[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 116 (Wednesday, June 24, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3161-S3162]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE JUSTICE ACT
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, on another matter, today was supposed
to bring progress for an issue that is weighing heavily on the minds of
Americans. In the wake of the killings of Breonna Taylor and George
Floyd, following weeks of passionate protests from coast to coast, the
Senate was supposed to officially take up police reform on the floor
today. Instead, our Democratic colleagues are poised to turn this
routine step into a partisan impasse.
Frankly, to most Americans, the situation would sound like a satire
of what goes on in the Senate: a heated argument over whether to invoke
cloture on a motion to proceed to a proposal--a heated argument over
whether to invoke cloture on a motion to proceed to a proposal. We are
literally arguing about whether to stop arguing about whether to start
arguing about something else.
I can stand here for an hour and extol the virtues of Senator Tim
Scott's JUSTICE Act. His legislation has already earned 48 cosponsors
because it is a straightforward plan based on facts, based on data, and
based on lived experience. It focuses on improving accountability and
restoring trust. It addresses key issues like choke holds and no-knock
warrants. It expands reporting, transparency in hiring, and training
for deescalation.
I am proud to stand with this legislation, but the reality is that
nobody thought the first offer from the Republican side was going to be
the final product that traveled out of the Senate. What is supposed to
happen in this
[[Page S3162]]
body is that we vote or agree to get onto a bill, and then we discuss,
debate, and amend it until at least 60 Senators are satisfied, or it
goes nowhere. It goes nowhere at the end until 60 Senators are
satisfied.
So what are they giving up? Nothing. They don't want an outcome. The
vote we will take in a few hours is just the first step. We aren't
passing a bill. We aren't making policy decisions. It is just a
procedural vote to say that police reform is the subject the Senate
will tackle next. That is all it says--that police reform is the
subject the Senate will tackle next.
Alas, our Democratic colleagues have suddenly begun to signal they
are not willing to even begin the discussion on police reform. They are
threatening to block the subject from even reaching the Senate floor.
Yesterday, in a letter to me and on the floor, the Democratic leader
and the junior Senators from New Jersey and California put forward an
argument that was almost nonsensical. First, they explained a number of
policy differences they have with Senator Scott's proposal. No problem
there. The Senate has a handy tool for settling such differences; it is
called legislating. We take up bills. We debate them. We consider
amendments from both sides. And only if and when 60 Senators are
satisfied can we even vote on passage.
But this time, Senate Democrats say the legislative process should
not happen. This time, the Democratic leader is saying he will not let
the Senate take up the subject of police reform at all--at all--unless
I pre-negotiate with him in private and rewrite our starting point
until he is satisfied.
This last-minute ultimatum is particularly ironic given the weeks of
rhetoric from leading Democrats about how very urgent--how very
urgent--it was that Congress address police reform and racial justice.
For weeks, the Democratic leader has blustered that the Senate simply
had to address this issue before July 4. Well, that is what the vote
this morning is about.
Last week, Speaker Pelosi said: ``I hope there's a compromise to be
reached in the Congress. . . .'' because ``How many more people have to
die from police brutality?'' So, as recently as last week, leading
Democrats called it a life-or-death issue for the Senate to take up the
subject this month. Well, here we are. Here we are. We are ready to
address it. But now, in the last 48 hours, this bizarre, new ultimatum.
Now they don't want to take up the issue. They don't want to debate.
They don't want amendments. They will filibuster police reform from
even reaching the floor of the Senate unless the majority lets the
minority rewrite the bill behind closed doors in advance. Let me say
that again. They will filibuster police reform from even reaching the
floor unless the majority lets the minority rewrite the bill behind
closed doors in advance.
Yesterday, the Speaker of the House told CBS News that because Senate
Republicans do support Senator Tim Scott's reform bill, we are all--
listen to this jaw-dropping comment--``trying to get away with murder .
. . the murder of George Floyd.'' That is the Speaker of the House
accusing Senate Republicans of trying to get away with murder.
Are you beginning to see how this game works? Two weeks ago, it was
implied the Senate would have blood on our hands if we didn't take up
police reform. Now Democrats say Senator Scott and 48 other Senators
have blood on our hands because we are trying to take up police reform.
What fascinating times we live in. Armies of elites and Twitter mobs
stand ready to pounce on any speech they deem problematic. Yet unhinged
comments like these get a complete free pass--a complete free pass.
When our country needs unity, they are trying to keep us apart. When
our Nation needs bipartisan solutions, they are staging partisan
theater. This is political nonsense elevated to an art form.
In a body that has amendments and substitute amendments, it is
nonsense to say a police reform bill cannot be the starting point for a
police reform bill. It is nonsense for Democrats to say that, because
they want to change Senator Scott's bill, they are going to block the
Senate from taking it up and amending it. If they are confident in
their positions, they should embrace the amendment process. If they
aren't confident their views will persuade others, that just
underscores why they don't get to insert these views in advance--in
advance--behind closed doors.
No final legislation can pass without 60 votes. If Democrats do not
like the final product, it will not pass. The only way there is any
downside for Democrats to come to the table is that they would rather
preserve this urgent subject as a live campaign issue than pass a
bipartisan answer.
The majority has done everything we can to proceed to this issue in
good faith. I have fast-tracked this issue to the floor this month, as
our Democratic colleagues said they wanted until 48 hours ago. I have
expressed my support for a robust amendment process, as our Democratic
colleagues said they wanted until 48 hours ago.
So make no mistake about it: Senate Republicans are ready to make a
law. We are ready to discuss and amend our way to a bipartisan product,
pass it, and take it to conference with the House. The American people
deserve an outcome, and we cannot get an outcome if Democrats will not
even let us begin--not even let us begin.
I hope our colleagues reconsider and let the Senate consider police
reform later today. If they do not, the next time another appalling
incident makes our Nation sick to its stomach with grief and anger yet
again, Senate Democrats can explain to the Nation why they made sure
the Senate did nothing
____________________