[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 21 (Thursday, February 4, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S646-S647]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     FLINT, MICHIGAN, WATER CRISIS

  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I know there are others waiting to 
speak, and I will be brief. I want to take a couple of minutes to 
reflect on what just happened on the Senate floor.
  We had a bipartisan bill that was shepherded through the Energy 
Committee by the chair, Senator Murkowski, and the ranking member, 
Senator Cantwell. Because our colleagues from Michigan refused to take 
yes for an answer--objecting to a vote on their very amendment--the 
Democratic caucus has come together and brought down this bipartisan 
bill--killing it, at least for the time being.
  I share the majority leader's hope that discussions can continue and 
cooler, more reasonable minds will prevail, rather than just the 
gamesmanship that, frankly, frustrates all of us and gives Congress a 
bad name. We know that the vote that just went down was not about the 
Energy bill. This was about trying to embarrass Republicans and to try 
to make us look bad and portray us as having no compassion for the poor 
people of Flint--which is exactly the opposite of true.
  The fact is that Senator Murkowski, who is the bill manager and 
chairman of the Energy Committee, made an offer for a vote on a $550 
million package--a $550 million package. The Senator from Michigan has 
asked for a check for $600 million, but Senator Murkowski, in good 
faith, trying to be responsible, offered them an alternative of a $550 
million package, and they refused it, instead choosing to bring down 
this legislation.
  I think it is important to note that the State of Michigan has 
already appropriated somewhere close to $37 million, including funds 
specifically set aside for outside experts to conduct an infrastructure 
integrity study. The fact is, the State of Michigan and the city of 
Flint don't yet know what they need to do to fix the problem or how 
much it will cost, and the Senators from Michigan come in here and say: 
We don't need a plan. We just need cash

[[Page S647]]

upfront of $600 million. We want this added to the national debt--which 
is already $19 trillion.
  I think the Senator from Alaska, the bill manager, made a very 
reasonable suggestion: Let the State and the city get started with the 
money that has been appropriated by the State, together with the tens 
of millions of dollars the Obama administration is making available to 
the State of Michigan that can then be available to the city of Flint 
to get started, to do the infrastructure integrity study, to come up 
with a plan. Then the Senators can come back to Congress--hopefully 
during the regular appropriations process--and come up with a 
responsible, shared plan for this local government, for the State 
government, and for the Federal Government to help the poor people of 
Flint out of this terrible crisis.
  Instead, what we seem to have found happening is, in the immortal 
words of Rahm Emanuel--now the mayor of Chicago, formerly chief of 
Staff of the White House--never let a crisis go to waste. That is what 
is happening here. It is not responsible. It is not reasonable. And I 
think Senator Murkowski's counteroffer to the demands of the Senators 
from Michigan demonstrates it is not even a good-faith effort to try to 
solve the problem. It is just trying to put on a show vote and 
embarrass people.
  We also need to understand that the Environmental Protection Agency 
bears significant responsibility. The Obama administration's 
Environmental Protection Agency failed the people of Flint when they 
didn't act sooner. We heard that one Agency director has already 
resigned.
  But let me be clear. There is no disagreement that we all want to 
work together to help the people of Flint find a solution once we have 
more information about the needs of the city and the State of Michigan 
and they know exactly what kind of help they need and in what amount. 
What we disagree on is that this bipartisan Energy bill should be held 
hostage until we know the solution. Frankly, that is beyond 
frustrating. It is disappointing. It is not serving our constituents 
and the American people the way we should, in a responsible, 
commonsense, bipartisan way. This is all about gamesmanship. This is 
all about ``gotcha.'' In other words, this is all about the things the 
American people have come to loathe and hate about the political 
process in Washington, DC.
  We can do better. We must do better. And I share the majority 
leader's wish that negotiations continue and that cooler, more sensible 
minds come together on solutions that we can perhaps agree to.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.

                          ____________________