[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 222 (Wednesday, December 30, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7977-S7979]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CORONAVIRUS

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I wanted to come to the floor and talk 
about what strikes me as something akin to Groundhog Day. Groundhog Day 
is only the day I was born. It is something I feel like we are living 
through here as we debate the same points over

[[Page S7978]]

and over and over again, forgetting what it is we have already done--
the good things we have done together on a bipartisan basis.
  We have already appropriated roughly $4 trillion in response to this 
pandemic, and it is appropriate that we have done so because this was a 
true public health crisis. But now this is--we are seeing politics 
creep back in in an attempt to send money in an untargeted and wasteful 
sort of way to people who have suffered no financial loss.
  These relief packages that we passed together have provided hundreds 
of billions of dollars to support our hospitals and healthcare workers 
who are on the frontlines. I voted for it, and I think we were right to 
do so.
  We have thrown small businesses and their employees a lifeline 
through the Paycheck Protection Program, and we were right to do so. We 
have invested in research, development, and manufacturing of 
therapeutics and vaccines that are currently being administered--thank 
goodness--throughout the country and, indeed, around the world. And we 
have sent unprecedented assistance to workers, families, and 
individuals whose livelihoods have been upended by this crisis.
  Thanks to President Trump's leadership, Congress has stepped up and 
met this unprecedented challenge to deliver relief bill after relief 
bill for the American people. If you had told me a year ago I would 
have voted this year alone for roughly $4 trillion worth of spending in 
this pandemic, I would not have believed you. But I do believe this is 
a domestic equivalent to World War II, where we have to do everything 
humanly possible to try to help our fellow man, woman, and child during 
this pandemic.

  The latest round of relief came, of course, just this week, when 
President Trump signed the $900 billion rescue package into law. While 
I am glad Congress was able to send more relief out the door at the end 
of the year, I am disappointed that it took so long to do so. It is 
amazing the sense of urgency our Democratic colleagues have today, 
since at least three times--maybe four times--they blocked our attempts 
to pass half-trillion-dollar relief bills during the course of the 
summer.
  In July, our colleagues introduced the HEALS Act, which would have 
provided just under a trillion dollars in relief, covering the same 
types of policies included in the most recent relief bill--direct 
payments, unemployment benefits, funding for schools, vaccines, and a 
host of other priorities.
  Our Democratic colleagues not only complained about the bill, but 
they called it weak, little, pathetic, and unserious. They refused to 
engage in the sorts of negotiations that are customary around here when 
you actually want to solve a problem or consider anything short of the 
House's multitrillion-dollar bill, which they knew had no chance of 
passing in the Senate because of things like tax cuts for millionaires 
and billionaires, which had nothing to do with COVID.
  So our Democratic colleagues dragged their feet--July, August, 
September, October, November. Months went by, and the cases soared, and 
the economic squeeze tightened, and our Democratic colleagues refused 
to accept any sort of compromise.
  That was until a few weeks ago, when they finally changed their tune 
right after the election. I am sure it comes as no surprise that once 
the holdout agrees to negotiate, things can move pretty quickly, and 
that is what happened here after the election. Democrats, Republicans, 
and the administration agreed to a $900 billion package, which looks 
very similar to the one they dubbed pathetic just a few months ago.
  In recent days, the President has expressed an interest in doing 
more, and I have no doubt that we will do more in this area, but 
Speaker Pelosi's bill goes far beyond what the President is talking 
about. For one, it would dramatically widen the pool of recipients, 
enabling wealthy households to qualify for relief checks. This is 
unacceptable and wasteful.
  When Congress provided the first round of direct payments through the 
CARES Act, we did so in a way that sent relief to the hardest hit 
Americans. Individuals who made up to $75,000 received the full $1,200, 
and the amount gradually declined as income increased and completely 
phased out at $99,000. We kept the same formula for the $600 payments 
provided for under the omnibus and further targeted the relief. Once 
again, those who made up to $75,000 will receive the full amount, and 
the amount phases out completely at $87,000.
  Under the CARES Act, a family of four earning up to $150,000 received 
$3,400, and in the most recent rescue bill, the same family would 
receive an additional $2,400. This was the most effective and targeted 
way to ensure that assistance goes to those who actually need it while 
avoiding sending taxpayer dollars--borrowed, I might add--to those who 
don't.
  The House-passed legislation would provide $2,000 payments, but it 
doesn't have a similar structure to keep these payments targeted. Let 
me give you an example.
  If this bill were to become law, a person making $100,000 a year 
would receive a $750 check from the Federal Government, whether or not 
they lost income during the pandemic. This isn't someone who used to 
make that much but was laid off or had a reduction in their income. 
Someone who is currently earning a six-figure salary would receive an 
additional $750 from American taxpayers.
  For families, the income barrier goes higher. As I mentioned a moment 
ago, if you have a family of five with an annual household income of 
$350,000 a year, that family would receive a stimulus check under the 
House-passed bill. Now, that is not being smart with taxpayer dollars, 
and that is not targeted at the people who actually need it. That is a 
giveaway to people who have not suffered any financial losses during 
this pandemic and clearly not targeted at those who need the most help.
  I mentioned a moment ago that the median income for households in 
Texas is $60,000 a year, so this family of five is earning nearly six 
times as much and would still receive a check from taxpayers. That 
defies all common sense. Even the Washington Post editorial board 
dubbed this policy as wasteful because of the huge amounts destined for 
what they call ``perfectly comfortable families.''
  Even though Congress has already provided roughly $4 trillion in 
relief to the American people, our Democratic colleagues are acting as 
though this is the first and only way to help our country.
  Like I said, for them, every day is Groundhog Day. They ignore 
everything we have done in the past and act like this is the only thing 
we have or could do. It is just not true
  This debate isn't about whether or not Congress should help families 
who are struggling. We have. And there is no question we will continue 
to do so where needed. That is why we provided $1,200 in direct 
payments to the hardest hit Americans through the CARES Act and an 
additional $600 through the most recent relief bill. That is why these 
bills also bolstered State unemployment benefits and expanded them to 
include independent contractors and the self-employed. That is why 
Congress passed legislation to provide food assistance to families, 
keep more hard-working Americans on payroll, and ensure our economy is 
on track for a strong recovery.
  Again, we did this thanks to the leadership of President Trump and by 
working together in a bipartisan way.
  Countless Texans have told me about the impact of this relief on 
their businesses and their families, and we can't lose sight of the 
progress that has already been made. But future relief must be 
targeted. We need to support those who need it and avoid sending 
hundreds of billions of dollars, as this proposal would, to those who 
don't need it.
  Throughout the year, I have been an advocate for an incremental 
approach to these relief bills because I think it is hard to spend $3 
trillion and know exactly how that bill is going to work. And, indeed, 
we found out through the CARES Act that the mainstream lending 
facility, which we funded at roughly half a trillion dollars, wasn't as 
useful as we would have hoped.
  Conversely, the Paycheck Protection Program was more successful than 
our wildest dreams. So I think by seeing what works and what doesn't 
work, we can be better stewards of taxpayer dollars by spending the 
money more efficiently and in a more targeted way.

[[Page S7979]]

  This isn't like highway bills or farm bills or defense spending bills 
where we have an idea about what is needed for individual programs. 
There was no precedent for this pandemic, no handbook, and no clear way 
to gauge how long this crisis would go on or what would be needed to 
sustain our response.
  After the CARES Act passed, we knew it made the most sense to hit the 
pause button and see what worked well, what didn't, and where more help 
was needed. As I said, there were certain programs like the Paycheck 
Protection Program that almost immediately dried up. If I am not 
mistaken, in 2 weeks, roughly $350 billion was obligated under the 
Paycheck Protection Program--a strong indication that we really hit the 
sweet spot when it came to helping those small businesses. That is why 
we added more funding in April, another $320 billion, and we extended 
the program in July and reinvested in the Paycheck Protection Program 
again in the omnibus.
  As I said, there were other places where the money went unspent. But, 
fortunately, in the most recent bill we were able to repurpose hundreds 
of billions of dollars in unspent funds, again, to target it to where 
the need was greatest and where it could help the most.
  There is no question that tens of millions of workers and their 
families have been hurt by this virus. We all know that. And I think we 
have all acted together, by and large, responsibly, in trying to 
respond to that. No one will be left out if we have a means and method 
of targeting this to those people--whether it is direct payments, 
enhanced unemployment benefits, incentives to their employers to 
maintain them on payroll. And now that we have the beginning of the 
distribution of the vaccine, my hope is that in the coming months we 
will get back to, if not the new normal, whatever the next normal will 
be.
  But we are just a few days from kicking off the new Congress, and I 
have no reason to believe that our coronavirus relief work is finished 
here today. As a matter of fact, Vice President Biden said that he 
expects to send us an additional request for help once he assumes 
office.
  Once the legislation we have passed has a chance to benefit the 
American people, we will see if more relief is needed, and then, if it 
is needed, we should absolutely do more.
  I still believe in the wisdom of the incremental approach, and I 
believe our Democratic friends will join us in responding to the true 
needs of this crisis without monthlong delays or irresponsible 
spending.
  Countless Texans have told me about the importance of the relief we 
have provided through direct payments, unemployment benefits, food 
assistance, and other forms of support by the laws we passed throughout 
this year. I was proud to support each of those policies, which have 
eased the financial strains on millions of Texans and other Americans. 
I will continue to work with our colleagues to provide assistance as 
our war on COVID-19 rages on.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.

                          ____________________