Coronavirus
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, let me concur with my friend from Illinois on the issue.
I have a question for my colleague from Texas. It is a very simple question. You have concerns about the issue of corporate liability. I get that. I happen not to agree with you. You are entitled to your opinion. You may or may not be concerned about section 230 of the 1996 Federal telecommunications bill. That is fine too. We might have a discussion about how we protect American democracy. It is a good discussion as well. But I have a strong feeling, Senator Cornyn, that in Texas, as in Vermont--you know what--people are not really talking about corporate liability. It is a good issue. It is an important issue. I don't believe they are talking about section 230. What I think they are talking about, as the Senator from Illinois just said, is how they are going to feed their kids today. That is the issue. And what I would ask my friend from Texas is, What is your problem with allowing the Senate to vote on whether or not we are going to allow Americans, working-class people to get a $2,000 check?
Now I gather that when that vote comes to the floor--and I hope it comes immediately--you will vote no, and you will explain to the people of Texas why you voted that way. That is called democracy. I respect that. But what is your problem with allowing the Senate to have a free standing vote?
There are a number of people on your side, Republicans, who have already come forward and said yes, they want to vote for this $2,000 check.
Now, if you want to deal with corporate liability, that is fine. Let's deal with it at some point. Bring forward a bill, and we can vote on it up or down. All that we are asking for is a simple, up-or-down vote on the issue that tens of millions of people are talking about right now: Will they survive economically in the midst of this terrible pandemic?
I ask my colleague from Texas: What is the problem with allowing the U.S. Senate to vote on the bill passed by the House?
I yield to my colleague from Texas.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, if you listened carefully, you understood that my friend from Texas did not answer my question. He has a concern about corporate liability. It is a legitimate debate. Do you know what? Bring it to the floor. Let's vote it up or down. I will vote against it. You will vote for it. But I asked you a very simple question, not about linking things together--nobody in the real world understands that stuff. That is inside-the-beltway stuff.
What people in the real world know--and I want to take a moment to read some of these statements. We have a lot of people on our social media, and we asked the American people, just the other day: Tell me; what would a $2,000 check mean to you? What is going on in your life?
And in just over 24 hours, I would say to my friend from Texas, nearly 6,000 people responded. Here is just what a few of them had to say. This is Twitter stuff. So I don't have their names here, and I wouldn't use them publicly, anyhow. But this is what they say.
One person writes: ``$2,000 is the difference between keeping our apartment and being evicted.'' Here is another one: ``$2,000 means I can afford to feed my three kids.'' Another response: ``It would mean not having to choose between rent and groceries and not having to ration my partner's meds.'' Another response: ``I am raising my grandson with medical needs. I am $4,000 behind on utilities. We need electricity to run his medical equipment.'' Here is another response: ``$2,000 would mean I wouldn't have to worry about making my mortgage payment this month, and I could get my medication.'' Another response: ``$2,000 would mean paying my rent and getting lifesaving treatment because I can't afford the $50 copay through my work insurance just to see my neurologist right now''--and on and on and on. Thousands of people responded.
So, I want to get back to the point. I want to again say to my friend from Texas: If you have a concern about corporate liability--good issue--bring it to the floor. Let's vote on corporate liability.
I would yield for a question from my friend from Illinois.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. That is my understanding. And I think, you know, as Republicans do, they are going to let it be.
But I get back to my friend--my friend from Texas, Senator Cornyn. We are asking a simple question. If you want to bring up corporate liability, bring it up. If you want to bring up section 230, bring it up. If you want to bring up the man in the Moon, bring it up. But what the American people want now is an up-or-down vote.
Look, you are going to vote against it if it comes to the floor. That is fine. It is your right. Explain it to the people of Texas. I will vote for it. But all that I am asking for is the right, as a U.S. Senator, to have the vote.
Again I ask you: What is your problem with Members of the U.S. Senate, including a number of Republicans, who have already indicated they would like to vote for this? What is your problem with bringing that up as a single stand-alone bill, not merged with corporate liability or anything else? What is your problem with that?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. Then vote against it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. That is a good question. And then I will have to explain that to the people of the State of Vermont.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. He asked me a question, as I understood it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. Did the Senator from Texas ask me a question?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SANDERS. I took you literally.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source