[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 17, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1590-S1595]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                      Nomination of Xavier Becerra

  Mr. DAINES. Madam President, I rise to share my objections to the 
nomination of Xavier Becerra to be Secretary of Health and Human 
Services.

[[Page S1591]]

  With $1.3 trillion of spending in Health and Human Services, that 
Department has the largest budget of the entire executive branch. In 
fact, if we were to compare the budget--the budget of HHS to other 
nation's GDPs--HHS, in fact, would rank among the top 10 in the world. 
The size of this Department is significant, and the responsibility is 
even greater.
  Whoever oversees this Department has a big impact on our country, our 
economy, and the lives of all Americans, including those of the unborn. 
This is exactly why I am deeply concerned with President Biden's pick 
of Attorney General Xavier Becerra to lead HHS. Mr. Becerra has spent 
his career propagating far-left ideology and supporting divisive 
policies that don't resonate with the majority of Americans.
  The Secretary of HHS has massive authority to steer the future of 
healthcare in our country, and someone who has made a career out of 
defending the abortion industry and promoting other liberal policies, 
like free healthcare for illegal immigrants, should not be at the helm 
of this Department.
  I am concerned that Attorney General Becerra will use the power of 
this Agency to overstep and impose his radical liberal agenda on 
millions of Americans. This administration decidedly, intentionally, 
chose a nominee who has repeatedly attacked the religious freedoms of 
so many Americans, a nominee who has aggressively pushed a very pro-
abortion agenda, a nominee who supports a complete takeover by the 
government of our healthcare, a nominee who advocates for illegal 
immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded healthcare.
  How do these qualities make Attorney General Becerra the right person 
to head Health and Human Services? It just doesn't make sense to so 
many in our country. It is just another sign that this, unfortunately, 
is a far-left administration that is outside the mainstream.
  Especially now, during a pandemic, it is critical that all Americans 
can trust whoever holds this position. It is critical that the leader 
of this massive Department will operate as a good steward of Federal 
health programs and not use his post to impose a government takeover of 
healthcare and to eradicate job-based coverage for millions of 
Americans.
  Xavier Becerra is, unfortunately, not that person. He has built his 
career defending some of the very most extreme stances in our society, 
and we can expect that he will only take things further at HHS.
  When it comes to abortion, Attorney General Becerra doesn't believe 
there should be any restrictions--not one. In fact, I had the chance to 
ask Mr. Becerra some questions a couple of weeks ago at a hearing. I 
asked if he would support a ban on the lethal discrimination of babies 
diagnosed with Down syndrome, or, perhaps, what about banning sex-
selective abortions, or, at least, a ban on partial birth abortions. 
His refusal to answer spoke volumes. His inability to name even one 
restriction that he might think about putting on abortion is chilling.
  Mr. Becerra's views on abortion even go a step further. He has 
repeatedly bullied and harassed Americans who respect the sanctity of 
life, like the Little Sisters of the Poor. This order of nuns has 
dedicated their lives to serving the less fortunate, and under their 
Catholic faith, they do not believe in providing abortions or 
contraceptives.
  Attorney General Becerra litigated against these nuns in court and 
attempted to revoke an exemption that protects religious groups from 
providing contraceptives, and that goes against their religious 
beliefs. He has literally sued to impose crippling fines on Catholic 
nuns for remaining true to their religious believes--crippling fines on 
nuns--a horrendous attack on Americans' constitutional right to 
religious freedom.
  He has stated that crossing the border illegally should be 
decriminalized. Let me say that again. He has stated that crossing the 
border illegally should be decriminalized. No wonder we are seeing a 
crisis on our southern border. He has repeatedly pushed for illegal 
immigrants to receive health benefits on the taxpayers' dime.
  As we are seeing Biden's border crisis play out, it is even more 
alarming that one of his nominees would seek to incentivize illegal 
border crossings even more. I guess you could say this is all part of 
Biden's ``America Last'' agenda, but as Secretary of Health and Human 
Services, Xavier Becerra would have the massive ability to impose a 
pro-abortion, anti-religious freedom, socialist healthcare agenda. His 
nomination highlights just how extreme--sadly, how extreme--the Biden 
administration really is. These views fail to represent the majority of 
Americans and have no place at the head of the largest Department of 
our executive branch.
  I urge my colleagues to consider the impact that Mr. Becerra would 
have as the head of Health and Human Services and to vote against his 
confirmation. Rather, we must stand up for life, for religious freedom, 
an ``America First'' agenda and against Mr. Becerra's nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. LEE. Madam President, the stated mission of the U.S. Department 
of Health and Human Services is ``to enhance the health and well-being 
of all Americans.'' It is a laudable goal. The HHS Secretary is, thus, 
charged with overseeing all government healthcare and social services 
and protecting the health and the rights of the American people, a 
worthy goal, important job. Unfortunately, the history of the nominee 
before us, Mr. Xavier Becerra, poses grave concerns to our ability to 
carry out this goal and to our ability to oversee an Agency with such 
vast, far-reaching responsibilities.
  First, Mr. Becerra has repeatedly been on the record for wanting to 
eliminate private health insurance for millions of Americans even at a 
time when families need affordable, effective, and flexible healthcare 
and when healthcare workers need jobs perhaps now more than ever. What 
is more concerning, however, is that, while in public office, Mr. 
Becerra has repeatedly, deliberately undermined Americans' 
constitutional rights and waged political warfare on those who happen 
to disagree with his views.
  Take, for example, his views on abortion. Instead of supporting laws 
that protect and sustain the life and health of American women and 
unborn children, Mr. Becerra has supported laws that violently hurt 
them in his endorsing legal abortion up until and even during the 
moment of birth.
  As Attorney General of the State of California, he brought 15 felony 
charges against a reporter for exposing Planned Parenthood's role in 
trafficking the body parts of aborted babies--a prosecution that even 
the Los Angeles Times described as ``disturbing overreach.''
  He defended a California law that required pro-life pregnancy centers 
to advertise for State-funded abortion clinics, a law that so 
egregiously violated free speech that the Supreme Court ruled it 
unconstitutional, which, of course, it was and is.
  Not only that, but he has consistently and flagrantly taken hostile 
actions against the free exercise of religion. Perhaps the worst 
example of this can be found in his legal persecution of the Little 
Sisters of the Poor. Now, this is a religious order of Catholic nuns 
that cares for the elderly poor. Becerra waged a lengthy, difficult 
battle to force the sisters--again, this is an order of nuns--to pay 
for abortion drugs and contraception in their health insurance plan 
even though doing so violates their beliefs and even though they are 
nuns.
  Even after the Supreme Court ruled for the Little Sisters of the Poor 
in 2016 under a separate case and after the Trump administration 
granted them full conscience protections in 2017, Mr. Becerra still 
sued the Trump administration in an attempt to pierce those 
protections. Again, he wasn't comfortable with letting those 
protections stand in place with respect to the Little Sisters of the 
Poor. No. He was determined, even still, to make sure that they 
couldn't live according to their own religious beliefs and their 
teachings.
  During the pandemic, Becerra was the legal architect of some of the 
country's most strident, sweeping, and brazenly unconstitutional 
restrictions on church and on worship services, some of which were 
struck down by the Supreme Court last month, and he even

[[Page S1592]]

tried to prevent COVID relief funds from going to religious and other 
private schools.
  Our Founders established the principle of religious liberty--the 
natural right of all human beings to freely hold and live out their 
religious beliefs--because they understood that man is not free unless 
his conscience is free. They thought that this principle was so 
important, so fundamental, that it was the first freedom articulated in 
the very First Amendment to the Constitution. In doing so, they sought 
to defend and preserve the space of our deepest convictions, a space 
upon which a State cannot and must never encroach
  In practice, that has meant that the government's job is not to tell 
people what to believe or how to discharge their religious duties but 
to protect the space for all people of all faiths--and of no faith at 
all for that matter--to seek truth and to order their lives 
accordingly.
  The American people deserve a leader at the U.S. Department of Health 
and Human Services who will uphold and strengthen this monumental 
tradition. They deserve a leader who will protect their fundamental 
rights, not trample them. Unfortunately, tragically, the record of this 
nominee demonstrates serious threats to the rights and the health and 
the well-being of the American people. They deserve better. In good 
conscience, I cannot support the nomination of Mr. Becerra.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam President, it appears that President Biden 
arrived at the White House prepared and willing to grant himself and 
his administration a mandate that American voters didn't agree to give 
him.
  His party lost ground in the House, split the Senate, and maintained 
their trailing minority of governorships, but they seem to ignore that. 
In his first 50 days, he signed 34 Executive orders--more than anyone 
in history. He dismantled existing immigration controls, threatened 
protections for small businesses against the radical climate agenda, 
and destroyed thousands of jobs and the potential for greater energy 
security promised by the Keystone XL Pipeline project.
  Meanwhile, my Democratic colleagues got busy laying the groundwork to 
transform not only the Senate into a majoritarian institution but also 
to radically transform the country. They used budget reconciliation to 
ram through a $1.9 trillion bailout bill without a single Republican 
vote--the largest spending bill in our Nation's history--and now they 
are reversing their own positions on the filibuster to avoid debate on 
radical immigration reform, the Equality Act, and an already infamous 
bill that would federalize elections. They just don't want to talk 
about these things--just do it.
  The more people learn about what the Biden White House is up to the 
more questions they have for those of us who represent them.
  Some of my Democratic friends in Tennessee say to me: I may have 
voted for Joe Biden, but I did not vote for this.
  They do not want to radically change the country. They do not want to 
be tied to legislation that has a nice-sounding name but that does the 
exact opposite of what the Biden administration would have you believe 
that it would accomplish.
  They have noticed that the President's Cabinet picks have come to 
their confirmation hearings ready and willing to move the goalposts 
away from the Constitution and the rule of law in order to accommodate 
their radical agenda.
  Last week, this body voted to discharge from committee Xavier 
Becerra's nomination to the Health and Human Services Secretary 
position. I voted no, and I will vote no on his confirmation as well, 
not only because he is unqualified and has no experience in 
healthcare--Middle Tennessee has more than 100,000 individuals who are 
employed in the healthcare industry, and all, all are more qualified in 
healthcare than Xavier Becerra--and not only because his radical views 
shock just about everyone who speaks to me about him. Oh, yes, it was a 
topic of conversation at church on Sunday but also because, time and 
again, he has abused his power and weaponized the full force of the 
government against people whose deeply held, personal, political, and 
religious views don't align with his own: submit, conform, or else.
  It is in the nature of our job as legislators to recognize that, yes, 
elections do have consequences and that, yes, the President has a right 
to assemble his own Cabinet, but we cannot be expected to green-light a 
nominee who has so little patience for diversity--diversity of thought, 
diversity of opinions--that his first and only instinct is to destroy 
the diversity: Barrel in. Burn it to the ground. Build it back in their 
own image. That is not what the American people want President Biden 
and his administration to do, but that is what they are getting with 
this nominee.
  I strongly oppose Xavier Becerra's nomination, as I have from the 
start, and I would urge my colleagues to consider what you will be 
approving if you vote in favor of this confirmation: radically anti-
life, radically anti-religion, radically anti-border security, 
radically anti-free speech, radically unqualified to lead.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, I rise to oppose the nomination of Xavier 
Becerra for Secretary of Health and Human Services.
  There are, unfortunately, numerous nominees in the Biden 
administration who are either extreme or unqualified for the positions 
for which they have been nominated, but of all of those nominees, I 
believe Mr. Becerra is the single worst Cabinet nominee put forward by 
Joe Biden to serve in the Cabinet.
  President Biden has told this country repeatedly that his top 
priority is defeating the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department of Health 
and Human Services is on the frontline in fighting COVID-19. Mr. 
Becerra, by any measure, is woefully unqualified to lead that 
Department.
  Mr. Becerra is not a doctor. Mr. Becerra is not a scientist. Mr. 
Becerra has no healthcare experience whatsoever. He has no medical 
experience whatsoever. He has no experience in virology. He has no 
experience with pharmaceuticals. He has no experience running a State 
or local healthcare agency. He has no experience in logistics. The 
Department of HHS is in the process of distributing and administering 
hundreds of millions of vaccines. Mr. Becerra has never so much as 
distributed french fries at a McDonald's.
  Mr. Becerra's only qualification and, indeed, the qualification that 
earned him this nomination is he is a radical, leftwing trial attorney.
  If a Republican President had nominated as the head of the Health and 
Human Services Agency someone with zero healthcare experience, zero 
medical experience, zero pharmaceutical experience in the midst of a 
global pandemic, that Republican President would have been laughed out 
of the room.
  If a Republican President had done that, all of the Democrats would 
have been lined up here thundering: This is a President that doesn't 
care about science. We would have heard Democrats telling us: This is a 
President for whom defeating COVID-19 is not a priority, is not 
serious.
  ``This is a President,'' our Democratic colleagues would have told 
us, ``who puts partisan priorities above defeating the public health 
menace of COVID-19. This is a President who is more concerned about 
appeasing his radical base than he is about protecting the public 
health and safety of Americans.''
  Had a Republican President nominated a nominee as unqualified as Mr. 
Becerra, I feel confident the Democrats would not have been alone. We 
would see multiple Republican Senators standing up, saying: No. We 
should actually have an HHS Secretary who knows something about 
science. We should have an HHS Secretary who knows something about 
medicine, something about pharmaceuticals.
  I would note, by the way, President Trump nominated two HHS 
Secretaries. The first, Dr. Tom Price, was a medical doctor; the 
second, Alex Azar, was president of a major pharmaceutical company in 
the United States. Both had years and even decades of healthcare 
experience.
  As best I can tell, Xavier Becerra's only experience with healthcare 
is

[[Page S1593]]

suing the Little Sisters of the Poor. Frankly, it should be a joke.
  If a Republican President did this, a Republican Senate would 
discover the backbone to stand up and oppose it. And what I would say 
is sad is not a single Democrat is willing to stand up to Joe Biden and 
say: No. Try again. It is a pandemic. Over a half million Americans 
have died. How about putting someone at HHS that knows something about 
healthcare?
  I will tell you right now, every Senator that supports this 
confirmation, when they go home, should be prepared to answer to their 
constituents--should be prepared to answer when their constituents say: 
Why did you vote to confirm a guy at HHS who doesn't know anything 
about science or healthcare or medicine? Why, in the middle of a 
pandemic, did you put in a radical, leftwing trial lawyer instead of 
someone that could help us beat this pandemic?
  And for all the Democratic Senators who love to intone gravely 
``Listen to the science,'' that is actually--that sentiment is correct. 
We should listen to the science, which means we should have someone 
leading HHS who knows something about science
  My career, as a lawyer, has been litigating cases before the U.S. 
Supreme Court. If a President asked me to lead the Department of HHS in 
the midst of a pandemic, I would tell that President: With all due 
respect, I don't have the professional experience or expertise to do 
that job. There are other jobs for which I would be qualified, but in a 
pandemic, the Health and Human Services Department should have someone 
who knows a damn thing about healthcare.
  Instead of knowing anything about science or medicine or viruses or 
virology or immunizations, what Mr. Becerra does know about is 
persecuting citizens who don't share his radical, leftwing ideology.
  Mr. Becerra, as attorney general of California, has demonstrated a 
consistent pattern of contempt for privacy. While attorney general, he 
used his partisan power to overcome the individual privacy rights of 
California. As attorney general, he demanded that thousands of 
registered charities annually disclose to his offices the names and 
addresses of major donors, even though California law didn't require 
that. But he used government power to violate their right to privacy. 
Then what did he do? Did he keep it private for law enforcement 
purposes to examine irregularities? No. Instead, he published the 
information from nearly 2,000 organizations, subjecting donors and 
those nonprofits to harassment and abuse.
  Healthcare issues are personal. They are sensitive. When you and I go 
to the doctor, we don't expect our doctor to share our personal 
healthcare details with the world. Joe Biden has said to the American 
people: We are going to put someone in charge of the Health and Human 
Services Department who doesn't care about privacy and has a record of 
ignoring your right to privacy.
  Later this year, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether Mr. 
Becerra's invasion of privacy violated the First Amendment to the 
Constitution. While his disregard for privacy is before the Supreme 
Court, what did Joe Biden do? He said: Let's put him in charge of 
healthcare in this country.
  A third reason Mr. Becerra's nomination is so concerning concerns 
conscience protections.
  The next HHS Secretary will be responsible for upholding the 
conscience protections that are written into Federal law to protect the 
rights of people of faith, whatever your faith--whether you are 
Christian or Jewish or Muslim or whatever your faith might be, the 
right of professionals, of citizens under the First Amendment to live 
according to their faith.
  But Mr. Becerra, as attorney general, aggressively defended a 
California law that forced pro-life groups to advertise for abortion, a 
law that the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional under the First 
Amendment.
  Think about that for a second. He was so radical in going after and 
persecuting conscience rights, he wanted pro-life groups to advertise 
for abortion, and it took the U.S. Supreme Court to strike it down and 
say: That is unconstitutional. Joe Biden wants him to bring the same 
heavyhanded zealotry to the Health and Human Services Department.
  And Mr. Becerra has not shown that it is just free speech that he has 
antagonism to, but it is religious liberty as well. Mr. Becerra has 
defended California's targeting of churches holding indoor services. 
The State of California concluded that if you go to an indoor service 
at a church and you pray or you sing or you worship, you are a public 
health menace. But if you go to a protest, if you go to other secular 
activities where the name of God is not invoked, then, magically, this 
virus is not contagious. It is ludicrous. It was facially absurd. It 
was driven by an unconstitutional animus toward people of faith, and it 
took the U.S. Supreme Court to strike it down and to say the policy 
that Mr. Becerra was defending is unconstitutional. Government cannot 
target people of faith.
  So you have got a nominee with no healthcare experience, no medical 
experience, no scientific experience, but a record of being a radical, 
persecuting those with whom he disagrees, who has repeatedly gone 
before the U.S. Supreme Court and lost over and over again for 
violating the First Amendment, for violating free speech, for violating 
religious liberty. He is now currently before the Supreme Court for 
violating the privacy rights of Californians.
  Do you want an HHS Secretary who doesn't respect your privacy, who 
doesn't respect your free speech or religious liberty? Do you want an 
HHS Secretary who is not qualified to draw blood or give a shot, who 
doesn't know how to distribute vaccines, who has never distributed 
anything?
  If nominations and confirmations were based on the merits, were based 
on qualification to serve, Mr. Becerra's nomination would be rejected 
by this Senate by a vote of 100 to nothing. The fact that that is 
unlikely to happen and that every Democrat will march lockstep with the 
Biden administration to confirm a nominee who has no healthcare 
experience whatsoever in the midst of a global pandemic show just how 
profoundly partisan and radicalized today's Democratic Party is.
  I believe all of us should be united in demanding a Health and Human 
Services Secretary who is actually qualified to protect our health and 
defeat this pandemic.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote against this 
nomination
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I rise to speak this afternoon in support 
of the nomination of Xavier Becerra to serve as the next Secretary of 
Health and Human Services.
  President Biden nominated Mr. Becerra, who currently serves as the 
attorney general of the State of California. Prior to his service in 
State government for the people of California, he served in the House 
of Representatives, representing a district in Los Angeles for 12 
terms. He is someone I got to know in those years, especially in the 
debates about healthcare, which I will speak about in a moment.
  But when a person is nominated to be a member of any Cabinet, they 
bring with them not just their experience but their life story, and 
Attorney General Becerra's story is a great American story. His own 
story and that of his family is a great American story, a story of hard 
work and sacrifice, overcoming obstacles, achieving excellence, not 
only in his time in school and his academic record but also excellence 
in his public service as he discharges the duties of the offices that 
he has held.
  I mentioned that I knew him in the years we were debating healthcare 
here in Washington when he was a Member of the House. But just since 
his nomination, I met with him and questioned him closely on matters 
that are important to me and the people of Pennsylvania. I also asked 
him questions in not one but two--two--hearings because he just happens 
to be nominated to a Cabinet position where the confirmation is 
considered by two Senate committees, the Finance Committee and the 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, so I had the chance 
to question him in both hearings, both committees.
  Through these conversations and based upon his long and distinguished 
record of public service, Attorney General Becerra has demonstrated 
that he

[[Page S1594]]

is the kind of leader our Nation needs at HHS during this challenging 
time.
  He is a proven leader who spent his career fighting to expand 
healthcare--to expand it--protecting both patients and consumers and 
working to strengthen both Medicare and Medicaid.
  As a Congressman, as I mentioned, he was instrumental in drafting and 
working to pass the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the so-
called ACA. And as California's attorney general, he has led the fight 
to protect it.
  Now, my view of the disagreement on the other side of the aisle is 
just that. This is someone who worked as a Member of Congress and then 
has worked as attorney general to pass and then uphold the ACA.
  On the other side of the aisle, they don't like that because they 
have been committed as a party here in the Senate and in the House--
both Republican caucuses have been committed to two things on 
healthcare: destroying the ACA, which means destroying all protections 
for preexisting conditions and--it is important to add this--they have 
been dedicated to ending--not limiting, not cutting back--ending 
Medicaid expansion, which, of course, accounted for most of the 
healthcare gains. Millions of Americans have healthcare today because 
of the expansion of Medicaid. It is the official position of the 
Republican Party to end that--to say to all those millions of 
Americans: You don't deserve healthcare coverage. That is their 
position based upon what they have supported in bill after bill that 
came before the Senate. We know that. That is a fact. And until they 
move away from that position, they will try to take down the nomination 
of or oppose anyone who wants to uphold the ACA, uphold all protections 
for preexisting conditions, uphold and support the expansion of 
Medicaid, one of the best expansions of healthcare in American history, 
not just recent history, in all of American history.

  So I would support Attorney General Becerra just based upon what he 
has done on healthcare because it happens to be in the best interests 
of the American people to expand healthcare and the best interests of 
the people I represent.
  I don't come across many people in Pennsylvania coming up to me, 
saying: I want you to lessen the number of people in the United States 
or in my State that have healthcare. I want you to cut that back. I 
want you to cut back on the Medicaid Program--which folks on the other 
side of the aisle want to do as well.
  They not only want to end Medicaid expansion--end it completely--they 
want to cut the Medicaid Program by hundreds of billions of dollars 
over 10 years. That is their official position. It has been their 
position for years to cut the Medicaid Program and to end Medicaid 
expansion--cut the Medicaid Program by hundreds of billions of dollars. 
So if you are against that, they are going to be opposing you, whether 
it is for confirmation or anything else, because they are the party 
that wants to cut Medicaid, not by $100 billion over 10 years, not by 
$200 billion or $300 billion. Look at their budgets year after year. 
They want to cut it $500 billion or $700 billion. One year they even 
proposed--here in the debates about the budgets, one year they even 
proposed cutting the Medicaid Program by $1 trillion. That was the 
official position of the Republican Party. So if you want to oppose 
them on that, then they will try to take you down.
  The Medicaid Program, by the way, pays for half--almost half--of the 
births in America. Of the babies born in America, almost half of those 
births are paid for by Medicaid--the Medicaid Program--the program they 
want to cut by $500 billion, at least, and sometimes a lot more than 
that.
  So that is why they are against him, because they want to cut back on 
healthcare.
  Now, his leadership of this Agency could not come at a more important 
time. Our Nation is facing the greatest public health crisis in more 
than a century, since the horror of 1918. Now we are facing a similar 
challenge.
  We also have a jobs crisis. So the faster we put this pandemic behind 
us, the better it is for creating a lot more jobs and lifting our 
economy out of the ditch that it has been in the last year.
  So we need a strong leader at HHS. We need someone who has the 
experience, the integrity, to lead us in that Agency to help guide us 
out of the crisis. I am confident--very confident--that Xavier Becerra 
is that leader, and I urge my colleagues to vote in support of his 
nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Baldwin). The junior Senator from Florida
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, the first thing I would like 
to do is correct what my colleague from Pennsylvania said with regard 
to preexisting conditions.
  I was here last year. I brought to the floor a bill that would say it 
didn't matter what the Supreme Court did; we would make sure that we 
could keep preexisting conditions if the Supreme Court declared that 
the Affordable Care Act was not constitutional. The Democrats blocked 
it.
  I have been up here 2 years, and I have never seen once my Republican 
colleagues want to reduce spending for Medicaid.
  What I do think is unfair is, in my State of Florida, what money we 
receive from the Federal Government is significantly less per person 
than what a State like New York has. So I would like changes to the 
Medicaid Program. I would like it to be a fair program in which States 
like Florida will get treated just as well as States like New York.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 798

  Madam President, I rise today to discuss an insane issue in the 
Democrats' COVID spending bill that we need to fix.
  Tucked into the Democratic bill is a provision to give $1,400 
stimulus checks to inmates. That is right. As our Nation faces a public 
health crisis and a crippling debt crisis, Democrats are handing out 
stimulus checks with your tax dollars to Federal inmates who don't pay 
income taxes, have all their needs--food and medical expenses 
included--paid for by taxpayers, and they do nothing to stimulate the 
economy. It simply doesn't make sense.
  My friends and colleagues, Senators Bill Cassidy, Tom Cotton, and Ted 
Cruz, tried to fix this by introducing an amendment to strip this out 
of the Democratic bill, but the Democrats wouldn't have it.
  Senate Democrats voted unanimously to block the passage of that good 
amendment and chose instead to waste even more taxpayer dollars by 
sending $1,400 checks to inmates.
  Let's talk about what that means for American taxpayers. There are 
nearly 1.5 million State and Federal inmates incarcerated in Federal 
prisons across the United States. These are people convicted of 
committing serious crimes and victimizing their fellow Americans.
  Under this bill the Democrats passed, American taxpayers are on the 
hook for $1,400 checks to some of the most heinous people we have ever 
seen. I am talking about people like the racist Charleston Church 
shooter, Dylann Roof; serial rapist and predator, Larry Nassar; 
aspiring terrorist, Muhammad Dakhlalla, who tried to join ISIS and is 
now in prison in Georgia; convicted serial killer and rapist, Mark 
Goudeau, who is on death row in Arizona; convicted cop killer, Michael 
Addison, who is on death row in New Hampshire; and the monster who 
killed 17 innocent Floridians in Parkland at Marjory Stoneman Douglas 
High School on February 14, 2018.
  How could anyone--anyone--possibly justify sending checks to these 
people?
  If we send $1,400 checks to all State and Federal inmates, all 1.5 
million, that is more than $2 billion--$2 billion in taxpayer money 
going to stimulus checks for inmates.
  That is $2 billion that could be used to help our small businesses 
recover; $2 billion that could be used to enhance vaccine development 
and distribution so that more Americans can get the shots they need to 
move us forward and away from this virus; $2 billion that could be used 
to pay down some of our massive debt. There are so many positive uses 
for these funds that provide a real return for American taxpayers, but 
sending them to inmates isn't one of them. It is an unjustifiable 
expense that does nothing to fight COVID-19.
  Today, I ask for full support of this body to strip this bad policy 
from law. We cannot forget that America is in a

[[Page S1595]]

debt crisis. I have been talking about it for a while, and I won't stop 
talking about it because it is a crisis my Democratic colleagues still 
don't seem to understand.
  Right now, our Nation is headed toward $30 trillion in debt. Think 
about that--$30 trillion. The U.S. debt will be equal to $240,000 per 
taxpayer. That is insane. And what are the Democrats doing to rein in 
this unsustainable debt? Absolutely nothing.
  In fact, the Democrats' wasteful and untargeted spending bill, which 
will raise the debt from $28 trillion to $30 trillion contains loads of 
handouts and provisions, just like this one, that recklessly spend on 
their priorities unrelated to COVID.
  That is why I sent a letter to the Biden administration on Monday, 
urging him to rescind hundreds of billions in waste from this bill and 
create a targeted approach Americans truly need.
  It is clear that Democrats are living in a fantasy land where debt 
doesn't matter, spending has no consequences, and inflation is 
impossible. Of course, reasonable Americans know that is not true
  The Biden administration needs to take immediate action to request 
the rescission of the non-COVID-related, liberal agenda-driven, and 
wasteful funding found throughout this bill.
  So I will keep fighting to cut down on this liberal wish list. Today, 
we can start that important work and pass my bill to not only save $2 
billion from going to inmates who have no need for the money, but also 
show the American people that Congress is committed to remaining fully 
accountable to the American people for the proper stewardship of tax 
dollars.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to 
the immediate consideration of S. 798, introduced earlier today. I 
further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed 
and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the 
table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, today the Republicans are showing some 
real chutzpa.
  On this issue, Republicans were for it before they were against it. 
Today, they claim to want to target prisoners. The real harm they are 
doing is to innocent children and families.
  I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The junior Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, it is hard to imagine that my 
colleague just rose in opposition to this good bill.
  Let's be clear. By objecting to this bill, Democrats are standing in 
full support of spending $2 billion to send $1,400 checks to inmates. 
Democrats want to spend $2 billion in taxpayer money to send checks to 
people in prison, convicted of committing serious crimes and 
victimizing their fellow Americans.
  That means Democrats are saying that they want American taxpayers to 
be on the hook for $1,400 checks to some of the most heinous criminals 
we have ever seen--people like Dylann Roof and the Parkland shooter.
  How can anyone justify sending checks to these people? Let's 
remember, inmates don't pay income taxes. They have all their needs, 
food and medical expenses included, paid for by taxpayers. They don't 
do anything to stimulate our economy.
  I do hope my colleague will reconsider his objection and stand with 
me in putting accountability to American taxpayers over this insane 
policy that does nothing but throw $2 billion we don't have out the 
window.
  Thank you, Madam President.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MARKEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.