[Pages S2226-S2232]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following 
nomination, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read the nomination of William R. Evanina, of 
Pennsylvania, to be Director of the National Counterintelligence and 
Security Center. (New Position)
  Mr. McCONNELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The Democratic leader is recognized.


                              Coronavirus

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, the Republican leader has called the 
Senate back into session during a time when there are significant risks 
to the health of the Members of this Chamber and the staff who make 
this place function.
  This is a time of national emergency. We should be working to provide 
our country with the relief and support it so direly needs. But this is 
only the second day of business since Leader McConnell called the 
Senate back into session, and there will be no votes on the floor--not 
one vote. And so far, there is no plan--no plan at all--to consider 
COVID-related legislation on the floor in the near future.
  If we are going to be here in session, with an elevated health risk, 
why doesn't Leader McConnell have us work on issues that are directly 
related to COVID-19?
  Last night, we confirmed a noncontroversial nominee to the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission. The next nominee on the floor is for a 
counterintelligence post--no doubt important but unrelated to COVID--
whose nomination has been delayed by a hold by a Republican Senator. So 
when the Republican leader reasons that we must process nominees on the 
floor this week because of a previous Democratic obstruction, he should 
check his notes and his facts first.
  We could be using our time here to address a number of urgent 
priorities, whether it is rescuing our ailing health system, increasing 
testing capacity, assisting small businesses, renters, and homeowners. 
Providing vigorous oversight of legislation we have already passed 
would have been a better use of the Senate's time.
  Instead of coming together to work on these pressing matters, we are 
talking about nominations and rightwing judges, including a former 
protege of the Republican leader who was rated unqualified by the 
American Bar Association, a man who argued against the 
constitutionality of our healthcare law in the midst of a public health 
crisis--someone who probably 80 percent or 90 percent of Americans 
would reject if they knew his views. But he is a protege of the leader. 
We are rushing him through. We are not paying attention to COVID.
  The Senate Intelligence Committee is holding a virtual hearing on the 
nomination of Representative Ratcliffe to serve as the next Director of 
National Intelligence. This is an extremely important post that demands 
a candidate with deep experience, credibility on both sides of the 
aisle, and, above all, the ability to speak truth to power.
  Representative Ratcliffe meets none of these criteria. He is a deeply 
partisan cheerleader for the President, a yes-man in every sense of the 
phrase--someone who doesn't speak truth to power to the President of 
the United States. He tells the President what he wants to hear.
  Doesn't this sound familiar? Right now, we are living with the 
consequences of a President who doesn't want to hear the truth about 
the coronavirus, who doesn't want to believe it is as bad as it truly 
is, who wants to cling to quack medicines that will not work, and who 
runs away from the fact that his administration bears responsibility 
for the inadequacy of our national response--a President who still 
doesn't have a testing plan when we desperately need tests to get this 
country open again.
  The President doesn't like hearing the truth. It is that simple. That 
has hurt us dearly when it has come to the coronavirus. This crisis is 
partly the

[[Page S2227]]

result of an administration that did not take COVID-19 seriously enough 
early enough and refused to heed the warnings of public health 
officials and scientists.
  The same phenomenon of the President's not wanting to hear the truth 
will hurt us dearly when it comes to national security as well. If the 
Director of National Intelligence can't stand up and tell the President 
what is really happening, even when the President doesn't want to hear 
it, our country will be dramatically less safe--the same thing that has 
happened during the coronavirus crisis. If we move Ratcliffe and pass 
him, we will repeat the same mistake that the President has made on 
COVID. Not hearing the truth, not acting on the truth, listening to 
flattery and not much else, which we did on COVID, will be repeated on 
national security.
  Now, I think many of my Republican colleagues actually know this. 
This is not the first time that President Trump has floated Ratcliffe's 
name--it is the second--because, the first time, the Republicans 
balked. Many Republicans whispered: He has no experience. Some 
Republicans said to one another and to some of us: You don't need 
someone in the DNI who is just a cheerleader for the President; you 
need someone who knows intelligence and will speak the truth.
  There is no new evidence that Mr. Ratcliffe will act with the 
necessary independence. Nothing has changed about Ratcliffe's 
qualifications since he was shot down by the Republican Senators in 
their saying he was the wrong man for the job. Yet sometimes--all too 
often in this Senate and to the detriment of this country--even when my 
Republican colleagues know the President is wrong, they go blindly 
along with him anyway. That happened with COVID and will now happen 
with our intelligence agency. I hope it is not the case. I hope Mr. 
Ratcliffe's nomination will be roundly rejected, as it should be.


                       Nomination of Brian Miller

  Madam President, the second hearing this morning is in the Senate 
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs on Brian Miller to be 
the Special Inspector General of the pandemic relief efforts. Having an 
independent, experienced, and strong IG to oversee the administration's 
use of taxpayer funds in this pandemic is critically important. Under 
President Trump, who has been firing IGs left and right simply because 
they tell the truth and who believes that he is accountable to no one, 
selecting a truly independent watchdog is essential and urgent.
  As someone who currently works directly for President Trump as a 
member of his White House Counsel's Office, Mr. Miller's independence 
from the President is very much in doubt. We need a strong, tough IG. 
Billions of dollars are being spent. We don't want someone who has in 
his mind: I have to please the President. Mr. Miller needs to explain 
why the Senate should confirm him to a position that requires genuine 
independence. In particular, he must answer specific questions from the 
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs about his role in the 
White House Counsel's Office and what issues he has worked on. It is 
not acceptable to hide behind vague assertions that he can't answer 
those questions. It is too important. The burden on Miller is to 
demonstrate that he can be a truly strong and independent inspector 
general.


                              Coronavirus

  Madam President, there are serious questions about the fitness of 
both of these nominees--Mr. Ratcliffe and Mr. Miller. Yet, more 
broadly, the Republican leader has made a mistake by choosing to 
dedicate this session to nominations only instead of to urgent 
legislative business--COVID-19.
  We could and should be focused on issues like testing. The first 
diagnosed case of COVID-19 was diagnosed here in the United States just 
over 100 days ago. We still don't have a national testing strategy that 
is adequate. In early March, President Trump said that anybody who 
needs a test gets a test, which has entered the pantheon of 
Presidential lies, alongside: ``I am not a crook,'' and ``Read my lips: 
no new taxes.'' It was not true then, and it isn't true now. We still 
don't have a situation in which everyone who needs a test and wants a 
test gets one.
  As nations around the world, like South Korea and Canada, flatten the 
curve with rigorous national testing programs, the United States--this 
great United States, usually the leader of the world--is lagging so far 
behind. So, today, 42 Senate Democrats are sending a letter, demanding 
that the Trump administration fulfill its responsibility to produce a 
comprehensive, national strategic plan of action by May 24. Congress 
provided $25 billion in the last round of COVID legislation to help 
build up our testing capacity. The administration needs to take those 
resources and produce results. We have given him the money and the 
wherewithal. Where are they? The strategy they must come up with must 
include a strategy for managing supply chains and for making sure 
resources are equitably allocated and a strategy to use all available 
tools, like the Defense Production Act, to make sure we reach the level 
of testing that will manage this disease, save lives, and get our 
economy moving again.
  Until we have a vaccine, the most important tool we have at our 
disposal for tracking the disease, limiting its spread, and 
understanding where we can safely open is testing, testing, testing. We 
await the President's response to our letter and want to work with the 
administration to make sure we can end its embarrassment of inadequate 
testing, which, frankly, is far more than an embarrassment--it is 
crucial. It is life and death


                  Small Business Lending Transparency

  Madam President, finally, on small business lending transparency, 
over the past several months, Congress has provided historic levels of 
funding to help small businesses retain employees, meet payroll, and 
stay afloat during these turbulent times. Because of the depth of this 
crisis, we have dedicated trillions--not billions but trillions--to 
this effort. We must absolutely make sure these relief programs are 
implemented properly. With so much taxpayer money at stake, oversight, 
transparency, and accountability are musts.
  Issues with the small business lending programs cropped up almost as 
soon as the administration began implementing them. Truly, small 
businesses had a difficult time in securing loans while larger 
businesses that had standing relationships with big banks had a much 
easier time. Minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and 
other unbanked businesses--the proverbial small restaurant owner, the 
butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker--have been left out to a 
large degree. We tried to rectify some of these problems, particularly 
in COVID 3.5, but more must be done.
  As Justice Brandeis said: ``Sunlight is the best disinfectant.'' 
Transparency around these programs is the order of the day. So, this 
afternoon, Senator Cardin and I will ask the Senate to pass legislation 
that demands new disclosure requirements for the Paycheck Protection 
Program and other disaster relief accounts. Our bill is very simple. It 
would require the daily and weekly reporting of the PPP, the Economic 
Injury Disaster Loan, and debt relief programs to be broken down, in 
each case, by geography, demographics, and industry. The data would 
need to be downloaded and would include the names of the entities and 
the loans or grant amounts. It would need to detail whether the 
programs are reaching underserved communities.
  This is hardly a controversial idea. There is nothing partisan about 
it. Our legislation would simply require the basic transparency we 
expect from any Federal program--certainly, one of this size and 
importance. It is my hope that my Republican colleagues will not block 
our request simply because it comes from this side of the aisle. I 
would hope, on a day when the Republican leader has scheduled literally 
no business on the floor of the Senate, that we could come together to 
pass this very simple bill to make sure we know how taxpayer dollars 
are being spent.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.


                              Coronavirus

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, to date, more than 1 million people have 
contracted coronavirus in the United States--61,000 in the State of 
Illinois. Sadly, we are quickly approaching a death toll of 100,000 
Americans. While more people continue to contract and

[[Page S2228]]

succumb to the virus, another alarming trend has come to light. The 
coronavirus disproportionately affects minority communities. Black 
Illinoisans make up less than 15 percent of the State's overall 
population. However, they account for 34 percent of all coronavirus 
deaths. In Chicago, Black residents account for 52 percent of the total 
coronavirus deaths despite their comprising only 30 percent of the 
city's population.
  Recently, a survey of Latinos in Illinois, who make up 17 percent of 
our State's population, surpassed Black Illinoisans in confirmed cases 
of coronavirus. Now Latino Illinoisans account for 23 percent of 
confirmed cases in the State--the most cases of any race or ethnicity. 
Last week, on a call with the Illinois community health centers, I 
learned that, of the 34,000 African Americans who were tested in 
Illinois, 36 percent were positive for coronavirus. Of the 24,000 
Latinos tested, 62 percent tested positive--62 percent. Compare that to 
the 73,000 White Illinoisans tested for coronavirus, wherein 18 percent 
tested positive.
  Latino and Black populations in Illinois and across the Nation are 
bearing the brunt of this pandemic. As we continue to hit new, grim 
milestones during this public health crisis, these disparities are a 
sobering reminder of the historical inequities of our healthcare system 
in our country. Nationwide, Black and Latino Americans are more likely 
to have chronic diseases, such as diabetes, asthma, and heart disease, 
and are less likely to have health insurance than are White Americans. 
These health gaps are the result of historic and structural inequality, 
including their exposure to trauma, racism, stigma, and food deserts, 
and this pandemic magnifies the need to immediately address them.
  Black and Latino Americans are also more likely to hold frontline 
jobs that have been deemed essential in the food, retail, and service 
industries. That increases their risk of contracting the coronavirus 
when reporting for work. I have spoken with many community 
organizations, such as the First Ladies Health Initiative and West Side 
United, as well as the Illinois community health centers, and they have 
all stepped up to help Illinoisans find solutions to these challenges. 
Yet we can't just talk about the problem. We need to put solutions on 
the table.
  Congress needs to step up. I am working with the Illinois 
congressional delegation to improve our Nation's coronavirus data 
collection efforts so that we can better understand and address these 
racial disparities. It is unacceptable that not all States are 
currently reporting coronavirus incidents and deaths by race. We need 
these vital statistics to help the Federal Government, as well as the 
State and local governments, to develop plans to protect our most 
vulnerable populations.
  A few moments ago on the floor, the Republican leader--the Senator 
from Kentucky, Mr. McConnell--kind of warned us about the next stage of 
the debate when it comes to this coronavirus. He warned those of us on 
this side of the aisle not to see this crisis as the basis for 
fundamentally transforming our country. Well, I want to say to my 
colleague from Kentucky and all other colleagues, if we don't learn 
from this crisis the weaknesses of this great Nation when it comes to 
healthcare, if we don't understand the inequities of this great Nation 
when it comes to healthcare, and if we don't resolve to do something 
about it, shame on us. If at the end of this crisis we breathe a sigh 
of relief and say that now we will go back to business as usual, 
wherein health disparities are accepted in this country, shame on this 
Senate
  Yes, I want to see our way through this crisis with the fewest number 
of infections and the fewest number of deaths. That is our immediate 
goal--to protect America and to restore the economy. Yet, when it is 
over, if we don't step back and take a look at what we have learned 
from this crisis and vow to make America stronger, fairer, and more 
just when it comes to healthcare in this country, shame on us.
  There are those who voted against every aspect of the Affordable Care 
Act--so-called ObamaCare--10 years ago. I remember it well. Not a 
single Senator from the other side of the aisle would support our 
effort to reduce the number of uninsured people in America 
dramatically. We barely passed it--by one vote in the U.S. Senate and 
with Senator Harry Reid as the majority leader at the time--and without 
any help, without any votes, from the other side of the aisle. And what 
happened? In my State, the number of those who were uninsured was cut 
in half by this so-called ObamaCare. Proudly, I call the Affordable 
Care Act ``ObamaCare.''
  Since then, those on the other side of the aisle have been resolute 
in their determination to repeal it, not to replace it with anything 
that is better--they don't even have a replacement--and to give up on 
our quest of making sure that every American has the peace of mind for 
having the protection of health insurance--affordable, quality health 
insurance.
  At the end of this health crisis, are we still going to hear the 
other side of the aisle arguing that we shouldn't dedicate ourselves to 
reducing the number of uninsured? I hope they will take the time, as I 
have, to talk to administrators at hospitals about what is happening in 
their emergency rooms, in their surgical suites, and in other places in 
which they have had to address this crisis firsthand. One major 
hospital in Chicago said that half of the people in that hospital who 
have died from coronavirus-related disease had no health insurance. Is 
this a coincidence? No. It is a pattern. Without health insurance and 
with gross disparities in the delivery of healthcare, we know that 
there are groups of Americans who are suffering and that many will die.
  So I would just say to the Republican leader, yes, I hope that our 
experience from this coronavirus makes us all vow, on both sides of the 
aisle, to truly change America for the better when it comes to 
healthcare and health protection. That is a must.
  Last week, I had the opportunity to speak with several Illinois-
focused community development financial institutions. These 
organizations do amazing work by offering lending services to small 
businesses and populations that are typically overlooked by the big 
banks. They were grateful for the work we have done so far and for the 
legislation we have passed, but they had suggestions on how to improve 
the Small Business Administration's Paycheck Protection Program to 
ensure that financial relief makes it to minority-, women-, and 
veteran-owned small businesses.
  In addition, I am working with my colleagues to help ensure that 
vaccine and drug trials that are related to COVID-19 include diverse 
patient populations and are widely available and affordable. I have 
cosponsored the COVID-19 Racial and Ethnic Disparity Task Force Act 
with Senator Kamala Harris. This important piece of legislation would 
create a task force comprised of healthcare, economic, and government 
leaders to provide recommendations about how to best allocate resources 
to address racial disparities in our healthcare system.
  When the Senator from Kentucky, the majority leader, comes to the 
floor and says to those of us--warns those of us--on this side of the 
aisle not to use this healthcare crisis as an excuse or an opportunity 
to transform America, is he wedded to the racial inequality that we see 
in our system in his warning us not to try to address it? I hope not. I 
hope that we can have a bipartisan approach to making this system 
fairer in its reaching more people.
  This week, I am introducing the Health Heroes 2020 Act, and here is 
what is behind it: As we all put up signs in our windows and yards 
across America to thank healthcare workers for risking their lives, we 
understand that these doctors, nurses, and lab technicians and these 
people who work in nursing homes who are taking care of the elderly 
folks, as well as those who clean up and provide food, are all 
healthcare workers who are risking their lives to do their work. I 
thank them. We should all thank them day in and day out.
  Yet what are we going to do about recognizing the work they have 
done?
  First, I think we ought to compensate them for jobs well done. 
Senator Bob Casey has legislation on that subject, which I am happy to 
support.
  Beyond that, what can we do for our healthcare workforce? Why is it 
that in the United States of America the best and brightest, who get 
great grades in

[[Page S2229]]

high school, go through college taking the tough courses and getting 
good grades, get accepted to medical school, and after working hard for 
4 years or more there, go through residencies which are backbreaking 
exercises in actually learning the clinical practice of medicine, and 
just before we tell them they are licensed doctors ready to practice in 
America, we give them bad news--the news that they must be carrying a 
student debt from medical school of between $200,000 to $240,000 on 
average? What are we thinking? These women and men are critical to our 
future and our own healthcare. Why do we burden them with this certain 
awesome debt that they have to carry forward and build their career 
around? That is why this bill really seeks to look at this from a new 
angle and says that we ought to reward those medical students who are 
willing to practice in areas of greatest need--minority students as 
well--and provide for them scholarships to defray the cost of medical 
school so they don't end up graduating with this incredible financial 
burden. This legislation would help provide doctors, nurses, mental 
health professionals, dentists, and others to communities with 
shortages which often contribute to health disparities as I described 
earlier--inner-city areas, rural America, smalltown America. Studies 
show that having doctors who reflect the communities they treat 
actually helps health outcomes. So my bill would help to expand the 
representation of minorities in the workforce.
  Last week, in a letter to the CDC, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, I urged the agency to support global efforts to build up 
our community health workforce capacity. Communities of color across 
America are suffering at disproportionate rates across this pandemic, 
and we have to step up to help all Americans against the threat of 
coronavirus. It is unacceptable, but sadly not surprising, that 
communities of color are bearing the burden of this dangerous virus. I 
stand here to continue fighting with my colleagues in the Senate to try 
to solve these inequities happening in communities across the Nation.
  There aren't many redlines that have been drawn publicly so far as we 
have considered coronavirus legislation. We passed the original CARES 
Act, $2.2 trillion, with 96 votes on the floor of the Senate and with 
no dissenting votes. The next bill, the coronavirus 3.5, as it was 
characterized, passed the U.S. Senate by a voice vote, adding $484 
billion to the effort. More will obviously be needed, not just for 
small business loans but also for unemployment insurance and certainly 
to make sure that our hospitals, large and small, can survive this 
crisis as we all hope America will. We are certain they will, but we 
have to be prepared to do that.
  Yet, this morning, the Republican leader came forward and said he is 
drawing a redline; that Republicans will not move forward when it comes 
to dealing with these challenges without addressing one issue, and that 
was the issue of legal liability. I will not describe in detail what 
the Senator from Kentucky is proposing because we haven't seen it, but 
what he is suggesting is that our greatest fear shouldn't be the 
coronavirus; it should be trial lawyers--trial lawyers.
  He is fearful that we are going to see COVID-19 lawsuits. Well, let 
me tell you, there could easily be COVID-19 lawsuits and some--and I 
think most Americans would agree--should be filed. Is there a COVID-19 
lawsuit if someone is profiteering with protective equipment, raising 
the prices way beyond reach because they have this moment of 
opportunity with the crisis we are facing? One downstate hospital in 
Illinois talked about surgical gowns that cost 22 cents apiece and now 
cost between $11 and $20 apiece. Clearly, there is price gouging and 
profiteering. If we can, can we hold those responsible for profiteering 
liable? I would say yes. Is that a COVID-19 lawsuit? I think it is 
related to COVID-19, but it relates to it in a way that most Americans 
would agree there should be legal action.
  If there are scams and profiteering, the people responsible for it 
should be held legally responsible in a lawsuit, if necessary. If 
people are promulgating phony tests and making representations that are 
a fraud on the public, should they be held accountable? Well, of 
course. Is that a COVID-19 lawsuit? Could be.
  What about those who are talking about the protection of workers? If 
workers are not protected on the job, they may be turning to workers' 
compensation for any of the injuries and illnesses that result. Are we 
going to stop those as COVID-19 lawsuits going too far? Nurses are 
suing in some situations because they are not being given adequate or 
quality protective equipment. Do we want to stop that litigation as 
well? Is that what the Senator from Kentucky is suggesting
  There is an interesting situation with meatpacking workers right now. 
I know a little more than some Senators about that. When I was working 
my way through college, I spent 12 months working in a meatpacking 
plant in East St. Louis, IL. I was paid $3.65 an hour. I thought that 
was pretty good, but it was hard, hard work. I saw what it was like 
then, many, many years ago. I have gone back to see the meatpacking and 
meat processors today. It is not much different. People stand literally 
elbow-to-elbow, shoulder-to-shoulder, as conveyor belts bring through 
hundreds and hundreds of pounds of meat and poultry that have to be 
acted on immediately to keep up with the line. It is tough, hard work, 
and now it turns out to be an extraordinarily dangerous line of work as 
well. We are learning that disproportionate numbers of workers in this 
industry are coming down with the COVID virus infection. United Food 
and Commercial Workers, which represents many of these plant workers, 
estimated that at least 5,000 have already reported infected and 
anywhere from 10 to 20 have died. Now the President issues an Executive 
order mandating that these companies open for business. Well, I can say 
to the President, yes, they should open, but only if they dedicate 
themselves to the health and safety of their workforce as the highest 
priority. Let's make that workplace safe before we talk about making it 
a mandatory opening.
  In fairness to the industry, in my State of Illinois, several 
companies that have been affected have reached out to us and are, in 
fact, determined to make their workplace safe. I salute them for taking 
that approach. They are talking about testing and making sure that 
workers on the job have necessary distancing and protective equipment. 
That is the right approach. In the meantime, those companies that 
ignore that responsibility, should they bear some liability for the 
illnesses or injuries that result? Well, under workers' compensation 
law, they certainly would. Is the Senator from Kentucky calling that 
the COVID-19 lawsuit? It could be related to COVID-19, for sure. Should 
they have their day in court? I certainly hope so.
  As we look at the challenges before us, and there are many, this 
notion of drawing a redline on legal liability, unfortunately, fails to 
take into account that system of justice in America which we have 
turned to in good times and bad to make sure that justice is meted out 
to those who have no recourse but to consider lawsuits in court. Let's 
take this issue seriously, carefully. Let's not squander the 
opportunity of protecting the people who are risking their lives every 
day in essential workplaces and believe they, too, should be protected 
by our system of justice. I will stand with them, and I hope that other 
Members of the Senate will join me.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota


                       Business Before the Senate

  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, after a few weeks of working remotely to 
help flatten the coronavirus curve, we are back in Washington to 
continue our coronavirus response and address other important issues. 
It has been an incredibly difficult couple of months for our country 
and, in fact, for most of the world. More than 1 million Americans have 
contracted the coronavirus, and thousands have died. Our economy has 
taken a huge hit. Millions of Americans are out of work, and businesses 
are struggling to stay afloat. Americans are worried. They are worried 
about their own health. They are worried about the health of their 
families and loved ones, and they are worried about their finances.
  My colleagues and I know that Americans are suffering. Our overriding 
priority over the past 2 months has been

[[Page S2230]]

responding to the coronavirus crisis. We passed several major response 
bills and provided substantially more than $2 trillion in assistance. 
We have funded testing, medical care, personal protective equipment for 
frontline medical personnel, vaccine and treatment development, paid 
sick leave, unemployment benefits, direct relief payments to American 
citizens, forgivable loans for small businesses, and much more.
  Our goal has been to provide a comprehensive response, addressing not 
just the medical priorities but also the economic impact this virus has 
had on so many American families, and there is more work to be done. 
Right now a big part of that work is monitoring the implementation of 
legislation we have already passed. We provided a tremendous amount of 
money, and we need to make sure it is getting to where it needs to go 
as quickly as possible and is being spent in the most effective way.
  Monitoring the implementation of the legislation we have already 
passed is also crucial for informing any future legislation. As I said, 
we have provided a tremendous amount of money for coronavirus, equal to 
almost 50 percent of the entire Federal budget for 2020, and it is 
important that any future funding be carefully targeted. We need to 
make sure that Federal dollars are going only to real coronavirus 
priorities. Our children and grandchildren will be footing the bill for 
the money we are adding to the national debt.
  As a case in point, the debt to GDP, which was scheduled to be 79 
percent this year, is now expected to be, in the Year 2020, 101 
percent. That jump from 79 percent debt to GDP to 101 percent debt to 
GDP is the largest jump, I am told, literally, since 1943, in the 
middle of World War II. So it is essential that we spend wisely.
  In addition to overseeing the implementation of the coronavirus 
legislation we passed and gathering data to inform any future bills, we 
also have a number of coronavirus-related nominations to consider, 
something that is a role that is unique to the U.S. Senate under the 
Constitution. When it comes to judicial nominations, nominations to the 
executive branch, the Senate has the responsibility to ensure that we 
conduct the research, investigate nominees, hold confirmation hearings, 
and ultimately vote to put people into key positions in the 
administration and on the courts.
  So the question about why we are here this week I think is a fairly 
easy one to answer, and that is because there are lots of really 
important positions that are key not only to the healthcare crisis we 
are facing in this country but to our ongoing national security 
priorities as well as to the economic challenges we are facing through 
this crisis.
  In fact, this week, the Senate Banking Committee will be holding a 
hearing on the nomination of Brian D. Miller to be the special 
inspector general for pandemic recovery at the Treasury Department, a 
key role created by the legislation that we passed here in the 
Congress, critically important to the implementation, making sure 
everything is done in the right way. As we all know, inspectors general 
pay a key oversight role in Federal departments, helping to root out 
waste, fraud, and other abuses of taxpayer dollars. If confirmed, Mr. 
Miller will be an essential part of ensuring that the trillions we 
provided for coronavirus relief are spent properly.
  Committees are doing other essential coronavirus work this week as 
well. The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee is 
holding hearings on an initiative Senators Blunt, Alexander, and others 
worked to get included in the coronavirus legislation. This initiative 
was designed to spur innovation in private sector and public sector 
collaboration, with a goal of dramatically increasing our coronavirus 
testing capabilities. So that is going on in the Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions Committee.
  The Senate Commerce Committee, of which I am a Member, is holding a 
hearing this week looking at the impact of COVID-19 on the airline 
industry, an industry we know is being profoundly impacted by what is 
happening with the virus.
  Next week, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
Committee will be hearing directly from the leaders of our fight 
against the coronavirus--Drs. Fauci, Redfield, and Hahn and Admiral 
Giroir. Committee work will play a key role in any future coronavirus 
bill, and it is good to have committees able to meet once again here in 
Washington, DC.
  Of course, while the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to be our 
priority in Washington in the coming weeks and months, there is other 
essential work that we have to do for the American people: 
appropriations bills, nominations to essential administration posts, 
and critical national security legislation is just some of the items on 
our agenda over the next couple of months. This week, the Senate Armed 
Services Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee are holding 
hearings on nominees for key national security positions, including the 
Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of the Navy.
  Senate Republicans are committed to getting our country through this 
crisis and helping American workers and businesses deal with the 
virus's impact. We will be discussing a lot of ideas over the next 
couple of weeks, from tax and regulatory relief to support farmers and 
ranchers to ways to spur job creation and shield responsible businesses 
from frivolous litigation once the economy is opened up again. As I 
said, we will continue to focus on making sure that the money we 
provided gets where it is needed as fast as possible.
  The United States undoubtedly has more tough days ahead, but we are 
going to get through them. We are going to come out tougher on the 
other side. In the meantime, we have work to do here in the U.S. 
Senate. People across this country are hurting and struggling, and 
there are many priorities that need to be addressed. So I am pleased 
that the Senate is open for business. We are going to be working the 
next few months, as I mentioned, on the national defense authorization 
bill, a piece of legislation that we have to do on an annual basis that 
deals with all of our national priorities, making sure that the men and 
women who defend this country, the American people, and our interests 
around the world have the training, equipment, and resources to do 
their jobs to keep Americans safe.
  We have a critical water infrastructure bill that will be marked up 
by the Environment and Public Works Committee, also a piece of 
legislation that is important to the economy in this country. If you 
look at the long list of things and priorities that we need to deal 
with here in the U.S. Senate, it is important that we be about the 
people's business.
  I know I can speak from personal experience that over the past 
several weeks, like my colleagues, we have worked really hard to stay 
connected. I worked really hard to stay in touch with people across 
South Dakota using technology, platforms, and apps that I never really 
had much experience with using in the past. From Zoom to Skype, to 
Google Hangouts, to Shindig, there are all kinds of interesting new 
apps that I think many of us became acquainted with, conducting lots of 
virtual meetings and staying in touch with our constituents to see what 
is important to them, finding out what is working and what is not 
working and getting feedback on what we could be doing to even better 
respond to the crisis that is out there. But there is no substitute, 
when it comes to doing the Nation's business, for being here, for 
committees to work, to meet, for us to be able to vote, for us to be 
able to deal with the important nominations I mentioned that under the 
Constitution, we, the Senate, have an obligation and responsibility to 
advise and consent on, whether that is a judicial nomination, key 
Cabinet post, or an important administration position that pertains to 
national security and the virus.
  There are lots of priority items for which the U.S. Senate has a key 
and principal responsibility, and we need to be about that business. So 
I hope, in the days and weeks ahead, as we take on those challenges, 
that we can work together in a way that provides maximum safety for the 
people who work here but also gives the important priority to the items 
and the issues that are critical to Americans at this point, in the 
middle of this crisis and, hopefully, when we get on the other side of 
it, those important critical national security priorities, economic 
priorities, and other business that the American

[[Page S2231]]

people need us to deal with on a daily basis.
  I thank the Presiding Officer for the time and look forward to 
working with my colleagues, albeit in different circumstances than we 
have had to deal with in the past but, nevertheless, to have the U.S. 
Senate, the people's representatives, here doing the important work the 
American people expect us to do.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, let me join our friend and my friend, 
the Senator from South Dakota, and say that I am glad to be back in 
this Chamber doing the work of 29 million Texans. I see the Presiding 
Officer and my partner, my fellow Senator from Texas, joining us as 
well.
  I was listening closely to the Senator from South Dakota's recitation 
of all the things we have to do. There is no shortage of work for us to 
do, and there is no reason for us to continue to curl up in a fetal 
position in some undisclosed location and be afraid to go outdoors.
  The fact is, the experts at the Centers for Disease Control, people 
like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, whom we have seen on TV on a nightly 
basis, tell us what we need to do in order to function safely. It is 
the same thing that our grocery clerks and our doctors and nurses and, 
frankly, our law enforcement personnel are doing. We know how to do 
this and how to do it safely.
  At the same time, we simply cannot hide out and not show up for work. 
What kind of message does that send to the American people?
  We know this is an extraordinary crisis, an unprecedented crisis, and 
we have done some things we would never consider doing under normal 
times--appropriating more than $3 trillion at warp speed. I, frankly, 
think it is a good time for us to tap the brakes and to consider what 
it is we have already done and where we need to make some corrections.
  Anytime you do anything this big and this fast, you are going to make 
some mistakes. We have seen that, and there have been corrections both 
in terms of the way the Treasury is administering the program, but also 
we have heard about gaps. For example, I have done a number of video 
conferences with our chambers of commerce around the country, and they 
ask me: Why did you leave the chambers out of the support under the 
Paycheck Protection Program for nonprofits? I, frankly, don't have a 
good answer for that. I said that is something we need to go back and 
fix. If we can't do it by Treasury guidance, then we need to do it by 
future legislation.
  I have no doubt we will continue to legislate, but we need to do it 
smartly. We need to be here in person so we can have the interaction 
and deliberation and debates that are so important to coming up with a 
good product.
  We have done some pretty extraordinary work in the last 6 weeks or 
so. Both Chambers have come together and quickly passed four separate 
pieces of legislation to strengthen our response to the coronavirus.
  We sent vital funding to our hospitals. Ironically, at a time when 
our hospitals were the frontline of defense dealing with people with 
COVID-19, many of them were laying off employees because we had asked 
them to forgo elective surgery, which is one of the ways that they end 
up paying the bills.
  Then we learned, in the global competition for personal protective 
equipment, literally every mayor, every Governor, every President, 
every leader of every country around the world was in a global rush to 
try to come up with personal protective equipment.
  One of the things I have told my constituents and friends that I 
think we have learned is we can't depend on China and on these 
uncertain supply chains for things as important as personal protective 
equipment--or pharmaceuticals, for that matter. So these are some of 
the lessons and some of the feedback we have gotten as we have 
interacted with our constituents.
  We know that testing has gotten much more widespread, and we have 
made tremendous advances in terms of treatment with all the clinical 
trials that are underway--well over 70 of them--and now the hope of a 
vaccine, hopefully sooner rather than later. Once we get a vaccine, 
then hopefully this will be relegated to the same status as the 
seasonal flu, for which we typically do have a vaccine, so the 
particularly vulnerable individuals--the elderly, people with 
underlying chronic disease--can be protected first and foremost.
  We also sent funding to our State and local Governors: $150 billion. 
Now, we have all talked to our mayors and our county judges--in Texas, 
that is what we call our county leaders--and Governors. Obviously, the 
sales tax revenue has fallen off a cliff because there is not much 
business going on in our retail stores, to be sure, although there is a 
lot going on online with deliveries and those sorts of orders.
  But we know our State and local governments provide for law 
enforcement and other essential services, so we felt it was important 
to throw them a lifeline, too, to help them meet their budgets and 
maintain those vital services.
  Perhaps the most ambitious and the most popular thing we did is to 
try to help our small businesses stay afloat through the Paycheck 
Protection Program. Obviously, this was successful--or it is certainly 
popular in that $350 billion was spent in 2 weeks. Then we had to come 
back and replenish that with another $320 billion. But we know that 
money is flying out of our local community banks and credit unions, 
helping small businesses keep their employees on the payroll. And, if 
they do that, then this low-interest loan will turn into a grant.
  The goal, of course, is, once we defeat this virus--as we will--we 
will then be in a position for those businesses to bring their 
employees back, if they have furloughed them, to help us build out of 
this recession in which we are currently involved.
  We also provided critical funding for our farmers and ranchers and 
other producers so they can keep our country fed. We have taken 
unprecedented steps to minimize the impact of this virus on the 
American people and our economy and tried to provide some modicum of 
certainty amid so much uncertainty.
  I don't think there is a single event in my lifetime that rivals the 
breadth and depth of the crisis that we have reached. Certainly, 9/11 
was a different type of crisis. The 2008 great recession--with the 
meltdown of the banks on Wall Street and the great recession, those 
were significant events to be sure, but nothing quite has rivaled what 
the coronavirus has done to our public health and to our economy.

  The cascading consequences of this virus have reached every 
community, every sector of our economy, and every corner of the globe. 
Every single American has experienced some sort of shift in their daily 
routine as a result of the virus. Maybe ``shift'' is too tentative a 
word. Actually, many of us have had our lives turned on their head.
  For some, the changes were very significant. Think about those who 
contracted the virus, the loved ones who couldn't be at their side, the 
healthcare workers who were there and are helping them, those who are 
sick. Then there are billions of Americans who have lost their jobs, 
small business owners wondering whether they are going to cease to 
exist and whether they can survive this current crisis, and then the 
farmers seeing a glut of supply and reduced demand.
  Now, many people have been able to safely work from home, and that is 
wonderful, but often they end up pulling double duty as teachers for 
their children with the schools having been closed, and others have 
continued heading out to work every day to keep the cogs of our society 
running--so-called essential workers.
  By the way, I really don't like the designation between essential and 
nonessential. I think, really, what we ought to call it is safe and 
unsafe because all workers are, I believe, essential.
  In ways big and small, this virus has affected everybody in this 
country. While we must continue working to slow the spread and reduce 
the economic impact, we cannot ignore the profound human impact it has 
had. Many people have been isolated under very difficult circumstances, 
not knowing whether they will still have a job to go back to. Many are 
living with the uncertainty of this pandemic, perhaps in a crowded 
house or apartment with children, maybe elderly parents and others, cut 
off from the rest of society.
  It is no secret that this pandemic is taking a toll on America's 
mental

[[Page S2232]]

health. Last weekend, the family of a New York City emergency room 
doctor released some devastating news. Dr. Lorna Breen had been in the 
trenches battling this virus for weeks. She was working long hours, as 
many of our healthcare providers are, and told her family about the 
devastation that she was seeing every day.
  She contracted COVID-19 and took a week and a half off to recover, 
but then she went back to work, eager to help where she could. Shortly 
after, Dr. Breen's family intervened and brought her home to 
Charlottesville, VA, to rest and to spend a little time with her family 
and for R&R.
  Sadly, tragically, the struggles Dr. Breen was facing felt untenable. 
After overcoming COVID-19, she ultimately took her own life by suicide.
  Dr. Breen was a hero who devoted her entire life to caring for 
others, to putting others before herself. While her tragic death cannot 
be reversed, it should serve as a warning signal about the broader 
impact of this virus.
  In a recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly half of 
Americans reported that coronavirus is having a negative impact on 
their mental health--one-half. That is up from one-third in March. The 
number of texts to the Federal Disaster Distress Helpline skyrocketed 
in April--more than a 1,000-percent increase.
  As we continue to discuss what future coronavirus legislation could 
look like, we cannot ignore the mental health impact. Nationwide, we 
rely on the community mental health centers and community behavioral 
health organizations to support those battling mental health and 
substance abuse disorders. As the need for these services has 
increased, resources have actually decreased. More than 90 percent of 
the community behavioral health organizations nationwide have been 
forced to reduce their operations--reduce their operations at a time of 
increased need and demand--and more than 60 percent of behavioral 
health organizations project they can't survive financially for more 
than 3 months under the current COVID-19 conditions.
  Congress tried to do something to help. We provided $175 billion for 
the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund to support 
healthcare providers on the frontlines of this crisis. As this funding 
is being distributed, mental health providers cannot be forgotten.
  Along with 24 of our colleagues, Senator Stabenow and I have sent a 
letter to Secretary Azar and Administrator Verma, urging them to 
quickly allocate this funding and ensure that these mental health 
organizations are included. Not only do they provide vital care and 
support for individuals struggling with mental health issues; they also 
are key to fighting addiction and substance abuse
  Those struggling to overcome addiction are often living in a fragile 
state, fighting each day to stay the course, but the current 
circumstances have made those daily battles much more difficult. They 
are isolated from their friends and loved ones, and they are dealing 
with the anxiety caused by the virus and possibly--probably--facing 
financial struggles.
  The new stressors brought on by this virus are compounded by reduced 
capacity for treatment. In-person support meetings are canceled, 
treatment clinics and counselors are curtailing appointments, and the 
barriers to overcoming addiction loom even larger. For those 
individuals, treatment cannot simply be delayed.
  Our country has made serious inroads in our battle against the opioid 
epidemic. In 2018, overdose deaths were down 4 percent from the 
previous year, the first decrease in nearly three decades. We can't let 
the coronavirus derail the progress we have fought so hard to make.
  The CARES Act--I am glad to say--does expand access to telehealth. I 
think many Americans are experiencing the benefits of telehealth, and I 
predict at some point this will change a lot of the ways that we 
receive consultation by healthcare providers: not having to drive our 
car and make appointments, pay for parking, spend a lot of time out of 
our day. We can simply do it through video conference, conveniently and 
effectively. But more must be done to support those battling addiction 
and mental health challenges.
  For those who are transitioning from the criminal justice system, the 
need for additional resources and support is especially dire. Earlier 
this year, Senator Blumenthal and I introduced the Crisis Stabilization 
and Community Reentry Act to support those who have been a part of the 
criminal justice system and to provide stable treatment for those with 
mental illness.
  Most prisoners who are receiving treatment for a mental health or a 
substance use disorder are released without a plan to keep them on 
their regimen. This often leads to higher recidivism rates, 
unsurprisingly, which could be avoided. It also means that law 
enforcement is, all too often, left to be the first responders for 
those suffering a mental health crisis, which can escalate those 
confrontations and put both the officer and the individual in that 
crisis at risk.
  This bill creates grants to connect law enforcement, State and local, 
and community resources to help individuals who are either engaged in 
the criminal justice system or have been released from prison and makes 
it possible for them to access the resources they need to have a 
successful reentry into civilized society. These grants connect those 
services to make sure that people suffering from an acute episode can 
access treatment without the risk of being reincarcerated.
  We are facing a battle unlike any we have seen in my lifetime, and 
the stress and the anxiety that come with it are taking a tremendous 
toll on the American people. It is not just the virus and the threat of 
catching the virus that are taking the toll. We need to look at this 
holistically and realize, if you are a victim of domestic violence and 
you are forced to be confined with your abuser and have nowhere else to 
go and maybe have no money coming in the front door, only to have your 
abuser abusing alcohol and perhaps becoming even more violent--there 
are a whole catalog of problems associated with this virus and the 
virus itself, the risk of infection being just one, and we need to look 
at this holistically.
  As our discussions continue this week on how to support the American 
people during this unprecedented time, resources for mental health and 
substance abuse treatment providers cannot fall by the wayside.
  (Mr. CRUZ assumed the Chair.)

                          ____________________