[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 139 (Wednesday, August 5, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4888-S4889]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CORONAVIRUS

  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, last week Senate Republicans did 
introduce a new coronavirus relief bill called the Health, Economic 
Assistance, Liability Protection, and Schools Act. This bill is a $1 
trillion piece of legislation focused on getting Americans back to 
work, getting kids and college students back to school, and providing 
healthcare resources to help defeat the virus. As the title says--the 
Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection, and Schools Act--it 
does have liability protections in there.
  I just listened to the Senator from Illinois attack the idea of 
including those types of protections in the legislation, but I think it 
is really important to point out that those type of protections are 
critical if we are going to get the economy reopened again.
  Businesses that are doing all the right things--following the CDC 
guidelines, adhering to all the laws, all the guidelines and 
restrictions that are out there--shouldn't have to worry about 
lawyering up and spending thousands and, in some cases, millions of 
dollars to try and defend themselves against frivolous lawsuits, which 
are being filed as we speak by the thousands.
  The implication given by the Senator from Illinois that somehow this 
is all about big corporations or big businesses is just not consistent 
with the facts on the ground. In fact, I had a conversation 2 days ago 
with the school administrators in my State of South Dakota, all of whom 
are very interested in getting their schools opened up and getting kids 
back in school, which, again, is one of the priorities of our 
legislation and should be, I think, one of the priorities of the 
country as we head into the fall.
  One of their big issues was ensuring that they had protections 
against liability--a liability shield, if you will, not against gross 
negligence, not against intentional misconduct--those types of things 
would not be covered--but protections if, in fact, they are doing all 
the right things, consistent with the guidelines, following the rules 
that have been put in place, that they should have at least some 
protections.
  That is going to be true not just of schools and small businesses, 
but it is also going to be true of healthcare providers. We have people 
on the frontlines who are sacrificing every day to try and get people 
better, to heal those who have contracted the virus, and also protect 
those who are on the frontlines from getting it. They, too, are going 
to need those very types of protections that are called for in our 
legislation.
  So this is not something that was put in there on a whim just because 
we knew that the Democrats wouldn't like it. It was put in there 
because of feedback we received from States, local governments, school 
districts, healthcare providers, hospitals, nursing homes, and, yes, 
some small businesses, all of whom are going to be essential if we are 
going to get the economy up and going again and get people back to 
work, kids back to school, and Americans back on their feet.
  So it is an essential part of the legislation, one which, so far, the 
Democrats have demonstrated no interest in including and, frankly, no 
interest in even having a conversation about, which is unfortunate 
because it is a critical element, feature, of any bill that we should 
be working on right now to provide coronavirus relief.
  When we introduced this bill, we knew this version wouldn't be the 
final draft. I think everybody conceded that. We knew we would need to 
negotiate with our Democratic colleagues just like we did with the 
CARES Act, which was our largest coronavirus relief bill, back in 
March.
  Back in March, the model that was used was having committee chairmen 
and ranking members get together in compromise and work out differences 
and end up with a strong, bipartisan bill. Was it a perfect bill? Well, 
no, of course not. No bill is. Did everyone get everything that he or 
she wanted? No, but it was a strong, bipartisan bill that was praised 
by Democrats and Republicans alike--in fact, reflected by the unanimous 
vote.
  I would like to say that we are engaging in those same types of 
negotiations right now, but unfortunately I can't say that. I can't 
say, in fact, what is happening right now is even negotiations. 
Negotiations involve both sides being willing to give something up to 
compromise and to try and move toward a solution. While Republicans are 
willing to make compromises to ensure that we can deliver another 
coronavirus relief bill to the American people, Democrats apparently 
aren't willing to make any.
  Back in May, House Democrats proposed and passed a massive $3.4 
trillion piece of legislation that they called a coronavirus relief 
bill. Subsequently, it has been endorsed by Senate Democrats who have 
gone so far as to offer up unanimous consent requests here on the 
Senate floor to adopt the House-passed bill. In reality, that House-
passed bill, $3.4 trillion bill, was a lengthy liberal wish list which 
even Members of the Democrats' own party dismissed as dead on arrival. 
In fact, Democrats had some work to do to persuade Members of their own 
caucus in the House to vote for the bill.
  As POLITICO put it at the time: ``As of late Thursday evening, the 
House Democratic leadership was engaged in what a few senior aides and 
lawmakers described as the most difficult arm-twisting of the entire 
Congress: convincing their rank and file to vote for a $3 trillion 
stimulus bill that will never become law.''
  That is from POLITICO. The House bill includes various ``coronavirus 
priorities'' like funding for diversity and inclusion studies in the 
marijuana industry, tax cuts for blue-State millionaires, federalizing 
elections. Those are just a few of the items that were included in the 
House-passed bill that it is very hard to argue have anything to do 
with defeating the coronavirus. In fact, the House bill mentions the 
word ``cannabis'' more often than it mentions the word ``job,'' which 
tells you all you need to know about the seriousness of that proposal.

  Despite all that, Democratic leaders have taken the House bill as 
their starting and, yes, their ending point for negotiations. They are 
insisting that Republicans sign off on pretty much everything in their 
bill, from the tax cuts for wealthy Americans to major changes in 
election law. And

[[Page S4889]]

they are not budging on the pricetag either.
  As I said, Republicans have proposed a $1 trillion piece of 
legislation, and I can tell you--from being a Member of the Republican 
conference and the discussions that we have--what a stretch it is for a 
lot of Republicans, who already have voted for multiple coronavirus 
relief bills to the pricetag of about $3 trillion so far, to do another 
trillion dollars, knowing that every one of those dollars is a borrowed 
dollar, every one of those dollars is going on a Federal debt which is 
already upward of $25 billion and will ultimately have to be paid back 
by our children and grandchildren.
  Well, that said, the trillion-dollar legislation that was put forward 
by Republicans is nowhere close to the pricetag for the Democrats' 
bill, which is $3.4 trillion, as I said. Now, I think even an 
elementary school student would realize that compromise lies somewhere 
between those two numbers, more than, perhaps, the Republicans' bill 
and less than the Democrats' bill, but apparently that is not something 
Democrats are willing to entertain.
  A senior correspondent for CNN talked to Speaker Pelosi yesterday, 
who claimed she wanted to reach agreement on a bill this week. The 
correspondent asked the Speaker what pricetag she was willing to agree 
to. Her answer: $3.4 trillion. In other words, after more than a week 
of negotiations, the Speaker of the House hasn't budged from her 
original position. She hasn't budged, nor have the Senate Democrats, 
who every time something has come up on our side to try and address 
this crisis have answered with: Well, let's just pass the Heroes Act of 
the House, the $3.4 trillion boondoggle.
  Well, that is not a compromise. That is not a negotiation. And if we 
emerge from this process without a coronavirus relief bill, the 
responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the Democratic 
leadership.
  Let's suppose, for a moment, that Republican negotiators agreed to 
every single thing that Democrats are insisting on: tax cuts for 
millionaires, diversity studies for the marijuana industry, a trillion-
dollar pot of money for States, which, I might add, haven't even come 
close to spending the coronavirus money the government has already 
given them. Let's suppose Republican negotiators agreed to everything. 
What would happen then?
  Well, the bill would never pass the Senate. In the Senate, you need 
60 votes to pass a bill, and there simply aren't 60 votes in the Senate 
for the Democrats' liberal fantasies. In fact, it would be lovely if, 
as Democrats seem to think, the government drew its funding from a 
magical pot of gold that never runs out, but it doesn't. Every dollar 
of the coronavirus relief that we already provided has been borrowed 
money, which continues to drive up our national debt. Now, arguably, it 
was money that needed to be borrowed, but there has to be a limit.
  The higher we drive our national debt, the greater the danger to the 
health of our economy. Democrats may be fine with jeopardizing our 
economic health to pay for diversity studies in the marijuana industry, 
but I can tell you the Republicans are not. Republicans know we are 
going to have to borrow some additional money to meet the demands of 
the coronavirus crisis--and we have offered legislation to do just 
that--but we are not going to further endanger our already battered 
economy by signing off on every unnecessary spending item on the 
Democrats' liberal fantasy list.
  Now, are Republicans going to have to agree to some of the things 
that we are not crazy about? Of course we are. But Democrats are going 
to have to accept that they can't dictate every word of the bill.
  The bill which passed the House, I might add, was 1,800 pages long. 
The bill that we have proposed in the Senate is 165 pages. The ball is 
in the Democrats' court. Republicans want to pass a coronavirus relief 
bill, and we are ready to negotiate. The Democrats are going to have to 
decide they want to come to the table.
  ``Our way or the highway'' is not a negotiating position, and if 
Democrats continue to insist on getting everything that they want, they 
are going to be responsible for Congress's failure to deliver 
additional relief. I hope--I really hope the Democratic leadership will 
remember what it means to negotiate and that it will work with 
Republicans to arrive at a compromise bill that can make it through 
both Houses of Congress and actually become law.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse). The Senator from Indiana.

                          ____________________