[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 9, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1418-S1419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, it doesn't seem like that long ago--it
wasn't; it was only January 20 of this year--that we heard President
Biden talk about healing the divisions in our country and promoting
unity. He promised to restore respectful, bipartisan communication and
cooperation. He spoke eloquently, saying:
Without unity there is no peace, only bitterness and fury.
No progress, only exhausting outrage.
No nation, only a state of chaos.
It really was a fine speech. But here we are, 7 weeks into the Biden
administration with a lot of bitterness and fury and outrage over the
President's first big, broken promise. On Saturday afternoon, following
an all-night voting marathon, our Democratic colleagues passed, by
themselves, their so-called COVID-19 relief bill.
Sadly, the lack of bipartisan support was not a surprise. After all,
our Democratic colleagues decided to abuse the reconciliation process
for this very reason. They wanted to pass a bill they knew would not
generate any support among Republicans because it really is a Trojan
horse for their liberal wish list. And the only way they could make
that happen would be to exclude Republicans, turn down offers of
bipartisanship, as the President did when 10 Republicans visited him at
the White House just a few weeks ago and decided to go it alone, which
is what our Democratic colleagues did.
Since Republicans had no say in the drafting of the bill and because
our Democratic friends chose to skip the normal committee
consideration, our only opportunity to make any changes to the bill
came through the amendment process on the floor. From roughly 11 a.m.
on Friday until 12:30 p.m. on Saturday, the Senate voted on more than
30 amendments, largely from folks on our side of the aisle, almost all
of which were rejected in a party-line vote.
Outside of Washington, DC, not many people stay up for 24 hours
straight to watch Congress vote on budget amendments, so I think it is
important that we recap what the American people missed while they were
sleeping.
The first amendment vote last Friday was a good barometer of what was
happening on the other side of the aisle. The first vote, teed up by
the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Sanders, would have more
than doubled the minimum wage at $15 an hour. The Congressional Budget
Office said that this would kill 1.4 million jobs, and then the Senate
Parliamentarian said that this was an improper use of the budget
reconciliation process.
But our Democratic colleagues wanted to take this shot anyway, so
they voted to waive a budget point of order, but it did not go well.
Eight Democrats voted alongside all Republicans to prevent this abuse
of the budget reconciliation process and prevent this job-killing
minimum wage mandate from becoming part of this bill.
As it turns out, there is bipartisan opposition to killing jobs at a
time when our economy is already on a fragile footing. Who would have
thought otherwise?
And once Senators cast their votes, our Democratic friends held the
vote open for a recordbreaking 12 hours as they tried to whip their
caucus into shape on the most critical amendment, which was next in
line.
I am not one to tell our friends across the aisle how to do their
job, but normally, when you have a vote, you know ahead of time how
that vote is going to come out. That is just legislation 101. But when
you are trying to rush, at warp speed, a nearly $2 trillion wish list
to the President's desk, I guess you don't have the time to do things
the right way, and you certainly don't have an interest in getting them
done in a bipartisan fashion.
But on the rest of the votes we held, over and over again, our
Democratic colleagues held together and blocked commonsense amendments
offered by this side of the aisle. For example, there were amendments
to stop blue States from receiving more than their fair share of the
State and local funding. The Democratic proposal includes a jaw-
dropping $350 billion for State and local aid--more than double what
was spent in the CARES Act last March when the economic picture was far
more dire.
Unlike the CARES Act funding that was distributed based on
population, this proposal separated the funds into two pots of money--
one to be distributed based on a population formula while the second is
based on the unemployment rate.
Senator Graham from South Carolina offered an amendment which would
have required this funding to follow the same formula that we did in
March, in a bipartisan way, rather than this new formula that favors
blue States.
Since the primary argument for the bill was that States needed this
funding because of lost tax revenues, it made sense that the largest
population States should receive the most funding, a per capita
formula. This would eliminate a big windfall for blue States that have
largely kept their economies on ice and shuttered, even as COVID-19
cases decreased.
Then there was an amendment from the Senator from Utah, Senator
Romney, which would have ensured State and local funding was only going
to those States that actually need it. What a concept. His amendment
would require States to apply for aid through the Treasury Department.
They could then receive funds to help recover pandemic-related
expenses, revenue losses, or unexpected Medicaid costs. But, of course,
in a party-line vote, our Democratic colleagues blocked that amendment
as well.
And it is not just State and local funding that folks on my side of
the aisle wanted us to use more responsibly. I offered an amendment to
improve the quality of care for unaccompanied migrant children who
arrived along the U.S.-Mexico border. We know that these children are
especially vulnerable and their health and safety should have been
addressed in this COVID package.
Well, President Biden's border crisis is shaping up to be one of epic
proportions. Border agents reportedly detained nearly 100,000 migrants
along the southern border last month alone. That marks the highest
total for the month of February since 2006. The numbers have now
climbed so high that the administration is allowing facilities to house
children to operate at 100 percent capacity, when our kids aren't even
going back to school in many school districts around the country
because of concerns for their safety. Forget that. The Biden
administration is now allowing these facilities that house children to
operate at 100 percent despite the COVID risk.
An amendment I offered would redirect unnecessary funding for the
National Endowment for the Humanities and instead send it to the Office
of Refugee Resettlement. This office is part of the Department of
Health and Human Services, and this extra funding would help keep these
children safe and healthy. Unfortunately, for these children, many of
whom have endured long and dangerous journeys in the hands of human
smugglers, our Democratic colleagues chose the National Endowment for
the Humanities instead of these children in distress.
Well, the list of rejected amendments goes on and on.
Senator Scott of South Carolina offered an amendment to ensure States
weren't fudging on the nursing home death count totals, like the
disastrous situation developing in New York that we are just now
learning about the magnitude of nursing home deaths that were covered
up by the Cuomo administration. This amendment would have required
States to certify the accuracy of COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes in
order to assess funding for nursing home facility strike teams. Once
again, a party-line vote blocked that amendment.
One of the highlights of this long and drawn-out process, which just
left me scratching my head, was an amendment from Senator Cassidy, the
Senator from Louisiana, that would have prevented stimulus checks being
sent
[[Page S1419]]
to people in prison and one from Senator Cruz, my colleague from Texas,
that would have stopped payments from going to people who are not even
legally present in the United States. Both amendments were blocked in a
party-line vote by Democrats.
Our colleague from Florida, Senator Rubio, offered an amendment to
incentivize a safe return to in-person learning at our Nation's
schools. The crux of it was simple: If schools wanted Federal funding,
they should actually educate children in the classroom and do so
safely, according to CDC guidelines; otherwise, why do they need this
huge amount of extra money if they are not actually going to use it to
educate our children? Well, our Democratic colleagues blocked that
amendment too.
While Americans were sleeping, Senate Democrats stood in the way of
numerous commonsense reforms to this behemoth of a partisan bill. They
have proven, once again, this so-called COVID-19 relief bill has next
to nothing to do with what is best for the country and everything to do
with what is best for their liberal partisan agenda.
This bill includes a long list of liberal priorities that are
completely unrelated to the crisis at hand. I think roughly 90 percent
of it is unrelated to COVID-19. Blank checks for mismanaged union
pension funds, funding for climate justice--whatever that is--backdoor
money for Planned Parenthood, an exclusive paid leave program for
bureaucrats, those are just some of the greatest hits in the vote-
arama.
Even the portions of the bill that are related to the pandemic are
completely out of proportion. The legislation provides $130 billion for
schools when tens of billions of dollars that we have already
appropriated last December remain to be spent.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, only $6.4 billion will
be distributed through September of this year. The remaining $122
billion would trickle out the door through not just 2021 but through
2028.
Of course, there is the blue State bailout. Despite the fact that tax
revenues have largely rebounded and many States are still sitting on
piles of cash from previous COVID-19 relief bills, our Democratic
friends want to send another $350 billion to State and local
governments but not just on an equitable population-based formula. They
rigged the formula to make sure blue States reap the biggest cash
benefits.
We know this wasn't the only path forward. We worked, time and time
again, this last year on five different occasions to show we can unite
to provide COVID-19 relief to the American people.
We could have built on that record this year, which after listening
to President Biden's inaugural speech, I had hoped we might do. The
first legislation to pass during the Biden administration could have
been a bipartisan pandemic relief bill with overwhelming support. We
wouldn't have needed to go through the vote-arama or the abuse of the
budget reconciliation process. We could have had a bill that supported
the hardest hit families, got kids back at school, and helped expedite
vaccination.
But those types of policies, obviously, weren't top of mind for our
Democratic friends. They wanted to have a payday for the most radical
element of their party at an absurdly high pricetag, which our children
and grandchildren are going to be saddled with.
They assembled a laundry list of unrelated wasteful and downright
partisan provisions and rejected even the most commonsense amendments
offered by this side of the aisle.
Sadly, this legislation passed the House without a single Republican
vote. It passed the Senate without a single Republican vote. And now,
our Democratic friends are on track to write a $2 trillion check
completely funded by deficit spending without even a trace of
bipartisanship.
They don't have a figleaf to hide behind. This was a partisan bill
intentionally. Either the President sold snake oil on Inauguration Day
or he has already caved into the most radical elements of his own
political party. Either way, it is bad news for the American people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Markey). The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, today I am going to talk about the
growing crisis on our southern border and how we need urgent action to
address the degrading situation there, but before I begin, I want to
say a quick word about the reconciliation bill we passed last week.
The massive $1.9 trillion bill was not COVID-19 relief; it was
liberal relief. Everybody and everyone needs to understand what this
was. It was not a rescue plan. It was a heist of taxpayers' money. We
don't have $1.9 trillion to be spending. When we have to borrow this
much money, we are digging our country deeper into debt. And with this
massive spending bill, we are borrowing against our grandkids' future
and are going to owe more and more countries like China.
To keep up, the money supply will have to increase at such a rapid
rate, it could potentially spark inflation. That means we could see the
value of Americans' hard-earned dollars plummet.
To further underscore that point, that means your money doesn't go as
far. For the items you buy, it is very expensive. All of this bogs down
our economy and hinders future growth.
What is more, this entire sham of a process was partisan. It was not
about helping Americans, businesses, and communities recover from the
pandemic. That much is clear because only 9 percent of the bill is
going to COVID and health-related pressures and less than 1 percent is
going to vaccines. The remaining 90 percent went to progressive wish
list items for bailouts for poorly run States.
Instead of ramming through non-COVID-related spending, Democrats
should have worked together with Republicans as a team to pass a
bipartisan bill that actually makes lives better as we recover from
this pandemic.
We share a goal of helping the American people, but the bill that was
ultimately put forward failed to do just that. It is a shame. This is
not how our country should be run.
____________________