April 8, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 60 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session
All in Senate sectionPrev18 of 43Next
Disaster Relief for Puerto Rico (Executive Session); Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 60
(Senate - April 08, 2019)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S2287-S2288] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] Disaster Relief for Puerto Rico Now, on another matter, Puerto Rico. Last week, Senator Leahy and I offered this Chamber a chance to pass a natural disaster funding package that would have addressed everyone's concerns in the Senate. The ``all of the above'' solution we presented contained $16.7 billion in relief for all Americans affected by natural disasters. I would add, I see my two friends from Iowa on the floor today, one in the President's chair, one ready to speak. That would have included far more money for the Midwest than the Republican bill because the Republican bill that was on the floor, while it added 2019 to disaster relief, didn't add in any more money despite the devastation in Iowa and Missouri and Nebraska. Well, our bill added an additional--an additional--$2.5 billion in funding for the disasters of 2019, and the vast majority of that would go to Iowa, to Missouri, and to Nebraska, but it also provided much needed aid for the people of Puerto Rico and other territories. They need the help, too, and they are Americans citizens as well. Let's face the music, folks. Everyone knows what is going on here. Democrats and Republicans had agreed, as we always do, when there is a disaster, we help. The original bill that was put together had aid for Puerto Rico, as [[Page S2288]] well as aid for the other areas of disaster. The original bill was put together before the Midwest so it didn't have that. What happened? Is it that somehow our Republican friends from the Midwest and elsewhere thought Puerto Rico didn't deserve the aid? No; President Trump went to a Tuesday lunch, banged his fist on the table-- figuratively, I suppose--and said: I don't think any aid should go to Puerto Rico. Did our Republican friends, especially those from States with disasters and who needed the aid, say: No, no; we are not going to do that; we are not going to let you divide us? No; they went gamefully along with it, hurting their States. We all know that if there is no real aid for Puerto Rico, the House will not pass the bill. We in the Senate on the Democratic side do not want to hold Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, and the other States, Florida, Texas, Alabama, that are getting the aid hostage for what we want, and our Republican friends shouldn't hold Puerto Rico hostage for what they want. This grand tradition seems to crumble here day by day, minute by minute, of helping States that need help; that when one American is hurt in one area, Americans in every other area come together and say: We are going to help. That is why we have disaster aid because the enormity of a tornado or a wildfire or a hurricane--the taxpayers of that State can't afford to do it all themselves. So citizens throughout America have had, in effect, a compact that says, when one area is hurt, we all come together. Look, I suffered a little from that when New York had Sandy. We had some of our Senators from the very States--from the very States--that now are requesting aid say: Don't give aid to New York for Sandy. I have never done that. I have always been for aid to States that are far away from New York and just have Republican representation. We don't do that here--until now. Until now. So I would say to all of my friends on the other side of the aisle, there is a way out of this--provide the aid that originally Senators Shelby, a Republican, Leahy, a Democrat, agreed on. Don't let Donald Trump's nasty temper tantrum somehow about Puerto Rico get in the way. Do the right thing, and he will sign the bill. We know he will sign the bill. He is not going to stop aid for Texas or Florida or Iowa or any other State because this body and the House have put in aid for Puerto Rico. Let me just mention, just as the people in the Midwest are suffering, people in Puerto Rico are suffering. That island has had a slower recovery from a storm of greater magnitude than any others we are talking about. So we need to vote on this legislation. It is not an either-or situation. To say you are putting $600 million in food stamps for Puerto Rico so people will not starve, when they are not getting the same aid everybody else gets--CDBG, FEMA--that is not right, that is not fair, and that figleaf will not cover up the real motivation of President Trump, which, unfortunately, I don't think most of our Republican colleagues agree with, but they go along with. Everyone is afraid on the other side of anything President Trump does--right or wrong. Unfortunately, he is wrong far too often. Puerto Rico needs aid so they can rebuild. They need the food aid, but they need more than that. Trump wanted to cut out all of it. Someone on this side said: Well, you have to at least do food aid. He said: Well, I will do that and nothing more. That is not right. Should we do food aid just for every State? Should we do food aid just for Texas or just for Florida or just for Iowa? No rebuilding? Let all of those houses and homes and factories and stores suffer? No. We wouldn't do it for those States. We shouldn't, and we shouldn't do it for Puerto Rico. So then we decided to compromise even more. There is $20 billion of aid already for Puerto Rico that hasn't been allocated. The President, in his nastiness to the people of Puerto Rico--citizens, they are American citizens--refused to allocate that money. Well, Senator Leahy then said: Let's just take $8.3 billion of that and free it up. Our colleagues will not even do that. So when the American people want to know what is holding up this bill, when the people in the flooded areas and the areas that have been hit by wildfires and hurricanes want to know what is holding it up, it is Donald Trump picking one part of the country and saying: ``I don't want to give aid to them,'' and too many--just about every one of our colleagues, at least thus far--going along. Elections have consequences. The House is now Democratic. It is their strong view that we ought to give aid to Puerto Rico. It is a view I share, but if we don't do the right thing in this body, where we have a tradition of coming together, and you say President Trump will not sign something, when he originally had nothing to do with putting together this bill, we are all going to be stuck for quite a while. We are all going to be stuck for quite a while. Let us in the House, in this body, the Senate, come to a compromise that satisfies the Midwest, that satisfies the hurricane States of Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, and Alabama, that satisfies Texas, and get moving. That is what we should be doing. This idea that we are holding up this bill, when the House wouldn't pass it anyway; the idea that we are holding up this bill, when we know the history that President Trump went into that lunch and changed everything around in the nasty way that he can't even explain--uh-uh; that is not going to fly. That is not going to fly.
All in Senate sectionPrev18 of 43Next