have become so extensive for people that even if they have coverage, they can't use their plans in many cases. So when our colleagues across the aisle talk about the recently rolled out proposal coming from the House--which they will be discussing and we eventually will be discussing--to try to drive down the costs for people in this country, that is what this debate is really all about. You can say what you want, but the fact is that this year, 2017, premium increases are 25 percent in the exchanges--25 percent. In six States, the premium increases were 50 percent in the exchanges. I don't know how anybody--any family in this country--can keep up with those kinds of skyrocketing premiums. If you are buying your insurance on the individual market, the roof is blown off. I talk to people in my State of South Dakota all the time who share with me the excessive amount that it now costs for them to cover themselves and their families. I talked to a lady in Sioux Falls recently, and she told me they are now paying $22,000 a year for health insurance. That is not working. That is why what we had was an abysmal failure. In terms of choices, the whole idea was that people were going to have options out there. In a third of the counties in America today-- one-third of the counties in America today--people have one option, one insurer. It is pretty hard to get a competitive rate when you only have one option. There is a virtual monopoly in a third of the counties in America today. So we have markets collapsing, insurers pulling out, and we saw that last fall Blue Cross Blue Shield pulled out of the individual market in South Dakota and left 8,000 people wondering how they are going to continue to cover themselves with health insurance. The markets are collapsing, choices are dwindling, and costs are skyrocketing. The Senator from Michigan was just on the floor talking about how terrible things are going to be under the proposal that is being considered and discussed in the House of Representatives, but the fact is, things are terrible today, and that is why we are having this conversation. Eight in ten Americans think ObamaCare either ought to be repealed entirely or dramatically changed, significantly changed. By any estimation, by any objective measurement or metric, it has been a failure, and that is why we are having this conversation, and that conversation would have occurred irrespective of what happened in the Presidential election last fall. So let's be clear about why we are here and why we are having this conversation and why we are coming up with a better solution for the American people that will drive down their costs, give them more choices, create more competition in the marketplace, and give them a higher and better quality of care because it restores the doctor- patient relationship, which is so important, not having the government intervening and being in the middle of all of that. The Economy and Regulatory Reform Mr. President, we have a recovery that technically began almost 8 years ago, but for too many Americans, it still feels as if we are in a recession. Americans basically have not had a pay raise in 8 years. Since the recovery began in 2009, wage growth has averaged a paltry 0.25 percent a year--one quarter of 1 percent increase in pay per year since 2009. Well, imagine if you are a family and you are looking at everything that is going up in your lives, whether it is healthcare, which I just talked about, or the cost of education or the cost of energy or the cost of food, all of these things that continue to go up, and you are getting a 0.25-percent--one quarter of 1 percent--pay raise on an annual basis. It is pretty hard not to feel like you are starting to sink and your head is going to be below water before long. Good jobs and opportunities for workers have been too few and too far between. Millions of Americans are working part time because they can't find full-time employment. Even as some economic markers have improved, our economy has stayed firmly stuck in the doldrums. Economic growth for 2016 averaged a dismal 1.6 percent, and there are few signs that things are improving. By the way, the historical average going back to World War II is about 3.2 percent average growth in the economy. So last year we were at one-half of what the average had been going back all the way to World War II. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is projecting average growth for the next 10 years at just 2 percent--in other words, long- term economic stagnation. The good news, though, is that we don't have to resign ourselves to the status quo. We can get our economy going again. Republicans are committed to doing just that. To get our economy going again, we need to identify the reasons for the long-term stagnation we are experiencing. A recent report from the Economic Innovation Group identified one important problem: a lack of what the organization calls ``economic dynamism.'' Economic dynamism, as the Economic Innovation Group defines it, refers to the rate at which new businesses are born and die. In a dynamic economy, the rate of new business creation is high and significantly outstrips the rate of business deaths. But that hasn't been the case in the United State lately. New business creation has significantly dropped over the past several years. Between 2009 and 2011, business death outstripped business birth. While the numbers have since improved slightly, the recovery has been poor and far, as I mentioned before, from historical norms. The Economic Innovation Group notes that in 2012--the economy's best year for business creation since the recession--it fell far short of its worst year prior to 2008. This is deeply concerning because new businesses have historically been responsible for a substantial part of the job creation in this country, not to mention a key source of innovation. When new businesses aren't being created at a strong rate, workers face a whole host of problems. ``A less dynamic economy,'' the Economic Innovation Group notes, ``is one likely to feature fewer jobs, lower labor force participation, slack wage growth, and rising inequality--exactly what we see today.'' Well, American workers clearly need relief, and restoring economic dynamism is a key to providing it. We need to pave the way for new businesses and the jobs they create, and we need to ensure that current businesses, particularly small businesses, are able to thrive. There are a number of ways we can do this. One big thing we can do is relieve the burden of excessive government regulations. Obviously some government regulations are important and necessary, but too many others are unnecessary and doing nothing but loading businesses down with compliance costs and paperwork hours. The more resources businesses spend complying with regulations, the less they have available for growth and innovation. Excessive regulations also prevent many new businesses from ever getting off the ground. Small startups simply don't have the resources to hire individuals, let alone the consultants and lawyers to do the costly work of complying with the scores of government regulations. Unfortunately, over the past 8 years, the Obama administration spent a lot of time imposing burdensome regulations on American businesses. According to the American Action Forum, the Obama administration was responsible for implementing more than 675 major regulations that cost the economy more than $800 billion. Given those numbers, it is no surprise that the Obama economy left businesses with fewer resources to dedicate to growing and creating jobs or that new business creation seriously dropped off during those years in the Obama administration. Since the new Congress began in January, Republicans have been focused on repealing burdensome ObamaCare regulations using the Congressional Review Act. We have already used this law to repeal three Obama regulations, and this week we will use it to repeal at least two more, including the ``blacklisting'' rule, which imposes duplicative and unnecessary requirements for businesses bidding on Federal Government contracts, and the Bureau of Land Management methane rule, which curbs energy production on Federal lands by restricting drilling. This methane rule would cost jobs and deprive State and local governments of tax and royalty payments that they can use to address local priorities. Another area of regulatory reform we need to address is ObamaCare, as I mentioned. Repealing the burdensome mandates and regulations this law has imposed on businesses will go a long way toward removing barriers to new businesses and spurring growth at existing businesses. Another important thing we can do is remove unnecessary barriers that restrict access to capital. Both new and existing businesses rely on capital to help them innovate, expand, and create jobs. In addition to removing burdensome regulations, tax reform needs to be a priority. Measures like allowing new businesses to deduct their startup costs and reducing rates for small businesses would spur new business creation and help small businesses thrive. Republicans plan to take up comprehensive tax reform later this year, and I look forward to that debate. The American economy has always been known for being dynamic and innovative, and we need to make sure it stays that way. We need to free up the innovators and the job creators so that the next big idea isn't buried by government regulations before it has a chance to see the light of day. Sluggish economic growth doesn't have to be the new normal. By removing burdensome government regulations and reforming our Tax Code, we can spur business creation and innovation. We can increase wages and opportunities for American workers, and we can put our economy on the path to long-term health, where that growth rate gets back to that more historic level that allows for better paying jobs and higher wages for American families. I look forward to working with my colleagues in both Houses of Congress to achieve these goals, and I am anxious for us to start passing bills that will put policies in place that are favorable to higher economic growth, better jobs, and better wages for the American people and their families. I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, 2 weeks ago, major health insurer Humana announced its decision to completely withdraw from ObamaCare exchanges for 2018. The company decision was not particularly surprising. Humana had already sharply reduced its participation in the exchanges for 2017, but the decision did confirm yet again that President Obama's healthcare law is on its last legs. Choices on the exchanges declined sharply for 2017 as insurer after insurer cut back on participation. Nearly one-third of U.S. counties have just one choice of insurer on their exchange for 2017. Meanwhile premiums on the exchanges are soaring. Exchange premiums increased a staggering 25 percent on average for 2017. That is a 25-percent premium increase for just 1 year. How many working families can afford a 25- percent increase in their healthcare premiums for 1 year? Things are even worse in some States. Seven States saw an average premium increase of more than 50 percent for 1 year. It is no surprise that many people who have ObamaCare insurance have found they can't afford to actually use their plan. Well, Democrats can talk about coverage all they want, but coverage doesn't mean much if you can't afford to actually take advantage of it. It is time to give the American people some relief. Over the next few weeks, Congress will continue with the process of repealing and replacing ObamaCare. Our priority is replacing ObamaCare with personalized, patient-centered healthcare that is affordable for every American. ObamaCare was supposed to lower healthcare costs for Americans, but it has spectacularly failed to do so. Our reform efforts will focus on keeping healthcare affordable, including increasing competition, expanding innovation, and increasing flexibility. ObamaCare has defaulted to a one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to healthcare. That means that many Americans have found themselves paying for healthcare that they don't need or want. We need much more flexibility in insurance plans. A thriving healthcare system would offer a wide variety of choices that would allow Americans to pick a plan that is tailored to their needs. We also need to give Americans the tools to better manage their healthcare and to control costs. Along with keeping healthcare affordable, we are going to focus on restoring decisionmaking power to the American people. ObamaCare has put Washington bureaucrats in charge of healthcare decisions that should be made by individuals in consultation with their doctor. We are going to move control away from Washington and give it back to individuals. We are also going to ensure that States have the power to innovate and embrace healthcare solutions that work for individuals and employers in their States. Our healthcare system wasn't perfect before ObamaCare--nobody is denying that--but ObamaCare has just made things worse. The American people are ready for healthcare reform that actually works, and that is exactly what Republicans are going to give them.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise to voice my strong support for the nomination of Wilbur Ross to be Secretary of Commerce. We held a hearing on his nomination on January 18, 2017. Mr. Ross has also completed the required paperwork and responded to all of the committee questions for the record. Five weeks ago, on January 24, the Commerce Committee acted by voice vote to favorably report his nomination to the floor. We invoked cloture on Mr. Ross's nomination by a vote margin of 66 to 31 on February 17, with 15 Democratic Senators voting to invoke cloture. I am glad the Senate will finally confirm his nomination today after a long and unnecessary delay. When he is confirmed, Mr. Ross will bring decades of business, entrepreneurial, and civic experience to this important position. Mr. Ross is perhaps best known for his expertise in revitalizing distressed businesses, such as those in the U.S. steel industry. At a time when most investors had abandoned the industry, he organized the International Steel Group in 2002, and through acquisitions, he made it the largest integrated steel company in North America. Later, it merged with Mittal Steel to form the largest steel company in the world. It is for this reason that all of the major steel-industry labor unions also support his confirmation. I ask unanimous consent that the letter of support for the confirmation of Wilbur Ross from the United Steelworkers, dated January 9, 2017, be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. Mr. Ross's nomination is also supported by a bipartisan group of former Secretaries of Commerce, including Secretary William M. Daley, who served as Commerce Secretary under President Clinton, and later as Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. Mr. Ross's strong record of achievement in business led Bloomberg Businessweek to name him one of the ``50 Most Influential People in Global Finance'' in 2011. It is also why he is the only person elected to both the Turnaround Management Hall of Fame and the Private Equity Hall of Fame. Mr. Ross's nomination comes at an important time in our Nation's economic recovery. I believe his extensive management experience in the private sector and his understanding of the challenges faced by workers and businesses alike will equip him well for the job of leading the Department of Commerce. This large Department, which has 12 different bureaus and nearly 47,000 employees located in all 50 States and around the world, oversees a diverse array of issues, from trade to fishery management and from weather forecasting to the Census Bureau. Mr. Ross's experience turning around businesses should help them anticipate and mitigate the risk of major programs like FirstNet, the independent authority charged with creating a nationwide broadband network for first responders and the acquisition of critical weather satellites by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I would also like to underscore that the collaboration between the public and private sectors is one of the hallmarks of the Department's work, as exemplified by the ongoing development of cyber security best practices and standards, which the Commerce Committee has strongly endorsed. I look forward to Mr. Ross continuing his collaboration and strengthening it where necessary. I believe Mr. Ross's business know-how and intelligence make him an excellent candidate to serve as the next Secretary of Commerce. I strongly support his nomination. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support his nomination as well. It is high time we got this position filled and got this experienced person--someone who has a wide range of know-how all across the business sector and our economy-- into a position where he can make a difference in helping to create jobs and grow this economy for our country. I see that my colleague from Florida, Senator Nelson, the ranking Democrat on the Commerce Committee, is here as well. I would love to yield the floor to him and hear what he has to say about this nomination.

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the hard work of my Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee intern Rose Iles Fealy. Rose hails from Perth, Western Australia, where she studies political science at the Australian National University. While interning on the Commerce Committee, Rose has assisted the Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance, and Data Security Subcommittee. Following her internship, Rose intends to pursue law school. I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Rose Iles Fealy for all of the fine work she has done for the committee and wish her continued success in the years to come.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I have four 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, yesterday we began yet another week of considering Cabinet nominations in the Senate--our fourth week, to be precise--and we still have a long way to go. If anyone is wondering whether this is a normal confirmation process, the answer is no, it is not. Historically, Senate practice has been to quickly confirm a President's Cabinet nominees. President Obama had six nominees confirmed on his first day as President and nearly all the rest within the first 2 weeks. This tradition of speedy confirmation goes back a long way. By the point in every Presidency since President Eisenhower's, most, if not all, of the President's Cabinet nominees had been confirmed by now. Between 1881 and 1933, every incoming President had all of his Cabinet nominees confirmed on day one. What is the reason for this? Historically, Senators of both parties have recognized that Cabinet officials play an essential part in getting an administration up and running, doing the business of the American people. Once the American people elect a President, the thinking historically has gone that it is only right that the President be given the advisers he needs to do the job he was elected to do--that is, until now. This year, Democrats decided that they have had enough of timely Cabinet confirmations, that they have had enough of bipartisanship. Since President Trump was inaugurated, Democrats have done everything they can to drag out his Cabinet nominations. We don't have to take my word for it; here is what Politico had to say: Senate Democrats . . . are slow-walking the installation of Trump's Cabinet to a historic degree. . . . They are voting against Trump's Cabinet picks in unprecedented numbers. Two weeks ago, the Washington Post published a piece titled ``Trump's confirmations really are taking longer than his predecessors.'' ``Democrats,'' the Post noted, ``have tried to slow the process, invoking arcane parliamentary procedure to force delays, and boycotting committee meetings to prevent votes.'' For a party that has spent a lot of time complaining about obstruction, Democrats really are taking it to new heights. Thanks to Democrats' obstruction, the Senate has had to spend so much time confirming nominees that we have had very little time for actual legislative business. We still have a long way to go to finish confirming the President's Cabinet, unless the Democrats decide to stop their obstruction. Democrats aren't even really accomplishing anything with their delays. Thanks to the rules change that they put in place in 2013--that was something that was engineered in 2013 where they literally broke the rules to change the rules--they can't actually prevent President Trump's nominees from being confirmed. The only thing they can do is to tie up the business of the Senate and delay work on legislation to address the challenges that are facing American families. Democrats may not like President Trump, but it is high time they get used to the fact that he is our President. Democrats are not helping anyone by preventing the President from having a fully functioning administration. It is time for Democrats to abandon the obstruction, confirm the President's nominees, and allow the Senate to move forward with the business of the American people. Nomination of Neil Gorsuch Mr. President, in addition to Cabinet nominees, the Senate will be considering another key nomination in the coming weeks, and that is Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court. I met with Judge Gorsuch last week, and our meeting confirmed my opinion that President Trump could not have made a better pick for the Court. By now, I think Judge Gorsuch's qualifications are well known: his exceptional intelligence, his gift for the written word, his outstanding resume, and, most of all, his clear understanding of the proper role of a judge. In his remarks at the White House after accepting the nomination, Judge Gorsuch spoke of judges' obligation to follow the law ``as they find it and without respect to their personal political beliefs.'' ``A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge.'' Judge Gorsuch has said those words more than once. Why? Because a judge who likes every outcome he reaches is likely making decisions based on something other than the law. That is a problem. The job of a judge is to interpret the law, not write it--to call the balls and strikes, not to rewrite the rules of the game. Everyone's rights are put in jeopardy when judges step outside of their role and start changing the meaning of the law to suit their personal opinions. Judge Gorsuch doesn't just understand judges' responsibility; he lives it. He has won respect from liberals and conservatives alike for his deep commitment to following the law wherever it leads, even when he doesn't like the results. Here is what Neal Katyal, an Acting Solicitor General for President Obama, had to say about Judge Gorsuch: I have seen him up close and in action, both in court and on the Federal Appellate Rules Committee (where both of us serve); he brings a sense of fairness and decency to the job, and a temperament that suits the nation's highest court. . . . I, for one, wish it were a Democrat choosing the next justice. But since that is not to be, one basic criteria should be paramount: Is the nominee someone who will stand up for the rule of law and say no to a president or Congress that strays beyond the Constitution and laws? I have no doubt that if confirmed, Judge Gorsuch would help to restore confidence in the rule of law. His years on the bench reveal a commitment to judicial independence--a record that should give the American people confidence that he will not compromise principle to favor the president who appointed him. Again, those are not the words of a Republican. That is what Neal Katyal, formerly an Acting Solicitor General for President Obama, had to say about Judge Gorsuch. It is pretty high praise coming from a Democrat. One of the Democrats' favorite tactics is to accuse Republican nominees of being extremists, no matter how mainstream they actually are. No matter how hard they try, I don't think they are going to have much success with that tactic against Judge Gorsuch. When liberal after liberal attests to his fairness and impartiality, it is pretty hard to pretend he is anything but an excellent pick for the Supreme Court. Then there are the stats from his time on the Tenth Circuit. Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported: Judge Gorsuch has written some 800 opinions since joining the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2006. Only 1.75 percent (14 opinions) drew dissents from his colleagues. That makes 98 percent of his opinions unanimous, even on a circuit where seven of the 12 active judges were appointed by Democratic Presidents and five by Republicans. So it is a very divided circuit court in terms of the composition. Let me repeat that last line. That makes 98 percent of his opinions unanimous even on a circuit where seven of the 12 active judges were appointed by Democratic Presidents and five by Republicans. When 98 percent of your opinions are unanimous, it is pretty much impossible to argue that you are somehow outside of the judicial mainstream. Very few of Judge Gorsuch's decisions have gone to the Supreme Court. When they have, they have been almost universally upheld--often, unanimously. I wish Democrats luck in portraying Judge Gorsuch as an extremist. I think they are going to have a very uphill climb. Both liberals and conservatives recognize that Judge Gorsuch is a supremely qualified jurist who would make a terrific addition to the Supreme Court. I hope that Senate Democrats will listen to the consensus in favor of his nomination and abandon their threats of obstruction. Democrats spend a lot of time talking about the importance of confirming a ninth Justice to the Court. Now they are going to have a chance to confirm an outstanding nominee. I hope they take it. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE. I withhold my suggestion.

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be able to complete my remarks before the Senate recesses.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we continue to just sort of--at a glacial pace--work our way through the nominations. We have in front of us the nomination for Attorney General of Senator Jeff Sessions, a colleague of ours. I am very excited to be able to support his nomination to be the next Attorney General of the United States. But unfortunately it is taking an extraordinarily long time for us to plow through this because Democrats continue to use procedural roadblocks to keep the administration from being able to get their team in place. I say that, having concluded today, based on the research that we have been able to assemble, that this is the slowest pace for Cabinet approval since George Washington. Now, that sounds a little melodramatic, but I think it is accurate. In fact, if you go back to the Eisenhower administration and roll forward to today, every President, going back to Eisenhower, has had their Cabinet completely or mostly in place by today. In fact, going back to the 1880s and up through the 1930s, the entire Cabinet for those administrations was approved on day one--day one of the Presidency. Here we are, as we again continue to run into dilatory tactics by the Democrats here in the Senate. There have been now, I think, seven of the Cabinet-level nominees of President Trump who have been confirmed. At this point in President Obama's first term in office, there were 21 confirmed. So this idea that somehow some purpose is achieved or some goal accomplished by dragging this process on, I think, does a great disservice to the American people who, when they voted last fall, voted with an expectation that when they put a new President in office, that President would be able to assemble his team and get them about the important work of governing this country. So it is regrettable that we are where we are. It is unprecedented and historic, the levels to which the Democrats here in this Chamber have taken their attempts to slow this process down. I hope that will change. I hope we can get back on track here, get this team put in place, and then let's get on with the important work we have to do. There is a lot of stuff that needs to be done to make this country stronger, more competitive, safer for Americans today, to get the economy growing at a faster rate, to create better-paying jobs, and increase wages. There is just a lot of stuff that this body needs to be working on. Right now, what we are doing is simply human resources business. We are trying to confirm people to positions, but it could go so much smoother, so much easier, so much more quickly, and so much more efficiently if we would just get a little cooperation from the Democrats in the Senate. I hope that will happen because this is unprecedented, as I said, in the level of degree to which the Democrats are stooping.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I will just point out to the Senator from New Hampshire--perhaps she knows it, perhaps she doesn't, but her leader has suggested a 60-vote threshold for this nominee. I am delighted to hear her say that they are going to provide a hearing for consideration. I hope that she, like all of our colleagues, will provide this judge an opportunity to be heard, to respond to questions because I think they will find, as most of us who have looked at his record, that this is an exceptionally well-qualified judge. He is a very bright legal mind and somebody who I think understands what the role of a judge is in our constitutional democracy. With respect to the nominees we are considering, we are here right now, and the Senator from New Hampshire and some of her colleagues were here overnight last night stalling, if you will, to allow for votes on nominees that have been put forward by this administration. I don't think you can dispute the record. At this time 8 years ago, President Obama had 21 of his nominees in place. This President has seven. What I mentioned earlier, you have to go back to the time of Dwight Eisenhower, roll back to today, and every President from that point forward has had, on this day, all or most of their nominees in place and confirmed by the Senate. So there is no question. There is no question what is going on here. I am not calling anybody names. I am just pointing out what I see every single day; that is, foot-dragging and delays and obstruction trying to prevent a President--whom they, understandably, didn't like getting elected--from being able to get his team in place. All I am simply saying is I think the American people expect more of us, I think they expect better of us, and I think we have to answer the call to duty to allow that team to be put in place so this President and his team can go about the important business of governing this country. But you cannot dispute the facts with respect to the number of nominees who have been confirmed to date with this President and Presidents going back in history, and I said earlier, you have to go back to George Washington. I think that is accurate. I think you have to go back a long way in the annals of history to find any time where you see what is happening today happen in the Senate with any President historically of either party. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, last night President Trump announced the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. He will fill the spot left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Scalia left a profound mark on our judicial history. He had a brilliant mind, a ready wit, and a vivid and colorful writing style that made reading his decisions not only illuminating but enjoyable. But most importantly, Antonin Scalia had a profound respect for the rule of law and the Constitution. He knew that he was a judge, not a legislator, and his job was not to make the law but to interpret the law. That is exactly what he did. For 30 years, Justice Scalia ruled on the plain meaning of the laws and the Constitution. His politics, his personal opinions, his own feelings about a case--none of those was allowed to play a role in his decision. He asked what the law said, what the Constitution said, and he ruled accordingly, even when he didn't like the result. Justice Scalia once said: If you are going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you are probably doing something wrong. Needless to say, Justice Scalia left some big shoes to fill. But after learning a little about Judge Gorsuch, I have to say that if anyone can come to fill them, I think Judge Gorsuch can. Like Justice Scalia, Judge Gorsuch has a brilliant mind. He shares Justice Scalia's gift for the written word. The Washington Post noted the many people ``who have praised Gorsuch's lucid and occasionally lyrical writing style.'' Slate called Judge Gorsuch's writing ``superb, incisive, witty, and accessible.'' But most importantly, like Justice Scalia, Judge Gorsuch understands the role of a Supreme Court Justice. He knows that a Justice's job is to interpret the law, not write it. In a speech last year, Judge Gorsuch said the following: ``Perhaps the greatest project of Justice Scalia's career was to remind us of the differences between judges and legislators.'' Understanding those differences is indispensable. Brilliance, eloquence, learning, compassion--none of those things matter if you don't understand the proper role of the Supreme Court. That role is to interpret the law, not make the law--to judge, not legislate; to call balls and strikes, not to try and rewrite the rules of the game. It is great to have strong opinions. It is great to have sympathy for causes or organizations. It is great to have plans for fixing society's problems. But none of those things has any business influencing your ruling when you sit on the Supreme Court. Judge Gorsuch understands this. That is why I trust him to sit on the Supreme Court. When Judge Gorsuch was nominated to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals 10 years ago, he was confirmed by a unanimous vote here in the Senate. You can't really get a more bipartisan confirmation than that. At the time, then-Senator Ken Salazar, a Colorado Democrat who later became Interior Secretary under Obama, noted that Judge Gorsuch ``has a sense of fairness and impartiality that is a keystone of being a judge.'' Given the wide respect in which Judge Gorsuch is held, his outstanding record, and his previous overwhelmingly bipartisan confirmation, I am hopeful that his nomination will move quickly through the Senate. Senate Democrats have spoken a lot about the need to fill the ninth seat on the Supreme Court. Now is the chance. I congratulate Judge Gorsuch on his nomination, and I look forward to seeing him confirmed to the Supreme Court. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, with respect to the pending Chao nomination, we yield back the remainder of our time so that we can proceed to the vote.

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to speak in support of Secretary Elaine Chao to be the Secretary of Transportation. It would be hard to come up with a more qualified nominee than Secretary Chao for this important role. In addition to serving for 8 years as the U.S. Secretary of Labor, Secretary Chao has also served as the Deputy Secretary of the Department that she has now been tapped to lead. Her extensive experience also includes the United Way of America, the Peace Corps, and the Federal Maritime Commission. The Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which I am honored to chair, held a hearing on Secretary Chao's nomination on January 11 of this year. To no one's surprise, she demonstrated her experience, her thoughtfulness, and her commitment to working collaboratively with Congress on the challenges facing our transportation system. Last week, the Commerce Committee acted by voice vote to report her nomination favorably to the floor, and I am hopeful that the Senate will confirm her overwhelmingly today. The agency Secretary Chao has been nominated to lead plays a vital role in facilitating and promoting the safe and efficient movement of goods and people throughout the country and around the world. Our economy is truly dependent upon a thriving transportation sector. Without a robust and efficient transportation sector, rural States like mine would be unable to get their goods to the market. Increasing the capacity and the efficiency of our Nation's highways, rail lines, pipelines, and ports is crucial and will have to be a top priority for the next Secretary of Transportation. A continued focus on safety must also be a top priority for the next Secretary. While our Nation's pipelines, railroads, airways, and highways have a strong record of safety, improvements can and should be made. Many of the strong safety improvements the Commerce Committee advanced as part of the FAST Act and the PIPES Act last Congress are yet to be implemented, and we will expect our next Secretary of Transportation to work with us to ensure speedy implementation. We will also have the opportunity to collaborate on safety improvements when we revisit the authorization of the Federal Aviation Administration later this year. The next Secretary of Transportation will also have a unique opportunity to show Federal leadership in the advancement of transportation innovation. V2V technology, autonomous vehicles, and unmanned aircraft systems, to name a few, have great promise to promote safety, improve efficiency, and spur economic growth in this country. Secretary Chao will have a momentous opportunity to transform America's transportation network by promoting safety and innovation, growing our Nation's freight network, advancing needed improvements to our infrastructure, and ensuring that all users--both rural and urban-- benefit equally. Secretary Chao has consistently proved her willingness to roll up her sleeves and address the challenges facing our Nation. That is why I look forward to her confirmation as the next Secretary of Transportation, and I urge my colleagues to support her nomination. I see my colleague from Florida, the distinguished ranking member on our committee, Senator Nelson, is here. He also participated, as did members on both sides. Frankly, I think every member of our committee, both Republicans and Democrats, had an opportunity to ask questions of Secretary Chao when she was in front of our committee. As I said before, she has been carefully vetted, thoroughly vetted through so many different positions that she has held throughout previous administrations. I certainly welcome the opportunity to work with her, as I know my colleague from Florida does, in meeting the transportation challenges that our Nation has as we move into the future. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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, every year around this time, House and Senate Republicans get together for a joint conference to share ideas and develop our action plan for the year. Last week, we gathered in Philadelphia for this year's conference, and we had a very productive session. All of us came back energized and ready to achieve big things for the American people. In November, the American people elected Republican majorities in the House and Senate and a Republican President. That was a tremendous show of trust, and Republicans know it. We are committed to living up to that trust by delivering on the promises we have made. The last few years have been tough for American workers. Job creation has been sluggish. Wages have been stagnant. Economic growth has lagged far behind the pace of other recoveries, and opportunities for workers have been few and far between. It is no surprise that so many hard- working Americans feel as if they have been left behind. For millions of American workers discouraged over the past 8 years, I want to say this: We hear you. Republicans hear you, and we are going to act. Republicans have outlined an agenda focused on growing our economy, creating jobs, increasing wages, and lifting the burdens that the Obama administration has placed on the American people. One big issue that we will tackle this year is repealing and replacing ObamaCare. Seven years ago, ObamaCare was sold to the American people with a lot of promises. The law was going to reduce premiums for families. It was going to fix problems with our health care system without hurting anyone who was happy with their health coverage. If you like your health plan, you will be able to keep it, people were told. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, people were told. Well, as everyone knows, every one of these promises was broken. Premiums for families continue to rise. Millions of Americans lost the coverage that they liked. Americans regularly discovered they couldn't keep their doctors, and their choice of replacement was often limited. These broken promises were just the tip of the iceberg. The law hasn't just failed to live up to its promises; it is actively collapsing, and the status quo is unsustainable. Premiums on the exchanges are soaring. Deductibles regularly run into the thousands of dollars. In fact, for 2017, the average deductible for a bronze level ObamaCare plan is rising from $5,731 to $6,092. With deductibles like that, it is no wonder that some Americans can't actually afford to use their ObamaCare insurance. The problems on the exchanges are not limited to soaring costs. Insurers are pulling out of the exchanges right and left, and health care choices are rapidly dwindling. Narrow provider networks are the order of the day. One-third of American counties have just one choice of health insurer on the exchange. One-third of American counties have one option--one option. Tell me that is not a monopoly. This is not the health care reform that the American people were looking for. Republicans are committed to replacing ObamaCare with real health care reform that focuses on personalized patient-centered health care. One massive problem with ObamaCare is that it puts Washington in charge of health care decisions that should be made at a much lower level. Any ObamaCare reform that Republicans pass will focus on fixing this. We are going to move control from Washington and give it back to States and individuals. Health care issues don't have one-size-fits-all solutions. It is time to stop acting as if they do. States should have power to innovate and embrace health care solutions that work for the individual employers in their State, and individuals should be able to make health care decisions in consultation with their doctors, not Washington, DC. Another thing we are going to focus on is breaking down the ObamaCare barriers that have artificially restricted choice. As I said earlier, ObamaCare has defaulted to a one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to health care. That means many Americans have found themselves paying for health care that they don't need and don't want. We need much more flexibility in insurance plans. A thriving health care system would offer a wide variety of choices that would allow Americans to pick a plan that is tailored to their specific needs. We also need to give Americans tools to better manage their health care and to control costs. Of course, any reform plan has to make sure that employers have the tools they need to provide employees with affordable health care coverage. Mr. President, another priority of the Republican-led Congress will be regulatory reform. While some government regulations are necessary, every administration has to remember that regulations have consequences. The more resources individuals and businesses spend complying with regulations, the less they have available to focus on the growth and innovation that drive our economy and create new opportunities for American workers. Unfortunately, the Obama administration chose to spend the last 8 years loading employers with burdensome regulations. According to the American Action Forum, the Obama administration was responsible for implementing more than 675 major regulations that cost the American economy more than $800 billion. Given those numbers, it is no surprise that the Obama economy left businesses with fewer resources to dedicate to growing and creating jobs. Repealing burdensome regulations is one of the most important things we can do to get our economy healthy again. That is going to be a Republican priority. Mr. President, another big thing we can do to make America competitive again is to reform our outdated Tax Code. That will also be a Republican priority this year. Right now, the Congressional Budget Office is projecting that our economy will grow by an average of just 2 percent over the next 10 years. If we can increase that growth by just 1 percent, we would see average incomes rise by $4,200. Just get the growth rate from an average of 2 percent, which is what the CBO is projecting for the next 10 years, to 3 percent, and incomes go up by $4,200. We would see an additional 1.2 million jobs created in our economy, and we would see much faster increases in the standard of living. So many younger Americans today are finding that they are not able to enjoy the same standard of living that was enjoyed by their parents because of a sluggish economy that is growing in that 1-percent to 2- percent range. One of the ways to achieve that kind of growth, to get back to a 3- to 4-percent growth in our economy, is to reform our broken Tax Code. The current Tax Code is costly, complex, and frequently unfair. Some corporations benefit from special rules, deductions, and credits, while others are forced to pay the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. More and more American companies are focusing their business operations overseas because the tax situation is so much better abroad. That means American jobs are going overseas with them. Instead of pushing employees out of the country, we should bring our Nation's tax rates in line with those of other countries to keep more jobs here in the United States. We should make our whole Tax Code flatter, fairer, and less complex. Our Tax Code should work for all taxpayers, not just a privileged few. A simpler, flatter, and fairer Tax Code will make U.S. businesses more competitive in the global economy, and it will help businesses create new good-paying jobs for American workers. It will jump-start our economy and ensure long-term economic growth. Finally, Mr. President, Republicans in the Senate have another important trust to uphold this year, and that is confirming a new Supreme Court Justice. We are committed to confirming a well-qualified nominee with the right temperament to sit on the Court and have the proper understanding of the role of the Court in our country. Supreme Court Justices are umpires. They call balls and strikes; they don't write the rules of the game. The job of a Supreme Court Justice is to interpret the law and the Constitution, not rewrite the law based on his or her personal opinions. Democrats have spent a lot of time talking about the need for nine Justices on the Supreme Court. Republicans trust that they will follow through on their statements by working with us to confirm the President's nominee. To every American who voted for change in November, to every American frustrated with the sluggish economy and a lack of opportunity, I want to say again that we hear you. The Republicans hear you. We are not going to let you down. We will spend the 115th Congress fighting for your priorities, and we will not rest until every American has access to a future of security, hope, and opportunity. I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, at 12 noon on Tuesday, January 30, the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Executive Calendar No. 4. I further ask that there be 20 minutes of debate on the nomination, equally divided in the usual form, and that following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; that no further motions be in order; and that any statements relating to the nomination 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. Mr. President, it is hard to believe, but the Internet as we know it is already in its third decade. While it is no longer novel, this essential technology continues to transform the world around us in often very unexpected ways. Just a few short years ago, the idea of the Internet being built into farm equipment would have been unthinkable. Yet, today, wireless Internet in tractors and combines is making agriculture more and more efficient. This is just one small example of how new information technologies have become a fundamental part of our economy. There isn't a job creator in America who doesn't have a story to tell about how or when he or she realized the Internet had become a critical part of his or her business. But while the digital economy is creating massive opportunities, our Nation's laws are not keeping pace. Over the past several years, Netflix and Amazon have completely disrupted the video world. The iPhone, which redefined personal computing and connectivity, just celebrated its 10th anniversary. Yet most of the government policies dealing with video, wireless, and Internet platforms were written for a world where none of these things existed. It is a testament to the ingenuity of American businesses and entrepreneurs that they have been able to adapt and succeed with laws that are increasingly out of date. While I don't doubt that they will continue to work around these challenges, American companies and consumers deserve better. It is past time to modernize our communication laws to facilitate the growth of the Internet, and it is high time to update government policies to better reflect the innovations made possible by digital technologies. As the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, I have committed to modernizing government policies for the digital age, and that will be one of our top priorities in the Commerce Committee this year. One way the government can boost investment in our digital infrastructure is by finding ways to make it cheaper and easier to build broadband networks. At the Commerce Committee, I introduced legislation called the MOBILE NOW Act to ensure that huge swaths of wireless spectrum are made available for use by the year 2020. By then, we hope to see the next generation of ultra-high speed services known as 5G, which will need more spectrum than is available today. The MOBILE NOW Act will also cut through much of the bureaucratic redtape that makes it difficult to build wireless infrastructure on Federal property. I am happy to report that the Commerce Committee passed the MOBILE NOW Act earlier today, but this legislation is just the start. The Commerce Committee will continue to develop legislative proposals to spur broadband deployment, make more spectrum available for the public, and improve connectivity throughout rural America. Good Internet infrastructure policies and investments matter very little, however, if government bureaucrats can overregulate the digital world. The Federal Communications Commission has long been the main government regulator for telecommunications. As we have turned away from traditional telecom services and toward new technologies, the FCC has found its role gradually diminishing. This is inevitable and a good byproduct of technological innovation. But instead of accepting this, over the last several years the FCC has aggressively pushed for government interference in the Internet. Speaking about new economic opportunities on the Internet, the last FCC Chairman declared: ``Government is where we will work this out.'' The government is where we will work this out? Well, I believe consumers and job creators should be the ones deciding about new technologies, not the government. I think most Americans would agree. Right now, Internet providers are offering innovative service plans that allow you to stream video, music, or other content for free. These innovative offers are a sign of strong competition in the marketplace. Yet, 2 weeks ago, the outgoing FCC issued a report raising what it called ``serious concerns'' that such practices ``likely . . . harm consumers.'' That is right, it seems the FCC thinks that being able to do more online for less money is somehow bad for consumers. Meanwhile, consumers themselves seem to strongly disagree because a lot of these free data offerings are turning out to be quite popular. One of the most important takeaways from the last election is that people are tired of bureaucrats trying to micromanage their lives. One way we can address this concern is to see how the FCC operates and reform what it is allowed to do. The FCC should be focused on fixing fundamental problems in the marketplace, not dictating the direction of technological progress. The last time Congress passed meaningful laws affecting the FCC was when the Internet was in its infancy. It is clearly time for the FCC's reform once again. At the Commerce Committee, we have had many conversations about improving this agency, and I believe this year presents a real opportunity to turn those conversations into solutions. I am confident that we can attract the bipartisan support that is needed to move legislation modernizing the FCC across the Senate floor. Another area where I would like to achieve bipartisan agreement is on legislation to protect the open Internet. We need clear and reasonable rules for the digital road that everyone can understand. Complex and ambiguous regulations that shift with the political winds aren't in anyone's best interests. For Americans to get the maximum benefit from the Internet, they need certainty about what the rules are and, most importantly, what the rules will be in the coming years. The only way to achieve that is for Congress to pass bipartisan legislation. I have been working with my colleagues to find a legislative solution. While we are not there yet, I am committed to getting there. The Commerce Committee was incredibly productive last year, with 60 measures enacted into law. We made real progress on Internet-focused legislation, including committee approval of the MOBILE NOW Act that I mentioned earlier. We will build on that foundation in this Congress. I look forward to taking advantage of the good ideas of our committee members on both sides of the aisle. At the end of the day, it is not, as I said, Congress that is going to come up with the best solutions. It will be American innovators and entrepreneurs who will determine what the digital future holds, not us here in Washington, DC. Government should focus on facilitating their success while making sure that we are not accidentally standing in their way. I am excited to see how the Internet and other emerging technologies will continue to change our world in the coming years, and I am eager to do my small part to ensure that all Americans benefit from these amazing advances. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 115th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the rules for the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be printed in the Record.