[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 210 (Friday, December 11, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7433-S7434]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CORONAVIRUS

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, that said, we know the American 
people's eyes are trained on the Capitol for another reason as well. 
Struggling families, exhausted health workers, and anxious small 
business owners are waiting--waiting--for the Senate to do what I have 
tried to accomplish over and over for months: Pass a significant, 
targeted COVID-relief bill built on all the areas where bipartisan 
consensus already exists.
  We know what that common ground looks like: a new second round of the 
Paycheck Protection Program so hard-hit small businesses can keep 
paying their people, the necessary investments in distribution to get 
lifesaving vaccines out to our people, and an extension of some 
unemployment programs

[[Page S7434]]

that will otherwise expire in just a matter of days.
  Republicans have been crystal clear about the sort of urgent and 
unobjectionable relief we are ready to deliver. I even offered to 
temporarily set aside one of our side's major requests, commonsense 
legal protections--by the way, 6,500 lawsuits have already been filed--
to set aside commonsense legal protections to aid the reopening if 
Democrats drop their own controversial outstanding demands. But day 
after day, the Democratic leader finds new reasons not to compromise, 
new ways to avoid taking yes for an answer.
  In what universe should emergency aid for small businesses be 
contingent--contingent--on massive bailouts for State governments with 
no linkage to actual needs? Democrats are acting like it is more 
important to supply the Governor of California with a special slush 
fund than to help restaurant workers in California keep their jobs. Oh, 
and, by the way, these demands for State and local government giveaways 
are blocking urgent aid for struggling families at a time when many 
States' tax revenues have largely gone up--up
  In November, California admitted their tax revenue for this fiscal 
year was running about 19 percent ahead of what they had predicted. The 
Governor said earlier this week that he foresees a tax windfall--
windfall--not a horrible budget crunch, but a windfall of nearly $16 
billion.
  State lawmakers are preparing to argue over where to put all this 
unexpected tax money. According to the L.A. Times, they are considering 
topping up the State's cash reserves. They aren't just getting by; they 
are putting more money away.
  Here is another headline from a few days back--a State the occupant 
of the Chair is familiar with--``Massachusetts tax revenue[s] eclipsed 
total for last November despite COVID-driven recession.'' This is 
another State where revenues are actually up over last year.
  Whatever future problems Democrats may think they see around the 
corner, it is preposterous to claim that these blue States that are 
bragging about their tax windfalls must receive another Federal handout 
right this instant, before working families can get a penny more.
  Small businesses need saving right now. Unemployed people need relief 
extended right now. Vaccine distribution networks need funding right 
now. None of that should be held hostage over intergovernmental 
bailouts for States that are currently raking in revenue faster than 
they can spend it.
  Yet the Speaker and the Democratic leader have persuaded their entire 
conference that nothing should pass unless the Governors of California 
and New York get to cut the line and jump in front of millions of 
Americans who are trying to figure out how to pay their bills each and 
every month.
  Then there is Democrats' apparently strong opposition to enacting any 
kind of legal protections to aid the reopening. Targeted, temporary 
liability reforms are a common feature of national emergencies or 
strange events, such as the Y2K mess and September 11. This is not some 
new concoction; it is what Congress has done in the past.
  But this time, Democrats say the trial lawyers' interests must come 
first. They are threatening to kill any compromise whatsoever unless 
Congress leaves small businesses, universities, and healthcare workers 
as sitting ducks--sitting ducks--for frivolous lawsuits.
  My colleagues across the aisle want to present this stance as some 
bold crusade against evil corporations? Well, for one thing, it is the 
big corporations who can afford the massive legal departments. Lawsuits 
are not exactly alien from the perspective of the Fortune 100.
  No, it is small business advocates who have been pleading with 
Congress to pass legal protection since last May. It has been college 
presidents and higher education experts who have sounded this alarm the 
whole time. About 7 in 10 small business owners said a second pandemic 
of lawsuits was a major concern. University administrators told us 
liability is ``a national problem requiring a national solution'' that 
could produce ``a chilling effect'' on American education if not 
addressed. But Democrats are threatening to walk away altogether if 
Republicans try to give these institutions what they need.
  So look, a legislator's true position lies in what they do, not what 
they say. What Republicans have done since July is make one attempt 
after another to generate a consensus package that can actually be 
signed into law.
  What Senate Democrats have done is recite an endless--endless--chain 
of changing stories about why nothing that anyone proposes is any good. 
If my friends actually oppose PPP funding, vaccine distribution money, 
or extending some expiring unemployment aid, let's hear why. But if 
they do not oppose these things, let's get them out the door.
  I have proposed setting aside both liability protections and State 
and local bailouts and making law where we can agree. Democrats have 
thus far declined, but at the same time, they are blocking an agreement 
on these issues. So unless something changes, they will get to explain 
to a restaurant owner that Democrats didn't let her get a second PPP 
loan to save her business because her Governor needed a special slush 
fund or explain to a laid-off worker that his relief program may expire 
completely because Democrats didn't feel it was urgent or explain to an 
older couple, who have hunkered down and survived this long year, that 
their vaccines will arrive later than necessary because Democrats 
wouldn't let us fund distribution.
  If my Democratic friends don't want to explain these inexplicable 
things, then they need to let us act now.

                          ____________________