On the recordJune 29, 2016
I rise again this morning to urge my colleagues to vote no on cloture. As drafted, PROMESA exacts a price far too high for relief that is far too uncertain. I came to this Chamber in September and December of last year to raise the alarm bells about what was happening in Puerto Rico. The majority held the ball and ran out the shot clock, attempting to silence the voice of 3.5 million U.S. citizens living in Puerto Rico in this debate. So let's be clear about what this vote to end debate means. Despite what the proponents of the bill will argue, opposing this cloture vote is not a vote to allow Puerto Rico to default. Any legislation we pass includes a retroactive stay on litigation, meaning that any lawsuit filed after July 1 will be halted and any judgment unenforceable. As the bill states, the stay bars ``the commencement or continuation'' of suits to recover claims against Puerto Rico. It also bars ``enforcement . . . of a judgment obtained before the enactment'' of the bill. In addition, section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, which is incorporated by reference into the bill, bars the ``enforcement . . . of a judgment obtained before'' filing for bankruptcy, once the board files a bankruptcy petition on Puerto Rico's behalf. So even if the hedge funds win a judgment before the stay is enacted, that judgment cannot be enforced, and once the debt adjustment plan is confirmed, the judgment can be discharged.…
Source
govinfo.gov




