Schumer Floor Remarks on the Need for Special Counsel to Investigate Russian Interference in the Election, President Trump’s New Travel Ban and House Republicans’ ACA Repeal Plan
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer today delivered remarks on the Senate floor highlighting the need for special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, the President’s recently reissued executive order on immigrants and refugees, and House Republicans’ draft ACA repeal legislation. Below are his remarks:
Mr. President, I rise this afternoon on a few matters.
First, on the continuing investigation into Russian interference into our election and the ties between the Trump campaign, transition team, and Russia.
The events of this weekend -- which included another troubling, baseless tweet from the President -- highlight and, in fact, strengthen the argument for a special prosecutor to conduct the investigation.
The American people agree. A CNN/ORC poll this morning showed that about two thirds of Americans think that a special prosecutor should conduct the investigation: 67% of Independents and even 43% of Republicans. The trend lines suggest those numbers will continue to grow.
My Republican colleagues should understand that what they know in their hearts is the right thing to do—a strong impartial investigation that gets to the bottom of this -- is where the American people want them to go. The American people disagree with President Trump, and want a thorough and impartial investigation. Even 43% of Republicans.
They’re right: a special prosecutor is the best way to ensure that investigation proceeds impartially for several reasons:
- First, by the Department of Justice guidelines that are set up for this purpose, the special counsel is not subject to day-to-day supervision by the attorney general or anyone else at the Justice Department. That means the special prosecutor would have much greater latitude in who he can subpoena, which questions they can ask and how to conduct the investigation.
- Second, they can only be removed for good cause, such as misconduct, not to quash the investigation. So there’s insulation there. He or she is protected as they’re moving forward on the investigation.
- Third, there is built-in oversight - Congress is notified whenever a special counsel is appointed, removed, or finished with the investigation.
- And last, the special counsel has the independence to prosecute not only the subject of the investigation, but anyone who attempts to interfere.
So this is the right way to go.
Allow me to quote our Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who once said, “The appropriate response when the subject matter is public and it arises in a highly-charged political atmosphere is for the Attorney General to appoint a Special Counsel of great public stature and indisputable independence to assure the public the matter will be handled without partisanship.”
If there were ever a case that fit what then-Senator and now Attorney General Sessions called for, this is it.
This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee is going to have a hearing on the nomination of Mr. Rosenstein to serve as the Deputy Attorney General. During that hearing, Mr. Rosenstein should commit to naming a special prosecutor to look into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.
Mr. Rosenstein, by reputation, is a fair man. He’s a career prosecutor. Now that Attorney General Sessions has recused himself, Mr. Rosenstein, pending confirmation, will have the duty to appoint a special prosecutor. If he won’t appoint a special prosecutor, he would need to give a darn good reason – and it’s hard for me to see one right now. Whether or not he will appoint a special prosecutor will be front and center tomorrow, and far and away the most important question he needs to answer.
And as I mentioned last week, if, pending confirmation, Mr. Rosenstein delays or refuses to appoint a special prosecutor, Congress should consider reviving a narrower version of the independent counsel law.
Also, Mr. President, we should make certain that the investigation hasn’t been interfered with thus far. I’ve sent a letter to the inspector general of the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz, which was made public today, urging him to open an immediate investigation to determine if anyone has interfered with this investigation -- either attempting to influence the direction of the investigation or those conducting it.
The Attorney General should have recused himself on day one – I asked him to do it almost three weeks ago on February 14th – and we need to know if he or anyone else has meddled in this investigation in any way. His misleading statements to the Judiciary Committee about his meetings with the Russian ambassador only add suspicion. Attorney General Sessions has been in charge of this investigation for three weeks, and we need to know if he or anyone else did anything in that time to hinder the investigation.
…because it is absolutely critical that we protect the integrity of this investigation. That means ensuring that it is completely independent going forward, and that nothing has already occurred that could compromise it.
The good news is, the inspector general can take this investigation on his own—can go forward with what we asked in the letter on his own—and I would urge him to do so.
The second issue I’d like to discuss is the travel ban, the recently reissued executive order on immigrants and refugees.
Now that we have the details, it is clear that while the Administration has made some very minor changes, it has done nothing to alter the core thrust of the order, which I believe is terribly misguided, and nothing to address the core concerns of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled the original order was potentially unconstitutional.
Moreover, we know that the Administration delayed its announcement and implementation so that President Trump could bask in the aftermath of his joint address. That should be all the proof Americans need to know that this executive order has everything to do with optics and absolutely nothing to do with national security. If national security was at stake, it shouldn’t have been delayed one day.
The truth is: there is very little new or improved about this executive order. It’s barely a fresh coat of paint on the same car that doesn’t drive.
It is still a travel ban. It is still a refugee ban. It still makes us less safe, not safer—according not just to me, but to Republicans like Senator McCain. It still attempts to turn innocent immigrants and refugees into scapegoats and it still doesn’t do the things that would actually make us safer, like going after lone wolves and closing the loopholes in the Vise Waiver Program.
The new executive order is still mean-spirited, misguided, and, in my judgement, goes against what America is all about in being a country that accepts and cherishes immigrants, not disdains them. I fully expect it will have the same uphill climb in the courts that the previous version had.
Finally, Mr. President, on the Affordable Care Act.
My Republican friends have repeated a mantra for seven years: “repeal and replace;” “repeal and replace.” Turns out, during those seven years, they never came up with a coherent plan to replace the Affordable Care Act. It was all slogans, no policy. And now, they’re scrambling to come up with something.
The problem is: every draft plan, every leaked detail or outline or list of principles we’ve seen is tied together by one common thread: It will raise costs on average Americans and cut back on their benefits. Average Americans, under the Republican plan, will pay more and get less.
No wonder they’re hiding their plan somewhere in a basement room even as they are scheduling markups on the bill for a week from now. They don’t want folks to see it until the very last minute -- just rush it through.
I don’t blame them. It’s going to be very hard for Republicans to be proud of this plan which hurts average Americans, raising their costs and taking away their benefits.
Mr. President, it is the absolute height of hypocrisy. My Republican colleagues complained bitterly day after day, week after week, month after month, about not having enough time to read the Affordable Care Act when it was being debated.
At the time, my friend, the distinguished Majority Leader, said, “Americans want us to slow down, and Congress is putting its foot on the accelerator. Americans want to know what this bill would mean for them, and Congress won't let them read it before a vote…[on a] piece of legislation that will affect one of the most significant aspects of their lives. Americans have concerns about what they're hearing, and they are being told to shut up, sit down, and take the health care we give you.”
By keeping their replacement bill under lock and key only a week before potentially voting on it, the Republicans are engaging in an enormous hypocrisy – exactly what the Majority Leader complained about only a few years ago.
Their mantra in the past was always “read the bill.” Now they won’t even let us glance at it.
Why are they hiding it? I think I know why. They’re not very proud of it, and they know it’s not going to work. They’re being pushed blindly forward by their ideologues and their incessant campaign promises.
Mr. President, the American people ought to know how Republicans plan to drastically reshape this nation’s health care policy.
I suspect they won’t like it much. I suspect it will raise costs and cut benefits. I suspect far less Americans will get coverage. And I suspect that their plan will put the insurance companies back in charge. Whatever it does or doesn’t do, the American people and their representatives in Congress, after seven long years of slogans, ought to know the true face of “replace.”
