Executive Session
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, rather than spend time yesterday on a terribly destructive rules change, Leader McConnell could have focused the Senate on an urgent matter that this Chamber has failed to act on: disaster relief.
In a few moments, Senator Leahy and I will ask unanimous consent to have a vote on a new version of the emergency disaster relief that couldn't get through the Senate earlier this week. Our new amendment offers this Chamber a path forward from this week's impasse. It is a plan that meets everyone's needs. It doesn't say only aid this or only aid that; it recognizes all American citizens deserve to be helped when disaster strikes.
The amendment Senator Leahy and I will offer provides $16.7 billion in relief for Americans struck by natural disasters last year and in the last 2 years. It includes $2.5 billion in new funding--funding that the bill from the Republican side that failed, offered by Senators Shelby and Perdue, did not have--$2.5 billion in new funding for the recent flooding in Iowa, Nebraska, and Missouri. We all agree these communities need assistance now. This amendment also crucially includes aid for our fellow citizens in Puerto Rico and other territories. It doesn't say to pick one or to pick the other. It says to do both.
All of us in this Chamber should agree that we must do something now to help all Americans in need. This amendment offers our Republican friends--those who have said we need aid in the Middle West--the opportunity to do just that. So, if this Chamber wants to help families in Nebraska, in Iowa, in Missouri and if we want to help the families of Texas and of Florida, this amendment is the path forward. It is the key to moving forward. This is the solution that has the ability to pass the House. This is the option that has enough support to reach the President's desk. The Speaker of the House has said the original Republican bill wouldn't even have been put on the floor. This bill will.
Now, some will say and, I know, my dear friend from Alabama--and he is my good friend--will say that the President will not sign this. Well, I have something else to say. If my colleagues on the other side pass this measure, the President will dare not veto it. That is my prediction. We all know the President has huffed and puffed about vetoing bills in the past. He has said he would veto ``this,'' and he has said he would veto ``that.'' Yet, in most instances, when the Republicans in the Senate have stood up, he has caved. In this case in particular, he will not want to veto legislation that helps Nebraska and Iowa and Missouri and Texas and Florida. So let's not play this game.
We all know what happened. There was a bipartisan agreement. President Trump went to the Republican lunch and said: No aid for Puerto Rico. That is why we are in this mess, but we can change that. It is time to call the President's bluff. Elections have consequences. There is a Democratic House. The time has come for the Republicans of this Chamber and for the Republicans in the House to have a frank conversation with the President about what can and cannot pass the Congress.
If the President cares about farmers in Iowa and Texas and Missouri and all American citizens who have been affected by natural disasters, he will not veto this bill. We know that. The measure we are presenting today isn't some solution that has been cooked up out of left field; it is a simple proposal. We need disaster relief for all Americans, plain and simple.
Senators Leahy and Shelby worked in good faith earlier this year, as they always do, and I appreciate the great relationship our Appropriations Committee chair and ranking member--vice chair--have. It would have worked had the President not gone to that lunch. Who knows why, where, or when he pounded the table and said: No aid to Puerto Rico. He said that, OK? The only problem is when we are at the brink of a compromise, all too often, President Trump torpedoes things, and then the Republicans act powerless. They don't act.
If Leader McConnell and the Senate Republicans will not support this measure--a measure that notes the needs of all affected Americans--then what is their plan that can pass the House and pass the Senate and go to the President's desk?
If this measure just had aid to Puerto Rico and not to the Middle West, the President might veto it, but he is not going to veto a bill that gives aid to the Middle West nor should he.
So, if an ``all of the above'' solution will not work, what on Earth will?
So far, the answer from this Chamber on the other side seems to be nothing--none of the above. That doesn't make sense. This is an emergency. People are suffering. People can't get back into their homes. Small businesses need help starting up again. This is not the time to duck, to look for cover, to know when the President has done something sort of wrongly and seemingly on a whim to just bow to what he says. We should agree on the need to do something now to help communities that are recovering from natural disasters. Our amendment offers the Republicans the opportunity to do just that.
Nobody--no Member of this body--should pick and choose which American citizens get help in times of crises. It is a profound shame that my colleagues on the other side, thus far, have allowed the President to derail this process and have gone along with appeasing him. I say the power of this Chamber is greater than they realize. If we vote on this package and if it passes the Senate and if it passes the House and reaches the President's desk, the President will sign it. He will not follow through on a veto threat even if he knows that doing so will be a profound betrayal of his promise to look after the well-being of all Americans.
I urge the Senators to support our amendment today that gives aid to the Middle West, to the South--those from Florida to Texas--and to the people of Puerto Rico.
268; that all pending amendments be withdrawn; that Leahy amendment No. 246 be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source