[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 216 (Saturday, December 19, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7833-S7835]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Coronavirus

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as we all know by now, yesterday brought 
even more great news on the vaccine front. The FDA has now issued an 
emergency approval for a second COVID-19 Vaccine. This one will be 
developed by the American biotech company Moderna and millions of doses 
will be distributed across the country. I should say millions more 
doses will be distributed across the country in the coming days.
  As we know, the first vaccine approved, which was created by Pfizer 
and BioNTech, was approved just over a week ago, and already thousands 
of healthcare workers have been vaccinated. In my State, we expect a 
million people--a million Texans--to be vaccinated by the end of this 
month, which is a remarkable achievement and one we ought to celebrate.
  Both of these vaccines will be extraordinarily effective, estimated 
to be 95 percent effective. If you think about the seasonal flu 
vaccine, for example, it is, generally speaking, no more than 60 
percent effective and many times far less. So 95 percent represents an 
amazing accomplishment. So the American people have every reason to be 
optimistic about our ability to put this virus in the rearview mirror, 
once and for all.
  As we now know, the first round of Pfizer vaccines were sent to major 
hospitals across the country, including more than 100 in my State. 
Unfortunately, rural areas were almost entirely excluded. This is 
largely because of the infrastructure required to use the Pfizer 
vaccine, which must be kept at a negative 94 degrees Fahrenheit, which 
is significantly colder than the average freezer. While you are likely 
to find these ultra-low-temperature freezers in major hospitals and 
major research labs, they are far less likely to be found in smaller, 
rural hospitals. So when the first round of Pfizer vaccines went out 
the door, they were only sent to hospitals with the necessary equipment 
and a large number of workers who needed the vaccine. As a result,

[[Page S7834]]

the healthcare heroes in rural areas, who have been fighting the same 
virus, often with fewer staff, fewer resources, and fewer treatments, 
were left waiting. But we have every reason to believe that this will 
change with the approval of the Moderna vaccine. This doesn't require 
the same low temperature storage and can be kept at around 40 degrees 
Fahrenheit for 30 days. This will make it easier to safely transport 
these vaccines from manufacturing sites to rural parts of Texas and the 
rest of the country and ensure that all of our healthcare heroes, our 
frontline workers, and, eventually, the general public will not be left 
behind.
  There is no reason why rural healthcare workers in Texas or anywhere 
should be denied this lifesaving vaccine when their peers in larger 
urban areas are already receiving it. This is yet another reason to 
celebrate the approval of the second successful vaccine, and I am eager 
for the Moderna vaccine to arrive in healthcare facilities across 
Texas.
  Mr. President, that brings me to the business that remains before the 
Senate today and, likely, for the next couple of days. After months of 
trying to come together on coronavirus legislation--months--the last 
several days have given the American people a lot of reason to hope. 
First of all, it seems like, for the first time in months, there is 
actually bipartisan interest in achieving an agreement. That wasn't the 
case in the runup to the election, where we had at least three or more 
cloture votes fail in the Senate.
  So for months additional coronavirus relief was defeated by our 
Democratic colleagues who weren't even interested in the runup to the 
election on providing additional relief after the CARES Act passed last 
March. But, hopefully, that has all changed now after the election. 
Negotiators are working around the clock to reach an agreement that 
will gain the support of both parties and reach the President's desk 
before we gavel out for the holidays. But the days are dragging on, the 
clock is ticking, and the time is running out.

  I want to mention two things--one about the process, and the other is 
about the substance included in whatever the package will look like.
  First of all, given the way that this is being negotiated, basically 
there are four people who are negotiating this massive spending package 
on behalf of the 535 Members of Congress, and essentially, because this 
has been pushed off until these last days of the 116th session of 
Congress, the only thing most rank-and-file Members will be able to do 
is to vote up or down. In other words, there is no opportunity to amend 
it through regular order.
  I just have to say, this is a terrible way to do business, and in the 
future, I hope we do better because this is almost the worst of all 
worlds when it comes to legislating. But we know our backs are against 
the wall because of the politics leading up to the election, where we 
haven't been able to do more since March, and so we have to do what we 
have to do.
  The second thing I want to mention, which is more about substance, is 
about the Paycheck Protection Program and the deductibility of ordinary 
business expenses. I believe the Paycheck Protection Program has been 
one of the most successful parts of our COVID-19 economic relief. The 
goal, of course, was to provide small businesses access to low-interest 
loans, which could be converted into grants based upon their 
willingness to maintain their payroll and keep their employees 
connected with the business.
  The hope was that these businesses would survive and would rebound 
after we got the virus in the rearview mirror. We didn't know how long 
that was going to last, and, indeed, it has lasted longer than any of 
us would have wanted or had planned. But it is important that this 
Paycheck Protection Program be revived because time is running out.
  In my State, roughly $41 billion has been granted or--excuse me--
loaned with potential for grants to about 417,000 businesses. This has 
been an essential part of our response to COVID-19 and the economic 
fallout associated with it. But when we passed the PPP program in 
March, we expected--the Congress expected that businesses that got the 
loans that were converted to grants would be able to deduct their 
ordinary business expenses in the year 2020.
  Now, I know that may not be the best tax policy in the world, but we 
could choose one of two ways to get financial relief to the small 
businesses. We can shovel money in the front door, or we can allow them 
to deduct their ordinary business expenses even though they received a 
grant from the Federal Government.
  The reason why I say I know this was part of the understanding in 
March when we passed the bill is because I have now--because of the 
Treasury Department's opposition to the deductibility of ordinary 
business expenses for the recipients of the PPP grant, because of the 
Treasury Department's position that those are not deductible, we have 
had to file legislation which will override the Treasury Department's 
guidance and allow for that deductibility.
  Again, this is not an ideal way to write tax policy, but under the 
exigent circumstances here, I think it makes perfect sense. Again, you 
can either write more checks on the front end, or you can allow 
businesses financial relief by deducting their ordinary expenses on the 
back end.
  What I fear will happen, because of the opposition of the Treasury 
Department, is that, come January, the businesses that have received 
this incredibly important PPP benefit will find themselves having to 
pick up--having a tax bill, which will reverse, if not negate, the 
benefit that we intended by developing the PPP program in the first 
place. This will happen as early as January when many businesses have 
to pay their estimated tax. There will be an incredible backlash, I 
believe, because I think the recipients of the PPP loans and grants 
have every reason to expect, as Congress intended, that they would be 
able to deduct their ordinary business expenses.
  What is going to happen if we don't fix that in this underlying bill? 
Well, we are going to end up doing it next year, I promise you, because 
I think the backlash we are going to feel here from the businesses that 
have been suffering, have been hanging on by a thread--that all of a 
sudden, they have an unexpected tax bill of roughly, according to the 
Wall Street Journal, about $120 billion worth.
  We ultimately are going to have to fix that, so we might as well fix 
it on the front end rather than on the back end after our constituents 
who have been the recipients of the PPP grants rise up in outrage, 
really, that we haven't taken care of this now when we should. So I 
hope that in the negotiations on this COVID-19 relief bill, we include 
the deductibility of ordinary business expenses for recipients of PPP 
grants
  The funding we provided earlier this year for vaccine distribution 
has already been depleted, and States are dipping into other sources of 
funding to ensure they have the capabilities to carry out the 
widespread vaccination effort. That is another reason why we need to 
pass this COVID-19 relief bill as soon as possible.
  Workers lost bolstered Federal unemployment benefits at the end of 
July, and they are set to lose additional benefits the day after 
Christmas.
  Small businesses, as I said, are struggling to stay afloat, 
especially as the winter weather hampers outdoor dining and events. I 
saw the snow that hit New York, where many of the restaurants--because 
they have been shut down, indoor dining has been shut down. They tried 
to build up some infrastructure outside their restaurants, but now even 
those have been closed down because of the weather.
  People are hurting and need help. Parents and teachers are wondering 
when their children will be able to return to in-person learning and 
how schools will be able to keep them safe when they do.
  The list goes on and on.
  Earlier this year, we made a $3 trillion investment in our war 
against COVID-19, and that funding has been critical, not only to get 
us to where we are today in terms of therapeutics and vaccines but also 
to keep our economy from tanking entirely. But those funds are drying 
up, programs are expiring, and the American people are counting on us 
once again to provide the support they need.
  There appear to be a few remaining sticking points in the 
negotiations, but

[[Page S7835]]

there is no reason why Congress shouldn't be able to reach an 
agreement. The steady drip of information from congressional leaders is 
encouraging, but progress doesn't pay the bills.
  Enough time has been wasted this year on partisanship and political 
posturing. We have reached a make-it-or-break-it moment, and there is 
no room for inaction. The American people are looking to us to protect 
their health and their livelihoods, and we cannot let them down.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am going to be speaking just a few 
minutes on another matter, and I believe I will have time at 1 o'clock.
  With nobody else seeking the floor at the moment, I would just add to 
what the distinguished Senator from Texas just said. I discussed this 
with him off the floor after he spoke.
  There is a concern about what might be in the omnibus bill and in the 
COVID bill, and here on a Saturday and tomorrow, Sunday, or whatever, 
we are finished, and we are rushing it through. I would remind 
everybody that we were ready to bring up the appropriations bills that 
make up the omnibus in July. The House of Representatives had sent 
over--in June, it sent over their COVID bill. We could have brought it 
up then. We could have started having a series of votes. It might have 
taken us 2 or 3 weeks to have votes every day on different parts of 
their proposal--Democrats' proposals, Republicans' proposals, the 
Appropriations' proposals--and vote them up or down. I had urged that.

  Republicans have the majority in the U.S. Senate. If they didn't like 
proposals the Democrats had, they could vote them down. But instead 
they seemed almost terrified to vote.
  Ah, but there was a reason. We would have had to take 2 or 3 weeks to 
vote all of this up or down, but we had to take, instead, the time to 
put through lifetime judgeships of people who have been recommended by 
special interest groups. That is beneath the U.S. Senate.
  But, unfortunately, while these people got lifetime jobs with high 
pay, hundreds of thousands and millions of Americans have lost their 
jobs, have lost their places to live, are unable to educate their 
children, and hundreds of thousands have lost their lives. This is not 
the U.S. Senate's finest hour.
  We should have been doing our job and voting these things up or down. 
I know some may be afraid of what they had to vote, but so what? I have 
cast over 16,000 votes. Not all of them were easy, but I never thought 
there was any question about whether I would vote.
  (Mrs. HYDE-SMITH assumed the Chair.)