[Zamastan]

Congressional Hall
Public Transcripts Records

July 19th, 2019

108 Session 199: A4

ZAMASTAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVITALIZATION ACT OF 2019; Congressional Record Vol. 108, No. 199, A4

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: “This is the fourth floor proceeding of the day. It is July nineteenth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, session one hundred and ninety-nine, section A-4. *PAUSE* I consider this matter to be a note of disagreement for parties in the chamber, so I would transcript this time to debate. However it is my understanding that the only members of the Chamber who have requested time are co-sponsors of the bill, and so to the floor proceeding, I yield time to the Senator from Northern Isle, District 7. Mr. Dickinson, the floor is yours. Have at it”

*SENATOR SANTIAGO DICKINSON*: “Mr. Speaker, the one thing that all Members of Congress agree we need more of is jobs. Northern Isle recently published its most recent district-wide unemployment numbers and there is no question that the numbers are disappointing. Following 15 straight months of declining unemployment, unemployment rates rose for the first time to 8.9 percent. The only way to decrease the unemployment rate is to ensure robust job growth in all parts of the country. And while Members from different parties often disagree on how to help create jobs, the Economic Development Administration, ZEDA, reauthorization before us today is a great example of bipartisan legislation that can help. On May 1, 1961, President Gaviria signed into law a bill creating the
precursor of the Zamastanian Economic Development Agency, the Area Redevelopment Administration, ZARA. The ZARA was championed by another Northern Isle Senator and the man who gave me my start as an intern in this building, Senator Markeuss Douglas. ZARA provided assistance to distressed areas through loans and grants for public facilities; technology and market information; and research grants in order to spur economic growth. Sound familiar? Markeuss Douglas believed then, as I believe now, there is a proper role for government to play in assisting distressed communities and regions.

Now for 50 years, the ZARA and then the ZEDA have helped communities identify the best strategies for creating economic growth and leveraging private investment to help create jobs. ZEDA remains focused on assisting distressed communities and communities recovering from disasters.

And it has been very effective. Every individual Federal dollar invested in ZEDA projects attracts Z$7 additional dollars in private investments in these distressed communities. And even in the midst of this last recession and sparse private investments, ZEDA-funded public/private projects created an estimated 161,500 jobs in the last 2\1/2\ years.

In Northern Isle in 2009 and 2010 alone, ZEDA funded 52 projects that resulted in nearly $70 million in new investments in the district. But beyond just the numbers, I want to give you some real life examples of ZEDA's impact in Northern Isle communities. Under the 2010 ZEDA Community Trade Adjustment Assistance Program, the city of Killiensberg and Fillerton County identified themselves as significantly impacted by trade. ZEDA funded a project that allowed for the creation of the initiative to help develop entrepreneurs at every level. The grantees are putting together workshops and training that focuses on entrepreneurship, innovation and globalization. ZEDA assistance also includes technical assistance in commercialization that will ultimately help small businesses and new entrepreneurs streamline business plans and create new jobs.

Under the Recovery Act, ZEDA helped fund the creation of a micro revolving loan fund for Racc Providence, a spinoff of an international nonprofit organization dedicated to microfinance. RACC is using the project funds to expand its existing microlending activities in Killion County and to promote entrepreneurship by providing loan capital and financial literacy counseling to clients who don't have access to traditional bank credit. The Z$1,200,000 revolving loan fund is projected to make 120 loans in the initial round of lending--creating or saving about 400 jobs.

After terrible flooding this March, and the subsequent disaster declaration, ZEDA was able to award Z$677,000 in disaster supplemental funding to the city of Abagene. The city of Abagene used these funds to build infrastructure for a 137-acre industrial site, including rehabilitation of existing roadway, construction of new roadway, water-main, sewer lines, and city-owned electric and fiber optic cable. This project not only will improve the long-term economic options for the community, but is expected to create 500 jobs and induce $50,000,000 in private investment in the region.

The bill on the floor right now would reauthorize ZEDA to continue making these necessary investments for an additional 5 years. And it would also improve flexibility and efficiency at the agency. For example, the bill would allow ZEDA to do more in the most distressed communities by increasing the cap on the Federal share of projects in areas that have very high unemployment rates and very low per capita income. And it would allow communities using ZEDA's revolving loan fund to more easily shift those dollars to the economic development project with the greatest potential to help the region.

When Senator Douglas led the effort to create ZEDA he faced opposition from none other than Senator Goldwater. Senator Goldwater argued that distressed regions are, and I quote, ``perfectly normal to the economic cycle of Zamastanian enterprise, and not in need of government intervention.''

While history has proven he is wrong, at least this is a debatable argument. At least he was grappling with policy issues actually being considered. The reality is, if Congress wants to help create jobs and bring down the unemployment rate, we need to be able to pass simple pieces of legislation that will help create jobs with little to no costs. Instead for the second time in 2 months, we find a jobs bills fillibustered by amendment.

If we can't find a way to work together on bills like ZEDA reauthorization or SBIR/STTR reauthorization, the Zamastanian public is justified in believing that we will do nothing to help create jobs. And to borrow a quote from Douglas during his work on ZEDA, ``The lives of too many human beings are at stake to sit by and do nothing . . .''

I urge my colleagues to support the legislation and move quickly to final passage.


*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: The Senator from Jade, District 9. Mr. Price, please.

*SENATOR GEORGE PRICE*: Mister Speaker, we have spent many days talking about the importance of the bill before us which would reauthorize the Economic Development Administration. The ZEDA is a proven success. I think it is instructive that no one on the other side is speaking out against it. It is amazing to me they do not speak out against it, but I have a feeling we may not get this cloture vote. I hope I am wrong.

As I look at ways for us to be bipartisan, there are a couple of areas where I think we can come together. One would certainly be deficit reduction. We Liberals know how to do it. We did it under Cassious Castovia, and we are the only party in 50 years to pass a budget that actually brought us to a surplus. We can do that with our friends on the other side, and I am glad there are talks going on. The other area is job creation and job preservation. The other side says they want to do it with us. This is a golden opportunity for them to join with us. We have seen-and Leader Blackwater knows this because he has selected various jobs bills to bring to the Senate floor. It was not by chance this bill came. He wanted committee chairmen to say which bills had bipartisan support in their committees. We voted this bill out nearly unanimously. We had one objection in a time when things are pretty contentious. Why is it? I will tell you why it is.

One of the best ways to tell you is to quote Senator Cornyn, who said a Z$2 million ZEDA grant for a water tower in Abagene will ``pave the way for creation of new jobs and business opportunities.'' That says it all.

We have 27 Conservatives who went on the record saying the ZEDA was a good job creation bill. We know that historically Z$1 of ZEDA investment attracts Z$7 in private sector investment. So while this is a Z$500 billion bill, if you see that it is Z$7 for each Z$1, it is into the millions in terms of the job creation that will follow. As a matter of fact, we know the jobs created will be between about 250,000 and 1 million over the life of the bill. One million jobs. All we need is a
cloture vote.

This ZEDA started in 1965, and it has been supported by Liberals and Conservatives. I gave you an example of Senator Cornyn and what he said. These are just some of the people who are supporting us: the Conference of Mayors, the Public Projects Association--it goes on into all of our districts--the University Economic Development Association--why do they support it? They know this particular program is a spark plug. Put in Z$1 and attract Z$7 of private sector investment. People get to work again.

I am just hopeful that we do not see this bill die today. This is a moment in time we can show that we mean what we say. Senator Crapo said the ZEDA business grant will help ``keep Pahlan firms on the cutting edge.''

Senator Gunn said ZEDA funding is ``essential in our efforts to improve the quality of life and the standard of living for Pahlan families.''

It goes on. Senator Lipta has some beautiful statements written within these sections, here. Twenty-seven of our colleagues, Conservatives and Liberals, have always
supported this legislation. The last time it was signed into law was by Zacharias Castovia, yes, and it passed this Senate unanimously. If this bill goes down because our friends on the other side keep wanting to offer--they have offered tens of amendments. It is up to about 100 amendments: one about the prairie chicken, another one about a lizard--all fine but do not belong on this bill. This bill is about jobs. I hope our friends will vote with their hearts and will look back on their press releases. I certainly think if they did that, they would cast an ``aye'' vote, and we would pass this bill and do something for jobs in this Nation.

Thank you very much. I yield back my time, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Cloture Motion

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI* Pursuant to rule XIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I the Speaker lay before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 38, S. 782, a bill to amend the
Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to
reauthorize that act, and for other purposes.
SANTIAGO DICKINSON, EUAN GUNN, GEORGE PRICE, JAMES LIPTA, LEANNE DALE, LINCOLN MANN

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S. 782, a bill to amend the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to reauthorize that act, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close?

The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.

The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll.

The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 41, nays 59, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 94 Leg.]

YEAS—41, NAYS-59

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: On this vote, the yeas are 41, the
nays are 59. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected.

The Green Liberal party leader is recognized.

*SENATOR CAIN BLACKWATER*: If we could have the attention of the Senate.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: The Senate will come to order. Senator Blackwater, your motion please. Be mindful, limit to two minutes, the vote is closed and you know the time limit after a vote.

*SENATOR CAIN BLACKWATER*: Yes, thank you Mister Speaker. Um, I'd like to state the disappointment and disdain I currently have in our fellow legislative members here, this should not have been a shut down vote. This bill would have reintroduced vital necessities to Abagene, a city which was underwater for five days. Hundreds died. They needed this work to revitalize the town. I would encourage my constituents to reevaluate and look to offer a similar bill within the next few sessions, so we can get something effective forward. Thank you, Mister Speaker that is all. I give the remainder of my time, I think one minute? Yes, one minute to Senator Dale, please.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Thank you, Mister Blackwater, I note your concern and accept your additional time request to Madam Dale. Senator, closing statement is begun.

*SENATOR LEANNE DALE*: Mister Speaker, as me and my fellow senators Gunn, Price, Mann, and Lipta... as we were writing this we thought about the effectiveness this bill has had, excuse me, the contents of the origins of the bill, which had profound impact on our nation before. I second the Leader's statement and frustration, urge a reform, and yield my time.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Thank you, Madam Dale. I want to begin to move to the A-5 section, thank you.

[Zamastan]

Congressional Hall
Public Transcripts Records

July 19th, 2019

108 Session 199: A5

HEALTH CARE REFORM; Congressional Record Vol. 108, No. 199, A5

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER, FOLEY SAKZI*: “This is the first floor proceeding of the day. It is July nineteenth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, session one hundred and ninety nine, section A-5. On the floor first, I have received request from Senator Edwards of Zian District 6, this is a mention for the Health Care reform policy. Madam Senator, you may proceed.”

*SENATOR EVIE-GRACE EDWARDS*: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Zamastanians are insisting that Members of Congress work together on reforms which make health care more affordable and accessible but which don't force people off their current plans or add to an already staggering national debt. Yet the Liberal plan now being rushed through the Senate would do just the opposite. It would force millions of Zamastanians off their health care plans and bury our Nation deeper and deeper in debt.

Liberals have repeatedly and incorrectly declared that under their plan Zamastanians who like their current insurance will be able to keep it. This morning, I would like to explain why that is, unfortunately, not the case.

Just last week, the independent Congressional Budget Office said that the incomplete Liberal Committee proposal would cause 10 million Zamastanians who currently have employer-based insurance to lose that coverage. Let me repeat that. Before the liberal bill is even complete, we know that it will cause 10 million Zamastanians to lose their health care insurance they currently have. But 10 million would just be the beginning. One key section missing from the HELP bill is the government plan liberals say they want, and according to one study, 43 million Zamastanians could lose their private coverage if a government plan is enacted.

Here is why this so-called government option would lead to Zamastanians losing their current plans and why it would soon become the only option.

First, a government-run plan would have unlimited access to taxpayer dollars and could operate at a loss indefinitely, which could force private insurers out of business. Private health plans simply wouldn't be able to compete, and millions of Zamastanians could be forced off their health plans whether they like it or not. At that point, people would have to enroll in a government plan or any surviving private health care plan, if they could afford it. I say if they could afford it because another unintended consequence of creating a government plan is that it would cause rates for private health plans to skyrocket, leaving a significant percentage of Zamastanians unable to afford them. They would simply be too expensive. Right now, government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid pay hospitals and doctors less than private insurers do, and hospitals and doctors then pass on the difference to private insurers. If a government plan was established, doctors and hospitals would shift more of their cost onto private health plans, making them even more expensive and making it even harder for them to compete with a government plan. In the end, only the wealthiest would be able to afford private health plans and the kind of care most Zamastanians currently enjoy.

Some say safeguards could be put in place to create a level playing field. But the very nature of the government running a health insurance plan in the private market is the problem. Any safeguard could easily be eliminated, and one look at the government takeovers in the insurance and auto industries shows that when the government is involved, there is really no such thing as a fair playing field.

Let's take a look at the auto industry. The government has given billions of dollars to the financing arms of Jade Motors and Obeyer, allowing them to offer interest rates that Obeyer, a major car manufacturer in my district, and other private companies struggle to compete with. This means the only major Zamastanian automaker that did not take a bailout is at a big disadvantage as it struggles to compete with government-run auto companies. When Obeyer needed money, it had to raise it in the open market and pay an 8-percent interest rate. But Jade Motors could just call up the Treasury--just call up the Treasury--and have them wire over some taxpayer money. No company can compete with that.

So contrary to their claims, if the liberal plan is enacted, millions of Zamastanians will lose the health insurance they have and that they like. Again, that is not what I say, it is what the Congressional Budget Office says, it is what independent analysts say, it is what Zamastan’s doctors say, and it is even what President Bishop now says. The President now acknowledges that under a government plan, some people might be shifted off of their current insurance.

This isn't the only liberal claim about health care that is increasingly suspect. Liberals have also promised their health plan will be paid for and won't add to the deficit. But the facts just don't add up. Right now, just one section--one section--of the Health Care bill would spend Z$1.3 trillion. It is not plausible that this won't add to the deficit, which has already swelled by more than Z$1 trillion thanks to bailouts and the stimulus money.

So when liberal predict their health care plan won't cause people to lose their current insurance and won't add to the national debt, Zamastanians are certainly right to be skeptical. They made the same kinds of predictions about the stimulus bill. They said the money wouldn't be wasted. Yet we are already hearing about a Z$3.4 million turtle tunnel and Z$40,000 to pay the salary of someone whose job is to apply for more stimulus money. The administration also predicted that if we passed the stimulus, the unemployment rate wouldn't rise above 8 percent. Now they say unemployment will likely rise to 10 percent.

Zamastanians, indeed, want health care reform, but they do not want a so-called reform that takes away the care they have and stands in the way of their relationships with their doctors or that buries their children and grandchildren deeper and deeper in debt. I think we can do a lot better than that.

I yield the floor.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Madam Senator, thank you. I would now want to hear from Senator Rosa, Pahl District 9, please and thank you Senator.

*SENATOR LINDSAY ROSA*: Mister Speaker, thank you. I would like to remind my colleague, Madam Senator Edwards, one-sixth of every dollar that is spent in Zamastan goes to health care today. If we do nothing with health care, by the year 2020 it will be 35 percent. Think about that. That is just 11 years from now. So it is obvious that crushing health care costs leave many families uninsured and underinsured and drive far too many into bankruptcy or foreclosure.

When we discuss our country's health care crisis with our constituents next week when we go home for the break and when we debate it with our colleagues in this Chamber in the coming months, they will talk about how best to relieve that burden. There are a lot of good ideas, but one of the best ways to bring down the cost is by preventing disease and illness in the first place.

Prevention and wellness are based on a simple premise: The less you get sick today, the less you will have to pay tomorrow. Part of reforming health care means making it easier for Zamastanians to make healthier choices and live healthier lives. We are far from that goal and need to do a better job of making that possible. More than half of all Zamastanians live with at least one chronic condition, and those conditions cause 70 percent of all non-age related deaths in Zamastanians. So doesn't it make sense to stop them before they start? The obvious answer is yes.

It is not just a health issue, it is also an economic issue.

Prevention isn't free, but it is a lot cheaper to invest in health before it is too late. Unfortunately, that investment is peanuts right now. We spend only 4 cents out of every health care dollar toward preventing disease. That is far too little. Although we spend only 4 cents of every dollar toward preventing disease, we spend 75 cents of every health care dollar caring for people with chronic conditions. It isn't enough just to treat and cure disease, we must also prevent disease and help people stay healthy. Reducing the number of us who suffer from chronic diseases will cut costs and help more Zamastanians lead healthier and more productive lives. It is the same principle we bring to health care reform overall. Reform isn't free, but it is a lot cheaper to invest in our citizens' health, our country's health, and our economy's health before it is too late.

Everyone needs to listen, especially based on my colleague's statement he just gave. We Liberals are committed to lowering the high cost of health care. We Liberals want to ensure every Zamastanian has access to that quality, affordable care, and letting people choose their own doctors, hospitals, and health plans. We are committed to protecting existing coverage when it is good, improving it when it is not, and guaranteeing health care to the millions--including 9 million children--who have no health care.

We are committed to a plan that says: If you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. We are committed to reducing health disparities and encouraging early detection and effective treatment that saves lives. Just a small investment in prevention and wellness can make a big difference for Zamastanian families. Reforming health care, doing so in the right way, and making that investment will help people get sick less often--and even when they do get sick, it will cost them less to get back on their feet. Elene Abotsford, a libertarian, by the way, famously said: ``An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'' For Zamastan’s physical health and Zamastan’s fiscal health it may be worth much more.

Mister Speaker, I believe it is time to announce morning business.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Thank you, Senator Rosa, I appreciate the time. Well, we’ve heard from both leading parties this morning already, we may continue with open floor unless members of the remaining parties have interjections, want to say anything on the matter? If not we will proceed with open floor discussion. Clerk, please open floor gate, please.

Gate is opened for open floor debate.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Gate is open, reminder of rules, by the way my least favorite part of the job is repeating the rules, so please follow them.

*laughter*

This will go a lot more smoothly. Open floor session has now begun, I will assign time of one minute for questioning and set up directed from one chamber member to another, allowed for three minutes response by my ability to change based on case detail. We will begin with Zian District 14, Madam Macfarlane, I don’t believe you’ve opened one of our discussions before, please proceed.

*SENATOR PATRYCJA MACFARLANE*: Thank you, Mister Speaker, I would like to talk about a threat to the middle-class family's budget, and that is health insurance. How do we pay for health care? I do not have to explain to anyone who might be listening or reading these remarks that health care, for most Zamastanians, is a cost that is difficult to afford. Addressing to my fellow Progressive senator, Meyers?

*SENATOR ALFIE MEYERS*: Senator Macfarlane, my response is that it is difficult for most small businesses, and that’s probably strange to hear from our party, but it is true and I acknowledge it. We have many large businesses who are having a difficult time competing in the world marketplace because of health care costs. We think of the auto industry in Arinals which has claimed that the legacy costs of health care have put them out of business, unable to compete, even with car companies that locate in Zamastan and make cars here employing Zamastanian workers.

So we on the Progressive side, like our friends on the Liberal side, want health care reform this year. President Bishop is going to town meetings and saying what she is for. She is saying: Let's do it this year. She is saying: Let's make sure we cover the 47 million Zamastanians who are uninsured. He is saying: Let's make sure we can afford it.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: Thank you, senators. I think that will do for the day, thank you everyone. Let me close us formally, here, and we will retire until tomorrow. Session closed... *cough* It is July nineteenth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, session one hundred and ninety-nine, section A-5. Closing the current session, motions have been addressed, we will retire until July twentieth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, we will restart at 10 am on the stated date, with session two hundred, beginning with section A-1. We are closed, thank you, senators.

[Zamastan]

Congressional Hall
Public Transcripts Records

July 20th, 2019

108 Session 200: A3

GUN VIOLENCE: WE NEED TO DO BETTER; Congressional Record Vol. 108, No. 200, A3

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER, FOLEY SAKZI*: “This is the third floor proceeding of the day. It is July twentieth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, session two hundred, section A-3. I have been given the subject entitled Gun Violence, colon we need to do better, submitted by the Senator from Redeemer’s Land, District 4. I’m giving Senator Boone a minute to discuss, please quiet in the chamber, Mister Boone, you may proceed.”

*SENATOR KEANAN BOONE*: “Mister Speaker, a few days ago, we voted on a resolution for improved gun control measures. It is the first gun control measure we have taken up in years. It is progress, but we still have so far to go. There are so many lives that have been taken from too many communities.

On April 16 in Garretsville, Pahl, that was the community where a man with a gun took five innocent lives: Trevor Gurn, Jared Clayton, Markilun Yurritan, Russell Granterso, and Josh Killianu.

They were fathers, brothers, sons, uncles, friends, and they joined a
long line of Zamastanians who have been going about their daily lives and
got killed.

Here is what is really sickening: Most of the Members of this body don't even know their names. A week from now, you are going to forget their names, and you are going to replace them with another set of names, not because they don't deserve to be remembered, but because every day in Zamastan, 20 people get shot.

Can we remember all their names? I can't. And shame on us for allowing that to happen.

Occasionally, one of those shootings captures our attention, and we offer some thoughts and prayers. Leave that to families. Leave that to people of faith. We are lawmakers. Our job is to write the laws, fix the laws.

If we took 100 million guns off the street tomorrow, we would still
have a sizable collection of guns that ranks more than most countries in the International Democratic Union. We need to do more. Thank you, Mister Speaker.

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER, FOLEY SAKZI*: Thank you, Mister Boone. I would like to point out that, yes, we did pass the referendum with a resounding yes, 91-8-1, to be exact, and I understand your appeal and emotion as genuine. I certainly hope it is genuine, Mr. Senator. I will divert three minutes to the Senator from Jade’s 19th, Senator Li, you have the floor.

*SENATOR BRAD LI*: Mister Speaker, the liberal push for gun control is admirable and commendable, but what Senator Boone fails to note in his address, however sympathetic and moving, is that his proposed legislation has endangered more Zamastanians with its push for more and more gun control.

By definition, criminals don't follow the law. Criminals don't honor gun laws. They steal. They commit murder, all sorts of crimes without permission. They don't seek permission when they take something from you, when they enter your home.

They don't seek permission to become gun owners. Yet, what happens here in the legislation this week, limits the rights, limits the ability for people to defend themselves, defend their own homes, defend their own families, by having less options or less ability to get a weapon if they need it, especially timely.

These measures do not work. They do not work to stop the shootings that are often cited as the reason to deny people their rights in this country.

Indeed, it is a political agenda that gets pushed in every election, every possible time in legislation, and finally, with the majority they have, they are able to push this stuff through and harm innocent Zamastanians and their ability to defend themselves. I would also like to mention that though, yes, this year has had an increase in gun violence, we are still in the midst of the lowest recorded levels of gun violence in fifty years.

This has to come to a stop. I hope the Senate will defeat Boone’s proposed measure, which he failed to mention is up for vote in the coming weeks.

[Zamastan]

Congressional Hall
Public Transcripts Records

July 20th, 2019

108 Session 200: A5

INTRODUCTION AND VOTE OF THE NATIONAL FREIGHT NETWORK TRUST FUND ACT OF 2019; Congressional Record Vol. 108, No. 200, A5

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER, FOLEY SAKZI*: “It is July twentieth, the year two-thousand and nineteen, session two hundred, section A-5. I would like to begin our last proceeding of the day. Senator from Northern Isle District 13 is recognized. You have the floor, Mister Higgobaum.

*SENATOR AUSTIN HIGGOBAUM*: “Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the National Freight Network Trust Fund Act of 2019 along with my Co-Chair of the bipartisan Congressional Ports Caucus Chadwick. This legislation will provide a guaranteed dedicated funding source, at no additional expense to taxpayers, to serve our nations freight movement.

The Port of Lower Tariel is in my backyard and when I came to Congress, I was surprised that there was a lack of focus on ports and freight transportation in general. One of the reasons I co-founded the Ports Caucus is to educate Members about the importance of freight transportation to our nation's economy.

We are a consumer economy. Whether it is a ``mom and pop'' store on the corner or a large retailer like Fonnaden Market, we don't think twice when we go to these stores to purchase groceries, toys, or clothing. When we go to the store, we expect that milk and the Barbie dolls are on the shelf.

We also want to ensure that goods Made in Zamastan--including manufacturing and agriculture--are able to be shipped efficiently across our nation's highways and rail to our ports for export, which is crucial to our nation's continued economic success.

Ultimately, in MAP-21--our last surface transportation bill--we were successful in including provisions to start the conversation about developing a national freight transportation network.

The problem is that today there are not enough funds to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent--let alone make the necessary investment to modernize and increase the efficiency of our freight network. That will not keep our economy global competitive as we continue progressing through the 21st Century.

For example, goods that leave the Port of Lower Tariel take 24 hours to arrive in Tofino and takes 30 hours to travel across the city. This bottleneck is unacceptable and means higher costs for consumers, more congestion, more pollution, and less jobs. The bottom line is that we need to fund our nation's freight network.

If we fail to fund our ports, we will lose our competitive edge and add costs to our goods. A ZADOT report, Freight Transportation: Improvements and the Economy, estimates the cost of carrying freight on the highway system at between Z$25 and Z$200 an hour. Unexpected delays can increase the cost of transporting goods by 50 to 250 percent.

To keep our nation's freight network globally competitive, I am introducing the National Freight Network Trust Fund Act of 2019, which would create a dedicated source of funding for essential projects to improve and modernize our freight network at no new cost to the public. This legislation would create a National Freight Network Trust Fund and deposit 5% of all import duties collected by Customs and Border Protection (ZCBP) at Ports of Entry into the Fund to be spent only on freight transportation. Neither businesses nor taxpayers would incur any new cost because it uses a small percentage of funds our CBP officials already are collecting at the border as freight enters our nation.

Five percent of import duties amounts to roughly Z$2 billion in the Trust Fund every year at our current rate of imports, a level that would help address the nation's infrastructure funding deficit and allow us to make essential investments in the freight network.

This legislation would create the National Freight Network Trust Fund as an off-budget trust fund to only serve the roads of the National Freight Network and those roads and rail that connect the Network to Ports of Entry.

The legislation would also direct the Secretary of Transportation to work in accordance with the National Freight Strategic Plan to identify improvements to the National Freight Network, on-dock rail, and roads and rail that connect the Network to Ports of Entry, which show the greatest need in providing for the movement of freight and goods across Zamastan. It would also provide grants at the Secretary's discretion to State, regional and local transportation authorities to make freight network improvements.

This bill will infuse billions back into the economy every year, help create good paying Zamastanian jobs and keep our nation's ports strong and globally competitive.

This is a win for our ports and for our nation's economy. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I also believe, Mister Speaker, that if we pass this now, it will benefit immediately to be on the President’s signatory list.

Cloture Motion

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI* Thank you, Senator, I put this bill to motion. Pursuant to rule XIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I the Speaker lay before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will report.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 42, S. 918, a bill to amend the
Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to
reauthorize that act, and for other purposes.
AUSTIN HIGGOBAUM, AYOMIDE CHADWICK

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived.

The question is, is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S. 918, the NATIONAL FREIGHT NETWORK TRUST FUND ACT OF 2019 to pass that act, and for other purposes, the debate shall be brought to a close?

The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.

The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll.

The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 85, nays 12, abstentions 3 as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 98 Leg.]

YEAS—85, NAYS-12

*SPEAKER OF THE CHAMBER FOLEY SAKZI*: On this vote, the yeas are 85, the nays are 12, and abstentions are 3. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, the motion is adopted. Please bring the document forward, I’ll sign for Congressional Approval.

[Zamastan]

Congressional Hall
Public Transcripts Records

July 22nd, 2019

108 Session 202: C4

HON. Senator Preiane Peece

of Jade 10

in the Senate

Monday, July 22, 2019

______

*SENATOR PREIANE PREECE [BCP]*: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a great Zamastanian, a self-made man, a son of immigrants and founder of an agricultural colossus--Virlio J. Quinnon , who passed away on May 9, 2019 in Tofino at the age of 91.

Virlio’s father John left Lauchenoiria on the eve of the First Lauchenoirian Civil War as the nation teetered toward dissolution. In Zian, John married Mary, another Lauchenoirian emigre, and found in the Rillian Valley the familiar arid climate and rich soils of his homeland. On a small farm outside Porterville the Quinnon’s raised grapes and children too, two sons and three daughters by 1940. Virlio came first in 1923, and after attending high school in Durban, he left the valley for the University of Southern Zian.

The Tariel War swept Virlio into the Zamastanian Army and across the border to the plains of Gladysynthia. Returning in 1977 to Delano, Zian, Virlio married Margaret Durr and co-founded Jasmine Vineyards with his cousin Vincent. The farm marked the beginning of Virlio’s rise in the table grape industry just as it began to take off. In 1981, production stood at 450 thousand tons. By 2003, output had swollen to 730 thousand tons as aggressive marketing more than doubled domestic per capita consumption.

It was not an easy accomplishment. Facing weak demand in the late 1980s, Virlio convinced his fellow growers to pool their resources and press the Zian legislature to pass the Purr’s Yard Act, which elevated the table grape industry to parity with Zian's other agricultural commodities. Martin--who at various times chaired the South Central Farmers Committee, the Zian Fresh Fruit Association, and the Delano Grape Growers Products to promote and expand the market--accompanied the Zian Table Grape Commission he helped found on its first international trade mission to Laeral in 1983.

As a staunch conservative with a firm belief in individual enterprise and market economics, Virlio constantly pursued policies and goals on behalf of valley growers. His work ethic went hand in hand with his philanthropy; Virlio was one of the original founders of the Zian State University Arinals and a board member of Grace Mercy Hospital.

Virlio is survived by his wife, Margaret, and their three children: Katina, Sonya and Jon. Today, Virlio’s family operates his vineyards with the same hard work and discipline he personified so well. The Rillian Valley has lost one of its champions, formidable and tireless, another of those citizens for whom the greatest generation was named. On behalf of our community, I ask my colleagues to join me in remembering the life and legacy of Virlio Quinnon, and offering our condolences to his family.

[Zamastan]

---

[/hr]Zamastan | World - IDU | Politics | Economy | Opinion

---

[/hr]
The Tofino Times - CONGRESSIONAL HALL EDITION
Click Here to Visit The Tofino Times Website
[color=#800040]Saturday, July 27th, 2019

---

[/hr]VOL. XXXII .. Num. 5607

---

[/hr]

Presidential Hopeful Shuana Lultquist's Interview Transcript

Former Speaker of the Chamber, Shuana Lultquist, is running for President. She sat down on Friday night with Max Samhill to discuss her presidential campaign, military spending, tax cuts, and Former-President Castovia. The following is a complete transcript:

SAMHILL: Welcome back to The Tofino Times Public Broadcasting. I'm Jake Samhill.

She was a young politician whose speech to the Libertarian National Convention raised speculation that maybe he would run for president someday. That was 1993, and the next year, she became the first black Speaker of the Chamber. Since then, she’s been an activist, a businesswoman, and it turns out, she is running for president, now, for 2020.

Libertarian presidential candidate Speaker Shuana Lultquist joins me now.

Speaker Lultquist, thanks for joining us.

LULTQUIST: Good morning.

SAMHILL: For weeks now, the Liberal Party has said that President Bishop needed to open -- open the signatory, reopen the signatory, in order to then allow negotiations on education funding.

As you know, the signatory is now open. You said on Wednesday that -- quote -- "Everybody should work to keep the signatory open." How far do you think Liberals and Libertarians and Progressives should go to be willing to give President Bishop at least some money for military spending, including money for an aircraft carrier or a fighter program, as part of negotiations?

LULTQUIST: Well, as you know, Jake, the Chamber, Conservative and Liberal, Progressive, exedra, has made clear that they're willing to negotiate on investing in additional funds for security. In fact, they did that in the legislation that they passed earlier this month. I think the difference here is the focus.

What the liberals are opposed to is an unnecessary investment. There are better ways that we can ensure that we have a nation that is completely secure without adding a fourth aircraft carrier to our fleet.

And, by the way, as many people have pointed out, in many ways, our nation is more secure today than ever. But there are investments that we can make in additional personnel at the border, in technology so that we can better monitor what's coming through ports of entry. And we can better secure those ports of entry.

SAMHILL: Mm-hmm.

LULTQUIST: Blackwater said this the other day. He laid out where they're willing to negotiate.

So my hope...

SAMHILL: Right.

LULTQUIST: ... is that we're not going to get back into this situation on August 15 where you have 800,000 families that don't get a paycheck.

SAMHILL: Right.

Earlier this month, Speaker of the Chamber Sakzi said that the increase was -- quote -- "immoral." As you know, as you just stated, there are already three aircraft carriers in our fleet. Are they immoral?

LULTQUIST: Well, I don't think it represents the best of what Zamastan stands for.

I think -- I believe that if we were to build the kind of buildup that Bishop is talking about -- and, admittedly, as you know, sometimes, that's hard to figure out, because, some days, she says it's a necessity to our safety, which I commend her for her concern, but I believe, fundamentally, that if we were to build that fourth carrier, that it would change the notion of Zamastan from the idea that stands for freedom and welcomes immigrants to a country that walls itself off from the rest of the world.

And maybe that wouldn't make much of a difference on day one when we do that, but I believe that, as years go by, it would change how we see ourselves as Zamastanians and how others see us and have a real impact on who we are. And that's not a path that we want to go down.

So, yes, I agree that to do so would be immoral. A fourth aircraft carrier – by the way – the third one isn’t even completed yet. The ZMS Upham and ZMS Redeemer are active, and the third – the Clift – is still under construction. Let’s wait until that one is finished to put an additional ten billion dollars into a fourth.

SAMHILL: I don't want to spend the whole time talking about the navy.

But if there are already 3 aircraft carriers, why would adding another change the nation of -- notion of this nation any more than -- I mean, we already have that. Why -- why would adding any more change who we are?

LULTQUIST: You know, I would say two things, number one, that that 3 aircraft carriers were built out some time ago, and that was built out when the technology to be able to monitor what is happening overseas and it was not what it is today.

In other words, that's an old style of doing things. And we have a more effective way without that kind of barrier to do it.

The other argument that people have made that I believe is true is that we have addressed where we might -- where you might argue that, OK, you need a physical structure, a physical barrier, well, that was addressed in those 3 ships. And that's not the case for the rest.

SAMHILL: Let's move on to your presidential campaign.

You have laid out a very ambitious agenda. It includes a new climate change effective deal. It includes a brand new health care for all system. Obviously, you will need to raise revenue to fund some of these priorities.

If you were elected president, would you undo the conservative tax cut law and raise the corporate tax rate back up from 21 percent to 35 percent?

LULTQUIST: I absolutely would look at undoing several tax cuts that benefited the super wealthy and benefited corporations, but I believe in keeping some of the cuts for those who have recorded thorough and in-depth returns that show a degree of monetary gain. We also -- as you know, Jake, we are going to have to look at other things, other ways of raising revenue. But I have said very clearly that I believe that it's worth it. I believe that, in this nation, quickly on track to becoming the wealthiest nation on Earth, there is no reason that anybody should go without health care when they need it.

And I'm under no illusion that that's going to be easy. And during the course of this campaign, I look forward to putting forth a plan on how we'd pay for that, because I do think that Zamastanians deserve to know from candidates for president how they are going to do that, even though I will point out, as you all have seen, that Anya Bishop went through an entire presidential cycle, not only not releasing her tax returns until a few months ago...

SAMHILL: Yes.

LULTQUIST: ... but never telling the Zamastanian people how she was going to pay for anything or what his plans were. I think that we need to do better than that. And, during the course of this campaign, we will.

SAMHILL: You said earlier this month that you want top earners to pay more in taxes.

And you pointed to the top marginal tax rate during the Tariel War. It used to be 94 percent, the marginal tax rate. Just to clarify for people, that's not 94 percent of the income taxed. It's just the top rate, the top amount that individuals...

(CROSSTALK)

LULTQUIST: Thank you for pointing that out.

SAMHILL: Well, I just want to make sure people understand that.

LULTQUIST: Yes. I mean, you must point that out...

SAMHILL: Right.

LULTQUIST: ... because people often make that mistake.

They think, well, if somebody is making Z$5 million, suddenly -- Z$10 million or 50...

SAMHILL: Yes.

LULTQUIST: ... they are suddenly going to -- all of their income is -- you get taxed at...

SAMHILL: Right.

LULTQUIST: That's not true. That's a marginal tax rate, the top tax rate.

SAMHILL: But would you -- would you support it, raising it to the -- the top marginal tax rate to that level, more than 90 percent?

LULTQUIST: I would say this, that I support raising it. I think that we would have to negotiate on where that goes. I would not refuse raising it, but not as much as the liberal party wants. More than the conservatives, less than the liberals.

SAMHILL: In the middle?

LULTQUIST: That’s a given. (laughter) We’ll have to see, but I can guarantee it won’t be as high as Blackwater’s proposal.

I also think that it was very telling that, after Gunn mentioned the idea that perhaps the marginal tax rate could be as high as 70 percent, because it used to be -- in fact, if you think about it, Anya Bishop often says that she wants to make Zamastan better, which means we want to go backward.

I don't believe in going backward. I want to go forward. But if you did go backward, you would go right into a time where the marginal tax rate was higher. They did a poll. And 45 percent of conservatives said that they believe the idea of that kind of top marginal tax rate was a good idea. So, I believe that we should increase it. Now, where it goes to, I think that would be a subject of negotiation.

SAMHILL: Mm-hmm.

I want to ask you about Former President Castovia, who says this weekend he's seriously exploring a self-funded independent bid for president. He told The Tofino Times that he thinks both parties are engaged in what he called revenge politics and not acting in the interest of the Zamastanian people.

Do you have any concerns that a very wealthy independent, as well as a person who has already held office, with a message like Castovia’s could play spoiler in 2020?

LULTQUIST: Well, you know, first, I would say that I have tremendous respect for President Zacharias Castovia.

When I was Speaker, I had an opportunity to visit with his father, and he was obviously young at that point, but I know that, you know, he's done some impressive things in business. Obviously, if he runs, it's going to make an impression on the race.

But I do share that concern. I have a concern that, if he did run, that, essentially, it would provide Bishop with her best hope of getting reelected.

SAMHILL: You think if the former President runs, that’ll give Bishop an advantage?

LULTQUIST: Yes, because-

SAMHILL: President Bishop is polling third right now behind Speaker Sakzi and Speaker Blackwater.

LULTQUIST: Well, here’s what I mean. Just the other day, there was a fairly comprehensive poll taken that showed, essentially, right now, that the president has a ceiling of about 31 percent or 32 percent in terms of support for her, no matter which candidate they polled against Bishop.

So her only hope, if things stayed the same -- and that's a big if -- is essentially to get somebody else, a outside, non-party member, to siphon off those votes. And I don't think that that would be in the best interest of our country. We need new leadership.

And so, you know, I would suggest to Mr. Castovia to truly think about the negative impact that that might make.

The only other thing I will say about that is that we can't both-sides this to death. It's not -- yes, I agree that there are things that conservatives and liberals do need to improve upon, but there's a real difference between any of the folks who have said that they want to run on the liberal side and Anya Bishop.

I mean, that's become so clear. So, it's not all the same thing.

SAMHILL: All right, Speaker Shuana Lultquist, we hope we will have you on back -- back again sometime, talking more about the issues.

Thanks for joining us today.

LULTQUIST: Thank you.

See full article here: https://zkcastor.wixsite.com/mysite-1/po...transcript