[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 215 (Friday, December 18, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7693-S7695]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 806

  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, today what I want to talk about 
is religious freedom. Religious liberty is our

[[Page S7694]]

first freedom under the Constitution of the United States. Americans 
have the right to freely exercise religion, a sacred right that I will 
always fight for.
  There is no pandemic exception to the First Amendment. Unfortunately, 
we have seen liberal Governors and mayors across the country use the 
coronavirus pandemic to go after churches, synagogues, mosques, and 
other houses of worship. For months, they have argued that houses of 
worship should not meet and congregants could not sing. They have 
condemned in-person worship services as a threat to public safety, all 
while they applaud massive political protests.
  We saw it happen right here in the Nation's Capital. Mayor Bowser 
refused to grant a waiver to the Capitol Hill Baptist Church for 
religious gatherings but supported mass protests that violated her own 
orders. The church had to sue the city in Federal court for the right 
to gather, and the court ruled in favor of the church.
  It is simply hypocritical and unconstitutional to target religious 
institutions while letting other businesses operate. We know those on 
the left will take every opportunity to infringe on Americans' First 
Amendment rights, but we won't let it happen.
  This year has been challenging, and for many of us, our faith and our 
communities have helped us through it. Government doesn't have the 
right to take this away from American citizens.
  I am proud to lead a resolution today with 15 of my colleagues to 
call out those who have wrongly tried to prevent Americans from 
practicing their faith. This is about rights granted to Americans under 
our Constitution.
  What is the one thing every American believes in and has agreed to 
uphold. It is our Constitution, which we have each sworn to uphold as 
elected officials also.
  We each took the same oath of office:

       I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the 
     Constitution of the United States against all enemies, 
     foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and 
     allegiance to the same; that I will take this obligation 
     freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; 
     and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of 
     the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

  There is no reason anyone should object to upholding our 
Constitution. I will always fight for the religious liberty of all 
Americans, and I look forward to my colleagues passing this important 
resolution today.
  However, I now am going to wait because I understand one of my 
Democratic colleagues is going to come object to upholding the 
Constitution and the First Amendment, the Bill of Rights. This is 
shocking to me.
  As if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 806, submitted earlier today; 
further, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the 
preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered 
made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, my 
colleague Senator Scott has chosen an interesting point in this 
pandemic to object to public safety measures intended to protect human 
life and ensure scarce resources are not squandered.
  Over 17 million Americans--17 million--have contracted COVID, that we 
know of, and over 300,000 of our friends and our neighbors and loved 
ones are no longer with us. Think about that.
  September 11 was a great national tragedy. I know because I lost 700 
of those 3,000 citizens, on that fateful day, from New Jersey. This is 
100 times more than what happened on September 11.
  The people we have lost are not just some nameless numbers but 
mothers and fathers and grandparents. Essential parts of our hearts are 
gone forever due to a pandemic that has been mishandled and mismanaged 
from the start. And now, when this virus is running unchecked through 
our communities, we have before us this resolution that is riddled with 
misstatements of fact that I find deeply concerning.
  No Governor wants to see their constituents cut off from their daily 
lives, and I think we can all agree that the administration here in 
Washington--their inability to guide us through this crisis--has left 
our Governors holding the bag when it comes to securing resources, 
providing guidance, and making the difficult calls about the right 
public policy to prevent COVID-19 from rampaging like an unchecked bull 
in a China shop through our States because they know, the Governors of 
our States, that the lives of their residents--our neighbors, brothers, 
sisters, children, and parents--rest in their hands and these difficult 
decisions they must make.
  We are still losing Americans from COVID-19 at an unprecedented rate. 
Hospitals throughout the country are providing an amazing level of care 
with exhausted providers and continued resource issues. And our economy 
is cratering because we cannot fully reopen it until it is safe.
  I am deeply troubled to see a false claim about my State and the 
Governor banning indoor religious services. Let me be clear, houses of 
worship were never ordered closed--never. In fact, today, religious 
gatherings are allowed to have substantially higher capacity limits 
than most other gatherings.
  While New Jersey restricted the capacity of indoor religious 
services, as they did with all indoor gatherings, religious gatherings 
were never--never--designated as nonessential or essential, as this 
resolution suggests. That distinction was only applied to retail 
businesses.
  Perhaps religion is different in Florida, but our houses of worship 
are not retail businesses. Houses of worship and religious 
organizations have been subject to neutral restrictions that equally 
burden religious and nonreligious entities. They were put in place to 
do what? To save lives, not under the guise of doing so and certainly 
not for the purpose of targeting religious groups.
  I am a man of strong faith and conviction. I have always found deep 
solace in the rituals and shared worship of my church. I know many of 
us have. But perhaps the most important part of my faith is the duty, 
the responsibility to care for my neighbors up and down the State of 
New Jersey and all across the Nation. Our faith calls us to ensure the 
health and safety of this Nation before all else.
  As a matter of fact, I am reminded of a passage in the Bible of James 
2:14. It says:

       What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you 
     have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a 
     brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of 
     you says to them, ``Go in peace; keep warm and get your 
     fill,'' and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is 
     the good of that? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is 
     dead. But someone will say, ``You have faith and I have 
     works.'' Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by 
     my works will show you my faith.

  As for me, I will continue to work for the people of New Jersey, our 
healthcare workers struggling to care for the thousands filling ICU 
hospital beds, for the families who don't know how they will pay next 
month's rent and keep food on the table, for the small business owner 
trying to keep his doors open, and, yes, for the churches that want the 
see their parishioners safe. I, however, do not intend to play these 
partisan games. For those reasons, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, freedom of religion shouldn't be 
controversial. This is a fundamental right of our Nation, as stated in 
our Constitution: ``Congress shall make no law respecting the 
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.''
  What this resolution says is that the Senate affirms its support for 
the rights, liberties, and protections enshrined in the U.S. 
Constitution.
  There is no pandemic exception to the First Amendment. For months, 
across this country, liberal politicians have targeted churches, 
synagogues, mosques, and other houses of worship. To let this happen 
undermines the principle of our Nation and the Constitution we have 
each sworn to uphold as elected officials. I don't understand why my 
colleague, who swore to uphold the Constitution, would object to a 
resolution that simply reaffirms our commitment to upholding the 
Constitution.
  We are blessed to live in a great nation that respects religious 
liberty and

[[Page S7695]]

the right to worship, especially as we see countries around the world 
like Communist China and Iran deny their citizens these same rights. 
Americans have the right to worship, and government doesn't get to 
decide for them.
  I am clearly very disappointed that my colleague doesn't want to 
protect the First Amendment, but I will continue to stand against these 
misguided and hypocritical attempts to target religious institutions. I 
am never going to stop fighting for the religious liberty of all 
Americans, even during a pandemic.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I know that my colleague, I understand, 
is going to be the next chair of the Republican Senatorial Campaign 
Committee, and he has every right to do that, but what he has no right 
to do is misrepresent in this resolution what, at least in my State, is 
going on.
  You cannot say that churches were designated by the State of New 
Jersey as nonessential or essential. That simply is not true. It is 
simply not true. You cannot suggest that somehow these purposes are to 
target religions. They are to save lives.
  Now, maybe if my colleague and others here had spoken up when the 
administration was asleep at the switch as this pandemic was raging, 
maybe if my colleagues had spoken up when we found out that the 
President knew back in January, early February of this year, of how 
vicious this pandemic could be, how contagious it could be, how it was 
transmitted, but said nothing to the American people--and that silence 
was echoed in this Chamber--well, maybe then we wouldn't in the 
position that we are in. Maybe we wouldn't have lost 300,000 of our 
fellow Americans.
  So I find it really, really upsetting that, in the midst of a raging 
pandemic, one would seek to obtain a political value out of something 
that is simply not the case--simply not the case. I think there is a 
lot more to be done in this Chamber to stop this pandemic, to stop more 
lives from being lost, to save our brothers and sisters, to help those 
who have been ravaged by the pandemic, but not to pick a few States 
that happen to be Democratic--please.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT. So if my colleague from New Jersey's concern is the 
paragraph numbered 4 on page 3, I would ask him if he would object if 
we just take that paragraph out and then he would be willing to affirm 
that the Senate believes in religious freedom.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. The resolution is replete with inaccuracies, and, 
therefore, I will continue to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Let's remember, the concern was that he didn't 
like the section about New Jersey and said that was inaccurate, but the 
idea that the Senate will support religious freedom, he is not willing 
to stand behind.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Young). The Senator from Michigan.