-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SANDERS. Senator Lee raises important issues about the deficit. I hope very much that he will be able to convince his Republican colleagues and Democratic colleagues as well that, among many other reasons, we should vote against this major corporate welfare bill that is coming down the pike, which will add at least $76 billion to the deficit. So if we are concerned about the deficit, as Senator Lee is and many others are, I hope that will be one of the reasons we vote against this massive corporate welfare bill that we will be considering later this afternoon.

I hear a lot of concern about the deficit here in the Senate, and I hear people say: We can't afford to feed hungry children. We can't afford to deal with climate change. We can't afford to guarantee healthcare to all. The deficit is very, very large.

Well, we are talking about $76 billion--at least that; maybe more-- which will add to the deficit. So when you consider the deficit, you might want to also take into account tax breaks and corporate welfare for large, profitable corporations.

I want to say a few words about this so-called chips bill and what it says about our national priorities, what it says about our tax policies, and basically what it says as to whether or not the U.S. Congress is capable of representing the needs of working families or whether we are totally beholden to wealthy and powerful corporate interests and their campaign contributions.

Last week, when I spoke about this issue, I expressed deep concern that Congress would provide $52 billion to a handful of profitable corporations in the microchip industry with no strings attached. Here it is, guys, $52 billion. Well, I stand corrected. As a result of some new tax-reduction language, the corporate welfare total for the microchip industry has gone up; it is now at $76 billion. And the corporate lobbyists working on this bill, like pigs at the trough, are not yet finished. They want more and more and more. Their needs are insatiable.

Needless to say, I do not usually quote approvingly from the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal. They are not my best friends. In fact, I think I get attacked on that page more than any other Member of the Congress. But, as you know, a broken clock is right twice a day, and even the Wall Street Journal got this one right.

Among the many reasons they urged Congress to vote against this bill is one that I think is very relevant. Let me quote. This is from the Wall Street Journal editorial page today:

The chip bill isn't needed to compete with China, and it will set a precedent that other industries will follow. Anybody who can throw up a China competition angle will ask for money. Why Republicans want to sign up for this is a mystery.

The Wall Street Journal. The point they make is a good one. We should be clear that over 90 percent of the cell phones used in this country and over 90 percent of the laptops used in this country are made in China.

So you pass this bill, and tomorrow we will hear, no doubt, from the cell phone industry, from the computer laptop industry about how they need their welfare checks as well. So I think the Wall Street Journal every once in a while makes a good point, and today they did.

Mr. President, I recently came across a very, very interesting interview that the CEO of Intel, Mr. Pat Gelsinger, did last Friday on CNBC's ``Squawk Box,'' and I think in that interview he did tell us everything we want to know about the American oligarchy, about corporate arrogance, and the state of American politics. This is what Mr. Gelsinger said last Friday--Mr. Gelsinger, head of Intel:

My message to congressional leaders is, hey, if I'm not done with the job, I don't get to go home. Neither should you.

He is talking to Congress.

Do not go home for August recess until you have passed the CHIPS Act because I and others in the industry will make investment decisions, and do you want those investments in the U.S., or are we simply not competitive enough to do them here and we need to go to Europe or Asia for those? Get the job done. Do not go home for August recess without getting these bills passed.

That is Pat Gelsinger, head of Intel, last Friday.

In other words, Mr. President, the CEO of a major corporation which made nearly $20 billion in profits last year and a CEO who received a $179 million compensation package is saying to Congress that if you don't give my industry, the microchip industry, $76 billion and my company, it is estimated, some $20- or $30 billion, that despite their profound love for our country and their respect for American workers and their understanding of the needs of the U.S. military and the healthcare industry--despite all of that, in order to make more profits, they are prepared to go to Europe and Asia.

Now, Mr. President, I am, thankfully, not a lawyer, but that sure sounds like extortion to me. What Mr. Gelsinger is saying is that if you don't give the industry a blank check--here is $76 billion--and they want more, by the way--despite the needs of the military for advanced microchips--and we hear that from the military--despite the needs of the medical industry for advanced microchips, despite the entire needs of the American economy for advanced microchips, the industry is threatening to abandon this country and move abroad. Patriotic people, no doubt. Clearly, lovers of America.

Mr. Gelsinger says we should stay in session, if necessary, through August in order to pass his legislation. Well, I think we might want to stay in session through August but not necessarily to pass his legislation, because what I hear from the people in Vermont and people all across this country is that the job they want done is not a massive handout to large, profitable corporations; the job they want Congress to do is, for a change, to protect the American working class, our middle class, and the needs of the most vulnerable people in this country.

What I hear is that the American people want us to guarantee healthcare to every man, woman, and child, as every other major country on Earth does.

What I hear is that the American people think it is absurd that some of the wealthiest people in this country and largest corporations don't pay a nickel in Federal taxes and that we should demand that those loopholes be ended.

What I hear is that the American people want us to deal with the existential threat of climate change so that the young people of this country can actually have a planet they can grow up with in a healthy way.

What I hear from the elderly people in this country, in my State, is they can't make it on the Social Security benefits they are receiving now; they want to raise those benefits.

What I hear from the people back home is they want Congress to do the job and protect a woman's right to control her own body, they want to see us pass serious gun safety legislation, and they want to protect the rights of all Americans to be able to vote.

That, among many other things, is what I hear from the American people in terms of getting the job done. Not too many people that I can recall--I have been all over this country--say: Bernie, you go back there and you get the job done, and you give enormously profitable corporations, which pay outrageous compensation packages to their CEOs, billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare.

Now, maybe, Mr. President, you hear that. I don't hear that from the people in my State.

By the way, when we talk about an expenditure of $76 billion, yeah, we can give it to some large, profitable corporation with no strings attached or we can use it--$76 billion--to expand Medicare, to provide senior citizens with the high-quality hearing aids and eyeglasses they desperately need, and for a bit more, we can provide dental care as well.

For $76 billion, we could eliminate homelessness in America and create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs from Maine to California, building all of the affordable rental units that this country desperately needs. We can end homelessness or give a corporate welfare check to profitable corporations.

Mr. President, for $76 billion, we could make every community college in America tuition-free for the next 7 years. Go home and ask the people whether they think they would rather spend money on allowing our young people to be able to go to community college tuition-free or a welfare check to large, profitable corporations.

And on and on it goes. Seventy-six billion is a lot of money. I know Senator Lee would probably prefer to see that go into deficit reduction. Fair enough. And I am concerned about deficit reduction, but I am making the point that we can invest this in a way that really improves lives for millions and millions of working families.

Mr. President, there is no doubt that there is a serious global shortage in microchips and semiconductors, which is making it harder for manufacturers to produce the cars, the cell phones, and the electronic equipment we need. This shortage is costing American workers good jobs and raising prices for families, and that is why I strongly support efforts to expand U.S. microchip production. But the question we should be asking is this: Should the American taxpayers provide the microchip industry with a blank check of $76 billion at a time when semiconductor companies are making tens of billions of dollars a year in profits and paying their CEOs very high salaries and compensation packages? I think the answer to that is a resounding no.

It is important, in light of Mr. Gelsinger's remarks and his threat to go to Asia or to Europe, to have a little bit of history about this issue. Over the last 20 years, the microchip industry has shut down over 780 manufacturing plants in the United States and eliminated 150,000 American jobs while moving most of its production overseas. They did that, by the way, after receiving $9.5 billion in government subsidies and loans.

In other words, we have the absurd situation where we have a crisis that is caused precisely by the people we are now attempting to bail out. So as a reward for their bad behavior, for shutting down 780 manufacturing establishments in America, they come back and say: Oh, we have a crisis in America. We need your help.

So they want us to pay to undo the damage they caused. Well, that may make sense to someone but not to me.

In total, Mr. President, it has been estimated that five major semiconductor companies will receive the lion's share of this technology handout. Those companies are Intel, Texas Instruments, Micron Technology, GlobalFoundries, and Samsung. These five companies made $70 billion in profits last year.

The company that will likely benefit the most from this taxpayer assistance is Mr. Gelsinger's company, Intel. Now, I have nothing against Intel, and I wish them the best, but Intel is not a poor company. Last year, Intel made nearly $20 billion in profits. During the pandemic, Intel had enough money to spend $16.6 billion not on research and development, not on building new plants, but on buying back its own stock to reward its executives and wealthy shareholders.

Over the past 20 years, Intel has spent over $100 million on lobbying and campaign contributions. So $100 million may seem like a lot of money, but if you are about to get $20 billion from the taxpayers of America, that is a very modest investment. Meanwhile, while they spent $100 million on lobbying and campaign contributions, they were shipping thousands of jobs to China and other low-income countries. Does this really sound like a company that needs a taxpayer handout?

Another company that would receive taxpayer assistance under this legislation is Texas Instruments. Last year, Texas Instruments made $7.8 billion in profits. In 2020, the company spent $2.5 billion buying back its own stock.

Meanwhile, other companies that will receive taxpayer support are the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company--and by the way, you would be shocked to know that the largest shareholder of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company is--well, you guessed it; it is the Government of Taiwan. So we would be giving money, I guess, directly to the Government of Taiwan. And on and on it goes.

Mr. President, I should be clear in stating that I do believe in industrial policy. I think that at times it is absolutely appropriate for the government to sit down with the private sector and say: Look, we have needs, and we want to work with you to solve those needs. You have a right to make a fair profit. We have the need--the right to see the needs of the American people addressed. We need a partnership.

To me, industrial policy means cooperation between the government and the private sector--cooperation. It does not mean the government providing massive amounts of corporate welfare to profitable corporations without getting anything in return.

So the question is, Will the U.S. Government develop an industrial policy that benefits all of our society or will we continue to have an industrial policy that benefits the wealthy, the powerful, their lobbyists, and the campaign contributors?

In 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said:

The problem is that we all too often have socialism for the rich and rugged free enterprise capitalism for the poor.

I am afraid that what Dr. King said 54 years ago was accurate back then and is even more accurate today.

So, Mr. President, the Senate has an important decision to make, and that is, do we simply provide a blank check or do we put some restrictions on that money? That is why I will be offering an amendment which does that.

It seems to me that if private companies are going to benefit from generous taxpayer subsidies, the financial gains made by these companies must be shared with the American people, not just wealthy shareholders. In other words, if microchip companies make a profit as a direct result of these Federal grants, the taxpayers of this country have a right to get a reasonable turn on that investment.

Further, if microchip companies receive taxpayer assistance, they must agree that they will not buy back their own stock, outsource American jobs overseas, repeal existing collective bargaining agreements, and must remain neutral in any union-organizing effort.

This is not a radical idea. All of these conditions were imposed on companies that received taxpayer assistance during the pandemic and passed the Senate in the CARES Act by a vote of 96 to 0. That is why I will be filing an amendment to impose these conditions to this legislation.

I understand that some language has been inserted into this bill that would prohibit microchip companies from using these grants to buy back their own stock. Let us be clear: This language is totally meaningless. Under this legislation, companies will still be able to use the enormous profits that they are making on stock buybacks.

Bottom line: Let us rebuild the U.S. microchip industry, but let us do it in a way that benefits all of our people, not just a handful of wealthy profitable and powerful corporations.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SANDERS. Let me suggest to my friend from Utah that I agree with a lot of what he said about this legislation that we are going to be voting on within the hour.

I would simply add that while this bill has had many names--lately, they call it the chips bill; it has also been called the China bill and so forth--but theoretically, it is supposed to be competing against China.

But I would point out that since 2005, Intel has invested at least $700 million in Chinese technology companies, including at least four microchip startups. In 2020, 2 years ago, Intel invested in two Chinese semiconductor startups, ProPlus and Spectrum Materials, as part of a $132 million investment in 11 startups, including 3 in China. So we are investing, ostensibly to protect us from China, in a company that, in fact, invests in China.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source