Roger Wicker

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, when we passed tax reform late last year, we knew it would be a win for American workers and for the American economy. This win for our workers and families was long overdue after so many years of sluggish wage growth. Americans will see tax cuts very soon. They will be reflected in their paychecks next month. But tax reform is already making a positive difference. The response from our job creators--both small and large job creators--has been overwhelming. Some 164 companies so far, spanning industry sectors and geographical boundaries, have announced employee bonuses, higher minimum wages, better benefits, new jobs, charitable deductions, charitable donations, and new investments. According to Americans for Tax Reform, well more than 2 million Americans will benefit from these bonuses. The National Federation of Independent Business says that the tax cuts for our small businesses-- the bread and butter of our economy--will amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. I want to take a moment today to highlight how some of these job creators are giving back to the hard-working citizens of my State. They include Mississippi's single largest private employer, Walmart, which has announced that it is raising its starting wage rate for hourly employees to $11. Walmart is also expanding its maternity and parental leave benefits, as well as giving employee bonuses, as a result of the new tax bill. BancorpSouth, headquartered in my hometown of Tupelo, MS, has announced that it will give back to employees through pay raises or bonuses. In fact, BancorpSouth says it plans to invest more than $10 million into the employees who work in its 234 locations across Mississippi and seven other Southern States. Another bank based in Tupelo, MS, Renasant, has announced that it will invest its tax savings in its 2,000 employees. Nationally, AT&T is giving $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 employees. So are Bank of America, American Airlines, Boeing, and Comcast. And I could go on and on and on with bonuses benefiting hundreds of thousands of employees. Other Americans will get new jobs. Last month, television station WLOX on the gulf coast of Mississippi reported that the Half Shell Oyster House plans to use its tax savings to open new restaurants and hire more employees. Isn't this what we want? Isn't this what we predicted? And isn't it wonderful to see this come to fruition? Kevin Fish, a co-owner, told the news station: ``We've passed up on opportunities in the past that we wouldn't have passed up on had we had this tax structure.'' Millions of Americans might also see lower energy bills from investor-owned utilities. Utility companies across the country, including in Mississippi, are discussing how the law can help them lower energy costs for our consumers. The message is clear across my State, across every State, and across this country: The more money our job creators can save and the more money they don't have to send to Washington in the first place, the more they can invest in the future of their businesses and the well- being of their employees. And this is proving true every day and will continue. These are the opportunities we do not want our job creators to pass up. With every bonus, every pay raise, every expanded benefit, every lower energy bill, American families will have more money in their budgets to spend on the things they need most. Thank you to the leadership of the President and the leadership of the House and Senate for giving this outstanding benefit to the families, the workers, and the job creators of the United States of America. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Madam President, on behalf of the majority, I yield back all time.

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

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be considered yielded back.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the votes following the first vote in this series be 10 minutes in length.

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I have 6 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: Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 9 a.m., in SR-366 to conduct a hearing. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 10 a.m., in SD-406 to conduct a hearing entitled ``Promoting American Leadership in Reducing Air Emissions Through Innovation.'' Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 9 a.m., in SH-216 to conduct hearing on the bill entitled ``Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.'' Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 10 a.m., in SD-430 to conduct hearing entitled ``Encouraging Healthy Communities: Perspective from the Surgeon General.'' Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 2:30 p.m., in SD-430 to conduct hearing on the following nominations: Mitchell Zais, of South Carolina, to be Deputy Secretary, and James Blew, of California, to be Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, both of the Department of Education, and Kate S. O'Scannlain, of Maryland, to be Solicitor, and Preston Rutledge, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant Secretary, both of the Department of Labor. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 15, 2017, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 to conduct hearing on the following nominations: James C. Ho, of Texas, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, Don R. Willett, of Texas, to be a Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Claria Horn Boom, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky, John W. Broomes, to be United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, Rebecca Grady Jennings, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Kentucky, and Robert Earl Wier, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, over the past year, our Navy has had four serious mishaps at sea, including fatal collisions involving the USS Fitzgerald on one occasion and the USS John S. McCain on another. In the McCain and Fitzgerald accidents, 17 of our sailors were killed. In response to these serious incidents, the Chief of Naval Operations, ADM John Richardson, directed the comprehensive review take place. Today, the Senate Armed Services Committee was briefed on the results of this comprehensive review. The results will be made public either tomorrow or the next day, and Americans will be able to see the serious situation we are in. There are various reasons for these collisions and these fatalities, including, regrettably, human error and unfortunate circumstances, but, also, the review makes it clear that we are not doing right by our sailors, we are not doing right by the Navy, and we are not doing right by the taxpayers, in terms of making sure these brave men and women have what they need. We need to work quickly with the Navy here in Congress to implement the recommendations that will be coming forward later this week. We need to enhance training and readiness, and we need to recognize--and I think the majority of this Senate does recognize--that the size of the fleet has contributed to the problems. Simply put, we need to acknowledge that the Navy has a supply-and- demand problem. We have a demand for more naval action than the supply of our ships can produce. Our ship force has declined recently by some 20 percent. We are asking too few ships to do too many things for American security, and that needs to be rectified. The consequences of this supply-and-demand mismatch were summed up by naval analysts Robert C. O'Brien and Jerry Hendrix in a recent National Review online article. They argue that the Navy is on the precipice of a ``death spiral,'' wherein more overworked and damaged ships place an increasingly greater strain on the remaining operational ships, thus eroding readiness across the fleet. I agree with Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Hendrix that this situation will result in ``more collisions, more injuries, and more deaths in the fleet.'' To avoid this death spiral, we need to commit to growing the Navy and meeting its minimum requirement of 355 ships. I have the privilege of chairing the Seapower Subcommittee, which has held a series of oversight activities, both classified and unclassified, on the Navy's 355 ship requirement. We have examined the security environment that drives the requirement to add about 80 more ships to the fleet. We have listened to Navy leadership, outside experts, and industry on options, capabilities, and considerations. We received perspective from the key players behind President Reagan's naval buildup in the 1980s. As the Fitzgerald and McCain collisions have demonstrated, the short- term costs of ``doing more with less'' are simply unacceptable. The long-term implications will prove devastating to American power and the global order it underpins. The U.S. military's commanders have identified 18 maritime regions where the Navy must secure American interests. Our current naval strategy is designed to command the seas in those regions. The Navy needs a minimum of 355 ships to get this done. If the Navy cannot get the bare minimum it needs, then our naval strategy must change--and, I can assure you, it would be a change for the worse. Instead of a global command of the seas, what we would get would be a new, weaker strategy. What would this look like? In the National Review article I previously mentioned, authors O'Brien and Hendrix lay out two alternatives. Neither one of them are pretty. First, the Navy could strategically withdraw from certain maritime regions and hope our allies and partners will pick up the slack. Let Norway, Denmark, and Canada patrol the Arctic; let the Baltic States, Poland and Germany, patrol the Baltic Sea; let Turkey, Romania, and Bulgaria patrol the Black Sea. Really? Let Taiwan, the Philippines, and Malaysia patrol the South Sea China--and hope for the best or we could return to the pre-World War II unacceptable surge and exercise model. This strategy involved consolidating a smaller fleet into a few strategic hubs, deploying occasionally for exercises, and greatly reducing the number of missions the Navy could perform in peacetime and in crisis. In their article, O'Brien and Hendrix note that these two strategies ``make the past eight years of `lead from behind' look like an assertive foreign policy.'' These two strategies would create dangerous power vacuums and shifting allegiances. Our adversaries would use the Navy's absence to rewrite the rules of global commons. Our allies would accommodate challengers to the American-led order. Abandoned by America, in some cases, they would have no choice but to cut deals with Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran. I know my colleagues in Congress want a different future. In fact, I am hopeful we can take the first steps this year toward building up the fleet. As former Navy Secretary John Lehman told our subcommittee this year, President Reagan ``reaped 90 percent of the benefits of his rebuilding program . . . in the first year.'' This took place in the early 1980s and made clear that President Reagan, Congress, and the Pentagon were serious about rebuilding the fleet. It sent a signal to our allies and to the Soviets that America and our Navy was coming back in a big way, which makes 2017 and 2018 so important. I am confident Congress can establish a firm foundation in the coming months for a fleet buildup. To that end, I would note that both the House and Senate Defense authorization bills contain the Wicker-Wittman SHIPS Act, which would establish a 355-ship requirement as our national policy. Both bills also contain multiyear procurement authority for Virginia-class attack submarines and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. Multiyear procurement will stabilize the industrial base for those ships and generate billions in savings, which would be plowed into more shipbuilding. Both bills contain cost-control measures to protect taxpayers. Although negotiations are ongoing, the final NDAA conference report should include the SHIPS Act, multiyear procurement, and acquisition cost controls. The Defense authorization bill is a good start, but Congress also needs to add funding for shipbuilding in upcoming appropriations legislation. We need an agreement that eliminates the Budget Control Act with regard to defense spending or at least provides relief. The bottom line is that a buildup will require more funding. President Reagan's first defense budget included a 35-percent increase for the Navy compared to President Carter's last proposed budget, and it was well worth it. More resources are needed to accelerate shipbuilding. It is time to end the two decades of low-rate shipbuilding that has brought us to this point. Compared to its earlier planned levels, the Navy's Accelerated Fleet Plan concludes that the shipyards can produce 29 more ships over the next 7 years. Investment is needed--particularly in submarine facilities--but the yards are up to the challenge, especially those with hot production lines. I was disappointed to hear that Acting Under Secretary Thomas Dee, an Obama holdover still in the Department of the Navy, said last week that 355 ships is probably out of reach until the 2050s. Mr. Dee's pessimism about the Navy's own requirement is perplexing, when it is incumbent on the Navy to develop fleet buildup options within budget constraints. Those current and likely future physical environments were accounted for in the Navy's 2016 Force Structure Assessment of 355 ships. So we can do it, and the leadership of the Navy, with the exception of Under Secretary Dee, knows we can do it. CNO Richardson's white paper on the future Navy notes that we ought to achieve a 355-ship fleet in the 2020s--not the 2040s, not the 2050s, but the 2020s. Thank goodness for the foresight and positive attitude of the Chief of Naval Operations. He is right--a 355-ship fleet should be our goal for the next decade. Regrettably, Acting Under Secretary Dee must have been asleep for the last 9 months while Congress was talking about this and while we were on the verge of enacting legislation making a 355-ship Navy the official policy of the United States of America. Shipbuilding is indeed a long process, and a 355-ship fleet will not happen overnight. New ship construction is critical to achieve this objective, but the Navy should also examine service life extension programs for older ships and perhaps even reactivating ships in the Ready Reserve. It is irresponsible to retire ships early if they have useful life. Such ships may have to be reassigned to less stressing missions, but they should not be prematurely sold overseas or sunk as target practice. It is equally irresponsible to miss opportunities to reactivate retired ships if the benefits exceed the cost. Let's at least look at that. The Senate Defense authorization bill includes my amendment directing the Navy to look at service life extension and reactivation. The Navy needs to go ship by ship through the inventory and provide Congress with a thorough analysis of these options, and that is what the Navy is doing. As O'Brien and Hendrix write, ``Navies and international influence go hand in hand.'' A smaller Navy means a smaller role for America, and we can't afford that. We must cultivate the national will to avoid this fate. I urge my colleagues to help me, to help the Armed Services Committees in both Houses in an effort to begin rebuilding our naval power at once. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I will be brief, but I want to point out a matter of real concern, and it should be a matter of concern to all Americans. When new Presidents are elected, they have always been given the opportunity to put their team in place in short order. Regrettably, this has not been allowed to happen for this new President in this Congress. Here are the facts. Now 9 months in office, President Trump has had only 182 of his nominees confirmed. That is an unacceptable, unprecedented 39 percent. It is a grossly low statistic by historical standards. At this point in President Obama's administration, 65 percent of his nominees had been confirmed. At this point in George W. Bush's administration, 53 percent had been confirmed. Under Bill Clinton, 76 percent had been confirmed. And under President George H.W. Bush, 70 percent had been confirmed. Yet, because of delaying tactics by our colleagues across the aisle, this President, who needs a team in place, as does every President, has only 39 percent of his nominees in office. This has been done through an abuse of the process by our friends across the aisle--a distortion of the rules requiring cloture on noncontroversial nominees, requiring well-qualified nominees to be subjected to a 30-hour debating period for a motion to proceed and another 30-hour debating period, typically where there is only silence on the floor of the Senate, for the actual confirmation. This is inconvenient to the administration, but it is injurious to the American people. With more than 1,000 executive positions needing confirmation, we need these people in place. The American people need these people in place. These vacancies need to be filled to work for the American people, to provide hurricane relief, for instance. There are people who would have been part of the administration working on that, had we not had these delaying tactics. People in critical national security positions, people who are fighting against ISIS, are waiting for confirmation, and people who would be a key part of the counterterrorism efforts have been waiting for months to get to work. We had a spate of this in July, and I was one of several Senators who called on the leadership to just keep us in session in August to take care of some of these nominations. We demonstrated, by the action of the majority leader, that by canceling part of the August break, we could break logjams. As of the end of July, we had confirmed only 56 Trump nominees. By keeping us in session for one extra week and shortening our work period back home, we confirmed 76 nominees in one week, as opposed to 56 the previous 6 months of this year. We can do that again. I would simply say to the Presiding Officer and to my colleagues on this side of the aisle and on the other side of the aisle: I am among those calling on the majority leader to once again adopt an aggressive schedule that includes working all night, that includes working weekends, that includes canceling some breaks. We need, once again, to break this logjam. The American people spoke in November and, through our democratic process, they elected Donald Trump as President of the United States. He deserves the same consideration from minority Members of the current Senate that previous Presidents, Democrat and Republican, got from minority Members of the Senate. Let's free the process up. Let's eliminate the distortion of the rules. Let's have a more aggressive schedule, and let's once again break this logjam. I yield the floor.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, later on today, the Senate will move to a vote to advance the nomination of Ajit Pai to become Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. I rise today in strong, enthusiastic support for confirming Chairman Pai as the permanent Chairman of the FCC. In the 9 short months since Donald Trump chose Mr. Pai to serve as the FCC's Acting Chairman, he has restored confidence in the agency's ability to do its work on behalf of the American people and within the rule of law. He is working to establish the light-touch regulatory framework that allowed the internet to become the marvel of the modern age, keeping it free and open for consumers, innovators, and providers. Internet technology will continue to thrive if we keep the heavy hand of government away from the controls. Chairman Pai recognizes the need to close the digital divide between our Nation's rural and urban communities. I am working closely with him and with other members of the Commission to remove barriers to internet connectivity that exist in my home State of Mississippi and across the country. Without broadband access, these rural communities could lose out on critical jobs, economic development, and many other opportunities borne out of the thriving internet economy. Mr. Pai has already proven he is capable of being an exemplary FCC Chairman who will fight for the unserved and underserved Americans. As Acting Chairman, Mr. Pai has overseen the adoption of Mobility Fund Phase II rules supporting universal service. He has sought the advice of experts for the most effective broadband deployment, and he has encouraged the development of better networks, lower costs, and relief from regulatory burdens. Americans are being well-served by a leader like Chairman Ajit Pai, who understands the strong connection between technology and innovation. Mr. Pai understands how high-speed internet can revolutionize small businesses and benefit local economies. He understands the importance of consumer protections and has already instituted proposals and rules that would benefit public safety. I hope Mr. Pai will also continue to hold the FCC to the highest standards of transparency. His decision to make proposals and orders accessible to the public prior to the Commission's vote on them was a positive action. The FCC will continue to be in good hands with Mr. Pai as Chairman and when the Senate votes later on today to move this nomination along. I urge my colleagues to vote yes and eventually to vote yes for his confirmation.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I have 6 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: committee on agriculture, nutrition, and forestry The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 9:30 a.m., in 216 Hart Senate Office Building, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Rural Development and Energy Programs: Perspectives for the 2018 Farm Bill.'' committee on armed services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 28, 2017, at 10 a.m., in closed session, to receive a briefing on North Korea. committee on banking, housing, and urban affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Evaluating Sanctions Enforcement and Policy Options on North Korea: Administration Perspectives.'' committee on health, education, labor, and pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 28, at 10:30 a.m. in room 216 of the Capitol. committee on the judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on September 28, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting. subcommittee on aviation operation, safety and security The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to hold a meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 28, 2017, at 10 a.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, at some point during the course of this debate on the National Defense Authorization Act, the Senate may have an opportunity to vote on a McCain amendment authorizing a base realignment and closure round. As Members know, I have the utmost respect for the chairman of our committee, and I hold him in high regard. But I will certainly be voting against the McCain amendment because I do not believe authorizing a base realignment and closure round at this particular time is in the best interests of the United States or the security of Americans. I do that for two reasons. No. 1, whether you agree or not that base closings are a savings in the long run, almost everyone will agree that in the short term, a base closing round costs money. So it would be costly in the next fiscal year and in the fiscal year after that to have a base closing round. This is the very time when we don't need an additional expense, because we are dealing with the readiness problem we have in our various branches right now. As chairman of the Seapower Subcommittee, I can tell you that we have readiness problems with our fleet; we have readiness problems in the Marine Corps--those services in which I have a particular interest in my subcommittee. We need that money for readiness, and we need it in this fiscal year and in the next fiscal year. So for reasons of the short-term costs that BRAC would cause us to incur, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the McCain amendment. Further, it is my understanding that the wording of this particular amendment takes away the commission part of a base realignment and closure round. If you do believe we ought to move toward this concept-- which I do not believe we should do at this point--but if you do believe that, then we ought to at least have the independence that a commission gives to the process. It is the sort of process we have had time and again when we have had a BRAC round. It is what we had the last time the U.S. Congress faced a base realignment and closure round. So for those two reasons, I submit to my colleagues that a ``no'' vote is called for. This is something we may need to discuss in 2020. It may be something we need to do later on, and I will be open to suggestions about that. But when we have a readiness crisis facing U.S. security at this moment, this is no time to be taking money away from those immediate needs. For that reason, I will be voting no on the McCain amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 164, S. 123.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Fischer substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. WICKER

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

Mr. WICKER

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 117, S. 134.

Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be considered and agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.