[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 98 (Wednesday, June 12, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3337-S3338]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Socialism

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I confess that my fascination--or maybe 
``obsession'' is another word to describe it--with what some people 
proclaim to be their newfound belief in socialism is really a mystery 
to me. It is something

[[Page S3338]]

I have thought and read quite a bit about just so I could try to 
understand what they could possibly be thinking.
  A recent poll found that 4 in 10 Americans say they prefer living in 
a socialist country to a capitalist country--40 percent. For those of 
us who have witnessed the rise and fall of socialism over the course of 
our lives or who have even read about it in the history books, that is 
a major cause for concern. Yet today's socialists try to distinguish 
themselves from those countries that have actually implemented 
socialism--Venezuela, the Soviet Union, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, 
and other failed socialist nations. They are saying that they are 
democratic socialists.
  As a matter of fact, one of our Senate colleagues who is running for 
President--the junior Senator from Vermont, not the distinguished 
Senator on the floor--is speaking today at an event in defense of 
democratic socialism. I have to say, if you ask me, that is an 
oxymoron. You can't support democracy and socialism at the same time. 
Those two ideals are completely at odds with one another. Yet what we 
see happening is people who use labels to confuse the American people 
and who claim to be what they are not--literally being Trojan horses 
for ideas that have been demonstrated to have failed throughout the 
world's history.
  Many of these so-called democratic socialists have gotten into the 
habit of suggesting that Scandinavian countries are successful models 
for their ideology. They will point to the economic successes of these 
countries, combined with their expansive government-run programs--free 
higher education, universal healthcare, subsidized childcare. They will 
say: ``Look, it works.'' Robust welfare programs are not the 
cornerstones of socialism, although many seem to think that this is the 
case.
  The poll I mentioned earlier found that there is a broad disagreement 
about what exactly constitutes socialism. To me, one of the most 
interesting findings of some of the polling is when you ask some people 
what ``socialism'' is, they say, ``Well, that is being social.'' They 
also say, ``Well, it is universal healthcare, tuition-free education, 
and a living wage.'' Only two-thirds of the people say it involves a 
state-controlled economy, and fewer still believe socialism involves 
the state control and the regulation of private property, the media, 
and communications.
  Let me be clear. The most fundamental aspect of socialism isn't the 
social benefits it provides; it is having the government in control. It 
is the surrendering of your individual freedom and choices to 
government coercion and brute force. That is the only way people can be 
forced into limiting their freedom, their activity, and their incomes 
is by brute government force. That is the single most important, 
distinguishing feature of socialism.

  So those who claim that these Scandinavian countries with social 
security programs are shining examples of socialism could not be more 
wrong. These countries largely operate free markets, and they are the 
first to correct us and say they are not socialists. Nevertheless, so-
called democratic socialists continue to name these countries as 
successful examples because the only true examples of socialism don't 
poll quite nearly as high. The prime example is Venezuela.
  Venezuela's troubled story began in the late nineties when then-
Presidential candidate Hugo Chavez delivered an impassioned speech that 
promised to lead Venezuela into a socialist paradise. He talked about 
the country's wealth being stolen by evil capitalists and greedy 
corporations, and he promised hope and change if he were elected. That 
sounds pretty similar to what we hear from the so-called democratic 
socialists today.
  For any Americans who wonder if that hope and change being promised 
by these candidates might actually work, let me reassure you that there 
would be a lot of change but that it would not be the type of change 
you would want. Again, look at Venezuela. The government took over 
businesses, shut down free markets, and suppressed free speech. As a 
result, one of the richest countries in the world is now among the 
poorest. Basic commodities like food, medicine, and water are in short 
supply. About 6 months ago, I myself was at the border between Colombia 
and Venezuela, and I witnessed Venezuelans going across the border into 
Colombia in order to pick up some of the basics of life--medicine, 
food, and the like.
  Of course, with regard to freedom of the press, well, you can throw 
that out the window in Venezuela, and, of course, crime rates have 
skyrocketed. That is why you don't see caravans of people attempting to 
immigrate to countries like Venezuela--it is just the opposite. The 
United Nations announced last week that more than 4 million people have 
escaped Venezuela--4 million refugees from Venezuela--and that a 
quarter of those have left in the last 7 months. The UN Refugee Agency 
referred to this mass exodus as the ``largest in the recent history of 
Latin America and the Caribbean.''
  That is what happens under socialism. Citizens flee poverty, 
government control, and corruption in search of opportunities to build 
better lives for themselves. The trouble is, no matter what word you 
put in front of the word ``socialism,'' it doesn't really matter 
because it is still socialism.
  I think Winston Churchill summed it up best, as he frequently did, 
when he said:

       The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of 
     blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal 
     sharing of miseries.

  I can assure you that if these democratic socialists get their way, 
there will be no shortage of miseries to share.
  I urge all of our colleagues and all Americans to learn, to share the 
lessons of history, and to remind our fellow citizens that so-called 
democratic socialism is nothing more than a Trojan horse that would 
destroy our country and destroy our way of life. Most fundamentally of 
all, it would destroy the American dream.
  We can look around America and find good examples, but, of course, I 
am partial to the example of the State of Texas as to how free market 
ideals and less government can produce more prosperity, more freedom, 
and a better quality of life. Yet, if our Democratic friends--
particularly those who are running for President--get their way with 
Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and a host of other disastrous 
policies, the sort of prosperity and opportunity and freedom of choice 
that you see now in places like Texas will be out the window.
  When our friend the minority leader, the Senator from New York, calls 
the Senate a legislative graveyard, in one respect, he is entirely 
right, because we are going to do everything we can to make sure the 
U.S. Senate is a firewall against these disastrous socialist policies.