Legislative Program
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I inquire of the majority leader the schedule for the coming week.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for laying out the course of next week, as well as what could come beyond. We will surely go through some of those items.
I will start with the gentleman's schedule conversations about Monday and Tuesday, the ability for us to pay true tribute to our dear colleague that we lost, John Lewis. This week, of course, we mourn him. We look at the spot where John used to sit and think about the giant that he was.
There were some wonderful tributes here on this House floor earlier this week, and it is very fitting that he will be lying in the rotunda, which is a rare tribute that we pay to special, unique people. He clearly fits that bill as a colleague, but also someone who was a legend, a giant.
We got to serve with someone who we will tell our kids and our grandkids about. For that, we are all better for it. This body is better for John's service, and this country is better for what John Lewis gave, both his blood, his sweat, his passion, his ideas, and his voice.
And if the gentleman wanted to add to that--I know we share those same sympathies for the family, but also the same reverence that we did get to serve with someone who truly was larger than life.
I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman and thank the leader and the Speaker for providing that privilege to John, to his family, and to all of us, to be able to send him off to a much better place, where I know he already is.
As it relates to the schedule, as the gentleman talked about for potentially coming back in August, the negotiations that are going on between the House and the Senate and the White House on a potential next relief package, clearly we are not in agreement yet.
I know there was a House-passed bill. There is going to be a Senate bill brought forward that is probably a very different direction than the House bill. The White House has been talking about some items that the President liked. I know the President talked today about the payroll tax cut, which is something that I surely would advocate for, as a way to help get people back to work and to help families have more money in their pockets during these tough times and also an incentive to have businesses bring more workers back.
He acknowledged that is probably not something that we will reach agreement on, but he also laid out the olive branch to try to find other ways we can get agreement, if we do get agreement.
I would offer that. And as the gentleman talked about, whatever we do would need to be a bipartisan bill. And I agree, if there is one, it is going to have to be one where we come together, if it is going to be signed by the President.
I would offer that up, as we have looked at the trillions of dollars we have already appropriated--and we came together, Republicans and Democrats in both Chambers, with the White House to send a number of relief packages that have provided dramatic help to millions of families, to millions of small businesses, and they are still struggling.
But as we look at what we spent, we have identified over $500 billion of that money that still hasn't been spent that is in various accounts. You look at the Paycheck Protection Program, over $120 billion still unspent. Of course, there are limitations on each of these funds. It might be possible that we would look at making those existing funds more flexible before we look at spending new dollars, if we can get agreement on that.
I would also like to suggest, as we encourage the opening of schools, where kids can go back to the classroom, there is a healthy debate going on around the country. Many school systems have already made the responsible decision to safely provide an environment where kids can come back in school and they can have that opportunity.
There is a lot of data out there. The American Academy of Pediatrics has laid out strong guidelines for how you can reopen schools safely. And safety clearly has to be the top issue. But they also talk about the danger and the damage to the children, the over 50 million children in this country who do go to in-school settings, the damage that is done by not having that opportunity.
They were denied it, of course, in the middle of a pandemic. Millions of parents became home-schoolers. Myself and my wife were part of that. It was quite an experience. We would be more than happy to allow our children to go back into the classroom. And in New Orleans, they are scheduled to do that. They are going to be reopening schools there, as so many other systems.
But we also know there are some systems that are contemplating not allowing the children to come back in the classroom. I would just hope that we would urge all school systems to find a way to get it done safely. Others are doing it safely. It can be done safely. It doesn't mean it is easy to do it, but we know it can be done. We owe it to those children, the millions of children that would be harmed by not having that in-classroom experience.
You look at the billions of dollars that are still unspent, including money we sent to the States. We sent $150 billion directly to States for COVID-19 relief. This money, without any change in law, would be eligible for those States to send to their local school systems to buy sanitizer, to buy masks, whatever else they need to safely reopen the schools.
And I would encourage, if there are any limitations that States identify, I would hope they share it with us because I think we can find agreement even there.
But I think we should also look at an opportunity that if school systems are not going to provide that safe environment for kids to come back in the classroom and those parents still want their children back in the classroom, we should look, at least during this pandemic, to allow the dollars to be able to go somewhere else where they are willing to safely educate those children.
If the parents want to make that choice, if one school system is going to deny the children that opportunity, and there are other school systems that are willing to safely educate those children, we should give them that opportunity to be able to let those dollars follow the children so that they are not denied those opportunities as the American Academy of Pediatrics discussed. I hope we can have all of these conversations in the mix of the negotiations that are ongoing.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. I yield to the gentleman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I agree. We worked very closely over a period of weeks to come up with the CARES Act, which I have heard from so many families and small businesses throughout my district, as well as through my colleagues and their districts, how much of a lifeline that was, truly saving millions of jobs, saving millions of small businesses so that they can still work to reopen safely, hopefully get back to the successes they were having before.
We know we are not there yet, but with the encouraging signs we are seeing on the medical front, with both therapies as well as vaccines, showing incredible promise in the testing stages through Operation Warp Speed, where we are able to test on thousands of people. Nobody is cutting any corners, but we have a wider array of people to test now because the disease is so widespread, not only in America but throughout the world.
So, that testing that is being done in a very aggressive fashion is showing incredible promise. Hopefully, that gets us to a point where we have a vaccine. But as we know, today, we are not there yet.
So, hopefully, we can continue working to help those businesses get back open or stay open and help families through the tough time. That is just why I would suggest that, as we haven't gotten an agreement, whether the Senate hasn't even gotten an agreement amongst themselves, as the gentleman pointed out. The bill that came out of the House recently was not bipartisan, but we were able earlier, through the CARES Act, to have a bipartisan agreement. So, the ability is still there.
But, in the meantime, while those negotiations aren't resulting in an agreement, I would just offer up that there are hundreds of billions, well over $500 billion, that we have appropriated that haven't been spent and, in some of those categories, probably won't be spent because of the limitations.
Maybe we can look at providing more flexibility with existing dollars before we talk about another trillion, to allow more uses for that for the people who need it as a bridge to maybe get to another point, or a bridge to get to a healthier economy that takes off on its own. Hopefully, that would be one more option we can put on the table.
I would ask if we do continue these negotiations, I know the gentleman referred to the possibility that that first week in August, we may come back. If we are to come back, and the majority decides to bring Congress back at a time that it is not currently scheduled, could we at least get a 72-hour notice, as normally is the case, so that Members can adjust their schedules and know what is ahead of us without very short notice?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that. Maybe as we get toward the middle or end of next week, we will have a better idea where we are, and that number could change. Maybe there is an agreement by then, so we will continue this discussion.
I appreciate the gentleman's candor and willingness to work with us, to try to make sure that the Members are at least aware of where they will be, if they already have plans to do other things, that they can adjust that in a reasonable amount of time to address these challenges.
Finally, I would want to ask the gentleman, I know we have had a debate a number of times about this experiment with proxy voting. It was going to expire in July, and it was renewed until August. I don't know if the gentleman knows yet if the intention is to continue going on with that, but there have been a number of cases where you have had Members that were here one day and sent in a note the very same day saying they are unable to be here and then proxy-voted or were out on a boat or other things.
I would hope this process ends, that we get back to voting in person. It has been very safe. The environment here is safe. Members are wearing masks when they are in close contact with one another. Obviously, we are at a very safe social distance, and you don't need to wear a mask in this kind of environment. But when you are close, you have seen the Members following the protocols. There is a lot of safety equipment around.
I would just hope we could get back to the ability to be here physically. It is a much better working environment when you can see your other colleagues and share experiences and talk about best practices that we are seeing in each of our districts, people that are doing things better, that we can help other people in other districts do. It is hard to get that when you are just not here.
I would hope that we would work toward getting back to as normal of a process as possible, recognizing where we are, but where we are doing that work here in the Capitol in the same place together at a safe distance, but at least here physically.
I would hope we could continue to have this conversation. Clearly, there are a few more weeks and no decision has to be made yet. I don't know if the gentleman has already made a decision.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, look, obviously, we can have a disagreement over whether or not there should be a proxy voting system. But if there is going to be, I would just hope that we would see an increase in the integrity of that.
I mean, for a Member to literally be here physically on the House floor, and then later in that same day, sign a document--it is not a notarized document, but you are signing a document on your stationery to the Clerk of House saying you are physically unable to be here when you were physically here that day. It reduces the integrity when we see roughly a 15 percent increase in people that are here all week that all of a sudden sign a document saying they physically can't be here on the fly-out day. It reduces the integrity.
So if it is going to continue--clearly, our side does not want to see it continue, but if your side feels it should continue, I hope you would at least look at strengthening the integrity so if somebody signs a document, that you have confidence that that document is an accurate depiction to the Clerk of the House.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I respect that, and I appreciate the gentleman discussing that. I know we have additional negotiations that will go on, hopefully, next week. And we will have a clearer picture if those will result in actual legislation we can come together on and get a clearer picture of the timeline.
But at least until then, I know I appreciate the opportunity to not only be able to pay tribute to our dear friend John Lewis here in this Chamber where we served together but then to go in the rotunda, as the gentleman acknowledged, in a rare moment when a nonformer President of the United States gets to lie in that beautiful rotunda. No one is more fitting of that honor than the great John Lewis.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman if he has anything else.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source