[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 57 (Monday, March 23, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1921-S1929]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
MIDDLE CLASS HEALTH BENEFITS TAX REPEAL ACT OF 2019--Motion to
Proceed--Resumed
Motion to Reconsider--Motion to Proceed
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to
reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on the motion to
proceed to H.R. 748.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.
Motion to Reconsider
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which
the cloture was not invoked on the motion to proceed to H.R. 748.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now an hour of debate equally divided
under the previous order.
The majority leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I also ask that the vote be 30 minutes
in length.
[[Page S1922]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The vote will be 30 minutes in length. It is so ordered.
The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, we are in the midst of a crisis in our
country--a crisis caused by the coronavirus. I cannot believe that the
answer to this crisis from our friends on the other side of the aisle,
as we move to address the economic consequences that are so severe for
the people of this country, is delay, delay, delay; no sense of
urgency; no hurry.
I will tell you, I have had the honor to serve in this body for many
years. Never--never--have I seen Republicans and Democrats fail to come
together when confronted with a crisis. We did so after 9/11. We did so
with the financial meltdown in 2008. Here, we are facing an enemy that
is invisible but equally devastating to the health of our people and to
the health of our economy. Yet, unbelievably, the Democratic leader
objected to my even being able to speak this morning. Is that what we
have come to? The Democratic leader objected to our convening at 9
o'clock this morning so that we could begin working in earnest. Is that
what we have come to?
The fact is, we have been working on a bipartisan effort through task
force, with both Republicans and Democrats, making very good progress
and putting together a comprehensive package--the third package we have
dealt with. This one is to address and prevent the economic devastation
that is being caused by this virus.
We don't have another day. We don't have another hour. We don't have
another minute to delay acting. I have talked with businesses all over
my State--small mom-and-pop businesses, like a diner, a third-
generation diner operated by the Simones family in Lewiston, ME. For
the first time ever, they have had to close their doors. As Linda
Simones told me through tears yesterday: This is the first time ever we
have been unemployed. Our son is unemployed. Our friends who have
worked with us at this diner for years are unemployed.
We have a very good plan that we worked on in a bipartisan way--
Senator Marco Rubio and I on the Republican side and Senators Ben
Cardin and Jeanne Shaheen, in very good faith, on the Democratic side--
that would help these small businesses and keep their employees paid.
It would keep their employees getting paychecks. How can that possibly
be controversial?
How can any of us want to see millions of Americans lose their
paychecks, their health insurance, their contributions to their
retirement plans? We have a package that is part of this broader
legislation.
As the majority leader pointed out just yesterday, had we invoked
cloture, that is not the end of the process. There still could have
been 30 hours for us to refine this package.
Keep in mind that every single one of these task forces have been
bipartisan. Do we agree on everything? Of course not, but surely,
surely, in this time of extreme crisis for our country--when people are
getting sick, when people are dying from the coronavirus, when we are
facing unemployment rates which could go as high as 20 percent,
according to the Treasury Secretary--surely, we ought to be able to
pull together and work quickly to respond to the needs of the American
people.
I cannot believe the objections to proceeding to this package. Is
this package perfect? No. That is why negotiations are still going on.
Don't we want to act quickly to provide relief to the American
workers? This is disgraceful. We do not have time. Time is not on our
side. Let's get the job done for the American people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I rise because my dear friend, I can
tell, is very upset. I am upset that we are at this point. I really am.
I am working with you on so many things in a bipartisan way. I always
have and always will.
With that being said, let me make sure of this. I haven't been here
as long as you have and haven't the experience that you have. The way I
understand it, voting for cloture takes a 60-vote threshold, except for
the judges, which, basically, the previous leader, Senator Harry Reid
from Nevada, changed. I was opposed to that. We are in a situation now
where, if you vote yes on cloture and then you are not in agreement
with the bill, it only takes 51 votes. That seems to be the reason
everyone is saying: Wait a minute. Let's get an agreement so we can
move it through.
That is what I always heard and that is what I understand. They are
afraid, basically, that if you vote for cloture--even though it is not
the things you want or have been negotiated on--then the vote is 51,
even with the 30 hours of curing. Then, it goes from there, and, then,
we are back to where we have not had any negotiations because the
majority has the control with 51 votes. That is what I think the fear
is here.
The problem we have in West Virginia right now is that you can throw
all the money at Wall Street that you want to. You can continue to put
trillions upon trillions there. People are afraid to leave their home.
They are afraid because they are afraid of the healthcare. I have
workers who don't have masks. I have healthcare workers who don't have
gowns. I have hospitals that will not be open another 60 days because
they don't have cash flow. It looks like we are worried more about the
economy than the healthcare and well-being of the people.
Mr. McCONNELL. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. MANCHIN. Yes, sir.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Even if cloture were invoked, there are 30 more hours.
Mr. MANCHIN. We know about the 30 more hours.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask the Senator from West Virginia, in what way
would your side be disadvantaged by that?
The American people are waiting for us to act today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. McCONNELL. Senator Collins has laid it out. We don't have time
for this. We don't have time for it.
Mr. MANCHIN. Let me ask you a question.
Mr. McCONNELL. I have a question. In what way would the Democratic
minority be disadvantaged?
Mr. DURBIN. Who has control of the floor?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia has the floor.
Mr. MANCHIN. Sir, anything I am saying--30 hours or 30 days--as long
as you have the majority, 51 votes rule. The final vote is going to be
on passage, whether you have to negotiate or not with us.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. By firming a deal, we have to get cloture again once
we got on the bill. In other words, this is cloture on the motion to
proceed to the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. McCONNELL. Let me explain it to my good friend from West
Virginia.
Mr. MANCHIN. I understand.
Mr. McCONNELL. Here is the way it works, colleagues. We have been
fiddling around, as the Senator from Maine pointed out, for 24 hours.
Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I have the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia has the floor.
Mr. MANCHIN. I know where you are coming from on this. We have a
little difference of opinion about this.
Mr. McCONNELL. I thank the Senator from West Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Colleagues, here is an understanding of where we are.
We have been fiddling around for 2 days on the motion to proceed.
Mr. MANCHIN. If I could make my remarks.
Mr. DURBIN. Who has the floor?
Mr. McCONNELL. My friend, if that were invoked, there are still 30
more hours postcloture on the motion to proceed.
Once you get on the bill, you have to go through it again. There is
no way in which--
Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. MANCHIN. We should be able to get a bill that we can move forward
on with unanimous consent. We really should. That is what I am hoping
for. I think we can do it
Let me go back to where I am coming from. My whole thing is based on
the
[[Page S1923]]
healthcare right now. You can't throw enough money to fix this if you
can't fix the healthcare. If you can't give my people in West Virginia
and across this country the feeling that we have a treatment and we are
moving forward on a vaccine, they are not leaving their homes. My
restaurants aren't going to open up.
The most important thing is, How do we take care of the workers who
have lost their jobs through no fault of their own because businesses
have closed? It is the same in my State as in your State--through no
fault of their own. That is the package we have to get out. We have
$160 billion moving right now--moving right now.
I am saying this: It looks like things are weighted toward the Wall
Street corporations' side. True or false?
We are not in the frontlines. We are not one of the big four.
Many of us--100 of us--are not there negotiating at the table. Our
staffs are all having input, and we are working on that. But sitting
there and making the final decisions comes down to this: Can we give
the confidence that we can rise to the occasion to keep the people
healthy in our States? My hospitals need to stay open. My healthcare
workers need to be healthy. They need to be protected.
It seems like we are talking about everything else about the economy
versus the healthcare. That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.
For the people who aren't getting a check right now, we can get a
check to them. We should.
It seems like we are more focused on the big corporations and the
healthcare of Wall Street than we are on the healthcare of the people
in rural America and Main Street. That is the problem I have had on
this. That is the problem we have been talking about.
We want to fix this. I am not talking about all the regulations you
are talking about. I don't know anything about that. I will find out if
it is buried in the bill and it is not what I would approve right now
if we don't need it. But if you are giving all of the preferences to
the large corporations, they can shill and hide and do buybacks and
everything else. Don't you think the American worker ought to get
something or be protected in some way? That is what it is like.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, as the majority leader said, all this
vote is about is, Shall we get on the bill? Can we debate the issue?
Can we get together to decide what to do about what is the most
significant healthcare crisis in a century in this State? Can we get on
the bill? We are saying yes; they are saying no.
The distinguished Senator from West Virginia says: What about the
people who need help? I have a friend who emailed me last night and
said: It is too late; I am closing five small businesses.
These are little businesses.
Well, why did we not vote last night on this, because in this bill is
the proposal by Senator Collins--Senator Collins, Republican; Senator
Cardin, Democrat; Senator Rubio, Republican; Senator Shaheen,
Democrat--that would loan money to small businesses of less than 500
people so they can pay their employees in West Virginia and Tennessee.
And then, if they did that, it would be forgiven. In other words, it is
a grant. They could keep working. That is for the employees. Every day
we wait, they don't get paid.
Pass this bill and the laid-off employees would be available for sick
leave, which they weren't when the bill came over from the House. Pass
this bill today and the employee who was laid off last week could be
available for 2 weeks of sick leave at today's salary.
Pass this bill and most Americans would get $1,200 per person, $2,400
a couple, $500 more for a child. They would get it one day sooner if
you passed this bill last night.
These are not controversial proposals. On the Collins-Rubio-Cardin-
Shaheen proposal, I happened to be watching Robert Reich, the former
Labor Secretary for President Clinton, who is about as far to the left
as anybody goes, and someone asked him: What would be the single best
thing Congress could do to help workers get their money and be paid?
He said it is exactly what the Collins-Rubio-Cardin-Shaheen proposal
would do--loan money to those with 500 or less and let them keep
working.
As for this business about big corporations, Darden is a big
corporation. It owns lots of restaurants. Gaylord is a big corporation.
It owns Opryland. If it has a credit problem and the Federal Reserve
Board can make sure that it has enough money to stay in business, all
the people who work at the Grand Ole Opry can continue to have jobs. If
they don't, they will be out of work. What is wrong with that?
I mean, that is the goal. Whether you work for a big company or a
little company, you are still an American citizen--whether you work for
FedEx or the local diner.
And as far as solving the problem of the disease--and then I will let
others speak--pass this bill and 1 day sooner we would have $10 billion
to accelerate treatments. Treatments are what we need. We could
accelerate vaccines. Vaccines are what we eventually need. Pass this
bill and we would have $75 billion for hospitals and $10 billion for
those diagnostic treatments I just mentioned. We would have $1.7
billion to buy more masks.
All of that could happen 1 day sooner if the other side wasn't trying
to attach its political agenda to a crisis bill. This is no time to be
running a political campaign.
As the majority leader said, the House--dominated by Democrats--sent
us their ideas. We passed it through without a single amendment, even
though we didn't agree with many of their ideas. We worked for days
with our counterparts on the Democratic side and proposed a bill with
their ideas, such as unemployment compensation, at $600 per person.
That is twice as much as you get in unemployment compensation without
this bill in Tennessee.
Finally, I would say this: Pass this bill and 1 day sooner a
Tennessee worker, instead of getting $326, would get nearly $1,000 if
he or she has been laid off. There is no excuse for delaying getting on
this bill. It is outrageous that it will happen.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I think we all know what is happening here.
The leader pointed out in his opening remarks that everything was
going really quite well. There were a lot of working groups that were
meeting. There was great bipartisan cooperation. Both sides were
getting ideas included in a plan. Then, yesterday, the Speaker of the
House showed up with an agenda and, all of a sudden, it got taken over
at the leadership level.
Now, instead of talking about helping workers, we are talking about
the Green New Deal and all kinds of other things, including the demands
unions and other special interest groups want to see in this deal.
Yet the throwaway line in this is about bailouts for big
corporations. Really? Are we going to do that again? Are we going to do
this again? You guys are going to come over here and block votes and
use the line that this is a bailout for big corporations?
You heard what Senator Alexander just said. This has money in here
for workers. This has money for families. This has money for small
businesses. It has lots of money, and $300 billion is going to go to
checks: $1,200 per person, $2,400 per couple, and $500 per child, for
everybody. There is up to $75,000 for a single and $150,000 for a
married couple who is filing jointly. There is $250 billion in here for
unemployment insurance, as the Senator from Tennessee pointed out, in
order to plus up and top off those unemployment funds that the States
have, and we will add $600 per person, per week for the next 3 months.
That is going to help unemployed people in this country.
The Small Business Loan Program, which was just alluded to and which
Senators Rubio, Collins, Cardin, and Shaheen have worked on, is a $350
billion program that allows small businesses to pay their employees, to
keep them employed so they keep their jobs and so those jobs don't go
away. Right there, that is $900 billion that will go to workers.
As Senator Alexander pointed out, there is over $242 billion in this
bill that is going to help out with healthcare, and we all know we have
to help our hospitals.
Between the $75 billion in direct spending in this particular
provision
[[Page S1924]]
and the $25 billion or more that is going to be part of the Medicare
provisions, that will be $100 billion for hospitals; $20 billion for
veterans' healthcare; $11 billion for vaccines, therapeutics,
diagnostics, and other preparedness needs; $4.5 billion for the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention; $1.7 billion for the Strategic
National Stockpile; $12 billion for the military; $10 billion for block
grants to States; $12 billion for K-12 education; $6 billion for higher
education; $5 billion for the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund; $10 billion
for the airports; and $20 billion for public transportation emergency
relief.
All told, there is $242 billion--$186 billion, I might add, which
will go to the States. Everybody talks about helping out the States.
There is $186 billion of the $242 billion in this part of the bill that
will go to the States.
So there is $900 billion and another $250 billion. You are looking at
$1.2 trillion to $1.3 trillion, roughly, of this bill that will be
going to healthcare workers, hospitals, medical providers, families,
employees, and unemployed people. That is where it will go.
Yes, there is $500 billion in here to keep industries afloat that are
failing, and they are failing by the day and shedding jobs by the day.
These aren't grants--although, the Democrats did want some grants in
here, I might add. These are loans. These have to be paid back.
Bailouts usually apply to those who did something dumb on their own,
who made bad business decisions. These companies aren't in trouble
because of something they did on their own. This is no fault of their
own. They are in trouble because they have been shut down, and they all
hire millions of employees in this country. So, yes, we probably need
to do something to help businesses in this country so they can keep
working and keep their employees working.
This was put together with a lot of bipartisan input. The leader
appointed task forces, and the Democratic leader assigned people to
task forces. I observed those meetings and the discussions that went
on. They were bipartisan. I participated in some of those. They were
bipartisan, and we came together. All of these things that have been
put together in this plan were developed with an idea toward getting
help to workers, employees, small businesses, healthcare
professionals--the people who are fighting the crisis on the frontline.
Yet here we are, dillydallying around, and we can't even get on the
bill.
As the leader pointed out, there is another 60-vote threshold that
comes later. If you want to block it then, you can block it then. We
can't even get on the bill. The country is burning. The country is
burning, and your side wants to play political games.
It is time to get this done. The American people expect us to act.
They need action. We need to work together to get this done for the
American people. Do not come out here and say over and over and over
again that this is a bailout for big corporations. This bill is about
workers. It is about people. It is about families. It is about people
who are hurting out there economically, and we need to do something
about it. We are in a position to do something about it, and it is high
time that we did.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Democratic leader
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to suggest to my friends on
both sides of the aisle that we first assume the appropriate distance
and then, secondly, that we take a deep breath. The emotions we have
seen on the floor on both sides of the aisle are reflected in homes
across America, where families are very emotional at this moment as we
face this public health crisis. It is no surprise that it is reflected
on the floor of the Senate. We are going to solve this problem, and we
are going to do it in a timely way, which the American people expect of
us.
We have had two measures now that have come before us--one for $8
billion and another for $100 billion--that were addressed on a
bipartisan basis with an agreement. This will be as well.
Now, as for this argument that we can't spare 1 minute, that we can't
spare 1 day, I understand the sense of urgency.
The House of Representatives passed the second bill, the $100 billion
bill, in the early morning hours of Saturday. When did the Senate pass
the bill? It passed it on Wednesday--more than 4 days later.
With regard to this $100 billion bill, which included medical leave,
accelerated access to unemployment compensation, food, new Medicaid
payments to States, a guarantee that you would never have to pay for a
test, the Republican leader waited 4 days to call that bill. His
argument was, Wait a minute; the paperwork is not here. Well, I checked
on that because the Senator from Idaho raised it on the floor, and it
turns out that, as we have many, many times--and we were prepared
here--by consent, you can move on a measure before the paper actually
comes across from the other body.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, will the Senator from Illinois yield for an
inquiry?
Mr. DURBIN. I will yield.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, isn't it a fact, when the Senator was up
here talking and demanding that we pass that bill, that the bill wasn't
here? I have spent 40 years in the Senate, and I have never been able
to convince a Parliamentarian that we should vote on a House bill that
wasn't here. It wasn't here. The Republicans aren't in charge of the
House; it is the Democrats. Nancy Pelosi is in charge of the House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Democratic leader has the floor.
The assistant Democratic leader.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I might say to my friend from Idaho that
it is not unusual for us to move on a measure before the bill, the
paper, has come across the rotunda. We do it by consent. Yes, it
happens here, and we were prepared to do it again.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant Democratic leader has the floor.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, if time remains on the Republicans' side,
they can use it as they wish.
Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I will not yield at this moment. I want to
finish my comment as I allowed the Senator from South Dakota to finish
his. I hope the Senator from Arkansas will show me that respect. Thank
you.
Measures that have been raised this morning are important measures,
and for the most part, my colleagues are pushing an open door.
The Rubio-Cardin plan is one that I support. It is supported on a
bipartisan basis. I think it is an excellent idea for dealing with the
challenges of restaurants and small businesses. I support it. There is
no issue in terms of whether that will be included in the final
package. I believe it will, and I certainly hope it will.
As for the notion of cash payments that was brought to us by the
White House, I don't hear any objection whatsoever on the Democratic
side of the aisle to it.
With regard to the notion of extending unemployment insurance and
providing additional benefits within unemployment insurance, I guess we
are going to argue as to who came up with the idea first, but both
sides agree on that basic idea.
So these proposals that have been brought before us are not in
controversy, as I understand it, in the negotiations that are underway.
The thing that I was concerned about and that Senator Schumer
addressed--and Senator Manchin raised the same issue--was really
focusing on the threshold issue of the capacity of our healthcare
system to deal with this public health crisis.
When we heard the Governor of New York this morning suggest that the
hospitals of that State will have to increase their capacity by 50
percent and that it will still not be enough, it is a suggestion to all
of us that we need to start with healthcare and hospitals. It was our
feeling that the bill Senator McConnell tried to move yesterday was not
adequate. It didn't provide the necessary resources for that. When we
return to this measure--it has been said by Senator Schumer and others
that it could be today, and I pray that it will be--I think you will
find additional resources for hospitals and healthcare. In my State,
that is a critical element.
Let me also talk about the fact that we are dealing with a bill of
great importance and great magnitude. Reflect
[[Page S1925]]
for a moment that the amount of money we are talking about in this bill
is roughly equivalent to the entire Federal Government's domestic
discretionary budget in 1 year. We are dealing with this bill, as we
should, on an urgent basis. We should take care to make sure we do the
best we can but to not wait for the perfect. Let's make sure we have
something that is good and responsive to the needs we have
I also think that the measure yesterday that was pushed by Senator
McConnell did not provide adequate resources to State and local
governments. When I talk to my Governor in Illinois, Governor Pritzker,
they are spending money in ways they never dreamed of in order to deal
with this public health crisis. They are also seeing more unemployment
insurance benefits being claimed than we ever have in our history. We
need to help the State and local governments, and that was one of the
objections we had to the bill yesterday. We didn't feel that it was
adequate.
When it comes to corporations and providing help to businesses, large
and small, count me in. I am one of those Democrats who stood for the
stimulus package that President Obama brought before us because I
thought it was necessary. I still believe we did the right thing in
passing that stimulus package when many on the other side of the aisle
did not. Part of that package helped larger corporations, and so be it,
for I thought that was necessary. Yet we learned a bitter lesson. Many
times, the benefits being given to those corporations and the tax
breaks being given to them translated into stock buybacks, whereby they
took the money and ran. We don't want that to happen again.
Arguing for transparency and accountability on the money that goes to
any business, large or small, is not unreasonable, and it used to be
bipartisan. We are arguing over that, debating over that, and
negotiating over that at this minute.
Let me also say that I continue to be amazed at the references to the
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. She really unnerves a lot of people
on that side of the aisle. She is the Speaker of the House, you know,
and the measure--whatever we do here--will be headed over there for
consideration. The fact that she would want to be party to that
negotiation is not an outrageous idea. It happens to be consistent with
the bicameral system of government that we have.
The Senator from Kentucky got up and talked about how she came into
the meeting and ruined the whole meeting by asserting herself as the
Speaker of the House. It is reasonable for her to do that. In fact, the
suggestion by Senator Schumer at the outset was that we have the four
corners--the four leaders, the Democrats and Republicans--and a
representative of the White House for this negotiation. That approach
was rejected by the Senator from Kentucky. We will do our own, he says.
We will get back to you when we have a Republican plan. It was not
bipartisan from the start, and it should be all the way. It is the only
way it will work.
Let me say for a moment that if and when we have reached an
agreement--and I pray that it will be done under the circumstances--and
if and when we vote for cloture on the motion to proceed, at that
point, the Senator from Kentucky can offer any amendment he wishes. At
that point, I hope that we will have an agreement and that we will all
agree to do it in a quick fashion. Yet this idea that it is going to be
instantaneous as soon as we vote for the motion on cloture on the
motion to proceed is not a fact, and it hasn't been for a long time.
Let me just conclude by making an observation on something related to
our meeting here today and what is going on in the United States of
America. Five of our Members did not vote yesterday on the Republican
side of the aisle. One has been diagnosed as having COVID-19, and the
other four are self-quarantining because of the concern about their own
health, which is natural. It is naive for us to believe this will be
the end of this challenge to our membership.
I implore Senators to consider the bipartisan measure that Senator
Portman and I have offered for remote voting. We should not be
physically present on this floor at this moment. We know better, and
our staff is subjected to whatever we bring on the floor in terms of
viral load. Let's think about this in human terms. Too many of our
colleagues and their families are falling prey to this disease. We
should change the rules of the Senate to reflect humanity and reality.
It is the 21st century. Voting in a remote fashion, as I have suggested
with Senator Portman, is the best way, I think, to protect us and our
families from further problems from a health viewpoint.
Let me close by saying a final word on this. Senator Schumer came to
the floor and didn't say, with arms crossed, we are stonewalling. He
said he had to leave the floor to go back and negotiate. With whom? He
left the floor to negotiate with the Republican leaders from the White
House and, perhaps, from other places. That is the way it should be.
We are going to get this done today. Take a deep breath. Everybody is
emotional at this moment on both sides of the aisle, but we have a job
to do, and we are going to get it done.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tillis). For the information of the
Members, the majority has approximately 14 minutes, and the minority
has 15 minutes.
Which Member seeks recognition?
The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, I have been here for 5 years. I came from
another world, one in which, to get anything done, you had to
compromise. The problem we have today is that I can't find any partners
with whom to compromise.
This bill has been characterized as another bailout for large
corporations. Really? That is the most amazing characterization I could
hear today.
When I look at this, what this bill is focused on is the American
worker, who, in the time we have been debating this morning here,
thousands have had phone calls given to them today by their employer to
say: We are sorry, but because of the liquidity situation we have,
there is no demand for our products or services. We need you to go
home.
That has been going on now for weeks, while we sit up here and talk
and blame each other for things.
The time for action is right now. This bill gives us an opportunity
to bring over almost $2 trillion of liquidity to the American people
who are in need. This is not about Big Business. As a matter of fact, I
don't see any grants in here. What I see are liquidity opportunities so
employers can keep their relationship with the employees.
We have already heard the details today: direct payments of $300
billion directly to individuals, $250 billion for 3 months of
unemployment insurance--unprecedented--$350 billion going directly to
small businesses. Why? So that they can keep their employees employed,
even if they are furloughed.
There are $500 billion being made available for loans through our
banking community. This is federally guaranteed loans. These are not
grants. These are not moneys that are going to go to the boards and the
executives and all that. This is money that is going for the purpose of
getting directly to payroll.
There are $517 billion of tax deferrals on withholding taxes on the
corporate side. That is a 1-year deferral. That is not a guarantee; it
is not a grant.
There are $250 billion of other moneys, 180 of which is going to
cities and municipalities and States.
And I agree with the assistant leader of the Democratic Party that we
might need to do more for our States, and let's get to it, if that is
the biggest issue here, but that is not the biggest issue. There are so
many of these other things that are being thrown in this bill because
it is a big bill; it is unprecedented.
But let me just say this: What we have done is try to make this a
situation where we can avoid a liquidity crisis causing an insolvency
crisis, and that is the most damaging thing we can do to the American
worker.
At the end of the day, the American worker has something that they
all have in common. They have an employer. That employer is made up of
investors, just like you and I, who invest in those companies who
employ these people.
This is not a government employing 150 million people in our
workforce.
[[Page S1926]]
This is about getting the American economy a bridge--and that is all
this is, is a bridge to weather this medical crisis that we have.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments from the Senator
from Georgia. There are plenty of negotiations going on. I don't know
what he means when he says he doesn't have anybody to negotiate with. I
just spent 2 hours with Secretary Mnuchin talking about provisions of
this bill.
We spent hours on Friday and Saturday talking within our committees.
I applaud Senator Rubio, what he and Senator Cardin did. There has been
bipartisanship but not from the majority leader, and that has really
fundamentally been the problem--the Republican leader.
Let's back up. Let's back up 10 days. I stood on this floor--Senator
Durbin was here, a bunch of us--when Senator McConnell on a Thursday
night, we were this close to agreement with the House on the second
package, the one that had sick leave policy. We were that close.
Senator McConnell decided he had to go back to Kentucky to go to a
political event with a Justice of the Supreme Court--a political event
with a Justice of the Supreme Court.
Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. BROWN. Of course.
Mr. COTTON. When did the Senate receive that bill from the House?
Mr. BROWN. That is not the point. The point is that--
Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. BROWN. Certainly.
Mr. COTTON. Will you answer my question? When did we receive that
bill?
Mr. BROWN. I don't know the day, but I know it was a day or two
later.
Mr. COTTON. Where has the House been for the last week?
Mr. BROWN. I am not yielding now, Senator Cotton. I know you always
want to do Trump's--the President's bidding. I have the floor, and I
will keep the floor.
The fact is, we were in negotiations with Speaker Pelosi, I assume
with Leader McCarthy. In the Senate, we were this close to legislation.
Senator McConnell went home. Senator Cotton is not disputing the fact
he went home for a political event with a Justice of the Supreme Court,
for gosh sakes--went home.
We didn't vote Friday. We didn't vote Saturday. We didn't vote
Sunday. We didn't vote Monday. We didn't vote Tuesday. We didn't vote
until Wednesday. So we have tried to be bipartisan.
Senator McConnell then dispatched all of us just a few days ago to do
negotiations within our committees. I sat with--
Mr. ALEXANDER. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. BROWN. Well, I would like to sort of explain the details, but if
the time comes out of your time, I would be glad to.
Mr. ALEXANDER. My question will be short.
Is it not true that the bill to which the Senator refers was still
being written over the weekend, and it would have been impossible for
the U.S. Senate to vote on it before Monday?
Mr. BROWN. No. The answer to that question is no. It would have been
possible. We can always suspend the rules and move if it is in the
national interest.
But we didn't vote--you know this, Senator Alexander--we didn't vote
until Wednesday.
But let me back up. This weekend Senator Crapo and I and Banking
Committee Members were making progress on Friday and Saturday. Then
Saturday night, Senator McConnell decided that he would take everything
back and write a partisan bill. So don't tell us that this has been a
bipartisan effort.
Again, Senator Rubio and Senator Cardin had some bipartisan efforts.
We attempted that, but the fact is, we need to learn from 10 years ago.
The same people came to us and said: We need this bailout. They
promised that it would help people stay in their homes. They promised
it would be money in the pockets of workers.
The banks have done well, the executives have done well, but since
then, wages have basically remained flat. The American people don't
want another corporate bailout. They don't want a bailout for Wall
Street. They don't want a bailout for the airlines. They want money--if
we are going to do a relief package, the money needs to go in the
pockets of workers.
We know that hundreds of people, thousands of people in each of our
States are faced every day with this situation: Do I go to work? I am
sick today. Do I go to work and possibly infect somebody else in the
workplace or do I stay home and lose the pay I need in order to pay my
mortgage or in order to pay my rent?
This plan is all about a corporate bailout. The money--$425 billion
that the Secretary of Treasury can decide is a slush fund or where to
direct that money instead of money going to workers, to food banks, to
unemployment insurance, to sick days policy, to all of the things that
we need to do to keep businesses going and people in their homes.
We have a prohibition that so far Senator McConnell has objected to
on foreclosures and evictions. You all know the statistics--40 percent
of Americans don't have $400 discretionary money in their pockets that
they can use in an emergency to fix their car or whatever.
If they go several weeks without pay, they will be evicted; they will
be foreclosed on. We need Senator McConnell to actually agree to that.
And when it comes to the $425 billion slush fund, we want to help
these businesses, especially small businesses. We want to help the
airlines, but we need to make sure that this money passes through to
employees. That means no corporate bailouts without investing in the
dignity of work; it means if you are taking taxpayer money, no stock
buybacks, no sending jobs overseas, no outsourcing your jobs to
independent contractors, no golden parachutes for executives, no using
taxpayer dollars to bust unions, no wage cuts for these employees, no
healthcare or pension cuts.
If we put money into these businesses, this money is there not for
the executives; it is there for the workers, and it is there for the
community. It means actually helping people stay in their homes.
If you love this country, you fight for the people who make it work.
We have to show the people we serve that we have learned from
Congress's mistake 10 years ago when the banks did very well, thank
you. And Wall Street again will do very well, thank you, under the
McConnell plan.
We have to come together to put money in people's pockets. We need to
help people stay in their homes. We need to invest in healthcare
workers who are on the frontlines. We need to mobilize American
manufacturers.
The partisan McConnell plan doesn't do this. The bipartisan work we
are trying to do could do this. We know we can get through this
together, put this partisanship aside, and come together for the people
whom we serve
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I would defer to the Senator from
Tennessee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from North Dakota.
I have a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state the inquiry.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, the discussion we just heard was about
when the Senate could have voted on H.R. 6201, which was the bill that
came over from the House.
When did that bill from the House of Representatives arrive in the
U.S. Senate?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It came to the Senate on Tuesday, the 17th.
Mr. ALEXANDER. On Tuesday, the 17th.
And my second question is, Could the U.S. Senate have voted on that
bill before it arrived from the House of Representatives?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would take consent. The Senate has done it
on several occasions. In one case, H.R. 3630, the Middle Class Tax
Relief & Job Creation Act; another case, H.R. 2194, Comprehensive Iran
Sanctions, Accountability, and Investment Act. It would take consent.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Did anyone ask consent that it be voted on before
Wednesday?
[[Page S1927]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair does not have any record of a
request for consent.
Mr. ALEXANDER. I thank the Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I believe I have the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I want to talk about the bill that we want
to vote on right now and why it is so important that we pass it.
For my part, what I work on is support for our farmers and our
ranchers, and that is exactly what we have put in this bill is help and
support for our farmers and ranchers, for rural America.
And yet, my understanding is that Democrats are objecting to the help
and support that we have put in this bill for our farmers and ranchers.
Last week, the Department of Homeland Security recognized that
agriculture--our supply of food, fiber, and feed--is one of our
Nation's critical industries. Our country has been blessed with an
abundant, affordable, and safe food supply that we rarely stop to
notice but that we depend on every single day and we certainly depend
on at this time with this pandemic.
The good news is, our farmers and ranchers, our ag sector, are out
there working every day, carrying on this critical work of ensuring
that we have the food on our grocery shelves throughout this pandemic.
The bad news is, the farm economy, already facing a number of years
of declining income, has taken a further nosedive on account of the
coronavirus. So we have put forward assistance to make sure we address
that.
Let me just give you one example, though, of the difficulty faced in
farm country, in rural America.
The cattle industry has lost between $7 billion and $9 billion over
the last 2 months--over the last 2 months--and that is just one sector
of our ag economy.
Congress needs to act, and we need to act now, to ensure that
farmers, ranchers, and rural America--farmers, ranchers, and rural
America--receive the relief they desperately need.
Why would Democrats object to that? Why would they object to that?
We included two important provisions to ensure that rural America and
our farm and ranch families receive assistance.
First, we replenish the Commodity Credit Corporation, making sure
that the CCC has the funding necessary to carry out the farm bill,
including the farm safety net, conservation programs, trade programs,
as well as emergency and ad hoc programs like the Market Facilitation
Program.
Second, we increase CCC authority to ensure that we can meet the
coronavirus impact on agriculture head-on. That makes sense. That is in
the bill. They are objecting to it. They are objecting. This is our
food supply. This is our food chain.
We also included an important provision that enables USDA to provide
critical support to ranchers during this market downturn--to ranchers.
However, the Senate Democrats are objecting to that provision.
Congressional Democratic leadership has objected to helping our farmers
and ranchers in this relief package.
The bill also includes an additional $15.5 billion for the SNAP
program--for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, for food
stamps--to provide nutrition assistance for those affected by this
economic downturn.
I urge my colleagues to get on board and support our farmers, our
ranchers, and our food supply. Support rural America. Quit objecting to
rural America. Quit objecting to our farmers and ranchers. We can't let
that happen. We have talked about the importance of the bill. It is
important for our entire country, and it is certainly important for our
farmers and for our ranchers and for the food supply--the lowest cost,
highest quality food supply that they provide every single American
every single day.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President.
Mr. TILLIS. The majority has 5 minutes. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Mr. President.
Do you know what the American people are thinking right now? They are
thinking that the brain is an amazing organ. It starts working in a
mother's womb, and it doesn't stop working until you get elected to
Congress.
Do you know what the American people are thinking right now? They are
thinking that this country was founded by geniuses, but it is being run
by a bunch of idiots.
Do you know what the American people are thinking right now? They are
thinking, Why do the Members of the U.S. Senate continue to double down
on stupid? This is not a Republican bill, Mr. Chairman; this is a
bipartisan bill. We have spent hours and hours and hours negotiating
these provisions with our Democratic friends.
This is not a slush fund. This a bill to help people and businesses
in America. This bill is going to increase unemployment insurance. This
bill is going to send $1,200 to every man and woman in America--
taxpayers who make less than $75,000 a year--and $500 for each of their
children.
This bill is going to help every small business in this country. It
is not a bailout. It provides up to $350 billion for small businesses
for the next 8 weeks to keep them going, and if they don't lay anybody
off, the bill provides that the loans are forgiven.
We have some businesses in this country that are bigger than 500
employees. This bill has a provision to help them, too, as well. In the
America I was raised in, growing your business and becoming as large as
possible was something we aspired to.
This bill does not create a slush fund for the Treasury Secretary. It
provides $75 billion to help some of our industries hardest hit in a
collateralized loan, not a bailout, and then provides another $425
billion to the Federal Reserve under section 13(3) of the Federal
Reserve Act, which the Federal Reserve will make available to all
businesses, including those that don't qualify as a small business. It
is not a gift. We can negotiate warrants; we can negotiate stock
options; we can take a piece of their company in stock.
I don't understand it. I get politics; I have been around it my whole
life. But there comes a time when we have to stop thinking about the
next election and start thinking about the next generation.
What are we going to leave to our children if we allow this economy
to crash? And it is happening as we speak. I mean no ill will toward my
Democratic friends. I like and respect every one of them. But let's
pass this bill.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. MURPHY. Objection.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection by the Senator from Connecticut is
heard.
There is less than 10 minutes remaining.
The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, you can't keep on saying it is a
bipartisan bill when it clearly is not. If it were a bipartisan bill,
you wouldn't have this level of angst from the Democrats who were shut
out of the process.
Let's be clear about what we are talking about here. We don't think
your bill works. We don't think the bill that has been drafted by the
majority party is going to fix the problem. This is a policy
disagreement, and I have an obligation as a representative of my State
to stand up and say when I don't think a $2 trillion bill is going to
fix the problem. It may make a lot of people rich, but it doesn't have
the resources in it today to take care of the most vulnerable in this
country, and it is not going to do the primary job at hand, which is to
stop the virus.
Remember, there is no amount of economic stimulus we can pass--$1
trillion, $2 trillion, $3 trillion--that will solve this problem if we
don't get serious about the public health crisis that exists today.
When you shortchange States, when you don't provide enough money to
help my State and my municipalities manage testing, move congregate
populations apart from each other, and try to manage the crisis, then
you aren't serious about stopping the virus. Yes, one of the
outstanding issues in this bill is that we think we need more funding
for the States and municipalities that are on the frontlines of
fighting the virus. Yes, we don't think this bill will work--will
work--at job No. 1, which is stopping the public health crisis, unless
we provide ample funding. And, yes, we are worried about the lack of
conditionality on funding to big businesses, to
[[Page S1928]]
Wall Street. Yes, we are worried about the fact that this is going to
make rich people much richer and, at the same time, not actually stop
the public health crisis.
These are policy differences. Instead of coming down here and having
showboat after showboat, we should be sitting together trying to
resolve differences that, frankly, I don't think are so large that they
can't be solved within the next several hours.
I just hope we understand that we are down here very frustrated
because we worry that we are about to vote on a bill that is not going
to solve the problem. That is a policy disagreement but a policy
disagreement that can be resolved.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, how much time is remaining on our side?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 5\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. DURBIN. I yield to the Senator from Montana.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, during the past couple of weeks, I have
been talking to Montanans about their needs as we deal with this
coronavirus. Healthcare officials tell me that folks on the frontlines
need more masks, more protective equipment, and, quite frankly, this
bill does not get that done. It helps, but it doesn't get it done.
Small businesses and their employees are telling me that they need
immediate access to relief. This bill doesn't do that because, quite
frankly, we need more on the front end on bridge loans. Tax credits are
great, but you have to be in business to be able to take advantage of
those. Mayors and local city officials are worried that if they can't
keep up with the mounting needs their communities are facing, this bill
fails them. Tribal leaders across Montana have made it clear to me and
to other folks in this body that they are largely and unfortunately
ignored in the bill before us.
This bill is nearly $2 trillion. One of the things it does do, and I
know there are folks on the floor right now who disagree, but the fact
is, massive corporations through that $500 billion slush fund, which, I
might add, has very little, if any, transparency or accountability--it
goes to those folks.
Look, I think all of us agree that $2 trillion is a lot of money. It
is all borrowed money, and if there is ever a time to borrow money, it
is in economic times like these, but this needs to be a targeted,
temporary support to keep our economy going.
As the Senator from Connecticut said, the fact is that this bill,
particularly this slush fund, is not a good use of taxpayer money. It
would allow an unelected official with no accountability to the
American people to dole out $500 billion while hiding the receipts for
months, if not longer.
I know there are Senators who say: Well, they can get warrants for
these loans. They must get warrants for these loans.
These companies can take advantage of hundreds of billions of dollars
of this money and continue to lay off some of those same taxpayers who
are supporting them through their taxes.
Montanans know we can do better, and they expect better. Working
together, I am going to tell you, we can get this done. There isn't a
person in this body who hasn't filled a leadership position outside of
their service to the U.S. Senate. You know that you need to negotiate
and you need to compromise. If that is done and it is done in good
faith, we will have a bill before the day is done.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I can give you a very long list to
describe everything we are doing here to help small business people in
this country, our hospitals, personal protective equipment.
Let me say this. This bill was written by both Democrats and
Republicans in good faith. It is time to get over our differences and
put our country before ourselves. Let's come together and vote this
bill out of the Senate now.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, how much time remains on our side?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes 40 seconds.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me just say, strike a responsible
distance and take a deep breath. We are going to pass this bill--not
the one that Senator McConnell brought before us yesterday but a
version of that, which I think is a dramatic improvement.
My prayer is that bill is going to include even more money than the
McConnell bill when it comes to dealing with the healthcare crisis we
face and the challenge we face--more money for hospitals, more money
for providers, and more money for equipment, and we are going to have
to come back again, I am sorry to say, if this continues, to make sure
we put even greater investment in the men and women who will save our
lives across this country.
Secondly, we want to make certain that this McConnell bill is
improved when it comes to accountability for the taxpayer dollars given
to the largest corporations in America. Some of us feel burned by what
has happened with some of those corporations in the past when we
trusted their leadership to build their companies and help their
employees, but, instead, they built up their own bank accounts at the
expense of their employees. We don't want to return to those days. I am
sure the Republicans don't either. We want language in this bill that
moves this in the direction of accountability and transparency when it
comes to spending taxpayers' dollars by major corporations.
Third, never overlook the need of State and local governments. They
have been waiting, begging, and pleading with the administration in the
White House to give national leadership. Absent that, they have taken
on the responsibility themselves. They are asking us to stand behind
them as they make these difficult decisions, State by State by State,
because the White House refuses to make these same decisions. We need
to provide the resources to do that. State and local governments need
that help, and I believe the McConnell bill could be improved by
providing more resources in that regard.
There are so many bipartisan things that we do agree upon in this
bill. Let's get these things right. As Senator Murphy of Connecticut
said, if we don't get it right in terms of dealing with the
coronavirus, we can't put enough money on the table for economic
recovery. Let's do it.
I am sorry we are going to this roll call. It is not an indication of
the progress that I believe has been made since yesterday in
negotiating a bipartisan approach to improving the McConnell bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. DURBIN. I think it is time to recognize that.
Thank you.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
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,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 157, H.R. 748, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on
high cost employer-sponsored health coverage.
Mitch McConnell, David Perdue, Mike Rounds, Mitt Romney,
James E. Risch, Lamar Alexander, Steve Daines, Kevin
Cramer, Tim Scott, Martha McSally, Deb Fischer, Marco
Rubio, John Boozman, James Lankford, Rob Portman, Tom
Cotton.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to H.R. 748, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored
health coverage, shall be brought to a close upon reconsideration?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the order.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Colorado (Mr. Gardner), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), the
Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Romney),
and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Scott).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hawley). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
[[Page S1929]]
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 49, nays 46, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 78 Leg.]
YEAS--49
Alexander
Barrasso
Blackburn
Blunt
Boozman
Braun
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Jones
Kennedy
Lankford
Loeffler
McConnell
McSally
Moran
Murkowski
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Wicker
Young
NAYS--46
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Harris
Hassan
Heinrich
Hirono
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Manchin
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Udall
Van Hollen
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--5
Gardner
Lee
Paul
Romney
Scott of Florida
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 49, the nays are
46.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted
in the affirmative upon reconsideration, the motion is rejected.
____________________