Despite some tweaks to the original text produced by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act continues to represent an assault on the Fourth Amendment. The Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of our constitutional republic, and crucial to defending the civil liberties of all American citizens. FISA has caused damage to the Fourth Amendment for years, and now is a critical time to support genuine reform, such as the USA RIGHTS Act. The revised version of the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act remains the exact opposite of reform, and it is worse than current law. The bill would continue the backdoor search, with an utterly meaningless “warrant requirement.” The caveats proposed to this purported “warrant requirement” are an end-run around the Fourth Amendment. The bill provides a path for the National Security Agency (NSA) to restart the practice of “abouts” collection. This means if a U.S. person mentions a potential surveillance target in a communication, the NSA can collect it, regardless of whether or not the U.S. person was communicating with anyone associated with the target.

This vote is for cloture on the Bipartisan Budget Act. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had offered an amendment to restore the original spending caps under the Budget Control Act. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) "filled the tree," refusing to allow amendments. A vote for cloture is essentially a vote not to allow amendments.

The Schumer-McConnell spending deal, the Bipartisan Budget Act, is the worst-case scenario for fiscal conservatives under a Democratic president and Democrat-controlled Congress, but it is happening under a Republican president and Republican Congress. This is reckless spending, and a massive tax hike on future generations, made under the guise of “bipartisan negotiations.” This is deceitful, aggressive overspending by those elected to protect taxpayers. Leaving Americans with higher budget deficits likely over $1 trillion, and a national debt that will balloon to over $21 trillion, is no way to govern, and its weight falls squarely on the shoulders of taxpayers. This deal makes clear that Republicans only care about deficits and out-of-control federal spending under a Democratic president. With a Republican president and Republican control of the House and Senate, there is no other conclusion that one can possibly draw.

Russ Vought's nomination had been stalled by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who sought to leverage his obstruction of the nomination in exchange for more emergency supplemental funding for his home state. Vought's credentials to serve in this important post, which handles budget and regulatory policy for the White House, were never in question. Democrats opposed Vought's nomination over issues that have nothing to do with his ability to serve as deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act would provide targeted relief in the banking industry from onerous regulatory overreach into the financial sector created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly known as “Dodd-Frank.” Initially passed in response to the recession of 2008, Dodd-Frank created a series of reforms that were supposed to address the issues in the financial sector that had supposedly caused the recession, but instead created a climate of overregulation, authorized the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) with little to no oversight, and gave the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) the authority to label financial firms as too big to fail.

The Federal Reserve Transparency Act instructs the Comptroller General of the United States, who serves as the director of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to complete an audit of the Federal Reserve within 12 months of its enactment. A report of the findings of the audit would be required within 90 days of its completion. The bill would require the Federal Reserve to provide information to the GAO, currently excluded from audits under 31 USC 714(b), including discussions between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department, as well as transactions with foreign banks. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote.

The CREATES Act would grant relief in court for generic and biosimilar competitors seeking FDA approval. This would clear the pathway for new drugs to enter the market, drastically reducing prices through increased competition. The cost savings stemming from this legislation could reach between 15 percent and 50 percent of current prices for impacted drugs. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote.

The REINS Act would require congressional approval for economically significant rules promulgated by federal regulatory agencies. Under the REINS Act, the House and Senate would have to vote on a proposed rule and the president would have to sign it before enforcement of the rule can begin. The bill would give Congress 70 days to pass a resolution to approve a rule. If a resolution is not passed, the rule cannot take effect. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote.

The Earmark Elimination Act would make permanent the temporary moratorium on congressional earmarks put into effect in 2010 by creating a point of order against any provision within a bill that matches the definition of an earmark, and when raised would be stricken absent a two-thirds majority to override. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote.

The CBO Show Your Work Act would require the Congressional Budget Office to make the models and data employed to produce its analyses and cost estimates, as well as any details that were used, available to Congress and on the agency’s website. This much-needed transparency will allow interested parties outside of Congress to hold the CBO accountable. Should Leader McConnell bring this bill to the floor, FreedomWorks will substitute the cosponsor key vote for the roll call vote.

Altogether, the bill spends nearly $1.3 trillion in discretionary funds – $700 billion for defense, and $591 billion for non-defense – for fiscal year 2018 alone. These appropriations would bring us back to Obama-era trillion-dollar yearly deficits, and balloon our national debt to nearly $22 trillion. This level of spending for a unified Republican government is unacceptable and breaks the promises of every Republican member who ran on a platform of defending taxpayers, spending responsibly, and reigning in the size of government.

Between his time as an aviator in the United States Navy, his firsthand experience serving as the executive director of the Tulsa Air and Space Museum and Planetarium, and his work in Congress, Bridenstine is extraordinarily qualified for the role of NASA administrator. In this role at NASA, Bridenstine will have the ability to bring much-needed reform to the agency, implementing the same principles of free markets and government efficiency that he tirelessly fought for in Congress. Serving on the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Bridenstine became a champion of issues pertaining to air and space exploration.

The passage of this CRA would do nothing to change the prohibition against discrimination in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act that the guidance cites. It would simply roll back the gross regulatory overreach of the CFPB in claiming for itself -- behind closed doors and a screen of smoke -- a power that Congress, in the law that created the CFPB, explicitly banned the CFPB from having. As Sen. Moran said, the CFPB “had to work its magic to find a way to regulate auto dealers.” Good governing is done through accountable and transparent processes, not magic.

S.J.Res. 52 would undo the Restoring Internet Freedom Order and reinstate the Obama administration’s Internet red tape. This will hurt tech companies, as well as consumers. Internet access is becoming vital to commerce, and many Americans still lack connectivity. In order to get service to these most vulnerable parts of the country, we need an Internet free of the meddling hand of government, so it can innovate and expand as it did for so many years before the Obama-era regulations took effect.

S.J.Res. 52 would undo the Restoring Internet Freedom Order and reinstate the Obama administration’s Internet red tape. This will hurt tech companies, as well as consumers. Internet access is becoming vital to commerce, and many Americans still lack connectivity. In order to get service to these most vulnerable parts of the country, we need an Internet free of the meddling hand of government, so it can innovate and expand as it did for so many years before the Obama-era regulations took effect.

Sen. Paul’s resolution would balance the federal budget in five years by assuming the repeal of the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act and from there cutting total outlays by one penny for every dollar spent, continuing for the next five years. At this point, the budget would be fully balanced and spending would be allowed to grow at one percent thereafter. Doing so would reduce spending by $404.8 billion in fiscal year 2019 and by $13.35 trillion over ten years relative to the baseline under current law.

Sen. Toomey’s amendment would apply the principles of the REINS Act to CFIUS to make sure Congress has a final say on these regulations. This will mean that only regulations that try to address truly predatory behavior will pass, while those that are unnecessary and anti-market will be stopped from taking effect. This was the intent of Congress when it authorized CFIUS and it should not abandon its ability to set policy in this way. Sen. Toomey’s amendment gives Congress this oversight.

Approving this initial $15 billion rescissions request in full -- pulling back funds sitting in useless accounts that can only otherwise be used to spend more in the future -- is a task that conservatives in Congress should wholeheartedly endorse. It is one of few opportunities to exercise any semblance of fiscal discipline. It is only one small step towards actually tackling Washington’s out-of-control spending addiction, but it represents a chance to begin this fight.

The Lee Amendment ensures that if the government wishes to making any such detention, that it have clear authorization to do so. The entire text of the Lee Amendment is consistent with the Constitution and with the prior Supreme Court cases that govern this issue. This amendment is narrow in scope, and will not hinder our counterterrorism efforts. This is merely to strengthen American citizens’ constitutional protections. The motion to table would kill this important provision.

This amendment would add work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. The Senate stripped out this pro-work provision from their version of the Farm Bill. Work requirements are important for helping people rise out of welfare and becoming independent of government assistance. A vote to table the Lee-Cruz Amendment would prevent them from being added back in to the Senate text.

The motion to instruct simply states: “[M]anagers on the part of the Senate at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 5895 be instructed to include language providing a role for Congress in making a determination under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862).” The administration has misused Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act to unilaterally impose tariffs – which are taxes – for purposes unrelated to national security. These tariffs threaten American consumers with higher prices and American businesses with retaliatory tariffs imposed by our trading partners.

This amendment, sponsored by sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) would reduce appropriations in the minibus by 11.39% across the board. This would result in cuts of $17.5 billion and would bring spending in line with the budget caps in place before passage of the Bipartisan Budget Act. Given that we are rapidly approaching a trillion dollar deficit, this is a necessary step to reining in government spending.

This amendment would prohibit funds from being used to carry out the District of Columbia’s recently-passed Health Insurance Requirement Act. The D.C. mandate states that a “taxpayer who fails to pay the District of Columbia shared responsibility payment imposed...shall be subject to all collection, enforcement, and administrative provisions applicable to unpaid taxes or fees, as provided in Chapter 18, Chapter 41, Chapter 42, Chapter 43, and Chapter 44 of this title.” When dissected fully, this includes levying and seizing property, or even imprisoning individuals for choosing not to purchase health insurance.

H.R. 6157 is more of the same profligate spending resulting from a broken budget process and members unwilling to stand up for their campaign promises of shrinking government and reducing spending. The bill appropriates $33 billion more for Defense than the FY 2018 omnibus and $16 billion more for Labor/HHS. It also includes a CR until December 7, setting up votes on a spending package during the lame-duck session that will almost certainly be packed with last-minute giveaways to special interests.

When it comes more broadly to the rampant expansion of the unconstitutional regulatory state, Judge Kavanaugh is perhaps second to none in standing up for the Constitution. According to Kavanaugh, if Congress hasn’t yet opined on a matter of deep economic significance, any regulation relating to that matter should be presumed unconstitutional. He recognizes that lawmaking, under Article I of the Constitution, was delegated to Congress, not unelected executive branch bureaucrats.

When it comes more broadly to the rampant expansion of the unconstitutional regulatory state, Judge Kavanaugh is perhaps second to none in standing up for the Constitution. According to Kavanaugh, if Congress hasn’t yet opined on a matter of deep economic significance, any regulation relating to that matter should be presumed unconstitutional. He recognizes that lawmaking, under Article I of the Constitution, was delegated to Congress, not unelected executive branch bureaucrats.

American taxpayers cannot afford to continue to use billions of dollars to prop up failing agri-businesses. The subsidies programs, as bloated and wasteful as they are now, will increase in cost by over one billion over the next ten years. This is inexcusable given our crushing national debt.

The resolution would simply reclaim Congress’ rightful and required Article I powers by mandating the removal of unauthorized U.S. armed forces from hostilities in or affecting the Republic of Yemen not later than 30 days after the adoption of the resolution, absent a declaration of war or specific authorization for engagement in such activities. In Yemen, the executive branch has very clearly gone a step too far. By providing mid-air refueling, targeting assistance, and intelligence sharing to the Saudi-led coalition in its bombing of the Houthis in Yemen, the U.S. is directly involved in the conflict. In no way connected to al-Qaeda or the Islamic State, U.S. military force against the Houthis remains unauthorized, falling outside of the scope of the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs. A power explicitly delegated to the deliberative bodies of Congress is being actively stripped from them, time and time again, even in an instance where the Department of Defense admits the unauthorized nature of the conflict. The people of the United States deserve to have their government respect the Constitution that protects our rights, and the men and women of our armed forces deserve to have their involvement in foreign conflicts vetted as statutorily and constitutionally mandated. The vote on the Yemen War Powers Resolution is a significant opportunity to affirm these basic principles.

The First Step Act would reform the federal criminal justice system to make our communities safer by reducing crime and focusing limited resources on the most dangerous offenders. By increasing access to and instituting incentives for inmate participation in recidivism reduction programming and by modestly modifying some sentencing laws, the First Step Act would provide much-needed changes to the federal criminal justice system. The bill would reform four areas of sentencing law by reforming 18 U.S.C. 924(c) stacking to clarify that enhancements for second and subsequent offenses are used only on those who are true recidivists, by tailoring 21 U.S.C. 841 to modify mandatory minimum sentence enhancements and those who they may apply to, by applying the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactively, and by expanding the existing federal safety valve for judges sentencing individuals with little to no criminal history.

This resolution of disapproval of the Congressional Review Act nullifies the Department of the Interior's Stream Protection Rule. With an annual estimated cost of $81 million, according to the Department of the Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, the Stream Protection Rule is another blow to the coal industry, which was a favorite target of the Obama administration. The National Mining Association estimates that rule will lead to billions of dollars in lost revenues to state and local governments, as well as the loss of between 113,000 and 280,000 jobs.

This resolution of disapproval of the Congressional Review Act nullifies the Securities and Exchange Commission's Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers rule. Promulgated under the authority of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank, this rule requires resource extraction issuers to include in annual reports the payment of any entity controlled by the regulated business to foreign governments or the United States government "for the purpose of the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals." The Securities and Exchange Commission projects initial compliance costs between $239 million and $700 million and annual compliance costs between $96 million and $591 million.

An orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Price, who has a lifetime 89 percent score with FreedomWorks, would bring a unique perspective to the Department of Health and Human Services that is desperately needed at a time when America's health care system is facing significant challenges. The Department of Health and Human Services was one of the federal agencies primarily responsible for the implementation of ObamaCare. HHS promulgated or approved rules developed by agencies it oversees, including rules that led to millions of health insurance policy cancellations and so-called “essential benefits” that have increased the cost of health insurance premiums for Americans. While the details of an ObamaCare replacement supported by the House and Senate Republican conferences are yet to be developed and introduced in legislative text, Dr. Price is the ideal individual to lead this effort in the Trump administration.

The Office of Management and Budget is the largest office working in the Executive Office of the President of the United States. As OMB director, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) would play a large role in preparing President Trump’s Budget, as well as evaluating the degree to which agency programs, policies, and procedures follow the president’s policies. With Rep. Mulvaney’s history of serious concern and constructive activity toward reining in Washington’s overspending, this nominee deserves our support to take Washington by the horns and fight for responsible spending levels at the federal level.

The EPA has become the most notorious offender in the unconstitutional fourth branch of government that we know as the regulatory state. It has promulgated rules and regulations, such as the Clean Power Plan, aimed at destroying an entire industry, hurting workers and their families. Under Scott Pruitt's leadership at the EPA, Americans will have safe air and water and protection from government overreach through rules and regulations. Pruitt is a staunch believer in federalism and Article I of the Constitution, which charges the legislative branch with the power to make laws, not executive-level regulatory agencies.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act nullifies a the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation. This regulation requires federal contractors to disclose decisions on the reporting of violations of federal labor laws and creates paycheck transparency protections for employees of federal contractors. The rule is expected to cost employers $458.3 million in the first year, $413.7 million in the second year, and between $398.5 million and $400 million annually thereafter.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, which gives Congress authority to effectively nullify regulations submitted for review by federal agencies within 60 legislative days, would cancel the Department of Education’s Accountability and State Plans Rule. The Department of Education’s Accountability and State Plans Rule implements part of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and leaves open a loophole that federal bureaucrats could exploit to force Common Core on states that haven't implemented the standards. Education officials from several states and local jurisdictions strongly opposed the rule when it was being crafted.

he resolution would prevent the FCC from implementing rules that dictate the way broadband Internet service providers handle their customers’ personal information. S.J.Res. 34 passed the Senate last week by a vote of 50 to 48. Although consumer data privacy is of significant concern to every American, the proper parties should address the issue. In this area, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has historically held authority on the establishment and enforcement of general online privacy rules. Since the FCC can only regulate a portion of the Internet sphere – service providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T – other Internet companies, namely websites like Facebook and Google, would escape any stringent data privacy rules enacted by the FCC. Creating more regulation in an uneven fashion would not only benefit certain companies in the industry by creating a clear advantage in digital advertising, it would also fail to achieve any consumer data protection purpose. In order to provide Americans with more robust and clearly defined protective measures, it is important to allow Congress and the FTC to set the rules in this sphere. Enabling other agencies to further restrict only a certain portion of an industry burdens privacy, progress, and business. It is important to move away from the Obama-era, regulatory induced system we have seen grow over the last eight years.

Our activist community drove more than 1.7 million messages to the Senate urging Members to preserve this important seat on the High Court for someone who respects the rule of law and a textual interpretation of the Constitution. With the nomination of Judge Gorsuch, we now have the opportunity to follow through by solidifying the conservative bloc on the Supreme Court. As explained by SCOTUSBlog, “some of the parallels” between Justice Scalia and Judge Gorsuch “can be downright eerie.” Indeed, Judge Gorsuch has the same originalist and textualist approach to the Constitution and narrow application of criminal laws against defendants and support for mens rea, or criminal intent, requirements in federal law in common. The key difference between Justice Scalia and Judge Gorsuch is that Judge Gorsuch has written critically of the Supreme Court’s 1984 "Chevron deference," which requires federal courts to defer to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of “silent or ambiguous” statutes. The Chevron deference has allowed federal bureaucrats to enact law without judicial review, undermining the separation of powers in the Constitution.

The process for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, which funds the federal government for the remainder of FY 2017, could not have been worse. This massive, nearly 1,700-page spending measure was negotiated behind closed doors between congressional leadership from both chambers and appropriators. With a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican president, this spending bill reflects Obama-era spending levels. The bill annualizes base discretionary spending for FY 2017 at $1.07 trillion. This spending level blows through the spending caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 by $30 billion. The bill spends an additional $106 billion for overseas contingency operations, disaster relief, and other spending, which isn’t counted toward the spending caps. In total, the bill authorizes more than $1.175 trillion in annualized discretionary spending for FY 2017. The bill also falls short of promoting conservative priorities. While the bill does renew the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program and does not include funding for ObamaCare’s cost-sharing subsidies, it allocates nearly $296 million to bail out Puerto Rico’s Medicaid program, preserves current spending levels for the Environmental Protection Agency, increases spending for the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Arts, and provides a bailout for a private sector labor union.

This vote was on the motion to proceed to consideration of H.J.Res. 36, which would have canceled the Bureau of Land Management’s Methane Rule. With annual compliance costs between $114 million and $279 million, the so-called “venting and flaring” rule purports to reduce waste from “reduce the waste of natural gas from mineral leases administered” by the Bureau of Land Management. In reality, the purpose of the rule is to discourage oil and gas production on land overseen by the agency. The Bureau of Land Management estimates annual compliance costs between $114 million and $279 million.

The current authorization expires in December, which means that Congress must reauthorize it by the end of the year. S. 1287 bill would eliminate the need for reauthorization, granting indefinite authority for a program that collects information on, potentially, millions of Americans. Section 702 allows the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to collect electronic communications by non-citizens of interest to the federal government. Officially, the program is not supposed to target U.S. citizens, but intelligence agencies cast a wide net and often the communications of Americans can be swept up by the surveillance as well. Given the sweeping powers in Section 702 and the potential for misuse, this program should require congressional oversight, which can be used to assess both terrorism and privacy concerns. Granting this surveillance authority indefinitely, as S. 1297 does, limits even further Congress’s ability to oversee this program.

This vote simply allows the Senate to begin debate on the House-passed version of H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act.

This amendment is virtually identical to the 2015 ObamaCare repeal bill – the Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act, H.R. 3762. This bill passed the Senate by a vote of 52 to 47, with only two unsurprising Republican defections. For more than seven years, Republicans successfully campaigned on ObamaCare repeal. They made floor speeches in support of repeal, and they voted to pass a repeal bill less than two years ago. Grassroots conservative activists are not going to accept excuses if Republicans fail to pass a bill that they have passed once before. The ObamaCare Repeal Reconciliation Act would repeal much of ObamaCare – including the tax and cost sharing subsidies, Medicaid expansion, and the taxes that came with the law – with a two-year delay to pass a replacement. This delay provides more than ample time to reach an agreement on a replacement bill or package. President Donald Trump has indicated that he will sign a 2015-style ObamaCare bill into law. Senate Republicans should do as they did in December 2015 and pass a bill that delivers on their frequent promises to repeal ObamaCare.

The amendment offered by Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would increase the debt limit and fund the federal government through December 8 without any spending or regulatory reforms.

Chairman Pai has served on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) since May 2012. Chairman Pai should not only be confirmed for his record of eloquently championing sensible regulation grounded by market principles, but because he also serves as an example of what the American people deserve from officials in Washington. Pai’s efforts, particularly on the debate surrounding Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, demonstrate his commitment to policies that work rather than policies that simply grow the power of government and relevance of his position as a regulator.

This amendment, sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would reduce discretionary spending by $43 billion.

This amendment, sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would create reconciliation instructions to repeal and replace ObamaCare, providing a path to follow through on more than seven years of promises after the Senate's failure this year.

It has been more than 30 years since Congress passed fundamental tax reform. Since that time, the tax code has become riddled with carve-outs that benefit politically connected special interests. Today, there are more than 74,000 pages in the tax code. According to the Tax Foundation, Americans spent 8.9 billion hours and $409 billion on tax compliance in 2016. Congress has a generational opportunity to reform the tax code by consolidating and lowering tax rates, broadening the tax base, and promoting job creation and international competitiveness for American businesses. This will make the tax code fairer and simplify the filing process, allowing the vast majority of Americans to file their taxes on a postcard. There is no doubt that 2017 has been a frustrating year for conservatives. Failure on fundamental tax reform is not an option. Passage of the FY 2018 budget resolution is the first step in this process. This is a step that the Senate must take.

No one disagrees with the need for assistance for areas recently impacted by disasters. Nevertheless, the concern with the Additional Supplement Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act is that Congress is spending $36.5 billion without any spending offsets. Sadly, some, like Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), are demanding more money, attempting to extort additional funds by blocking a conservative nominee. Currently, the national debt is $20.4 trillion. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the projected budget deficit for FY 2017 and FY 2018 is $804 billion and $855 billion, respectively. Congress is only a few years away from the $1+ trillion deficits that Republicans frequently and rightly criticized under President Barack Obama. Long-term budget projections are even more ominous. Unfortunately, Congress continues to kick the can down the road, avoiding difficult decisions.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) would cancel the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) arbitration rule. The final rule was published on Regulations.gov on July 19. While the CRA isn’t a panacea, it does provide a means for Congress to act as a check on out-of-control federal agencies. The CFPB’s arbitration rule is, in reality, a giveaway to trial lawyers. The rule ostensibly bans contractual arbitration clauses related to consumer financial products offered by banks and other financial sector firms. This severely limits consumers’ ability to enter into arbitration during disputes. Arbitration is an easier and quicker process for consumers to resolve issues, but lawyers don’t make much money from this process. The rule, however, will encourage trial lawyers to pursue more class-action lawsuits, which take longer and result in smaller payouts to consumers. But class-action lawsuits do bring in big dollars for trial lawyers. Class-action lawsuits can take two to five years to resolve, and the average payment is $32.35 per individual. These class-action suits, for which trial lawyers are paid an average of roughly $1 million, also drive up costs to consumers. By comparison, arbitration typically takes two to five months, with an average payment of thousands of dollars. It’s clear which process truly protects consumers.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowers individual rates for the vast majority of taxpayers. In addition, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act nearly doubles the standard deduction, meaning Americans keep more of their hard-earned money, and doubles the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000. This bill also provides relief by doubling the exemption amount from the unfair death tax. Pass-through business owners, who file their taxes on their individual tax return, will be able to take a 20 percent deduction. This lowers the tax burden currently faced by pass-through businesses, which, according to the Tax Foundation, employ 70 million people, and promotes fairness. America’s business community will also see added growth as a result of the policy changes in this bill. The corporate tax rate will be lowered substantially from 35 percent to 21 percent, making American businesses more globally competitive and allowing them the resources they need to innovate and create jobs. It also eliminates confusion and complexity so job creators can focus on building their company and hiring working Americans. This bill also repeals the harmful ObamaCare individual mandate, a coercive tax on Americans. It’s estimated that 80 percent of households subject to this tax earn less than $50,000 per year. This is an unnecessary hardship being placed on working Americans. The federal government should not punish individuals who cannot afford ObamaCare’s costly health insurance plans or decide it is not the best course for them.