Tom Cotton

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, ``I hope I am over wary, but if I am not, there is, even now, something of ill omen amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country, the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions in lieu of the sober judgment of courts, and the worse than savage mobs for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it exists now in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth and an insult to our intelligence to deny. Accounts of outrages committed by mobs form the everyday news of the times.'' Now, those are not my words. Those are the words of a young Abraham Lincoln. Sadly, they ring with truth today. In recent weeks, violent mobs have roamed our streets, defacing and tearing down statues and monuments--in most cases, with neither resistance from the police nor legal consequences. On Friday, a mob tore down another statue just a few blocks from here. The police stood idly by and watched as rioters toppled it and set it on fire. One can only assume they were ordered not to intervene by Washington's leftwing mayor. Here is the thing: Steps were already underway to move that statue lawfully. Washington's delegates in Congress had legislation to that effect. But mobs don't care to negotiate--only to destroy. The delegate said: I have no doubt I could have gotten that bill through, but the people got here before due process. It is hard to imagine a more chilling summation of mob rule. As Lincoln knew, the mob threatens not just old statues but the lives and livelihoods of us all. Indeed, the mob threatens civilization itself in many ways. Most simply, Lincoln knew that mobs inevitably make mistakes and commit injustices. Some may celebrate the destruction of disfavored statues and monuments, but what of the vandals in Boston who defaced a monument to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment, the first African-American regiment to fight for the Union, whose bravery and skill was immortalized in the movie ``Glory''? What of the outlaws of Philadelphia, who defaced a statue of Matthias Baldwin, a devout, passionate abolitionist? Mobs don't discriminate between legitimate and illegitimate targets of their destruction. That is because they are mobs. Lincoln also warned that the ``lawless in spirit'' will become ``lawless in practice'' because of mob violence seeing no consequences for crimes. A mob doesn't stop at statues. Rioters have already torched police precincts and low-income housing in Minneapolis. Churches and synagogues have been vandalized. Next, perhaps the mob will target the homes of police officers, and soon enough the mob may come for you and your home and your family. As the mob expands its power, Lincoln cautioned that good citizens, ``seeing their property destroyed; their families insulted, and their lives endangered; their persons injured; and seeing nothing in prospect that forebodes a change for the better; become tired of, and disgusted with, a Government that offers them no protection.'' Mob rule can only serve to demoralize our people and shake their faith in our government and our way of life. As the mob rises, civilization recedes. Finally, Lincoln observed that ``by the operation of this mobocractic spirit, which all must admit, is now abroad in the land, the strongest bulwark of any Government, and particularly of those constituted like ours, may effectually be broken down and destroyed--I mean the attachment of the People.'' The final victim of mob rule is the very spirit of civic-minded patriotism that's necessary to preserve our Republic. For all these reasons, Lincoln said: ``There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.'' We cannot tolerate mob rule, and we cannot allow it to go unpunished. While local authorities would usually take the lead in prosecuting these criminals, unfortunately, many of them seem unwilling to stand up to the mob and uphold the rule of law. Therefore, I call upon the Department of Justice to bring charges against these mob vigilantes, prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law. The Anti-Riot Act and the Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act can provide legal grounds in some cases; still other Federal statutes may govern in other cases; but there must be consequences for mob violence because if you give the mob an inch, it will take a mile. Witness the events of just this past weekend, where mobs tore down statues of George Washington and Ulysses S. Grant. When you tear down statues of Washington and Grant, it is not about the Civil War; it is because you hate America. Indeed, these rioters hate America. In Portland, where they tore down the statue of Washington, they also spray-painted on him the date ``1619,'' a reference to the New York Times's revisionist, anti-American history project. Perhaps we should call them the ``1619 riots.'' After all, the architect of that execrable project said: ``It would be an honor.'' This hatred for America was nowhere on greater display than in San Francisco, where the mob tore down the statue of Grant. That would be U.S. Grant, commander of the Union Army, whose very initials embody his tenacious, unrelenting approach to war: unconditional surrender. That would also be President Grant, the political heir of Abraham Lincoln, a statesman who smashed the first Ku Klux Klan, signed the first major civil rights legislation, and presided over passage of the 15th Amendment. In one famous instance, President Grant sent in the troops to disperse a White mob in New Orleans that was terrorizing the city's Black and Republican residents and had to depose the State's lawful Governor. Grant had zero tolerance for mob rule. He said: ``[N]either Ku Klux Klans, White Leagues, nor any other association using arms and violence to execute their unlawful purposes can be permitted in that way to govern any part of this country.'' This was a man whom the great Frederick Douglass eulogized as ``too broad for prejudice, too humane to despise the humblest, too great to be small at any point.'' Yet the mobs still came for Grant. Some people have been asking: Where is the line? I say: This is the line--the line between mob rule and the rule of law. Since I began by quoting Lincoln, let me conclude by borrowing from Grant, who wrote during the Battle of Spotsylvania: ``I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer.'' I will fight it out on this line if it takes a lot longer than that. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, ``cancel culture''--we hear that in the news a lot these days--the idea that we all need safe spaces from mean words, trigger warnings on op-eds, or TV shows that might constitute a microaggression. This is the language of the campus social justice seminar, but increasingly it is the language of our workplace and our culture. We saw an instance of it just last week at the New York Times. I published an op-ed there that said simply, while we respect peaceful protesters, we can have zero tolerance for looting and rioting, and if the police are overwhelmed or outnumbered, the National Guard and, if necessary, Federal troops have to restore order. It has gotten support from a large majority of Americans, if you believe the polls. The New York Times published it. The editorial page editor defended it publicly. The publisher defended the decision publicly. But a woke-child mob at the New York Times rose up and demanded heads on pikes. They demanded that the op-ed be taken down. They demanded that the grownups--maybe I should say the supposed grownups--who run the New York Times apologize, and that is exactly what happened. In what could only be called a struggle session from the Cultural Revolution, in the greatest traditions of Mao, the publisher of the New York Times fired the editorial page editor, and he reassigned the deputy editorial page editor. He apologized--prostrated himself--in front of the woke-child mob, and he said: ``We will do much better.'' The new editorial page editor has told everyone at the Times: If you see anything that gives you the slightest pause, please contact me immediately. If you have any trigger warnings, don't worry; I will find a safe space for you. The New York Times has made itself a laughing stock, but this is no laughing matter because the cancel culture threatens the very principles of free inquiry and open debate upon which our society is based. You see other manifestations of the cancel culture all across the country today. In many cases, they have adopted the spirit of a Jacobin mob in the French Revolution. In a reign of terror, they are trying to completely erase our culture and our history. Unfortunately, many Democrats are vying to be the Robespierre for this Jacobin mob. Look at what is happening in Seattle. Revolutionaries, anarchists have taken over city government buildings. They have taken over neighborhoods. They have declared themselves an autonomous zone. They put up a sign that says ``You are leaving the United States'' when you enter this autonomous zone. The Democratic Party today, I suppose, is still the party of secession. It is not just in Seattle. Look at what is happening to statues and monuments all around our country. In several cities, statues of Christopher Columbus have been pulled down, or they have been defaced or destroyed--statues that in most cases were put up by Italian American immigrants who were proud of their part in the great American story. This was not done in accordance with law. It was not done after thoughtful debate in city councils or State legislatures. It was done by mobs. Just last week, the Lincoln Memorial--a temple to the great emancipator--was defaced. The World War II Memorial--a memorial to those who fought and liberated the world from fascism--was defaced. Now, across the Atlantic, the ideological kin of this Jacobin mob defaced statues of Churchill. Wait until they hear about what the other guy did on the other side. But, you know, history is not the long suit of these woke children. They didn't take history classes, apparently, in high school and college. They were too busy taking social justice seminars. You can see that, too, in Philadelphia, where the statue of Matthias Baldwin was defaced. Matthias Baldwin was a committed and devoted abolitionist who funded education for freed African Americans. He gave them jobs, and they defaced his statue. Even more amazing, in Boston, the Shaw Memorial was defaced. The Shaw Memorial honors the 54th Massachusetts Regiment--the first African- American regiment formed after the Emancipation Proclamation, whose bravery and valor in battle on behalf of the Union cause was memorialized in the movie ``Glory.'' Yet it was defaced by these mobs. It is not just our history; it is pop culture and entertainment too. You may have seen the news that ``Live P.D.'' and ``Cops'' television shows were canceled. ``Paw Patrol'' was on the cutting board too. You may know that Chase is the police cop in ``Paw Patrol.'' There are calls to euthanize the police dog on social media. I wish I could say I am joking, but I am not. Legos has announced they are not going to advertise any of their police Lego sets for the next year. They are not going to take them out of distribution. They are not going to recall them from stores. No, no--woke capitalism only goes so far. They are still capitalists. They are just not going to advertise police sets anymore. HBO announced they are not going to run ``Gone with the Wind'' anymore--``Gone With the Wind,'' for which African-American actress Hattie McDaniel won the first Academy Award, the first Oscar ever given to an African-American women. HBO says: ``No, we are going to cancel it.'' If you think it is just limited to statues or TV shows or toys, you would be wrong. This woke mob could very soon be coming for any one of you. At UCLA, a college professor has been suspended and is under police investigation because he declined to postpone final exams so students could apparently go out and participate in protests. Another professor is being investigated for reading aloud from Martin Luther King, Jr.'s letter from a Birmingham jail because it uses offensive language--Martin Luther King, Jr.'s letter from a Birmingham jail. A professional soccer player, Alexander Katai, was fired for his wife's tweet--not his own, his wife's tweet. Multiple different business executives and editors at newspapers and magazines have been fired. If you think this is only for people who are not powerful and not rich, you would be wrong. Ivanka Trump was scheduled to give a commencement speech last weekend at a Wichita technical school. The speech was canceled because she was being too controversial. It was a speech about workforce training and women's opportunities in our economy, and Ivanka Trump was canceled. Where does this cancel culture take us? What is the logical conclusion? What is the end of the cancel culture? I will tell you what it is--it is right here in this city, Washington, the District of Columbia. That is where it will end if we don't put an end to the madness now. Just up the Mall is the Washington Monument. Are we going to tear down the Washington Monument? Are we going to rename it the ``Obelisk of Wokeness?'' Up the hill is the Washington National Cathedral, where so many times we have gathered as a nation over the years to mourn our great leaders, to pray for God's protection and deliverance in moments of national strife and struggle. Are we going to rename the Washington National Cathedral the ``Temple of Reason,'' as the Jacobins did to Notre Dame during the French Revolution? What are we going to call this city? We can't call it Washington. We can't call it Columbia. We have to come up with new names all around because--I will say this--the cancel culture, whether in its malice or its Jacobin forms, ultimately is animated by a single ideal: that America at its core is fundamentally irredeemable and wicked. I reject that claim fully and wholeheartedly. America is a great and noble nation. It is the noblest Nation in the history of mankind that has struggled throughout our history, imperfectly but ceaselessly, to live up to our founding creed that all men are created equal--the single greatest defense against tyranny, against racism, against oppression. That is the stake of this debate. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, if the Senator from New York would like to enter into a colloquy, I did not hear an objection to a single sentence of that resolution, to a clause of that resolution, to a word in that resolution, which calls for justice for George Floyd and other victims of excessive force and also says that the Senate opposes radical ideas to defund the police. So if the Senator from New York would like to explain to the Senate what part of that resolution he opposes and why he is objecting, I would welcome to hear his answer.

Mr. COTTON. Reclaiming my time, I have not yielded the floor. So I would just point out this. Let's be clear what just happened here. We have a resolution. It is a couple of pages long. The Democrats have had it for 24 hours. Until just moments ago, we had no indication that they planned to object or that they had any other contrary resolution. We have heard objection from the Senator from New York not to a single word of that resolution itself--a resolution which, I will say again, calls for justice for George Floyd and for all victims of excessive force, as well as opposes radical efforts to defund the police. So I will only conclude that the minority leader is here to speak on behalf of the Democratic Party and defend this radical idea to defund the police, since he is unwilling to cite what part of that resolution he opposes. And now, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, a free society depends on the rule of law, which is the foundation for public order and peace. Police are the indispensable guardians of that law. We rightfully honor them for the risks they assume every morning when they put on the badge and sometimes the bulletproof vest, knowing they may not come home at night to take them off. But the police have a sworn duty to wield their power with justice. They take an oath never to betray their character or the public trust. They must hold themselves to the highest standard and overwhelmingly do so. But in the cases when they do not, the consequences can be devastating. What happened last week to George Floyd in Minnesota was horrific. He was killed by police officers--dying at the hands of men who pledged to protect and serve their communities. I am glad that justice appears to be moving swiftly in George Floyd's case. The officers who participated have been terminated from the department, and the criminal process is well underway. But this is little consolation to many Americans, including many Black Americans, who feel they have experienced unjust, unequal interactions with law enforcement. Many have protested peacefully for change in the finest tradition of our country. And in sharp contrast to the rioters and looters, who have exploited this tragedy for their own purposes, we must now seek to reveal national unity from the wreckage of broken trust and broken glass on our streets. To do this, we will need to be guided by our Nation's noblest principles, while rejecting the anti- American suggestions of radicals who want a revolution. Every American deserves to be treated equally by their government, as guaranteed by our Constitution and our country's most fundamental principle that all men are created equal. There is no greater bulwark to tyranny and injustice than that old, simple proposition. But we must reject efforts to scapegoat and demonize all police for the actions of a few, and we must reject radical proposals to dismantle and defund police departments, as some have suggested. These proposals are offered in the spirit of revenge that would lead only to more crime, more lives lost, and more sorrow. The communities that would be hit the hardest by the disappearance of police would be the most disadvantaged. When police are understaffed and undertrained, there is greater risk of mistakes and misconduct, not to mention higher rates of crime. By contrast, a well-staffed, well-trained, and well-respected force is a blessing to its community and a scourge to criminals who threaten it. Defunding the police would be deadly. It isn't a solution but an insult to good officers, and a threat to law-abiding citizens. Americans are not blind to injustice. We all understand the hard work that is needed to repair trust in this country, but defunding the police is not the answer. We need the rule of law and equal just under law. We need them both. I urge my colleagues to join with us in passing this resolution, which calls for justice for George Floyd and other victims of excessive use of force, while also honoring the law enforcement officers who keep us safe. Therefore, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a resolution that is at the desk, calling for justice for George Floyd and opposing calls to defund the police. I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am a bit mystified about what has happened here. We had a resolution on the floor, a couple of pages, calling for justice for George Floyd and victims of excessive use of force, as well as condemning the radical idea of defunding the police. Now, the minority leader wants to offer a resolution that would immediately make the pending business of the Senate--at some distant, speculative time in the future--a piece of legislation which, if I am not mistaken, hasn't even been written and filed yet in the House of Representatives. Now, maybe it has been written in the last day or two and I am not aware that they filed that bill, but it certainly hasn't been debated and voted on in the House of Representatives. There is all the time in the world to decide what is going to be the pending business in the U.S. Senate when the Senate acts, but we have a resolution right in front of us that condemns the unjustified killing of George Floyd, calls for justice for his death and all those victims of excessive use of force, and also--since the Senate opposes the radical idea--of defunding the police. Yet, the Democratic leader, on behalf of his party, objected to that without citing a single word, a single clause, a single sentence that he finds objectionable. I assume it is because they do, in fact, want to defund the police. I know he keeps talking about rhetoric versus action. I will just remind you that the Senate, on almost every day we are in business, passes multiple resolutions by unanimous consent. If I am not mistaken, I think the Democratic leader was on the floor last week trying to pass a resolution condemning the President once again. So the idea that we don't pass resolutions expressing the sense of the Senate or, for that matter, there is a choice between passing such a resolution and taking action is simply foreign to the way the Senate acts every single day. I will just say again that what we are seeing here is the Democratic leader apparently objecting on behalf of the Democratic Party in defense of the radical idea that we should defund the police. I object to the Democratic leader.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, if the Democratic leader, again, would like to engage in a colloquy, I will ask him, is the bill that he wants to make the immediate pending business of the Senate even written in the House of Representatives? Since he has departed, I guess the answer to my question is, no, that bill is not even written and filed in the House of Representatives, and certainly it has not been voted upon in the House and sent to the Senate for us to make it the pending business. So the objection you just heard, again, didn't object to a single word in our resolution, much less a clause or a sentence--a resolution that calls for justice for George Floyd and the victims of the excessive use of force, while at the same time opposing radical Democratic proposals to defund the police. I can only infer, since I didn't hear a single objection to the language of our resolution, that the rub of the matter is that the Democrats really do support defunding the police. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, today is the 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, when thousands of peaceful students asking for their freedom were gunned down by Chinese Communist tanks and troops. Because of Beijing's relentless censorship and control over information, we never learned the true death toll of that dark day, but it is certain that thousands of peaceful protesters were murdered in the streets. Beijing's savagery was exposed during that massacre, reminding the West that this was the same, unreconstructed Communist Party that killed millions--tens of millions--of its own people without batting an eye in Mao's Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward. A tiger never changes its stripes. Now the Chinese Communist Party is threatening another atrocity in Hong Kong, a city whose traditions and freedoms it once promised to respect--but that it, secretly and increasingly openly, loathes as a gleaming repudiation of Chinese Communism. Last year, an extradition bill that could have allowed Hong Kong residents to be ``disappeared'' to mainland China sparked mass protests. Hong Kong residents flooded the streets to display their disapproval and protect their freedoms. These are not anarchists trying to tear down the law--as the Chinese Communist Party's shrill organs falsely claim--but they were free citizens fighting to preserve the rule of law they love so much, against a Communist power that knows no law above itself. They are fighting for the very same freedoms we enjoy in the United States: the freedom of religion, speech, and assembly; private property; the rule of law. The Hong Kong protesters won the battle over the extradition bill, but the war for Hongkongers' freedom isn't over. While the world has been distracted by the coronavirus pandemic and other upheavals, the Chinese Communist Party has seized the opportunity to finally enact what it euphemistically calls a national security law but what is, in reality, an attempt to extinguish Hong Kong freedom--a law that will allow Beijing's agents to take broad action against Hong Kong residents, including those who protested against the extradition bill last year. Seven million residents of Hong Kong now face the very real possibility of losing their freedom and possibly their lives. Political dissidents risk being jailed arbitrarily--or worse. Hundreds of thousands of Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, and other religious minorities risk being driven underground like their brethren on the Chinese mainland--or perhaps put in a gulag of concentration camps like the Uighurs in China's Xinjiang Province. The free world cannot stand by while the Chinese Communist Party sets fire to the venerable laws and freedoms of Hong Kong. Already the administration is moving to revoke Hong Kong's special trade status, which has allowed Chinese Communist Mandarins to get rich off a free economic system while denying those very freedoms for more than 1 billion of their subjects on the mainland. And our great ally, the United Kingdom, has announced it will extend visas to 3 million Hongkongers--many of whom took part in last year's pro-democracy protests so that they can escape the Chinese Communist Party. I highly commend Prime Minister Boris Johnson for striking this bold blow for freedom, but the United States can also do more. Today, I call upon the administration to prioritize the admission of persecuted Hongkongers to the United States through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. In coordination with our allies, this action could save these brave Hongkongers from a horrific fate under authoritarian Communist rule. While this refugee program has been abused in recent years, it has always served the noble purpose of allowing those who are truly oppressed by their governments to immigrate safely to the free world. Now it can be used again in this worthy cause to help noble Hongkongers flee the grasp of the Chinese Communist Party before it is too late. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, the deadly coronavirus that emerged from China late last year has now spread across the globe. The Chinese Communist Party deceived the world, even their own people, and unleashed the worst pandemic in a century on us all. Now it falls to us to defeat it. Here at home, a strange and unsettling hush has fallen over much of the country, as businesses close and millions of Americans brace for what is to come. In New York, Seattle, New Orleans, and elsewhere, preparation for the virus has ended. The virus has arrived in force. The urgent battle to suppress it has begun. In emergency rooms and ICUs, courageous doctors and nurses are already locked in a battle to save the lives of their patients. Protective gear is in short supply, but their regard for safety and even family come second to their duty. The days ahead will be a close- run thing in those cities, as they struggle to keep their hospitals open and functioning. But make no mistake. The China virus will spare none of us--from the high-rises of the big cities to the hills of the Ozarks. Soon, the Senate will finally pass desperately needed emergency legislation for our Nation, including a massive infusion of funds to our healthcare system. But this legislation isn't about stimulus. It is about survival. With this legislation behind us, Americans are beginning to ask: What is next? Yes, the virus is testing us already, and it has already touched most of us by closing our churches, shuttering our businesses, and threatening the jobs and retirement savings of millions of Americans and, of course, threatening our lives. It is only natural that so many are wondering anxiously when and how this unprecedented crisis will end. And when it ends, will their jobs still there be? How will they put food on their table? How will they pay the bills? Americans want to know the plans so they can do their part. More fundamentally, they want to know that there is a plan. Upended routines combined with worry about the future naturally breed frustration. We are citizens, after all, not passive carriers of a deadly pathogen. This frustration has given rise to a new and growing argument that Americans can't wait any longer, that we ought to open back up and take our chances with this virus. After all, we can't stay inside forever. We can't, as the saying goes, let the cure be worse than the disease. The urgency to stave off economic collapse is, of course, understandable. It is also tempting to think that we face a simple choice between shutting down to fight the virus and opening up to save the economy, but the choice is not so simple. Some thoughtful observers note that the seasonal flu and automobile accidents kill more Americans annually than has this virus. That is true as far as it goes, but we are just at the beginning of this pandemic. I have to add that the Javits Center in New York City has never been converted into a field hospital for the flu or car wrecks. Granting that, some say, perhaps we can reopen in a few days since our elderly are most at risk from this virus. Quarantine them. Keep them safe, the argument goes, while the rest of us get back to work. Yet there are 72 million Americans who are over the age of 60 in this country. Many of them raise children, live alone, or work outside the home. They can't wall themselves off from the world nor should we wall them in. Moreover, tens of millions of younger Americans have preexisting conditions that put them at an elevated risk for this virus. Are we to quarantine all of them too? Even younger and healthier Americans are not safe from this pandemic. The China virus attacks the lungs of the young and the old alike. Of the cases we know, the virus appears to send about one in seven younger people to the hospital. It is true that survival rates for younger patients are better, but even their recoveries depend on there being a functioning healthcare system. If we give up on our efforts to control this virus now, our medical system will be overwhelmed--hospitals will collapse; care will be rationed; doctors will face the terrible choice of whom to save and whom to let perish--and not just for patients of this virus but for every American who needs intensive care, whether it be from a heart attack or a stroke or a car wreck or anything else. Besides, if left unchecked, this deadly virus will continue to wreck our economy as surely as it has already. It was not President Trump who shut down businesses, after all, and it really wasn't even the Governors and mayors, though they issued the orders. Government- enforced closures were largely rearguard actions by communities that had already ground to a halt due to the virus or that would have soon come to a wrenching stop in the teeth of the pandemic. Who among us would take our kids to a restaurant tomorrow if we opened back up? Our economy isn't seized up because of government dictates but, rather, because our people are understandably fearful of the dangerous virus. So an immediate reopening without having the resources in place to fight the virus isn't an option. Our hospitals would be overwhelmed, and our brave doctors and nurses would succumb to the illness. Our businesses would keep their doors closed or would quickly close their doors again as workers and customers would stay away. The supposed choice between saving the economy and fighting the virus turns out not to be much of a choice at all. We can't yet stop the strong measures that are in place because we have no better option in the short run, but neither can we continue them forever, for the American people can only hold out for so long. So we must come up with a better plan and fast. That plan starts with this big pause as we protect ourselves and each other. We simply don't have the resources today to fight any other way, but it will not end with this approach. We must use the precious days and weeks ahead to lay the groundwork for a new strategy to fight the virus--a strategy that will allow all of us to gradually get back to work. For that to happen, we will need to scale up our ability to rapidly test for the virus, as they have in South Korea, so that we have a sense of where the virus is and where we must keep it contained. Already, America's public laboratories and companies are rising to the challenge by processing tens of thousands of tests, but our ability to test must grow even faster, and it is. We will need masks, too-- billions of them. We will also need local personnel who are trained and prepared to do widespread contact tracing for those who test positive. We will have to develop procedures for the strict quarantines of those who test positive or for those who have been exposed to the virus--with zero tolerance for breaking quarantine and endangering our fellow citizens. Once these elements are in place and the first wave of this virus has passed, then we will be prepared to reopen our cities and communities while remaining vigilant about new outbreaks. These preparations will ensure we are ready to sustain our way of life until our scientists can create what we so desperately need--therapeutic drugs and, ultimately, a vaccine. A vaccine may take a year or more before it is available, but these other intermediate precautions must go into effect much, much faster. America must, indeed, reopen. When we do, these decisions must be based on local conditions, not an arbitrary nationwide timeline. Our Governors and mayors understand their local conditions. They can make gradual, rolling, calibrated decisions in a way that is responsible when the tools to effectively fight this virus are ready and available. What I have outlined may seem like a daunting and even impossible challenge, but our Nation has overcome far greater challenges before. Already, America is rising to take on the China virus. The giant of American industry is awakening and retooling our factories to join this fight just as we did during World War II. Never bet against America's workers and American ingenuity. All across this country, Americans are springing into action. We know the vital role our doctors and nurses will play in the coming months alongside our first responders, our factory workers, our farmers, our grocers, and on down the list. Ask yourself now how you can help. Can you keep your distance from those who are most at risk, realizing that the China virus preys on our most earnest desires for society and companionship? Can you offer your charity to a friend in need? Can you pick up groceries for your elderly neighbor? Can you keep your workers on payroll and benefits for just a little longer until our legislation kicks in? Can you postpone your tenant's rent for a month? Can you pray for the deliverance of our Nation and the world? These are just a few of the things we must do as a country to make reopening possible and life bearable in the months ahead. We are all in this together, so we will need to have each other's best interests at heart. Many years of comfort and ease have, perhaps, conditioned us to ask only what we are free to do, not what we are called to do. Yet the old disciplines of peril and privation threaten to return, and we will need old notions of duty to maintain order in the face of them. The darkest days of this coronavirus are, in all likelihood, still ahead of us. Let us face up to them bravely. Let us acknowledge the troubles ahead, and let us devote our whole energy to winning this battle quickly so that the normal life of our Nation can resume I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. COTTON. When did the Senate receive that bill from the House?

Mr. COTTON. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. COTTON. Will you answer my question? When did we receive that bill?

Mr. COTTON. Where has the House been for the last week?

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, the United States is in the middle of a global pandemic, probably the worst public health crisis in over 100 years this country has faced. Every minute matters, every hour, every day. I have been saying this for 2 months now. Yet where are the Democrats? There is not a single one of them down here right now. Where have they been all afternoon? There was maybe one, two, or three. Probably every Republican over here has spoken because twice in less than 24 hours, the Democrats have refused to even start debate on legislation that would help the American people and our economy survive this crisis; that would provide over $3,000 to your average working family in just the coming weeks; that would provide extra unemployment benefits to the millions of Americans who already lost their jobs and regrettably are going to lose their jobs; that would provide loans to our small- and medium-size businesses so they won't have to lay off those Americans as they struggle to pay the bills; that would help industries that have been devastated, like the hotel industry. Thousands and thousands of hard-working Americans clean the rooms, make the beds, cook the food--all of whom desperately need help. The Democrats won't even start debate on that legislation. That is what they have done twice. They have not voted to defeat any legislation; they have voted to not even start debate. In fact, earlier today, Susan Collins--probably the kindest, most decent, most bipartisan Senator--took the floor to speak, and Chuck Schumer blocked her. He refused to allow her to speak, probably because he was scared of what she had to say and probably, just like there are no Democrats here right now, because they know they don't have anything to say. They have no case to make. Earlier today, Sherrod Brown was accusing us of not acting quickly enough on Nancy Pelosi's legislation that the House passed, popped smoke, and left town for more than a week. I asked a simple question: When did the House bill arrived in the Senate? He refused to answer. I asked him again that simple question. He refused to answer and rather engaged in ad hominem attacks, which is his weak and sad way of saying he has no answer, which is so often the case with the Senator from Ohio. They come down here and they attack the Republicans for wanting corporate bailouts. They say we want to bail out corporations. Nothing could be further from the truth. Any large company that borrows money from the Treasury or takes advantage of Federal Reserve programs will have onerous terms attached to it and will have lots of strings as well. We insisted that only loans be available, not grants, not cash handouts. Do you know what the Democrats are advocating for behind closed doors? Behind closed doors, the Democrats are demanding free cash handouts for the airlines. Right through that door right there is Chuck Schumer's office. They are demanding free cash giveaways for major corporations, and they have the nerve to come down here and accuse us of bailouts? Go right through that door and ask Chuck Schumer what he is demanding in secret behind closed doors. Don't forget about all of their cities and all their States. Dick Durbin represents one of the most bankrupt States in America and the most bankrupt city in America--Chicago. Behind those closed doors, they are demanding straight cash bailouts for States and cities that have been fiscally irresponsible for years. Yet they come down here and accuse us of bailouts. We are willing to help these cities and States. They are overwhelmed by this pandemic. Yet we simply say they have to repay the money on the back end. That is not what the Democrats are asking for behind those closed doors over there. They want straight cash payments. You ask yourself, why would they not even start debate? Remember, that is all we have been talking about here over these last 18 hours. Why would they risk your life and your loved ones' lives and your job and your lifetime of retirement savings? Now we know. Nancy Pelosi is circulating a 1,400-page bill that she wants Congress to pass that she claims will help save this Nation from this terrible crisis. It is 1,400 pages. It is almost three times longer than our legislation, by the way. To give you a sense of what might be in that bill, because, let me tell you, she is not hiding the good stuff in her bill--I don't have 1,400 pages here, but I have a few pages. Let's just go through what is a priority for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats as they dither while Americans die. Corporate board diversity. The Democrats want to impose quotas for race and sex on corporate boards. I know they have wanted to do that for a long time. Is that going to stop anyone from getting sick from the coronavirus? Here is another one: bailing out the Postal Service, wiping all the debts that the post office has towards the Treasury. That is another issue we have been debating for a long time. The Postal Service needs relief. I greatly respect and praise the hard work of the men and women who are still delivering the mail, but is a survival package for the coronavirus the right time to be talking about Postal Service debt to the Treasury? Here is another one: a $10,000 minimum of student loan forgiveness across the board. That is another ideological wish-list item for the Democrats. What does it have to do with stopping a pandemic, especially when Donald Trump has already waived student loan payments for Americans who are affected by this terrible pandemic? Early voting mandated in every single State. That is the same kind of early voting that almost doomed the Democrats' favorite Presidential candidate, Joe Biden, for whom Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer worked tirelessly to beat their colleague Bernie Sanders. Combine that with same-day registration. Every single State has to register voters on the same day. Now they want to pile election rules on a bill that is designed to stop a pandemic. Let me remind you, these election rules were written by the same partisan geniuses who couldn't even count their own votes in the Iowa Democratic caucuses. Here is a good one too: airline carbon emission offsets. Every airline that benefits from these programs--which is probably going to be all of them--has to go carbon neutral by 2025. Gee, it is going to be a pretty amazing feat of engineering to get jet engines you can plug into the wall and fly across the continent. Democrats have a lot of faith in American ingenuity. I wonder if that will apply, by the way, to the private planes that Nancy Pelosi and her family fly in or all their buddies in Hollywood. What about this one: Every airline has to tell you on every single flight what the greenhouse gas emissions of that flight are. You get your departure time and your seat number and your gate number and, oh, by the way, how many greenhouse gas emissions your plane will have. What will that do to help a vitally important and devastated industry get back on its feet? Subsidizing retirement plans for community newspaper employees. Look, this has been a longstanding debate in Congress. It almost sank the retirement reform bill last year, and here it is again in a bill designed to stop a pandemic. Are you kidding me? There is a $15-an-hour minimum wage. Unfortunately, millions of Americans are learning that the true minimum wage is zero when you lose your job because of a global pandemic that is killing your fellow citizens and our elected leaders won't even have a debate on the bill. Here is a beauty too: mandating that Federal public employee unions get paid for the union work they do. That means you, as a taxpayer, will pay Federal bureaucrats when they are doing work not for you, the taxpayer, but for their unions. Again, is that going to stop the pandemic? I could go on and on and on. The Democrats' bill is 1,400 pages, after all. But the point is this: There is a good bill that was negotiated in good faith over the weekend with many Democrats--no matter what they say--that they are now blocking, that they will not even start debate on because of ideological wish-list items like those. It is disgraceful and it is dangerous to the lives of our people and to their economic well-being. It is time for the Democrats to get serious and to do their job.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, I sat at this very desk 2 months ago during the impeachment trial, where I read news, oftentimes from East Asian sources, about a viral pneumonia from an unknown virus emerging from central China. From those earliest days, I began calling for drastic measures to prevent this virus from reaching our shores and to prepare for its potential arrival. I cannot claim any special expertise. I am not a doctor. I am not a scientist. I am not an epidemiologist. But I could tell from the very beginning that the Chinese Communist Party was lying about everything related to this virus, and that we had to be prepared for the worst. That is why in January I called for a travel ban from mainland China. That is why in February I began to call for crash approvals of laboratory-developed testing kits or the use of the kind of testing kits the World Health Organization approved or that South Korea has been using. That is why I urged a Manhattan Project level of investment in rapid testing and approval for therapeutic products and vaccines. That travel ban and some other measures taken has bought us some time, but our hour of great national testing has arrived. The moment of decision is upon us. The time has come for extraordinary measures. Look at what has happened to Italy just over the last 2 weeks. Two weeks ago, Italians were enjoying early spring weather, sipping coffee and wine in restaurants and bars--just 2 weeks ago. Today, elderly Italians are being denied care and instead administered last rites because their healthcare system is totally overloaded. It is time to take extraordinary measures to avoid that fate. What seems extreme today will seem obvious tomorrow. Here are a few of the measures whose time has come, regrettably. First, we need to stop all nonessential business activity in this country. You can call it a shutdown. You can call it quarantine. You can call it curfew. You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be going to work in this country unless they are involved in essential activities--groceries, pharmacies, delivering goods to those places, electricity, water, sanitation, public safety. Anything else poses too great a risk to public health. Second, it is time for nonessential government services to shut down, as well, at the Federal, State, and local levels. Anyone who is involved in trying to arrest the spread of this virus or to mitigate its economic impact or provide other essential services, like food aid to the needy or care for other kinds of patients in a VA hospital, must come to work, and we must be prepared to work extremely long hours. But anyone else in government at any level should be telecommuting, if they can, and staying home, in any case. Third, it is time for our military to prepare to provide advanced support of civilian authorities. This is a mission the military long plans for. They are rarely called upon to do so, but an urgent hour is approaching, especially at our hospitals and our nursing homes and other healthcare facilities, when our young men and women in uniform could be called upon to support our great doctors and our nurses to provide additional capacity to treat patients, not just with this coronavirus but with other urgent needs as well. That planning is in its infancy. It needs to accelerate immediately. Again, I know these are extraordinary measures, and they will impose hardship and pain and dislocation, but the faster we arrest the spread of this virus, the faster things can get back to normal and our economy will heal. We will protect ourselves, and we will protect our well- being. In the meantime, this Congress will be called upon for some pretty drastic measures, as well, to ensure that all those persons affected by steps taken on this day and the steps I am calling for can make ends meet, can put food on the table, and keep a roof over their head and pay their bills. The House, over the weekend, passed a bill that has many important provisions that I support and I suspect will pass unanimously from this Chamber: free virus testing; provisions for school lunches for those whose schools have closed, like the children all across Arkansas; liability protection for the manufacturers of respirator masks, which need it so we can get millions of more masks out to doctors and nurses. But the House bill doesn't go far enough, and it doesn't go fast enough. The centerpiece of the House bill providing aid to affected workers is a new kind of tax credit for paid sick leave. Unfortunately, that is wrongheaded on both counts. First, a tax credit--even a refundable one, even one on which you can get an advance from the IRS-- will not do much good if a business has no revenue whatsoever. Imagine all those restaurants, all those bars, all those gyms that are going to come to a screeching halt today or tomorrow. They will have no cash to pay their dislocated workers. They will not be sending anything to the Treasury every 3 days in the form of payroll taxes, from which they can get an advance. They will have nothing. They will go bankrupt if we force them to advance sick leave with no revenue whatsoever. But, also, it doesn't go far enough on the sick leave front. That is a misguided category error. Yes, we should take care of those who are sick with this virus. But there are so many others, as well--those who are quarantined but are not sick, as some of those in the Senate have done; those whose businesses are shuttered but are perfectly healthy, if they work in a bar or restaurant or theater or gym; those who have children whose schools have closed and have no means to provide for childcare so they can get to work. They all have bills to pay as well. They all have mouths to feed. So the House approach simply doesn't go far enough or fast enough to create a complicated new system that doesn't cover enough of America's workers and families. So I would suggest a better approach. We simply need to use existing systems to get cash in the hands of workers and their families as quickly as possible. One approach is instant tax refunds or rebates-- call them what you will--to anyone who filed taxes last year, especially those in the lower tax brackets, who are most likely to struggle to make ends meet if they are not bringing home a paycheck. That can be done almost instantly. A second approach is to use existing social welfare agency programs to get cash out the door and into the hands of displaced workers and their families. Take unemployment insurance, for instance. The whole point of unemployment insurance is to get checks quickly in the hands of those who need it. I consulted this weekend with our State officials. I consulted today with Federal officials. We don't have to redesign the unemployment system. We don't have to set new parameters and criteria in 50 different information technology systems in our States. All we simply do is treat someone who is sick with this virus or quarantined because of potential exposure or who is furloughed from a job or who is caring for a child as if they were unemployed. The cash stipend may not be their full wage, but it will be enough, and it will be in their hands immediately so they can feed their kids and so they can pay their bills. That can be done right now-- immediately. We don't have to use employers and tax credits as a middleman or a conduit. Third, we have to think about all those businesses that are essentially going into a self-protective shutdown--all those restaurants and bars and gyms and theaters and I suspect many more in the days ahead. They are not making payroll. They are probably cutting supplies. They still have other debts to pay, though. We should help them get through this short period of testing, whether with loans or loan guarantees or grants--what have you. We have to remember, though, that when small businesses and medium- sized businesses run out of cash, they go into chapter 7 bankruptcy. They liquidate. Those jobs don't come back. When giant businesses have a cash crunch, they go into chapter 11. Sure, the owners may change, but they come back into business. Those are just a few of the steps we have to take to mitigate the economic harm this virus is inflicting on our people and to ensure that no one, not a single person in this country, has any financial incentive to go to work when they are sick or when they even may be feeling sick or to go out to try to find another job because their workplace is shut down and they can't get any support from the government. Again, I know these are extraordinary measures, but these are also extraordinary times, and the faster we act, the more aggressively we act, the shorter these times will last. We will stop the spread of this virus; we will get our people back to work; our markets will come back; and we will be stronger on the back end of this crisis than we were coming into it. Nothing I have said here is a Republican idea or Democratic idea. I don't have partisan objections to what the House has proposed. I simply want to make sure that the action we take will work and will get relief to all of those displaced workers and their families in a timely fashion, when they need it, to put food on the table and keep a roof over their kids' heads and pay for medicine and make car payments. That is why the Senate is here today. That should be our focus in the days ahead, and that is something we can accomplish together this week. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I have 14 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Indian Affairs The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: John Peter Cronan, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, Thomas T. Cullen, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, and Jennifer P. Togliatti, to be United States District Judge for the District of Nevada. Committee on Veterans' Affairs The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2 p.m., to conduct a closed roundtable. Subcommittee on Seapower The Subcommittee on Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Aviation and Space The Subcommittee on Aviation and Space of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on National Parks The Subcommittee on National Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Water and Power The Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 10:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism The Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism of the Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 2 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate passed my resolution to honor the life of Li Wenliang, the Chinese doctor who heroically tried to warn his fellow citizens and the world about the Wuhan coronavirus late last year. Dr. Li tragically fell victim to that very disease but not before he was victimized by his own government, the Chinese Communist Party. Li was 34 years old when he passed away of coronavirus on February 7. He had a wife, a young child, and another child on the way. His whole life was ahead of him, and now his wife is widowed, his child has no father, and his second child will never know his father. As Li knew, when you become a doctor, you pledge to care for the sick and the dying--whatever the hardships, whatever the cost, whatever the risks to yourself. So when patients with a severe pneumonia began appearing in Li's hospital late last year, he sounded the alarm to fellow doctors, and the Chinese Communist Party responded with lightning speed--not to contain this epidemic but to intimidate Dr. Li and attack his reputation. Local Communist goons paid him a visit a few days later, forcing him to retract his statements and apologize for so-called illegal behavior. China's state media piled on, denouncing Li and other whistleblowers as rumormongers who were spreading fear among the Chinese people. That has been the pattern of the Chinese Communist Party's response to the coronavirus from the very beginning--first coverup and then catastrophe. When Chinese internet users flooded social media with indignation following Dr. Li's death, their cries were scrubbed from the internet by the Communist Party's army of censors. When a Chinese human rights activist called for Chairman Xi to step down, he was detained and then disappeared. When Wall Street Journal columnist Walter Russell Mead wrote a bracing article about the Chinese Communist Party's failure to contain the coronavirus, the Chinese Communists kicked three of the paper's reporters out of the country. The Chinese Communist Party's deception has been so thorough that its rare moments of candor, however obviously helpful, have been quickly suppressed and punished. When the number of reported infections spiked upward due to an improvement in data reporting, the party purged local officials who were likely responsible. After Chinese scientists gave the world a headstart in developing a vaccine by publishing the disease's genome online, what happened? Were they given awards? Were they celebrated? No. Their lab was shut down the very next day. These scientists deserved awards. They deserved a medal. Instead, they were given a professional death sentence. The Chinese people have suffered greatly from this coronavirus. They are, in fact, the first and the worst victims of their own Communist government. But now the whole world is suffering with them. Just as the Bubonic plague spread to Europe via traders on the Silk Road, the Wuhan coronavirus is traveling China's new Silk Road. It turns out that the Belt and Road Initiative exports not just China's money and Chinese debt but China's viruses as well as its repression. It threatens not only economies around the world; it threatens peoples around the world. Right next door to China, Iran is suffering a devastating outbreak of the coronavirus. Birds of a feather flock together, I would have to add. The mullahs in Tehran have emulated the Chinese Communist Party's shameful response to coronavirus, first denying and then downplaying the outbreak until it was no longer possible to ignore the bodies stacking up in clinics, a mysterious sickness spreading through the Cabinet of Iran's Government itself. Remember the suffering people in these countries when you hear triumphant, self-congratulatory messages coming from Chinese propaganda rags like Global Times and China Daily--or even the World Health Organization, which, I have to say, seems more interested in protecting the feelings of the Chinese Communist Party than protecting the health of people around the world. China's propagandists are reportedly hard at work on a book exonerating Chairman Xi for his negligent response to this virus. The official line is that the coronavirus is contained and China is back to work, but don't believe it. Do not believe the hype. The Chinese Communist Party lied from the very beginning of this outbreak, and it is lying still. It is responsible for the scale of this virus outbreak around the world. This outbreak didn't happen in spite of the Chinese Communist Party's efforts to contain it; it happened because of the Communist system of government. Three months later, we still don't know how many people have been infected or killed by coronavirus on the Chinese mainland. All we have are bogus statistics that just so happen to track perfectly-- perfectly--with the Communist Party line day after day. I will cite just one example. Barron's, the financial publication, discovered that the official number of deaths could be predicted perfectly in advance--in advance--in China using a simple mathematical formula. This coronavirus isn't just contagious and deadly; it is good at math as well--if you believe the Chinese Communist Party. But that doesn't just happen in nature. They are obviously cooking their books. It is not hard to see why. China's economy has ground to a halt. The Chinese Communist Party is desperate to restart it and avoid the first contraction in the last 30 years, whatever it may cost in lives of the Chinese people. If China is truly back to work, as the Chinese Communists claim, it is only because it has employed Communist tactics that evoke the worst horrors of Soviet communism, from Stalin's 5-year plans to Leningrad in 1943. After shutting down almost half the country's factories to stop the spread of coronavirus, the Chinese Communist Party is opening them again, barely 1 month later. Investors around the world beware: That decision is motivated not by confidence but by desperation. It will almost certainly lead to more outbreaks as workers congregate on crowded subways and factory floors, all because the Chinese Communist Party mandarins, living safely behind armed guards and walls in Beijing, decided that hitting their growth target was more important than the peasants' lives. When I first called for travel restrictions on China back in late January, Dr. Li was still alive and the coronavirus was, thankfully, far from our shores. Tragically, it is now a global disease, and we have to do all we can to arrest its spread. The most vital thing China can do is still be fully open and transparent about the origins and extent of the coronavirus. I say to the Chinese Communist Party: Stop hiding behind your fake numbers and politically correct bureaucrats at the World Health Organization. Let truly independent experts into Wuhan to investigate this virus. The United States has offered repeatedly--repeatedly--to send a team and would do so tomorrow if you would just have the humanity to let them in and help save your own people. Finally, give those people the freedom to speak candidly about the disease that has devastated your nation. Do not stifle the next whistleblower, the next doctor or nurse who speaks up to save the lives not just of their own people but of the people around the world. Here in America, only time will tell how this virus will run its course. We have many advantages, though, to help us in this fight. We have the world's best doctors, nurses, and healthcare professionals. As important, we live in a republic that protects the liberty of our citizens and gives every American the freedom to speak, to write, to dissent, to sound an alarm--loudly sound an alarm--when we see something that isn't right and we think we can make it right. Tragically, for himself, for his family, for the world, Dr. Li Wenliang enjoyed no such freedom. Yet he still spoke up to try to save his neighbors and to save the world. For that he was punished, and now he has passed. May he rest in peace, and may his memories inspire other selfless heroes who will speak truth and hold the Chinese Communist Party to account, no matter the cost. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, this week the Senate has another chance to vote on basic pro-life protections for babies, both born and unborn. This week we have another choice to live up to our Nation's highest principle--that every person has the right to life--or to stoop down to a narrow vision of humanity peddled by the abortion industry and its cronies. The first bill we are considering--the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act--would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, when there is clear, scientific evidence that these young babies can feel pain in their mother's womb. The abortion lobby and all of its defenders will dispute this science, claiming that babies or fetuses--which is the euphemism they like to use for babies--can't feel pain at all or at least until the very latest stages of pregnancy. Anyone pedaling that myth must have never visited a neonatal intensive care unit, or the NICU, as they are usually called. Ask any one of those NICU nurses who cares for little preemies, even micro-preemies, and they will tell you how they can hold that small infant sometimes even in the palm of their hands, and they can see it grimace at a poke or a prod, maybe even slap away a tube or a needle as they approach--just as older kids do, just as some grownups do. The undeniable fact of fetal pain in these young babies influences every aspect of how we care for the young in our hospitals. We swaddle them with only the softest fabrics because their little bodies are so easily stimulated. We give them pain medicine during surgery, whether they are in the womb or outside it. But we offer no such comfort during abortions, even in the latest stages of pregnancy, when abortionists crush a baby's skull and dismember it. Indeed, a scientific paper published earlier this year in the Journal of Medical Ethics noted a curious fact: Abortion is the only--the only--invasive procedure performed on unborn infants without pain medication. Then again, abortion is unusual in so many ways, as so few hospital procedures are designed to end a life, not to save a life. Are we comfortable with this state of affairs? Are we comfortable with the fact that more than 11,000 abortions were performed after 21 weeks when, again, we have clear, scientific evidence that these babies feel pain and that many of them could survive outside their mother's womb? I would suggest the American people are not comfortable with this situation, and we can do something about it in the U.S. Senate this week. The second bill we are voting on, called the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, is even more modest but perhaps even more urgent. This bill would simply protect babies when they are born alive during an abortion. I know it is amazing to even hear this, but there are rare and horrible cases in which babies are intended to be aborted, yet they are born alive, and the doctors are under no obligation to provide medical care for that young baby with a spark of God living in its soul. So this bill would simply obligate abortionists to render lifesaving medical care to a baby struggling for life on the operating table. It would require abortionists to act as those babies' friends and their doctors, consistent with their oath--not act like the baby's mortal enemy. Of course, the abortion lobby will tell you: Oh, this never occurs. All of their defenders in the media will say that it never occurs. But if you are being honest, the facts are, they do occur. The implication here is clear. They simply want us to look away from this horror. That doesn't mean we should, though, because, in fact, we do know--we do know--that babies can survive abortions. We have the numbers to prove it from a handful of States that require abortionists to confess when they fail to kill a baby in the mother's womb and, instead, murder it on the operating table. In Florida, 11 babies were born alive during abortions in 2017; another 6 were reportedly born alive in 2018; and another 2, last year. There were 19 precious little babies born alive during abortions in just 1 State in just 3 years. Other States have reported dozens more cases. Still, the abortion industry will dismiss these lives as a mere rounding error: Let's not even focus on it. It is not a serious matter. But forgive us if most Americans see the matter differently. These are precious little children, made in the image of God and endowed by him with the same worth and dignity as you and me and all of us. We have a duty to these little children. We have a duty not to look away from them. These pro-life bills are modest and humane. They have the strong support of the American people--clear majorities. But the real reason we must protect these babies is not because it is popular but because it is right. Every human being is created equal and deserves recognition and protection under our laws. It says so right in the preamble to our Declaration of Independence. Our country doesn't always live up to that noble principle. But right now we have an opportunity to live up to it just a little bit more, if only in just a few more cases--but those cases in which life is most vulnerable and most innocent. So I urge my colleagues to seize this opportunity and protect life by acknowledging the humanity of these precious little children. We must not look away any longer. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, this is not about the Basque, and this is not about the IRA. This resolution applies only to the Government of Iran. This is, indeed, only about the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Let me tell you a story about the last 17 years in Iraq. For 17 years, the most deadly weapon our troops have faced has been something called an explosively formed penetrator. It takes a slug of copper, superheats it into a ball of magma, and sends it hurtling through the air at 6,000 feet per second at our troops. I will spare you the graphic details of what a liquid ball of copper magma does when it travels at 6,000 feet per second into the human body, but I will tell you that those were smuggled into Iraq by, yes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The vote here is simple: Do you want to vote to stand with our troops, hundreds of whom have died at the hands of Iran, or do you want to vote to be a lawyer for Iranian terrorists?