[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 81 (Tuesday, May 11, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2426-S2428]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Liability Immunity

  Mr. President, the American Rescue Plan was the Biden threshold 
initiative to bring to America what it desperately needed after this 
President was sworn in on January 20 of this year. Unfortunately, we 
didn't have a single Republican to support it--not one. Not a single 
Republican Senator or House Member would support the American Rescue 
Plan of President Joe Biden.
  What did the plan do? Well, it bought more vaccines. It invested 
dramatically in the distribution of these vaccines across America. It 
turned around and kept the President Trump promise of the cash payment 
of $1,400 for each individual. It extended unemployment benefits so 
that people could continue to keep food on the table and pay their rent 
and mortgage payments until they found good jobs. And it basically said 
to small businesses: We are not giving up on you. We are going to help 
you, whether it is the restaurant industry or other businesses. We want 
you to be back in business. We invested that money as a nation, and it 
was a critical time to do it.
  President Biden believed, and all the Democrats supported him in this 
belief, that we should move forward now or run the risk of falling 
behind in developing our economy. The American Rescue Plan was 
successful. It has given assistance across the board to families and 
businesses and delivered resources where they were needed the most. It 
really matched the crisis with an initiative that was significant in 
scope.
  But if my Republican colleagues had had their way, the American 
Rescue Plan would have looked a lot more like a giant corporate 
giveaway because all throughout 2020, they were clamoring for massive 
handouts to big businesses in the form of liability immunity. I am glad 
that my colleague from Texas is on the floor because it is an issue 
that he has been interested in and has spoken on the floor many times.
  All last year, we heard from the other side of the aisle that 
Congress needed to give sweeping Federal liability immunity to 
corporations when it came to their conduct during the pandemic. Well, 
we heard some dire warnings about the number of lawsuits that were 
going to be filed because of COVID-19. It was called a tsunami of 
lawsuits by the Republican leader of the Senate.
  One year ago today, on May 11, 2020, Senator McConnell spoke on the 
Senate floor and raised fears of ``a second job-killing epidemic of 
frivolous lawsuits.'' The next day, he came to the floor and kept the 
attack on, and he warned of ``a tidal wave of medical malpractice 
lawsuits.'' That is from Senator McConnell on the floor of the Senate.
  Senate Republicans rallied behind a bill introduced by Senator Cornyn 
that would give corporations immunity from accountability both in court 
and from regulators for conduct that could be considered negligent 
under current law. I argued against these corporate immunity proposals. 
Granting corporations legal immunity gives them an incentive to cut 
costs and cut corners when it comes to the health and safety of workers 
and consumers. It gives a pass to unreasonable and irresponsible 
behavior and puts people at greater risk. I don't think that is the 
right approach.
  As I kept pointing out to my Republican colleagues, they couldn't 
show statistically why this was necessary. The data never justified 
their proposals. That tsunami of lawsuits never arrived. We are now 
over a year into this pandemic. Over 32 million Americans, sadly, have 
been infected, and nearly 600,000, tragically, have died. So how many 
lawsuits have been generated by all these terrible outcomes?
  Well, there is a law firm, Hunton Andrews Kurth, that has tracked all 
of the lawsuits filed in the United States over COVID-19. I checked the 
totals over the weekend. You may be asking: Well, how many medical 
malpractice cases have been filed in the United States over the last 
year related to COVID-19? The number: 20--20. And how many cases 
alleging personal injury from exposure to COVID-19 in a public place 
have been filed? The number is 60 in the entire United States. That is 
not a flood. That is not a tsunami. It is a trickle.
  In fact, the main litigation we have seen involving COVID has been 
one business suing another business. For example, there are 1,831 
lawsuits involving insurance disputes, 640 lawsuits involving business 
closures and stay-at-home orders, and 772 lawsuits involving contract 
disputes. It was not what was predicted on the floor over and over 
again by Senators from the other side of the aisle.
  I am always troubled how the Republican immunity proposals try to 
block infected workers and families from suing corporations for 
negligence, but let corporations continue to file their own COVID-
related lawsuits by the hundreds whenever they feel like it. How is 
that fair?
  I believe Americans deserve a chance to have a day in court when 
these families believe their loved ones have been harmed due to 
negligence or misconduct. For example, if a senior citizen dies because 
a nursing home refused to share what it knew about the virus's spread, 
I believe the families of those victims deserve a chance to go to court 
and seek justice.
  Those types of cases are traditionally governed by State law. States 
can and do adjust their State liability law to fit the circumstances. 
As it turns out, more than half the States have changed their liability 
laws, either through legislation or executive action, in response to 
COVID. In my view, some of the States went too far, to be honest with 
you, in shielding negligent behavior by corporations, but that was 
their call to make since this is a State law issue.
  I find it surprising that my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle want Congress to step in and impose sweeping Federal corporate 
immunity that would override the laws of all 50 States. There was no 
justification for doing so, and I am glad we didn't. It would have made 
us less safe.
  I hope the next time we hear calls for sweeping Federal liability 
immunity

[[Page S2427]]

during a national crisis, we remember this experience and how the dire 
predictions of tsunamis and floods of lawsuits never came to pass. 
Let's continue to address this virus with targeted relief much like the 
American Rescue Plan did. And as we emerge from the pandemic, let's 
invest in the areas that actually need support. That is why Democrats 
support President Biden again with the American Jobs Plan and the 
American Families Plan, targeting investments that help the American 
economy.
  Like President Biden said last month, we have got to build our 
economy from the bottom up and the middle out and not from the top 
down. Giant corporations don't need another handout like immunity. They 
already have all the help they need. I hope we can work together to 
deliver real relief to the American people.
  I yield the floor
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President I ask unanimous consent to be able to 
complete my remarks before the vote occurs.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, listening to my friend, the Democratic 
whip, reminds me that there is one type of business that my Democratic 
friends always support, and that is the lawsuit business. As he pointed 
out, about half of the States have taken steps to protect their 
citizens from frivolous litigation and other litigation that would 
arise out of their good-faith following of the guidelines laid down by 
the CDC, the Centers for Disease Control. That is what we proposed here 
in the Senate.
  And my friend's, the Senator from Illinois's view did prevail because 
I found out that there is one--the most powerful lobby here in 
Washington, DC, is the trial bar, and, unfortunately, it is not just 
big corporations. I am sure big companies can take care of themselves. 
They have got lawyers; they have got compliance officers; and they have 
got people who can help them figure out how to deal with the pandemic. 
It is the mom-and-pop businesses, the music venues, the houses of 
worship, the schools, and the universities--those were the ones that 
were reluctant to reopen, even complying with the CDC guidelines, 
because they were afraid of being sued into oblivion.
  So my colleague's views did prevail here in the Senate, 
unfortunately, but, thankfully, States like mine--Texas is currently in 
legislative session taking appropriate steps to avoid this sort of 
frivolous litigation, which will be like a wet blanket on our economic 
recovery and on job creation. Again, this is not a get-out-of-jail free 
card. These are citizens--American citizens--trying to do the best they 
can under very difficult circumstances who have, in good faith, 
complied with the Centers for Disease Control guidelines.
  I would like to rewind just a little bit to 2019, before the pandemic 
hit, and recall that the American people were reaping the benefits of 
one of the strongest economies in American history. The driving force 
behind that economic boom, I think, was, in significant part, the Tax 
Cuts and Jobs Act, which we passed in 2017, which sought to help 
American families and the economy thrive by keeping more of what they 
earned and turning over less to the Federal Government. In my opinion, 
there is no question that it was one of the biggest contributors to our 
booming economy.
  Our national unemployment rate had reached a 50-year low, and we saw 
record unemployment rates for Hispanics, African Americans, and Asian 
Americans. Unemployment among women fell to the lowest rate since the 
early 1950s. That was prepandemic.
  The benefits did not stop there, though. Wages were on the rise. The 
poverty rate hit an alltime low, and millions of new jobs were being 
added to our economy. Families were bringing home more of their hard-
earned paychecks, and median household income reached a record high.
  But then the pandemic hit, as we know, and things took a very sharp 
turn downward. Businesses closed their doors; workers lost their jobs; 
and the unemployment rate skyrocketed from 3.5 percent to nearly 15 
percent in April.
  Fortunately, this dark economic picture is gradually brightening. 
Thanks to the investment we have made in therapeutics and vaccines in a 
historically short period of time, thanks to the ingenuity and 
perseverance of workers and business owners, combined with the 
assistance that Congress has given them and, like I said, advancements 
in modern science, we have made steady progress.
  The unemployment rate has steadily declined over the last year, 
reaching 6 percent in March, but the new data from April is a cause for 
concern. The unemployment rate increased by a tenth of a percentage 
point. It didn't go down. It went up. It is a bump that wouldn't have 
raised any red flags before the pandemic. But this single data point is 
not the only indication of how our economy is faring. Last month, only 
266,000 new jobs were added to the economy. That is a quarter--25 
percent--of what economists had predicted. Now, again, 266,000 new jobs 
would not have been a bad jobs report before the pandemic because we 
were literally at nearly full employment, but we aren't currently in a 
build mode. We are currently digging our way out of a hole, a 
recession, to be specific.
  We are still missing 8 million jobs that existed prior to the 
pandemic. I don't think anyone expected all those jobs to come back 
overnight, but we did expect to be faring far better than this. As I 
said, the economists said this is a quarter of what they anticipated.
  Well, this is the first full month of data since our Democratic 
colleagues passed their $2 trillion so-called rescue plan on top of the 
trillions of dollars that we spent in 2020. If things continue to go 
the rate we are on now, we are in for an extremely long recovery. In 
other words, sometimes policies that emanate from Washington actually 
make the recovery harder, not easier.
  Unfortunately, the administration is doing more to slow down the 
recovery than they are to solve it. Last year, Republicans and 
Democrats worked together to provide unprecedented assistance to 
workers and their families hit by this economic downturn. Bolstered 
unemployment benefits were intended to provide laid-off workers with 
the money they needed to support their families until they could return 
to work, and over the last year, many of those workers have, 
fortunately, gotten back on the job.
  These benefits were a lifeline for millions of families and, today, 
there are still workers unable to find a new job. But there are, 
unfortunately, also people abusing the system, the generosity of the 
American people, the American taxpayer. The partisan relief bill our 
Democratic colleagues pushed through earlier this year extended 
supplemental unemployment benefits through September of this year, far 
beyond the amount of time anyone would have expected that those 
benefits, the supplemental benefits to the State unemployment benefits, 
would be needed.
  Even as vaccinations were on the rise, our Democratic colleagues 
insisted on extending these benefits through September, and many of us 
predicted the outcome. Last spring, workers couldn't find jobs. Now, 
businesses can't find workers.
  Between bolstered unemployment benefits and a steady stream of 
stimulus checks, many people who lost their jobs can't be convinced to 
return to the workforce. One restaurant owner in Texas said he had had 
plenty of applicants; people just won't show up for the interviews. One 
day, when he had scheduled eight interviews for potential employment, 
only one applicant showed up. The next day, the same thing happened--
five scheduled interviews; one person showed up. He said: It makes you 
wonder, are they just filling these applications out to collect 
unemployment? Because, of course, most unemployment benefits require 
you to apply for work and accept it if it is offered. But apparently 
here, whatever the incentives are, they are simply persuading some 
people to fill out applications but then not to seriously pursue work.
  In a year's time, we have gone from the strongest economy in a 
generation to the government paying people to stay home. This reminds 
me of the discussion we had a couple of years ago when the Green New 
Deal was launched. An overview of the bill was listed on the website of 
one of its authors and said that the government would foot the bill for 
any person who is ``unable or unwilling to work.'' ``Unable or 
unwilling to work,'' that the

[[Page S2428]]

government would foot the bill--that was the proposal initially when 
the Green New Deal was rolled out. ``Unwilling to work.'' Don't like 
the job? Don't want to get out of bed in the morning? Don't worry; 
hard-working Americans who are getting up and going to work every day 
will foot the bill so you can stay home. I am sure it comes as no 
surprise that this received a great deal of criticism and even ridicule 
2 years ago.
  Unfortunately for the taxpayers who actually do get up every morning 
and go to work, we are seeing this play out in real time. Folks who 
lost their jobs and who are now able but unwilling to return to work 
can continue to reap the bolstered unemployment benefits that our 
Democratic colleagues provided for them through September.
  Another restaurant owner in Texas said that between the stimulus 
checks and the enhanced unemployment benefits, it is tough to find 
people who want to work at all. He said:

       I believe our biggest competition in the job market is the 
     government.

  This isn't an isolated problem. In Texas, the average unemployment 
benefits equal more than $36,000 a year. In Washington State, you can 
receive $39,000 a year in unemployment benefits. In Massachusetts, it 
is $41,000 a year.
  A few Governors have said their States will stop offering the 
bolstered benefits because it is a disincentive for workers to get back 
on the job. If you are able to stay home and bring in as much money or 
maybe even more than you were earning while you were actually working, 
what is the incentive to go back?
  This poor job report isn't a surprise to anyone who has spoken to 
employers, as I have, who have said repeatedly that no one wants to 
return to work when they can get paid to stay home.
  Another factor that has likely contributed to the slow recovery is 
the slow reopening of schools. Despite the fact that in many States, 
teachers are among the first individuals to get vaccinated, the return 
to classrooms has been incredibly slow. Less than half the school 
districts throughout the country are operating fully in person.
  The nearly $2 trillion that our Democratic colleagues rammed through 
Congress in March did little to get us back on track. It sent more than 
$120 billion more to K-12 schools that were already flush with cash but 
attached no requirement that the money be used to actually get children 
back in the classroom, where we know they will learn best.
  If at least one parent has to be home with their children for even 
part of the week, that makes it incredibly difficult for them to return 
to work. For single parents, it is virtually impossible.
  If we are ever going to get our economy back on track, we need to get 
our children safely back in school. We need to get people who are able 
but who are currently unwilling to work to get back on the job. And we 
need to supply the businesses that managed to survive this past year 
with a reliable workforce.
  Right now, the biggest hurdle to our economic recovery is the 
government itself. That needs to change. If you asked the President or 
a number of our Democratic colleagues in the Senate, they would say the 
solution is easy--the American Jobs Plan. Let's spend more money.
  This proposal is part social safety net, part infrastructure, and 
part taxpayer-funded spending spree. It is really designed to transform 
America into Europe--a social safety net economy.
  It spends more than $2.5 trillion on things like electric vehicle 
chargers and home healthcare, which we are happy to debate in any other 
context, but what we really need is a jobs plan to get America back to 
work, not another Trojan horse like we saw passed earlier this year and 
is currently being advertised, for example, under the guise of being an 
infrastructure bill.
  In order to finance this plan, along with the President's American 
Families Plan, our Democratic colleagues want to enact the largest tax 
hike in a generation. So contrary to what we did in 2017 by lowering 
the tax burden and giving people more of what they earned--and we have 
seen those tremendous economic results as a consequence--our Democratic 
colleagues want to, while we are still at 6 percent unemployment, raise 
taxes, which will further retard the economic recovery.
  So to recap, the plan for economic recovery is to make it more 
expensive for businesses to operate and nearly impossible for them to 
find workers. No wonder the economy isn't rebounding like we had hoped. 
That is what happened to the million jobs that were projected to be in 
the latest jobs report, but it was unfortunately a disappointing 25 
percent of those million jobs.
  So instead of building on the successes of 2017 and the prepandemic 
economy, the administration wants to double down on the old, tired 
belief that America can tax and spend and regulate itself to 
prosperity. We don't need dramatic tax increases for sweeping social 
safety programs to get our economy back on track. We need to replicate 
the same factors that led to our banner prepandemic recovery. We need 
to get our children safely back in the classroom so their parents can 
return to the workforce. We need to stop paying workers to sit on the 
sidelines, and we need to give the job creators the ability to drive 
our economy forward.
  Democrats don't have an ``American Something Plan'' for every 
problem. Sometimes all the government has to do is get out of the way
  I yield the floor.