Manchester. Americans are bond to our british friends by common language, culture and many other things such as common law. As a boy i remember the strength that to us americans to witness the courage of the british people as they stood strong in the battle of britain. We know the result of the british people will once again vanquish a common foe. Today i think we can speak to all members of the committee when i say god save the queen and god save great britain. We care great deal for friends overseas and we wish them the best. Todays hearing will have a dual focus. We will discuss the president s budget for fiscal year 2018 and ongoing efforts to reform our nations tax code. We are pleased to be joined here today by treasury secretary, Stephen Mnuchin will provide the ministrations perspective on these important issues. We welcome you back to the committee and as if this was your first Budget Hearing before this committee let me warning these hearings tend to be grueling, that is a necessary part on the budget process in the committees oversight function. Not to worry and i think youre up to the challenge, let me begin by saying a few words out about the president s budget. Obviously we are all still very near the details of this proposed budget. At this point i can say that i apply the president for advancing progrowth economies for getting the economy moving. I should the ministrations concern which ballooned by nearly doubling under the previous a ministration. The budget increased Economic Growth and reaches 3 . As i understand it that vision relies on implementation of the number policies including tax reform cutting unnecessary regulation, Building Infrastructure and some other approaches as well. I think reforming healthcare is part of that, reducing deficits that significantly him prove the surprise side of the economy. This is not unheard of that the administration places belief in its policy proposals. For example in the fiscal year 2010 budget growth was assumed to get to a size 4. 6 . It was assumed to average 3. 8 over an eight year time. Was premised on the administrations belief and policy and prescriptions. While critics will want to criticize the nature of the budgets growth projections it is more realistic than a number Budget Proposals ive seen in the past, particularly some of came from the Previous Administration. As i shared the overall goal to reduce deficits keeping them mind the nations debt nearly doubled in the administration. We have a number of difficult choices as we work to address reforms. The difficulties reflected in the budget. I look forward to continuing to examine the various proposals and to hearing secretary mnuchins insights about the items in the budget that we will discuss today. I like to talk about discussing the other elements and that is tax reform. I have been beating the drama tax reform. I start to make the case for reform in the committee, the senate floor public forms and events in private conversations. I have not been alone. Theres been a bipartisan recognition, one that is growing more by the day that our current tax system doesnt work. Throughout the endeavor i have stated numerous times that it is going to be successful if were going to be successful and see engagement from the president. He for anyone right set off as a political statement let me make it clear that i was not advocating for the election of the republican president , i repeatedly implored president obama to engage with congress on tax reform, but to no avail. The Current Administration but i tax reform framework earlier this month. One that i think could serve as an outline as a separate move sword, keeping in mind as with any major and undertaking we need to be realistic and commit to practicing the art of the doable. I expect to get a number of questions about the tax plan today. In addition i expect to hear a lot about the process to achieve tax reform will move through congress. That point, we have already heard a few demands of my friends on the other side via as if they were preconditions for any serious engagement on tax reform. I hope that these are preconditioned but still i want to address one of them briefly here today. One of them is that republicans have abandoned the use of budget reconciliation for tax reform. This is a hard demand. Historically speaking most major tax bands that have moved through reconciliation have had bipartisan support. The past when republicans have controlled the house and senate along with the white house all of our tax reconciliation bills have enjoyed some Senate Democrats support. If we can reach agreements on policy theres no reason why democrats cannot agree to support a tax reform package to move through the reconciliation process. In the intention is to continue working so long as theyre willing to engage. With this desire and commitment to. And thanks to the secretary for being here today so i will turn to my colleague and friend for his opening remarks. Thank you very much and to share your view with respect to those despicable acts in manchester. So we understand your points are very well taken. With the American People demanded buses bipartisan cooperation health care to affect the daily lives for what it has offered is a onepage tax cut proposal that is shorter than the typical drug store receipt. For those working families those that have led to easy those to even having close to make Bernie Madoff blush. I will focus my remarks into areas. First of the Economic Team with the middleclass tax cut. If this was billed for a middleclass tax cut this is like middleclass housing. And just openended promises. How which treats the very fortunate to to eliminate the estate tax with a mile wide loophole than it is a prescription for more inequality and right in this room that mr. Mitchell and and i agreed though long of a note tax cuts for the rich but after what we have seen in the tax plan in the budget we have to throw that in the waste bin along with the trump plan not to cut medicare the health plan to make it harder for us to keep the trust fund solvent solvent, 1 trillion of medicaid cuts 70 billion of cuts to Social Security disability. So the promise not to cut medicare or medicaid it also has not rung true. So with the proven idea of tax cuts there is anybody that agrees with that. And then to zero the amount in into the stratosphere but instead the revenues have cratered. And then to go further to the early 2000 and those did not pay for themselves either. And the low and behold to have to raise revenue bottom line to pay for itself argument is as well as the flat Earth Society is those trying to defend it. To want to respond briefly to the point with respect to the process going forward. Because citing those that our more than the economic sugar high pass to be bipartisan. Because you have that oped article it takes a lot of careful consideration and i know something about it because i wrote two of them. But the focus has to be on riding the economic proposal to create good paying jobs without the burden on the middle class. That is the kind of reform from poolsides but the point with respect to reconciliation this is not a debate about the desire of my friends the chair and wanting to work in a bipartisan way because he and i have done that on a lot of occasions but the chair as intent noted reconciliation is inherently a partisan process. That is what it is all about and in effect puts a gun to decide. So thats why there is such a strong feeling on our site about not using reconciliation and iil want to make that comment to not diminish and have the desire for a partisan bill because having written two of them, i would very much like in accordance with these principles i outlined, and i know my colleagues have said that also. The dysfunctional, we have to understand that. But we have to ensure that weo have a bipartisan process. And for that, i want to comment briefly on my friend from arkansas. I would like to extend a warm welcome to the secretary of state. We are grateful to have you he here. In 2017 prior to his confirmation, he was the finance chairman for donald trump for president and in addition to traveling with the president or out of the country in that role, he also served as the senior economic adviser in the economic positions and sanctions. Before those activities, he served as the founder, chairman and chief executive officer of Capital Management and also served as the chairman and chief executive officer until the sale to the group. Earlier in his group he marked as the chief Information Officer and has extensive experience in Global Financial markets and oversight of training at u. S. Government securities, mortgages and municipal bonds. Hes committed to philanthropic activities and served as the members of the board and the museum of contemporary art los angeles, the museum of art and Sculpture Garden on the mall, ucla Health Systems board and New York Presbyterian Hospital board and Los Angeles Police foundation. He was born and raised in new york city and has a masters degree from yale university. We are grateful to have you here and appreciate your willingness to serve your country. Please proceed with your opening statement. It is a pleasure to be here. Members of the committee, it is an honor to be here today. I am looking forward to working with members of congress and this committee on passing important legislation for the American People. My number one priority is treasury secretary creating sustainable Economic Growth for all americans. The best way to achieve this ise a combination of tax reform, regulatory relief and protecting taxpayers. This also includes making some difficult decisions with respect to the budget. We are currently bearing the cost of previous years and this has forced us into making hard choices but the remarkable thing about Economic Growth is it builds on itself. If we develop the right policies today, our children and grandchildren will reap the benefits of an ever growing economy. India in the next ten years of the return to the modern historical average of about 3 annual gdp growth our economy will grow by trillions of dollars. This will be meaningful to every man, woman and child in thisch country and future generations. Tax reform will play a major role in the campaign for growth. Its been more than 30 years since weve had comprehensive tax reform in this country. This administration is committed to changing that. We have over 100 people working at the enormous issue. We are working diligently tod bring tax relief to middle and lower income americans as well as making america does this competitive again. All of this comes as we simplify the tax code and make it easier for hardworking americans to file their returns. Finally, i would like to speak about the importance of free and Fair International trade. Its a component of Economic Growth of the trade deals that disadvantage american workerss and business can hardly be considered either free or fair. In meetings with my international counterparts, i expressed this dual importance. Just two weeks ago i had productive meetings with the finance ministers of the g7 and met with members of the world bank. They understood our concerns and we have an approach to the International Dialogue with the spirit of mutual understanding. And the president joint session to congress, he spoke about the marvels of the country is capable when the citizens were set free to pursue theirir passions. Fundamental is improving the uncompetitive taxes from blocking the way. This has been a significant few months and treachery. We have been studying, developing and implementing policies that will put this country on the path to sustainey Economic Growth. In the coming months, we will work with this committee and the congress in what we will look back on as an important time for the nations economy and our history. Thank you and i look forward to answering your questions today. We are glad to have you here and appreciate the way that you are doing your work. In the oped was written by senator obama blank advisor is doctor goldstein in the 2,008 edition of the journal and i will put that in the record at this point. Th in that oped, he stated that then senator obamas tax proposal would reduce the west end and 18. 2 of gdp. That would be a revenue to gdp target that they thought was desirable. And in that target it certainly exceeded the nations longrun average for the revenue to gdp which the nonpartisan cbo tells us they are about 17 over the last 50 years. Interestingly, the Current Administrations budget has revenues averaging 18. 2 of gdp over a ten year budget window exactly what then senator obama was advocating. They are already heading higher and above the historical average and considering the president s budget projects an average of 18. 2 in revenues as a share of the economy, how do you respond to critics of the president s budget doesnt raise enough revenues . Thank you for pointing that out and i look forward to that oped that you are putting in the record. I believe as you pointed out we have rid of the week for revenue and gdp with Economic Growth we think that the critical issue is we haveon tax reform thatre simplifies the taxes and makes the business competitive again. E some have argued congress shouldnt pass the reconciliation process and should get categorically off the floor before any bipartisan talks on tax reform. The Democratic Senate had adopted a budget that included a reconciled tax increase of almost 1 trillion. That purpose is tax reform. Despite the objections at the time i agreed to work with but then chairman and on an intense bipartisan tax reform process. There were no preconditions need and they abandoned the reconciled tax instruction. There are other relevant examples that played out the hist same way. In fact it is fairly safe to say requiring that type of precondition of the categorical abandonment of the reconciliation prior to negotiating is without any substantive precedent. What are your thoughts on that mr. Secretary, any process related demand that you would like to make before you would be willing to work with both sides on capitol hill on theoth side bipartisan tax . I have no process demands from my standpoint i am hopeful we can work with both republicans and democrats. I know weve had the opportunity to work with your staff and i know my staff is going to be sitting down with senators staff indoors later in the week. We are hopeful we can find Common Ground particularly on the issue of making the business tax is competitive. We have a system that is highly uncompetitive. We need to put the workers back to work. Mr. Secretary, the president s budget is increasind Economic Growth and reaches 3 . As i understand, that relies on the implementation of a number of policies including progrowth tax reform cutting out unnecessary regulation buildingg infrastructure, reforming health care, boosting Energy Production and reducing the deficit significantly improve the supply side of the economy. It is not unheard of that and administration places belieanadn the efficacy of his policymini proposals. In the fiscal year 2010 budget of the growth was assumed to get to as high as 4. 6 and assumed to average 3. 8 over the extended eight year period. That was on the belief in the policy prescriptions particularly the stimulus. Mr. Secretary can you spend a little bit of time explaining why the administration believes its policy proposals including but not limited to tax reform can generate sustained Economic Growth . We believe that a combination of tax reform, regulatory relief and trade policies will return t us to the levels of 3 Economic Growth with gdp. And i believe that our longterm projection is actually 2. 9 in the budget. It takes several years to get to 3 and ive heard lots of economists tell us why that is not going to be the case. But we are committed to have policies to get back to what our appropriate growth rates in this country where. Thank you very much. Welcome, mr. Secretary. Nothing shows tax unfairnesss more clearly than your proposal to let the fortunate few convert the ordinary income into business income without Strings Attached paying the lowest 15 p tax rate and also avoid Social Security and medical payroll taxes into prescription for more inequality in america. So you are creating a massive new tax loophole. My reason for asking the question is especially because you cant enforce the tax laws on the books now. How do you expect the American People to believe you can prevent the fortunate few from exploiting this new loophole when you cant even stop the current . That is a very good question. Let me assure you ive said this repeatedly to the banking side but we are absolutely committed to make sure pass through his small and mediumsized businesses have the benefit of the business right. But this is not just something for large corporations, small and mediumsized businesses are the engine of growth in this economy but we will make sure people cannot use this as a loophole where they should be paying 35 on the wages and they pay 15 instead. I assure you that will be in the code and we will have ways to enforce that. Respectfully, i dont think that cut it. I do not doubt that you believe you can absolutely make it happen. You are absolutely sure its going to go for the Small Business but the reality is they thrived in the absence of tough enforcement principles and ii didnt hear that now. This proposal has been out there and we have not gotten any specifics about how this is going to be done and if anything since we talked about it last, the problem is even more serious because the Budget Proposal cuts the enforcement budget. The sooner you get that to us, the better. It assumes 3 growth that you claim as 2 trillion to revenue. This Economic Growth pace for tax reforpays fortax reform that doesnt include tax reform so unless you make this clear to us, arent you doubletime dinged the same 2 trillion to pay dowo deficits that you claimed would pay for tax reform . Maybe i am missing something. We are absolutely not intended to double counting. When the budget was done we were not ready to have a fullblown tax reform plan that could model it to the budget. When we present a tax plan we will not be double counting the growth. Sometime down the road you will not double count . I would like to see as we talk about more specifics because i do not see how the plan doesnt blow a multitrillion dollar hole in the budget deficit, and that is going to harm the ability to generate more high skill high wage jobs in the innovation. I will have more questions in the second round mr. Chairman. Senator grassley. That are i would like to bring your attention to the proposal i introduced with senator cantwell that is very much aligned with the president s America First agenda, the renewable fuel chalk creation act is what its called with the current bio diesel credit to switch insurers in the tax credit and incentivize the Domestic Production and text pagers are not subsidized in the fuel like we are doing now. With biofuel imports nearly doubling from 510 million gallons to almost 1 billion gallons in 2016, this change is critical to ensure it is supporting the domestic industry rather then subsidizing foreign imports have already received favorable treatment from their own country. So, it is and really a question, but for you to understand argentina we are getting all of this biofuel and taxpayers of the United States areth subsidizing the import just like we are attempting to incentivize the domestic. I would like to hear if you agree with me. We look forward to working with you on the details of that. I appreciate yours and the president s dedication to the tax reform. A key aspect is jumpstarting by reducing Corporate Tax rate 35 to 15. This makes sense according to the Corporate Tax it is most harmful for the taxation to Economic Growth however the devil is in the details for instance the camp tax reform proposal sought to lower the Corporate Tax by slowing to appreciation. However as evidenced by the joint committee on taxation revenue estimate of the camp proposal, the slowing of thehepl depreciable undated much if not all of the positive growth effects. Where does the administration stand on accelerating the depreciation or fold expansion. That is a good question. Is we fully support the need that the capital goods and investment and capital is what fuels the growth of this economy. So, no we do not support slumping for depreciation and we are looking at various alternatives as we build the tax plan. Im not going along the lines of the same question on the 15 for Small Business. Its a little more direct to the coverage. Will the 15 raise on the passthrough business income be admirable whether we are talking of simple family farming proprietorships, a small family partnership, no, i said that wrong. I meant family farmers proprietorship, a small family partnership, a subchapter s. Milp corporation or any other passthrough entity. We want to make sure to put rules around this that can be managed in the irs technology so that wages are not abused in that system and Large Private Companies are not abusing the system and use it from getting around will there be any part of the business that can be treated int another part. They will all have the benefit of that. Wireless slows the depreciable white it takes the opposite approach but part of the tradeoff is that would eliminate interest as a deductible business expense do you view this as a tradeoff or do you support any limitation on the deductibility of interest . Again i think that is a very good question and something that we are looking at carefully. We are also reaching out to lots of different groups. Ive heard some strong concerns from small and mediumsized businesses that interest is an important part of what they need to deduct, but that is one of the issues we are looking at. Senator nelson. Enco this is encouraging to hear the commentary to make things fair for Small Business. Where the commentary to become not a part of the overall agreement of which you get the Small Business tax way down, we filed to make sure Small Businesses dont have a higher tax than the corporations. In other words if you change the existing tax code instead of them paying a rate much higher than the individual rate that they would pay no higher than the corporate rate i hope you will take a look at that as aat backstop. But you are proposing something even further, is that correct . I hope that we do not need your backstop that we do look forward to working with you. In the budget there are large cut for the medicaid food stamps and medical research at nih, Housing Assistance for low income especially with disabilities and you eliminate subsidized Student Loans and the cdbg program. The city in miami uses that to serve poor seniors for the meals on wheels and there isnt a full offset for tax reform, the overall tax reform. What could happen is you will starve the programs of this resource so without the full offset how can we have confidence in the president s tax reform plan that it is aello just attempted to transfer wealth from the least privileged to the most privileged . We look forward to working with you as we develop more details of the tax plan. We were not ready to release more details. For the reforms we look forward to working with you on the overall budget i think you should know the president she priority in the budget reflects a large increase in militaryy spending because the president believes we have under invested in the military and National Security is incredibly important and across the board there are very difficult positions on many good parts of the program and i know he looks over to working with congress on the budget as it moves forward. I appreciate your attitude. I support a big increase in defense spending, to back but what are we to think when we sen these programs being savaged . There has to be balance in the budget and that is what i want you to consider. I would point out florida is the state that has on its license tag the orange stitchers industry is under threat of extinction because of an imported bacteria from asia. We have the research, senator cornyn has a lot as well. They are making progress. But as we make this progress, we have not found a magic cure. But what we have done is to be able to hold off the effect of the killing of the tree for a couple of years. But there is a lot of groves that are dead. What we need if youre going to have this as industr citrus indt is less than half what it was seven years ago. That is how dramatic the decline in his. What we need is the ability for the grower to go in and plow out the abandoned grove until we find a magic cure. They need expensing in the first year because of the tremendous threat to the industry. I assure you i love florida orange juice and as we look at the code we would get Different Things promoting Economic Growth they are and other parts. I want to thank you for being here. Youve made your self. Available in many differentbut contexts. I appreciate that and i want to use the first part of my time off so much to ask a question but to set the record straight. When you were here in the banking committee. In the amendment to achieve that objective in the committee and on the floor it was rejected byy the other side each time evenh after the joint Tax Committee explained that it contains a number of increases on thehethe middle class. They will bring significant tax relief to the middle class. It gets up to 3 . But the period is slightly low lower. The budget heres assumed at least 4 growth rate. The us and a 3. 2 growth rate for the entire decade that weve just been through. The Budget Proposals for even below the same type of projections that the Obama Administration projected in the budgets. Lets talk about a 3 growth rate is it unreasonable to expect it could grow at a rate co of 3 . I know there are lots of economists who will give us reasons why structurally wes cannot grow at that rate but we believe with the right policies the economy can get back to the normalized growth rates of 3 or higher and we are committed to do that. What is the abnormal growth ratnormal growthrate of the unis perceive the last 50 years . It is over 3 . And currently, i think over the last eight or nine years we have c seen roughly under 2 . I appreciate your unwillingness to accept that. Whether it is tax reform, healthcare reform, Housing Finance reform and Regulatory Reform and i also want to thank you for the work you were doing at the Treasury Department. I want to thank you for fighting for these policies and try to achieve the growth rates you hope to see america achieve. Thank you. Senator brown. Your party has a history of less than enthusiastic support for Social Security come on employment insurance. I was in youngstown and a woman stood up andsign 63yearsold and i hold two jobs. I dont have insurance. I just want to my goal is to livwas tolive until im 65 whene medicare. That was her goal, not to see what her talking about raising the system to 67 let me go to the tax reform. On page 17 was an article by Martin Feldstein on the tax cuts pay for themselves. You will grow out of the deficit tax cuts. Martin feldstein of the supplyside economics is that it wont work that way and we should pay for it with socialy security cuts. So i want to ask a series of questions about that. Im worried about this tax cut because no economic theories say we will grow our economy to the point we will remake all the revenue. Can you give us your word the administration will live up to the promise and will not cut, alter or privatize Social Security. Even though already in your plan you are cutting 72 billion frog Disability Insurance which is in fact a part of Social Security. Anybody who is eligible. The president intends to make pe sure that those that have disability and are on that and get their benefits. What impact would you like to do in the budget cuts when it comes to tax reform on the economic aid to you are not specific on the taxes yet again i in my last couple of minutes will ask some very specific questions argue considering changing the earned income tax credit . It isnt a focus of ours at the moment. The deductibility of mortgage interest. We are not considering that. That is one of the things that can be looked at. At the current time we are not. We havent gone through all of these. N its not something we are considering at the moment we are looking at many different ways of broadening the base. That specific one i havent seei but i want to emphasize youre looking at things acrosstheboard. Its to keep the interest deductibility. It is the sharp deep cuts to housing programs. The Census Bureau tells us average american salaries of 52,000 a year. I know in both previous testimony ended the conversation last week with members of thee finance committee you were careful about what you could guarantee in the final outcome so in light of that salary was 52,000, can you guarantee in terms of the administrations proposals whether it will not receive a tax cut greater than that of 52,000 a year. We are going through a process across the house and senate and administratiothe senateand admin lots of input. This goes through multipleoes to different areas. On . Im just asking in the tax reform proposal when it is finalized and presented will that be the case. It can pass the house and the senate and be signed by the president and i said before when we come out with all the details we will obviously have all theto distribution and people will be able to make whatever comments and changes as it goes through the legislative process. To guarantee what was proposed it has been and will be a middle income tax cut and that is our priority. We have almost 2 Million People who earn less than 23,000 a year. Someone making a Million Dollars a year or more. What is your answer to those . They make 23,000 is that your question . That is what weve read in this proposal. Its to eliminate almost all deductions with the exception of mortgage interest and charitable deductions that are important to offset almost all of those deductions with a reduction of taxes that is progrowth and will create jobs and we look forward to working with you and others as we get through the details. M we are looking at everything for the details and im not prepared to go through. Lets try this again. So youre not going to answer on the student Loan Interest what about the Higher Education expenses . Let me be clear we are going through the base broadening. I am more than happy to come back when we release a plan and go through on a line item basis and have it marked up. I am more than happy to do that and to seek input from you and k your staff on what the priorities are so we can try to do this on a bipartisan basis. These are from january 1 is the letter i sent to regarding the statements and testimony that you allege so i ask you to find that letter and respond to it by the close of business tomorrow and second a letter that senator brown and i sent regarding foreclosure. I am no longer associated and i dont have access. Guess i stanyes i stand behind t that there was a letter to but i do not have that letter. Hu im sure youve requested. Mr. Secretary, it is good to see you. Ive repeatedly said it would be paid with Economic Growth and base broadening. Im going to come back at that moment. In the budget on page 131 of the proposals is the repeal of the estate tax that would benefit folks like you and e. You have a line item that says the revenues are still coming in. As you know, when we talked i applaud the efforts to make it rational and work in the repatriation. Their repatriation. I spent a couple of years in this process and took some arrows from my own team but also look at the net revenue. The nonpartisan has estimated that it would add about 5 trillion to the deficit over the coming decade. You cant get 5 trillion in savings impact he would have to take on at least more to go through the whole list. That would dramatically reduce the Health Care System not understanding why they would score it when they dont know the details. L there will be full transparency. We have over 100 people in the Tax Department looking at lots of different scenarios and we are working hard on that and have no intention of doing something that would add trillions of dollars to the de debt. That adds an additional deficit. I would argue the additional deficit payments. The significance of the debt bear responsibility. Ive spent a couple of years working through these numbers yl pretty closely. I think based on reasonable assumptions even on the dynamic scoring, you cant get to 5 trillion tax expenditures without going after the largest ones like employerbased tax any health care. I really fear that this becomes a lot harder than it looks, and i am worried around the 3 growth assumptions will look at the dynamic scoring that has to include the tax cut assumptions that they are not counted in the budget so there does seem again to be the double counting. Im also very worried we areio taking domestic Discretionary Spending down to 3 of gdp. That is the lowest it has ever been. We were both business guys. You invest in that Business Investment education and plant equipment and staying ahead of the competition. The. Your budget cuts the irs. Do you want to address that . I know you have tremendous business expertise and we hope that we can work with you and your staff on suggestions for the business tax. I know you appreciate the system we have is a very complicated system of worldwide income and deeper with trillions of dollars offshore which makes no sense and we need to get that money back so we very much hope you will work with us on ideas to move forward. As i did say, i have spent now a bunch of time looking at things. I will tell you my biggest focu and i do have a Technology Background upgrading the technology at the irs we are very focused and feet under invested in technology and i am pleased to report that in the budget we will protect the big increases in technology and offset them into the savings in other areas. We were looking to cut Government Spending and i am pleased that we protected the irs. There were many people that wanted to cut it more and we are comfortable in the spending level and some savings in technology and its been. One of the questions was about Social Security and i want to follow but not quite challenging and making the point we have a 20 trilliondollar debt is that correct . Under most math which is conservative, ten years from now it will be higher than00 24 trillion. Principally because of the growth and obligation to Social Security and other measures is that correct . I understand what youre saying. None of us here want to raise the cost of Social Security to anyone we look at 1983 from 65 to 66 i lost a year of Social Security 39yearsold in 1983 and then turned 6625, 26 years later. But i point is by recallable braiding the timing of the recalibrating the formula it cant be good for everybody. None of us want to raise the cost on anyone or prevent people from being eligible bute recalibrating the formula at a time for those that will be a beneficiary to the future can go a long way towards the lowering of the obligation we will have so i just want to make that point. Sh second, the budget documents instrument i want to message three things quickly. We were disappointed there was no inclusion for any funding for the savanna poured into the state of georgia for 248 million in its own port for the United States federal government and we have a process of deepening that. Without that additional money to a high cost in the future yearsi i would appreciate your working with me to see if there isnt a way we can re prioritized the capital proportion and to get additional funding. I would be happy to follow up with you and your staff. Secondly, section 45 in the tax code. The company is building a Nuclear Reactor in georgia andca South Carolina. They are the only two Nuclear Reactors in the United States under construction now because of the problem into bankruptcy those plans will not be finished as soon as we thought they would be. The tax credits say 2020; is that right . Its from 2020 out a few tears it doesnt cost any more money but the federal involvement gives us the abiliti to leverage in such a way so they can finish those plans otherwise they lose the money and opportunity to do so so i expect an answer. Time is of the essence and i would love to talk to you about it. Last, low and moderate income people worked on a program for d long time. I think its important weportan continue that i would appreciate your taking the time where they get free assistance to file their tax credit its a good program. Weve looked at that and agree with you and look forward to working with you on that senator scott and then senator bennett and then we are going to close this down. Indonesia will have a couple of questions. I have you will have to excuse me, i have to leave. With your indulgence we havent had any finance membersa either on the democratic or republican side who havent had their five minutes i assume it would be acceptable to what their questions let them ask questions. Mr. Secretary, good to see you. A couple questions. I do want to associate myself with senator isaksons comments about the importance of the Nuclear Protection tax credits. T it comes down to the commitment of the country need to encourage states to look at ways to give back to the Nuclear Energy business. South carolina and georgia both said yes it seems like the federal government is not honoring its commitment to those projects and that is what it boils down to it seems to be a suggestion that the administration and the treasury and the irs may be able to provide bridge from 2020 to 22 wer22or a couple years longer it wer22or a couple years longer it process but if i were an average person sitting back at home, and i am, taking a look at the conversation we are having around tax reform, it would be difficult to discern where the average person finds a benefit in the conversation on the tax reform because we have done such a poor job of having that conversation it seems to go bace home. The only comments i was glossed over is when you answered senator bob from pennsylvania, when you answered his question about the impact of the tax reform package of the person earning 23,000 each year in your answer was they were paying no taxes there was a moment of silence. I think its important to note as we have a discussion about tax reform, the direction we ars heading is the person that is at the lowest end of the economic ladder would have no Tax Liability in your tax reforms package, is that correct . A chunk of people that cannot afford to pay taxes and 95 of americans we think will be able to file their taxes on a simple arch postcard without having to itemize, simplification. That it takes time to get there with this committee but we simply dont talk to them but about them so with the Corporate Tax rate conservative and liberal economists come to the same conclusion the tax rate is by three groups of individuals those sad experience lower wages overlooking to have a conversation with an allamerica about getting a raise at work that tax rate is one of the fastest ways to get to the higher income for those that we care about if we lower the rate we could assume those benefits that could be avoided the second group that would benefit from a lower Corporate Tax rate would be consumers who are buying those products because embedded in the actual price of it is that tax for it and then third group, those in position to further invest and create more Economic Activity are folks who are shareholders and companies for those groupsid of three individuals are the folks that bear the burden of Corporate Taxes is that about right . It is an multiple economics have shown over 70 of the cost of Corporate Taxes are borne by the worker, so major part of reforming the Corporate Tax system is in an effort to increase wages and opportunities for workers. My final point as it relates to folks in South Carolina and around the country who art might like my mother or was, hardworking, single mom struggling to make ends meet, working 16 hours a day and eating more opportunities andd one of the things we see in this conversation about reform is that if we lower the Corporate Tax and allow for real pay treacher read patriotism and we make sure theres a symptom not a symptom to move income in that faster entity from income to prophet, which was the question of our Ranking Member we can figure that out, having a mechanism to stop that and with Regulatory Reform we should have a robust Economic Activity that leads to Economic Growth, and the final part that would help folks at home would be some emphasis on the workforce reinvestment that that gig economy, Technology Economy will displace workers, but if we have that in our sites through the Economic Activity we could actually design a workforce that would marry the workers looking for work with a job with a light if we had that synergy in our activities. Is that accurate . That is and we believe job training is in important part of Economic Growth in making sure workers are prepared. Final question and i appreciate you answering this later is the question about factor. Are you familiar . Sim. Those regulations imposed, they are not trying to scare up escape taxation as it appears this is a owner is a burden on a company and i would love to hear your response about your administration or this administration i want to finish this quick thank you. In a position to followup and see if there is something we can do now. My staff has made me aware o this issue and we will followup with you you. My colleagues have been patient. I think senator bennett has been here. I have been trying to make three hearings at one time. We all have. Let me just say Clara Mccaskill out of 100 senators my favorite senator. [laughter] she was my favorite senator before, but the graciousness, i can tell you how much i appreciate it. Thank you, claire. Secretary mnuchin, thank you for your service. We are grateful that you have taken the job you have. Are you aware that we collected revenue roughly 18 of our Gross Domestic Product . Yes, chairman hatch made that comment at the beginning. Are you also are where we spend a little over 21 of our Gross Domestic Product . Yes. You presented a budget and i say so the Tea Party Folks in america can hear it that you are presenting a budget that cuts more taxes. We will now be lower particularly that Economic Growth you have talked about and lowered to 18 and at the same budget that spends more money. We are cutting taxes and spending more money. An is that not correct . Again, the budget doesntoeso model any tax changes because we didnt have them ready. An are you not cutting taxes in the budget . We are cutting taxes. So the distinction or difference between 18 we are collecting revenue gdp and the more than 21 we are spending in this government in gdp, all promises have been made to the tea party, balance the budget and the rest are broken in this budget because we will collect less in taxes and spend more money. Is into that correct . I dont think that is correct over the 10 years. The 10 year. , when we deal with that is by cutting domestic spending, not not military, but domestic spending by 40 . But thats the proposal you have made. Isnt that correct . The president s priority is to grow the military we understand the present once to grow the military. We went to offset that. Cut taxes, said he wont touch medicare. Wont to tea party people, listen to work for medicare dollar you pay in, 3 are taken out. So, we will continue to have a deficit in medicare. We will have a deficit in the government. We will spend more in military spending. Tax rich people less and cut domestic Discretionary Spending by 40 . That is the plan thats our plan while the front page of the New York Times says tunnels through seven Different Countries in asia, our plan is that we will put our domestic Discretionary Spending by 3 . Thats your plan; right . Thats what the president told people in ohio, wisconsin and pennsylvania that hes going to cut that domestic Discretionary Spending by 40 so he can finance tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. That is not the case work the tax reform and its not just tax cuts, but tax reform will pay for itself and when we have details we will be happy to we would love to go through them. T its not for the secretary of state to go through the details. Let me ask you. Be said you werent prepared to talk about details and we know you have put out a tax proposal and i accept the fact that things will be modified and changed in the congress and i appreciate that, but will you say today that the Trump Administration will not accept the tax reform bill that cuts taxes on average for high income taxpayers limit what ive said is no, note what ive said is our priority is about a middle income tax cut and the lower the top tax rate will offset it with a reduction will you tell the American People today that your administration because at the end of the day you can sign or veto a bill, your administration will not accept a tax reform bill from congress that cuts taxes on average for high income taxpayers . Again, i have had some of these questions earlier and i will repeat that. You didnt answer them earlier. What i have said is we are working very closely with of the house and the senate on an overall tax reform package. We are taking in lots of input and when we have the details we are happy to go through them with you. Our objective is to create Economic Growth to make business taxes let me ask you this way. Mr. Secretary, will the president veto a bill, a tax reform bill that cuts taxes on average for ia high income taxpayers that violates the rule. Again, the president will look at the overall package. I just hope mr. Chairman that people who voted for this person are listening to these answers. The last question and i know im out of time because senator mccaskill is so kind i just want to ask one question about medicaid, so two questions, the healthcare bill you have endorsed and the president has endorsed is not a healthy view bill in my view, but it cuts medicare by roughly hundred 50 billion. Ughly this budget seems to propose is in another 600 billion dollars in medicaid cuts . Are we up to 1. 4 to in medicaid cuts . I i dont have the numbers in front of me. Those are the numbers as i understand them in the custom medicaid of of over 25 . In my state 50 of the people our children, so i hear politicians say they need to go to work. Are the childrens are thehe children supposed to work . Are people who are working at a wage that one allow them to a private insurance supposed to go to work . Wheres the quarter of medicaid, whos going to cover as much as i share your concerns this has to be the last response in an senator simpson or senator mccaskill. We are slowing the rate of medicaid and i can assure you that children will be taken care of. Its not an not our intent that they wont have coverage. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, was the Economic Growth rate than for the past eight years of the Obama Administration . Its been between one and a half and 2 . With the historic average . Over 3 . Is it fair to say that the policies, economic policies of the previous and menstruationhe havent been conducive are created conditions favorable for Economic Growth . I believe that to be the case is also fair to say the part of the reason for that would be the heavy tax and heavy regulation that have been part of those economic policies . I agree with you. Seems to me as we talk about where we want to go from as as country we want to get that growth rate backup to a more normalized rate, hopefully north of 3 . Would you agree to make thats our number one priority. In order to do that, clearlyt the tax increases, heavy relation of the Previous Administration had not worked and it seems to me simplifying our tax code and reforming in a way that makes us more competitive in a global marketplace would be a desirabll outcome and result in something we ought to be able to work on a bipartisan basis and i would hope my colleagues on the other side would join with us and hopefully with you and your team as we design eight tax reform plan that hopefully will get us back up to that 3 growth and one of the reasons i ask is because the best way to solve the longterm fiscal problem the country has is faster Economic Growth we get back up to north of 3 growth i assume we will see a significant increase in government revenues. Is that the case . Yes, over 2 trillion difference. To me growth should be the goal and i appreciate the fact that although i differ disagree with ethics of the president s budget there is an emphasis on growth and on what tax upon can do to generate a higher rate of growth in the economy. I introduced a bill last week i that is geared towards a small and mediumsized businesses who we believe are an engine for Economic Growth and job creation in this country that focuses on faster cost recovery. The proposal that you set forward talks about lowering rates which is the other lover we can use to get greater growtg in the economy. Can you tell me how you see faster cost recovery, mediayo expensing actually playing into the administrations tax reform ideas as well . Thank you, senator. First of all we absolutely agred with you that small and mediumsize businesses are the engine of growth in this economy and we need to unleash that growth. We are very focused on making sure that we had the appropriate policies on expensing capital goods to encourage people to invest and as i stated earlier we are looking at variety of ways to increase depreciation. I think that ought to be part of any tax plan that we come up with here. Secretary, under the present april 21, executive order you are in the process of identifying regulations within the department that impose undue financial burden and i believe there are number of final regulations that were promulgated by the last administration that should be on that list. Whats unclear is how you plan to handle regulations proposed but not finalized once like the estate tax evaluation regulation that the Obama Administration proposed in august, 2016. These resort relations would make it more difficult for owners of family farms to pass them on to future generations and increase the estate tax burden on family businesses. As part of your review of regulation, will you include proposed regulations and withdraw those that were not finalized that would give taxpayers confidence that these proposals will not i can assure you we are looking at those and i am familiar with the Family Discount issue we are reviewing. Final question. I was pleased to see the Administration Tax reform framework seeks to preserve the intent for terrible giving, start stakeholders have raised concern thats raising that the deck should could this incentivize terrible giving. Can you talk about whether your boat worked at that and if there are other steps we can take to encourage Charitable Giving . We do support the need and encouragement for chair will giving and thats why we wanted to leave that deduction in the tax code and we are happy to follow up with you and talk to you about ideas for people who use the standard deduction. Thank you. Senator mccaskill. Thank you. Secretary mnuchin, while i knowa you have repeatedly said that there is not specifics in the budget, the budget document is full of specifics including a specific claim that it balances the budget. Thats a very specific claim. Its only fair that if we continue to drill down on some of the kind way of putting it is anomalys in this budget document from a financial perspective or two or budget 3 growth, which i will not argue with you here, but most economists in the country are arguing about the notion that 3 growth will happen. To a tri and you say it contributes 2 trillion in dynamic revenue going to deficit reduction based on the tables in the budget. T. Bt then, we are told that in 2 trillion with a tax cut and i see nothing in the budget with a 5 trillion of revenue we will lose from the tax cuts are calculated in. So, either you are double counting and if someone is paying attention to how you do accounting or you just made a mistake and i need to know whice one it is. Senator, i appreciate you bringing up that question and i responded to a similar question earlier, so first of all the intent was not to do double counting. As ive stated earlier, we are not far enough along in tax reform to have modeled it. The impact of that, there are other areas of the budget that we think are conservative and in our calculation of revenue, but i assure you when we attach reform there will be full transparency of it and there was no intent to double count or anything else along those lines. So, its a mistake . No. Its not a mistake at all. You can have tax reform is paid for by growth and then count thats growth in the deficit. Either is paying for the lack of revenue we are getting from the tax reform form is going against the deficit. You cant do both. Thats beyond fuzzy math. To be clear, when the budget came out we overlay the administrations plans for growth, which were incorporated and that is what is shown in their. We do not have tax changes, so we did not modeling tax changes. There is full transparency. Is the growth coming from the tax changes . One of them, but there is other economic whether its our Regulatory Reform policies, there are other things that will impacte this defies understanding that you are going to project what the growth will be based on tax cuts, but you cannot put anything in the budget about what the lack of revenue will be because of the tax cut. En that doesnt even make sense. I mean, how can he say you have 3 growth and all of this growth and revenue because of the tax cuts if you never put in thend budget with the tax cost cuts cost, not even a ballpark. You didnt even say maybe it will cost 3 trillion. You didnt do any of that, so how can this document be taken seriously . It can be taken seriously and im sorry you feel that way. Is completely transparent. No one is trying to hide anything. I think if you cant say the growth of 2 trillion will pay for tax cuts are to say it reduce the deficit at the tate that same time. That just doesnt make sense especially when you are not even counting what the tax cut is. On the go to the stability of the pension fund. You graciously and i was impressed and frankly it indicated to me that you were willing to listen to folks that have real life problems and no one is helping with. You agreed to meet with some of the missouri Truck Drivers in your confirmation hearing to hear their plight with these people that have driven trucks many years are being told they will have a mere fraction of the pension that they were promised and that their families will rely on i want to let you know they will be in washington in a few weeks. B to save you a trip to missourd if i can and if we can figure out a time when they are here to have a small group of them. We dont want to overwhelm you. We can ask for one or two representatives to meet with you and i ask if you would be willing to meet these drivers . I would. I think we were reaching out to your office about bringing people in, multiple states, but if you have people and we will definitely we will try to coordinate and get multiple states in because the problem is the same whether no matter where they drove a truck the promise that was made to them will be broken. We spent a lot of time looking at this part of it is a function of treasury where we oversee certain intervals, but we appreciate the issue and we will look for to working with you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you. To mr. Chairman, thank you for being here today. I want to talk about the border adjustment tax rate minute and caterer feel on this. As you are where the House Republican tax reform blueprint includes a 20 back tax, estimated that it would net around a trillion dollars in revenue. You have cast that as an essential to tax reform and its not workable in its current form. Do you still feel the same way . I do and i testified at the house yesterday with several questions on a. We have been working closely with the house on this and we have expressed concerns and suggested they should go back and rework it. You also mentioned there are plenty of other ways to raise the revenue. Can use shine some light on what you mean by these other ways. I think this is all about base broadening and we are working hard to look at lots of different alternatives as to how to fill that gap. Can you give us an example . We are looking at everything as you know. Nothing is off the table as far as we are concerned. All right. When ask you you questions dealing with debt. Isaiah report recently that said the total us Consumer Debt is approaching 13 trillion. We talk of student death that student student debt we are looking at 13 trillion. Do you think you have any impact on your ability to grow the economy when we see such a staggering that out there . We are concerned about that and we are particularly concerned about the burden on students of the student debt. Have you guys looked at this and decided how much more debt can grow . We have not, but we have people who are looking at back. Would we anticipate that there be answers soon on that . Would be more than happy to follow up. I appreciate that. I went to same change subjects were minute and talk about investment tax credits and see if i get your feel for alternative energy. Since i have been in congress and over the last couple of years i have tried to look at some parity between solar tax credits, geothermal tax credits, wind tax credits and im sure you are familiar with these. During the past act of 2015, some of these tax credits were left out, the protection tax credits specifically talking about commercial geothermal and all the above energy guides. Of these alternative energies like solar, geothermal and wind have huge potential in the state of nevada as far as job creation and industry that could do quite well. Want to know if you are aware of the issue of parity between these industries and if you have any concerns or problems with trying to find some equal treatment between the different industries. , only broadly where the, but i would be happy to follow up with you and your staff on it. I would be happy to get some questions to you. Want to talk about state and local tax elections. State of nevada is one has personal income tax and we are able to write on sales tax. With the blueprint and discussions we have had, including the removal of those deductions it will cost the average person of the state of nevada about a thousand dollars more in taxes if those directions were removed. I guess i did a commitment from you as we go through this process we can make sure it is those individuals in the state of nevada will benefit from the proposal you have with or without these deductions. I would be happy to work with you. People who have state taxes really call me on this one. I can imagine. I hope you appreciate we are try to get the federal government out of the business of subsidizing states. I want to talk about one more issue, mortgage debt relief. We talked about mortgages in the state of nevada in the past and the declining home prices, rising foreclosure rates have the force many families to sell their homes in nevada for less than what they paid for it and in some cases less than the outstanding debt. I have worked with several members on this committee to try to find some relief for those individuals that have two pay for taxes for income they have never received. Im hoping you would help address this. Absolutely. I realize its a serious issue and we will follow up with you. I will get a list of questions to you. Thank you again for being here today. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Secretary, thank you for being here. Lets me ask you, do you believe its a good idea to cut medicaid to provide tax cuts for the wealthy . Again, we have no intention of cutting medicaid as an idea, do you believe its a good idea to cut medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy . Thats not the intent of cutting medicaid. Is her answer yes, no . Know. Whether or not its your intent we are talking about administration also fits policy views, so your deferral is amazing, but the Administration Sets policy views. Does it ministration believe that a good idea to cut medicaid for the wealthy. What are you referring to in the tax cuts for the wealthy . Well certainly lets take the mnuchin rule. So, are you referring to the taxes as part of obamacare of which we heard earlier many of those taxes im referring to what the tax house public healthcare does because it cuts nearly a trillion dollars from medicaid, rips away healthcare from the most vulnerable in our society and hands the money to the most privileged of our country. I dont share your view it has the money over to the most privileged. It cuts nearly a trillion dollars from medicaid. Again, it scales back the growth of medicaid. It cuts scales back. Cuts nearly a trillion dollars. You call that scaling back next i guess on wall street a trillion dollars is nothing. Senator, i appreciate your comments. Of a trillion dollars obviously is a lot of money and i realize that im happy to talk about the tax cuts let me ask you this. The other areas are out of my domain. Will the president adhere to his own budget and only sign a tax reform bill that doesnt increase the debt, yes or no . Again, i think the president s will look at when there is a overall tax reform bill that can pass the house end of the senates the president who has always said hes willing to so, you might find one that increases the debt . What i say is that the president has always said he will negotiate on these issues and make a decision and i will make a recommendation. There are no policy standards here. You want us to judge the absence of any executive policy standards. Its all very nebulous. I understand negotiations, but at the end of the day there has to be standards. With the present commit himself to your own mnuchin rule cannot find it tax reform bill that cuts taxes on the top 1 . The president is concerned about the debt and wants to pay down the debt and the president is very focused that there is a middle income taxcut as part of this. Well, if you sign a bill that actually permits that to take place been met concern is not that great. With the president sign a tax reform bill that doesnt cut taxes for families earning under 100,000 . Its not his intent to do that. Usa middle income does that mean no, he will not. I cant speak for the president. You advise him. I would advise him and we will make sure there are tax cuts in this process with a middleclass. Will will the president sign a bill that gives more tax cuts as a percentage of income to the top 1 of the middle class . Again, i will not go through a bunch of hypothetical scenarios of what the president will or wont do. Im happy to explain what the president s objectives are and we are moving through a process let me ask you these, with the president sign a tax reform bill creating a new surtax for millionaires [inaudible] i dont believe thats in the current plan. So, that would be a no. Will the president sign a tax reform bill that increases the estate tax . I do not believe that is in the current plan is. That would be a know. With the president sign a tax reform bill that doesnt cut taxes on large corporations . The president was to make sure we have a competitive Business System and for many Large Companies they pay substantially less than the 35 , so our intent the answer to that is a no, so you have answered pretty clear definitively, you couldnt answer yes or no on everything else, but on those things that paint a clear picture of what is priorities would be. A bill that explodes the debt, these middleclass families in the cold, breaks the mnuchin rule, but wont sign a bill including a giveaway to Large National corporations. Senator, in all due respect that is not what i said. No, he did not say that specifically, but your line of answers get me that. Final thing, i dont get, this is like enron type of accounting the trumpet budget is virtually no details on tax reform, yet it assumes there non existing plan will create existing 2 trillion in revenue, uses imaginary revenue besides the problems of counting your chickens before they hatch also the same 2 trillion imaginary dollars will offset tax cuts, so how did the administration estimate the macroeconomic effect tax reform without knowing any of the specifics of tax reform including whether and how revenue deductions would be offset . On sorry you were not here earlier, but i answered similar questions several times already in that we didnt and the details to put in the impact of taxes. We have complete you dont have details today . We had to wrap this up. Our final. Your immediate tell so if you dont have details i dont know how you do forecasting. Think you. Secretary mnuchin, we have one other area we have to explore before we wrap up here the Treasury Department makes payments directly to help insurers to help cover deductible pigments for roughly 7 million americans, folks with modest incomes. They have private health plans. They bought on the Insurance Exchange and this is for help with the deductibles and copayments. Of these are called costsharing reduction payments. The president s been making the payments since he took office, but recently its been reported hes threatening to stop. We have got enormous amount of letters and emails and tweets from citizens and insurers, governors, experts that really dangerous rhetoric about these payments causing a lot of uncertainty in the markets and this is raising premiums for hardworking americans. I have got all of these comments from governors and insurance executives. Im just going to put those in the record by unanimous consent. We know you and the president has stated your strong belief in the free market, but the lack of clarity here is just causing turmoil, almost like gasoline is being poured on the fires of uncertainty in the healthcare marketplace and the private sector just cant continue to operate at this level of uncertainty. The insurers have to submit the proposed rate of 2018 and they cite the fact that these costsharing reduction payments remain unresolved as a main reason for premium increases, so theres been all of this discussion about this. My staff discovered in the president s own budget that theres an assumption that they are going to be paid out in 2018 after all of this i was pretty surprised. So, my question is, secretary mnuchin, is the president going to follow his own Budget Proposal . This is in the budget document. Im amazed its in their. Is he going to follow his own budget document, his own proposal and continue funding these costsharing payments next year . Thank you, senator. I havent had any direct discussions with the president on this, but im happy to follow up with the director and him on this issue. Im asking you. This is in your budget, mr. Secretary. Im not asking if you went to medical school. Im not asking you about health care policy. Trying to find out about whether the president s budget and its in your treasury appendix section, whether us treasury secretary agree that these payments ought to continue as they have been made for the last several years . Again, i respect her question and i will follow up a get back with you. If i am a insurer setting rates right now, should and i believe the reported threat about these payments from the administration are accurate or should i believe the proposal that is in your treasury budget . Which should i believe right now we are happy to provide clarity for you into the free market on that. I will just tell you, secretary mnuchin, having started this i dont know maybe two and a half hours ago, we have really gotten virtually no clarity on the Big Questions starting from this proposal that so dramatically favors the very wealthy with respect to my colleagues questions, i mean, this is really critical issue and its critical right now because the 90 day period when this is going to continue to be debated means that everyone will be up in the air while the Insurance Companies are trying to make decisions and about someone who believes in the free market, i would hope you back the proposal in your own budget. It would be one thing if it was coming from somewhere else, but its in your own budget and im just baffled why you want to support your own budget. Let me just leave you with where i think we are. We now have on offer a onepage proposal and i gather that there is one section that may have been added. I have not had a chance to look at details, but i gather its involving retirement. At the rate we are going, we will have like a full proposal, you know, somewhere like 2075 or Something Like that. We really have got to get moving the American People as i said that first sentence out of my mouth the American People demand that we work in a bipartisan way on the issues that are important now particularly matters like healthcare and taxes. Of these are key but in butter issues for anyone who is a nurse, a cop, workingclass people, people who aspire to be middle class, so we have got to get more specific spirit i have told you publicly and privately, i wrote to fullfledged tax reform bills, not papers with a few principles on them. Actual bills providing a real middleclass tax cut and republicans went on it. It can be done and its got to be real as opposed to much of what my colleagues have said, so i gather that some emails are going around about a meeting coming up that will be bipartisan that were sent this morning. I want to make it clear that to get this done, we have to take the one page that is shorter than the drugstore receipts that my staff seen last night and turn it into something that could actually produce a bipartisan bill. I know from listening to my colleagues on the side of the aisle, they agree the Current System is a mess. Its a dysfunctional mess. We need changes to create more good paying Red White Blue jobs. I made it clear this morning that i would work closely with my friend, chairman hatch, because he believes we ought to try to work a bipartisan way, but you will have to speed this up in terms of getting us specifics, so with that, secretary mnuchin, we will adjourn and we hope to continue this discussion very soon. This morning the American Enterprise institute looks at the future of historically black colleges and universities. You can see the event live starting at 9 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan2 and also follow live on cspan. Org and our free cspan radio app. Vice president mike pence speaks at the Us Naval Academy graduation and commissioning ceremony today in annapolis, maryland. Our live coverage starts at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Regardless of your background , remember where you came from peer cold onto the way so many of you reached out to mentor Young Persons through the colby cares about kids. Called on to the way you engaged in this community and make sure to bring that commitment to whatever walk of life you choose. Bravery, not perfection was the key that unlocks every store that i walked through since. It took me 33 years to figure out that brown girl can do white guy things. As you understand that you are here because a lot of help and also understand that now its time to help others. Thats what this is all about. Saturday night, 8 00 p. M. Eastern, 2017 commencement speeches. This weekend and speakers include former california governor at a university of houston. Former Vice President joe biden at Colby College in maine, girls code founder at Scripps College in california, arizona governor, santa fe mayor at New Mexico Highlands University in michigan Governor Rick Snyder at Adrian Community college in michigan. Saturday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan and cspan. Org. The u. S. Senate is a way for the memorial day recess, but the chamber will meet for three brief performance sessions beginning with this one this morning and now, for live coverage of the senate on cspan2. The presiding officer the senate will come to order. The clerk will read a communication to the senate. The clerk washington, d. C. , may 26, 2017. To the senate under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable bill cassidy, a senator from the state of louisiana to perform the duties of the chair. Signed orrin g. Hatch, president pro tempore. The presiding officer under the previous order, the Senate Stands adjourned until 7 00a. M. On tuesday, may 30, 2017