[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 23, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1698-S1699]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 928
Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to propound a
unanimous consent request. But before I do so, I want to make some
brief observations.
Earlier this month, Democrats passed their extreme partisan
reconciliation bill--a bill that President Biden signed into law. When
the Senate was considering the bill, I introduced an amendment to
ensure that illegal aliens would not receive the $1,400 taxpayer
payments provided in the bill. Every single Democrat in this body voted
against that amendment. It failed by a single vote. If even one Senate
Democrat had voted for that amendment, it would have passed.
At the time, Senator Durbin incorrectly told this Chamber that no
illegal aliens would receive stimulus checks under this bill. It was
clear then, and it is even more clear now, that that statement was very
much in error, as even Senator Durbin has admitted.
Last Thursday, I gave my Democratic colleagues a chance for a do-
over, once it became clear that there was a very substantial number of
illegal aliens who would be receiving these checks. Unfortunately, the
Democrats objected again and put themselves on record that they are
just fine with millions of illegal immigrants getting taxpayer stimulus
checks.
There has been some debate as to the exact number, but, just this
week, the Center for Immigration Studies released an economic report
that catalogued that we are indeed talking about millions of illegal
immigrants who are receiving these checks.
At the same time we were debating this partisan reconciliation bill,
the Senate considered another amendment, which I had introduced and
Senator Cassidy had introduced, to prevent the payments from going to
criminals currently incarcerated in prison. Again, unfortunately and
astonishingly, every single Democrat in this Chamber voted against it.
It failed by a single vote. If even one Democrat had demonstrated the
common sense to say violent criminals who are currently in prison right
now, today, shouldn't be getting $1,400 taxpayer stimulus checks, that
amendment would have passed. But every Democrat lined up in a party-
line partisan vote to say no.
Today, I am going to give Democrats another chance at a do-over to
recognize that that extreme position is a position, frankly, none of us
could go home and explain to our constituents without being laughed at,
even in the bluest of States. And I am going to give an opportunity in
this instance for Democrats to vote on stopping the funds going to
criminals currently incarcerated and sending those funds instead to the
Crime Victims Fund, a program that is run by the Department of Justice
to compensate victims of crime.
So this is a choice the Democrats have: Do you want $1,400 checks
going to criminals in prison, or do you want instead to direct those
funds to the victims of crime that have suffered at the hands of those
criminals?
Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent
that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 928,
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. Reserving the right to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, just two quick points. First, this is not
really about prisoners. This is about disrupting payments to families
all across the country who need the money to make rent and pay for
groceries.
Here is why. The IRS administers the tax system for millions and
millions of Americans. The Cruz amendment has the practical effect of
keeping these folks who are hurting from getting that check that they
are going to use to pay for essentials. That is because their check
would be on hold while the IRS sets up the system envisioned by this
amendment.
Now, I guess that is what my colleague from Texas wants. After all,
he opposed the bill. He opposed these payments from the get-go. So if
he passes this amendment, he gets what he wants, but for all those
folks who are hurting, their checks are on hold.
The last point I want to make is that it wasn't always this way for
Republicans and our colleague from Texas. Republicans were for these
payments before they were against them. They voted for two rounds of
relief checks going out to all the people who are being discussed here
when they controlled the White House and the Senate.
Senator Cruz voted for the CARES Act. It passed unanimously. There
were 44 Republicans for the December relief bill, with no exception
like the Senator from Texas wants.
Donald Trump was so happy with the checks going to prisoners that he
put his name on them. The only difference between the CARES Act relief
checks that Republicans unanimously supported and America Rescue Plan
relief checks is the party in the White House.
Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
[[Page S1699]]
The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, the Senator from Oregon, I guess,
demonstrates the principle that hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays
to virtue, because the Senator from Oregon suggests that somehow
payments to people who are not criminals will be delayed if we don't
pay criminals in prison. That claim, on the face of it, is absurd.
The Federal prisons are administered by the Bureau of Prisons.
Government may not be good at everything, but I feel quite confident
that the Federal Government can produce a list of currently
incarcerated prisoners. I know the States can
The IRS, likewise, is perfectly capable of recognizing whether it is
mailing checks to prisoners in prison. This is not whether you have
ever been convicted of a crime. It is, Are you sending the checks to
Sing Sing? If so, don't send it.
The claim that somehow Joe Six-Pack at home is not getting his check
because we don't want to send checks to prisoners is demonstrably
untrue.
The Senator from Oregon also claims Republicans oppose stimulus
checks, when he knows that is simply not the case. As he noted, this
body overwhelmingly passed bipartisan COVID relief five times last
year. It is only when Senate Democrats took the majority that
bipartisan legislation ended because the Democrats decided to push a
hard partisan bill instead.
A clean bill providing relief checks would have passed with an
overwhelming bipartisan majority in this body, and the Senator from
Oregon knows that.
We have now discovered, though, that given a straight-up choice
between sending checks to criminals in prison versus sending checks to
the victims of crime, Senate Democrats stand with the criminals.