Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I came to the floor to talk about the pending business, but I have to just comment based on what the Democratic leader has said. Apparently, he has so little confidence in his party's nominee for President that he insists on coming to the floor every day that we are in session, trying to assist her by making arguments either she cannot make or that she has not made. We do have pending business that is very important and which I know he would agree is important, and that is to keep the government running past the end of this fiscal year, which ends on Friday.

That actually is the subject that I came here to talk about. We are continuing to work on a continuing resolution to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year. The fact of the matter is that we would not find ourselves in this distasteful position were it not for the filibusters of our Democratic colleagues who try to use the leverage and have effectively used the leverage to shut down the normal functioning of the appropriations process in order to gain some leverage to spend more money, notwithstanding the fact that we are $19 trillion in debt. They simply shifted from one excuse to another in order to refuse to do their job, which is actually to work in a bipartisan way through the appropriations process to fund the functioning of the government at agreed-to spending levels.

So we are now staring at a Friday deadline to keep the government open. Of course, this was their design all along--to drag their feet, delay, and turn from one excuse to another in order to keep from actually working in a bipartisan way to appropriate the money to fund the government so the government would continue to function. We could have finished this job a long time ago, but our Democratic colleagues simply made it clear that they wouldn't lose any sleep even as we get closer and closer to the funding deadline.

This is actually the narrative they hoped for all along. They want to talk about shutdowns or potential shutdowns that they, in fact, could cause, not because of anything that we have done on this side of the aisle.

The Appropriations Committee, chaired by Senator Cochran, and the Appropriations subcommittees have voted out on a bipartisan basis all 12 appropriations bills, and they have done their work. Many of them have passed unanimously. Most of them have passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support, which is very encouraging. So our Democratic colleagues have had a lot of participation and a lot of influence, as I know they would want, in the priorities of the Federal Government as reflected in the appropriations bill. Of course, that wasn't good enough, and that didn't meet their underlying need, which is to try to gain any advantage they possibly can when it comes to spending levels or in the upcoming November 8 election, which very much appears to be on the Democratic leader's mind as he continues to come to the floor and talk about the Presidential race rather than the pending business.

Of course, now we know that we are running out of time. So the majority leader, Senator McConnell, has now proposed to call their bluff. They said they wanted a clean continuing resolution. As a matter of fact, the Democratic leader said last week that if a clean continuing resolution were brought to a vote, we could ``leave in 10 minutes.'' That is what the Democratic leader said last week. But as of yesterday, we know he changed his tune. He said a clean CR wasn't near enough. He said: ``We want more.''

We will soon have a chance to vote on that clean continuing resolution after lunch. This is the continuing resolution that the Democratic leader said we could pass and leave in 10 minutes. This continuing resolution funds the government at levels this Chamber has already agreed to. There are no riders or anything that the Democrats can claim as controversial. It is a simple continuation of funding at current levels under the same terms that the President has already signed into law last December. It also includes resources for bipartisan priorities like veterans programs, flood control, fighting the opioid epidemic that is devastating communities across our country, and dealing with prevention of the Zika virus--something the Democrats said they wanted money for since last May. Well, this is it. This is the $1.1 billion agreed to on a bipartisan basis. But this is when they shift their argument to something else.

We remember that during the summer, our Democratic colleagues were quick to call for action on Zika funding. Ironically, they filibustered a bill that would have provided that funding, but when push came to shove, they flat out refused to act to give communities the funding they need to fight this real health crisis.
We know from what has happened in Florida, where they have had domestic infections of people from the mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus in Florida, that it is just a matter of time before this will spread to other parts of the United States, including warmer weather States like mine, in Texas.

I have spent some time in Houston, TX, with the mosquito and vector control folks at the Harris County Health Department, where they are monitoring these mosquitoes on a daily basis to see whether there are signs of the Zika virus in those mosquitoes. Thankfully, there is none yet, but they are identifying West Nile virus and other mosquito-borne diseases, and thank goodness for the work and leadership they are showing at the local level. It would be nice if the Nation's congressional leaders would demonstrate similar leadership getting our job done, getting the money to the people who need it and can put it to good use.

I have shown the picture of the devastating birth defects caused by the Zika virus in women of childbearing age. It is devastating. How our colleagues across the aisle can continue to block this funding in giving the money that could actually help address this potential health crisis is beyond me. We have given them what they wanted, and they refuse to take yes for an answer. They still talk a lot about it and the urgent need to get it done, while dragging their feet the whole way.

The Democratic leader even said at the beginning of this month that we need to handle the Zika threat first and foremost. Well, I guess that is why he continues to delay a vote on the continuing resolution and why they continue to do what they say they are going to do. They are going to block the cloture vote this afternoon, again, because now they have changed the subject.

Well, this is their chance to act, to send resources to fight the virus in communities across the country. I am glad the senior Senator from Florida, a Member of the Democratic caucus, has already said that he will support this clean CR, in light of the public health threat Zika poses to his constituents in Florida. He clearly has his priorities straight. It is not politics first and foremost. It is public health. I hope more of his colleagues follow his lead and vote to get on this continuing resolution so we can get our work done and so the money can go to those communities like those in his State and in my State that need it most.

Some of our Democratic colleagues say they don't like the continuing resolution because it doesn't allow for funding for the water problems in Flint, MI. But I have to say that this is just another manufactured excuse. It ignores reality. We just passed overwhelmingly the Water Resources Development Act with more than 90 votes in this Chamber. That bill provides funding for the crisis in Flint, MI. The House is taking up their version of the bill this week. The chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, has made it clear he is committed to sending this Water Resources Development Act, including funding for Flint, to the President for his signature.

So that excuse doesn't hold any water either.

Our Democratic friends may say: Well, that is not included in the House bill. That is true. But with the commitment of the chairman and the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator Boxer, who work so well together, there is no way in the world that a conference report is going to come back to the Senate without that Flint, MI, money in the bill. So that excuse doesn't hold water either.
Once again, I guess because they think it helps them somehow politically, our Democratic friends are marching this country closer and closer to a shutdown. They have been slow-walking the process, starting months ago when they refused to consider and even pass bipartisan appropriations bills. As I said earlier, these were bills passed overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis. Why in the world would they do that, I guess, perhaps is the question before us. Well, a Member of their leadership implied in yesterday's Washington Post that it is purely for political purposes.

I am not naive. I understand politics is part of this process, but clearly the priority of our colleagues across the aisle is not to do their job and to address the funding needs for the Federal Government, including the Zika crisis or even to deal in a bipartisan way with the very issue they have identified, the Flint, MI, issue that is going to get that money to the community.

In the article I mentioned in the Washington Post, the senior Senator from Montana, who heads the Democratic campaign committee, gave us just a momentary glimpse into our Democratic friends' playbook this election cycle. He said that in order to win more seats in the U.S. Senate, Democratic candidates need to show that ``Republicans really haven't done anything.''

That was the campaign chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, saying in order for them to win seats, they have to show that under Republican leadership nothing has been done. The facts would show otherwise. This reminds me of the story of a propaganda technique where, if you tell a big enough falsehood and you tell it over and over and over, there are some people who are actually going to believe it.

Facts are a stubborn thing. Democrats are marching us down a path that leads to a shutdown in order to gain some sort of political advantage. What a terrible thing to do to this country, to be brought to the brink purely for some perceived, temporary political game.

The facts are, under the leadership of Senator McConnell as the majority leader and under a Republican majority, the Senate has been brought back to regular order, which means we are actually doing the people's business. Committee chairmen have had the freedom to flesh out legislation on a bipartisan basis and craft good policy solutions for the American people, rather than have bills cooked up in the Democratic leaders' conference room that have never seen the light of day in any committee and certainly were not bipartisan. That was the record when the Democratic leader was majority leader during the last Congress.

We have had more votes on more bills so individual Senators could offer specific ideas on how to make legislation better, and the results speak for themselves. It is a long list, but the Senate has passed much needed overhauls of our education system and our transportation system, both on a bipartisan basis. We have passed bipartisan bills to help root out the dangers to our society from opioid addiction, heroin addiction, and human trafficking. We passed foreign policy measures that have made our country safer, including a bill to impose stronger sanctions on North Korea.

Again, it is a long list. Last week, we passed the Water Resources Development Act I was referring to earlier, thanks to the leadership of a Republican, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, and a Democrat, the senior Senator from California. That is the way this process is supposed to work.

The point is, until very recently, this Congress has been marked by a willingness of folks on both sides of the aisle to work through the issues and to find a path forward that would represent the best solution for the people we represent, the American people.

According to the senior Senator from Montana--in what appears to be an act of desperation--that doesn't make for good campaign strategy in the days leading up to the election, apparently, and now they want to try to sell this propaganda, this gigantic falsehood repeated over and over so people, at some point, at some level, begin to believe it. They want to paint this Congress as ineffective under Republican control.

When our friends on the other side of the aisle put the ``d'' in dysfunction during the 113th Congress, that is why the Republicans won the majority in the 2014 election, among other things, because Democratic incumbents running for reelection in 2014 had no record of accomplishment they could point to. That strategy backfired on our Democratic colleagues. You would think they would have learned something from that experience.

For example, they had the incumbent Senator from Alaska go home to Alaska and ask to be returned to the Senate. He could not point to a single amendment on a single bill he actually sponsored that received a rollcall vote in the Senate. That is pretty hard to explain, especially when you are in the majority, but that is what happened. You would think our colleagues would have learned something from that.

What do they gain by edging our country toward a government shutdown this Friday? I don't see how it helps anyone, but that is why we are here today, staring at a deadline and trying to hammer out a stopgap spending bill--and this only gets us to December 9.

Again, the reason we find ourselves having to do this is because they have simply shut down the Senate appropriations process, forcing us into a position that no one who actually has any interest in performing the duties of their job actually likes. This is not the way the Senate is supposed to work, but this is the hand we have been dealt because of their obstruction.

I would hope more Democrats would join the senior Senator from Florida and take yes for an answer when it comes to funding the government, when it comes to dealing with Zika, the potential Zika crisis in our country.
I hope our colleagues on the other side will reconsider their decision to block the vote this afternoon. We are ready to move forward with the solution our Democratic colleagues have called for, a clean continuing resolution, but again it is like Charlie Brown and the football. Do you remember that cartoon? Every time Lucy would put the football out, she would pull it back at the last minute and Charlie Brown would end up on his back.

All we need is a partner who will work with us. I encourage some of our friends across the aisle to reconsider their position.

Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act

Mr. President, late on Friday afternoon, the President fulfilled his promise to veto the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.

I have a hard time understanding the President's rationale. This legislation was approved unanimously in the Senate and in the House.

That doesn't happen very often, where Democrats and Republicans, where Senators and House Members, unanimously support a piece of legislation, but tomorrow afternoon we will vote on an override of that veto.
President Obama made clear in his message that he doesn't understand how limited and narrow in scope this legislation is. As a matter of fact, he misrepresents what this legislation actually does, which is an extension of current law, and it is well within the bounds of historical practice and modern court guidance under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

The victims of terrorism in this country need an ability to seek justice in a court of law. That is all this bill is about. It doesn't identify a single country, and it doesn't purport to decide the merits of the case. All it says is, yes, you can present your case to a judge and a jury in a court of law. Why the President would object to that is lost on me.

This legislation will help victims of terrorism on U.S. soil seek compensation. By doing so, it will potentially deter other terrorist acts. If there are consequences associated with sponsoring terrorist attacks on American soil, don't you think this might have some modest deterrence effect, including our counterterrorism measures that our national security forces are engaged in?

This also sends an important message that the United States takes care of its own and that we will never tolerate terrorism and we will never ever shy away from the pursuit of justice for Americans.

I realize there are some of our colleagues who say: Well, Saudi Arabia or some other country might be upset with us.

Frankly, I could care less. We are here to represent the American people, not some foreign country. The fact is, our colleagues--our friends in Saudi Arabia, to the extent that we have aligned interests, we work well together and that will continue despite this veto override. To simply say because some foreign country or some King or some Prince of some other country doesn't like legislation so the President is going to veto it is simply unacceptable, when clearly the American interest here is for these victims of terrorism to find recourse in our courts of law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source