June 3, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 103 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session

[Pages S2660-S2679]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the 
following nomination, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of James 
H. Anderson, of Virginia, to be a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant 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for the quorum call be rescinded.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 (Mrs. Loeffler). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.


                  Protests and Business of the Senate

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, this has been a very difficult week 
after what has been a very difficult few months. A nation, beleaguered 
by disease and economic depression, has once again come face-to-face 
with the racial injustice that infects our society. The death of George 
Floyd in police custody was a searing reminder of a long list of 
unarmed African Americans whose lives have been taken under similar 
circumstances--Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and too many others--a 
well of grief and loss and pain too deep to express. It was a searing 
reminder of the bigotry and discrimination that African Americans 
encounter as part of their daily reality.
  That is why so many Americans of all ages, colors, and faiths are out 
in the streets protesting right now. They are fed up with racial 
injustice in this country and want to see some change. Here in the 
Senate, Member after Member has come to the floor to share support for 
the same cause.
  Yesterday, our caucus held a somber, emotional, and very personal 
meeting, during which our Members shared their own lived experiences of 
racism and spoke about what we need to do next because the truth is, 
while speeches and protests are vital, they will never be enough.
  We need greater accountability and transparency in police departments 
and reformed police practices so these events don't happen in the first 
place. We need to reform the criminal justice system that is still too 
short on justice and begin chipping away at the racial disparities that 
exist in healthcare, housing, education, and in the economy.
  These issues will not be solved in a week or a month or in a year. 
Let's hope they can be solved in this decade. But I will be damned if 
we don't at least try to make some progress. Already, my colleagues 
Senators Booker, Harris, Cardin, Klobuchar, Duckworth, Schatz, Smith, 
and others are working with the Congressional Black Caucus in the House 
to develop legislation to address a number of issues related to police 
violence and racial justice. Senate Democrats will not wait to propose 
and push for bold, bold change.
  Will our Republican colleagues join us? Leader McConnell, commit to 
put a law enforcement reform bill on the floor of the Senate before 
July 4.

[[Page S2661]]

  I have made this request for several days without an answer from the 
Republican leader. Even more disappointing, the Republican leader 
blocked a simple resolution I offered last night that reaffirmed 
Americans' constitutional rights to peaceful protest, condemned the 
violence that is occurring in too many places, and condemned the 
President as well for having gas and rubber bullets used on a peaceful 
protest in Lafayette Park, where there were families and children 
protesting in the grand American tradition of peaceful protest.
  There was no partisan rhetoric in this resolution. It was three 
simple concepts, a recitation of the facts, but because Senate 
Republicans are so afraid--shivering--at the thought of criticizing the 
President, even when they know his actions are way out of line, Leader 
McConnell came and blocked this resolution. Shame, shame, shame.
  We all know there are very few checks on the President, especially a 
President who believes he can do anything he wants--and he said it. One 
of the most effective checks on President Trump could be the caucus of 
Republican Senators for once standing up to him when he is way out of 
line. Where are they? Where are they?
  Even a columnist like George Will has shown a disgust at the 
Republican Senate, and he is a conservative, for their failure to stand 
up to Donald Trump on issues like this. All too often on thorny issues 
such as gun safety, racial justice, and police reform, my Republican 
colleagues sort of say what is necessary to get through the day, when 
there is an immediate crisis, and then wait for public attention to 
fade.
  Leader McConnell called us back into session in early May during the 
height of the COVID pandemic, but we still have not considered a single 
piece of legislation on the floor. Now listen to this. Yesterday, when 
Leader McConnell was listing legislative priorities for June, he did 
not mention COVID legislation. Let me repeat for those who may have 
missed it in the swirl of news and events of the day. When listing his 
June priorities to reporters, Leader McConnell did not mention COVID-
related legislation. Other Republican Senators have said that another 
relief bill might come in late July--might, might.
  This is shocking. This should be a wake-up call to the American 
people. Americans of all ages, races, creeds, and philosophies, call 
your Republican Senators. Demand action.
  The recession will get deeper. It could develop into a depression if 
we don't have relief. We have not done enough in the eyes of every 
economist I have looked at and respected. Governors and mayors across 
the country in red States are slashing budgets in advance of the new 
fiscal year, which for most States starts July 1. States will be forced 
to cut millions of jobs and critical services. These cuts mean 
increased school class sizes, longer emergency response times, fewer 
services to keep the elderly at home and out of nursing homes. These 
cuts not only exacerbate the recession but the wrath of the coronavirus 
itself. That is what is happening while Senate Republicans wait until 
July, maybe, to consider another relief bill.
  America, look at what our Republicans are doing: not giving the 
relief you need for your safety, for your schools, for the services 
that local government provides.
  The Republican majority doesn't seem to have time to address a 
cascading series of national crises--no time. Why is that?
  Where is President Trump? Where is his Cabinet? They all know that we 
need more. They all know we haven't solved the economic problem--far 
from it. They all know that we have to do a lot more on testing.
  So our Republican majority doesn't seem to have time to address the 
COVID national crisis, but do you know what it does have time for? 
Chasing President Trump's wild conspiracy theories. It sounds like the 
death knell of the Republican Party as we know it. They can't deal with 
the two major crises of the day--racial justice and the COVID crisis--
and they are busy pursuing conspiracy theories, some of them emanating 
from Russia, to go after President Obama and Vice President Biden.
  This makes no sense. This, again, sounds like the death knell of the 
Republican Party. The Republican Party we used to know would have some 
principles but not be afraid to run to every major issue--to any major 
issue almost. But that is what they are doing.
  Today, in the Judiciary Committee, the Republican committee chairman 
has called in Rod Rosenstein to dredge up the President's favorite 
conspiracy theory related to the 2016 election. It is an egregious 
misuse of the institution--the Senate.
  Nearly a quarter of our workforce is unemployed. Over 100,000 
Americans are dead from a strange and contagious disease; Americans are 
in the streets demanding racial justice; and shopworn, discredited 
conspiracy theories are what the Republican majority is focused on? 
What alternative universe do they live in? What alternative reality are 
they in the midst of? One detached from the real reality that the 
American people face: conspiracy theories to help President Trump's 
reelection, rightwing judges, many of whom have antipathy to the civil 
rights we are talking about now.
  The Republican Party in the Senate has moved so far into a corner, 
the corner that Donald Trump is in, that they can't address two of the 
most important and major issues that have affected this country in 
decades.
  The American people should be furious with the Republican Senate 
majority, and the American people and historians will record with 
sadness how this once great party, even though I didn't agree with it, 
has declined so--no courage, no principle, but simply cowering for 
President Trump and his crazy theories that even they know are crazy.
  The American people, of course, should be furious with the President 
as well. On Monday night, Americans watched Federal officers, under the 
direction of the President and the Attorney General, use gas and rubber 
bullets to disperse a crowd of peaceful protesters in a public park so 
that the President could stage a photo op in front of a church, waving 
the Holy Bible as a prop.
  Last night, Americans saw an even more haunting image on the internet 
and their televisions: rows of camouflage troops standing at attention 
on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, like an occupying force defending 
a critical position.
  When you see the image of troops dressed for combat flanking the 
Lincoln Memorial, an altar of freedom, you cannot help but think of 
Tiananmen Square. This administration ordered Federal officers to gas 
peaceful protesters and charge on horseback and defend our monuments 
like battlefield positions.
  What is President Trump doing to this grand democracy? What is he 
doing? And why are our Republican colleagues just going along?
  President Lincoln's second inaugural address is engraved in that 
building where armed soldiers stood. During a moment of extreme 
political division and civil strife, President Lincoln urged malice 
toward none, charity toward all, and sought to bind up the Nation's 
wounds.
  There could be no greater contrast between Lincoln and this 
President, this President who seems to have malice toward all and 
charity for none, who seeks to deepen our Nation's wounds rather than 
bind them up. Our Nation is crying out for leadership, for direction, 
for some healing and some unity. Will this President even try to 
provide it?
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip is recognized.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  On page S2661, June 3, 2020, third column, the following 
appears: The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority whip is recognized. 
Mr. THUNE.
  
  The online Record has been corrected to read: The PRESIDING 
OFFICER. The majority whip is recognized. Mr. THUNE.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I want to speak here in just a moment to 
the issue of internet traffic and how that has been impacted by the 
coronavirus, how it has impacted our lives during the coronavirus. 
Before I do that, though, I want to just respond to a few things the 
Democratic leader mentioned.
  He again pointed out that the Republican Senate isn't doing work 
here. It is hard to fathom how he can possibly come to that conclusion. 
The Democrat-run House of Representatives is out of session for the 
entire month--the entire month of June. They are not even here. The 
Democratic House of Representatives isn't even in town.
  The Senate is here doing work, and important work, I might add. He 
said

[[Page S2662]]

we haven't passed any legislation. Well, the week before the Memorial 
Day break we passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 
reauthorization, a critical piece of national security and intelligence 
legislation that all our intelligence experts tell us is critical to 
fighting the war against terrorists. Pretty important legislation, I 
would say.
  He pointed out that the agenda for the month of June doesn't include 
much. Well, that is only if you don't think that the National Defense 
Authorization Act is not important. Funding the military, authorizing 
the weapons systems, paying the personnel, the technology, the 
intelligence, all the things that go into protecting the country seem 
to me to be pretty important.
  So the National Defense Authorization Act is a piece of legislation 
that the Senate will process during the upcoming weeks here in the 
month of June. In fact, that will probably take a good week to move 
across the floor of the Senate. It typically does. It is something we 
have to do on an annual basis, but there is nothing more important and 
more critical to the national security of the United States than the 
National Defense Authorization Act.
  We will be passing a major parks bill this next week, which will help 
fund the backlog in a lot of our national parks--something that has 
been a priority for many Democrats here in this Chamber for a long 
time. In fact, it is a great bipartisan bill. In fact, I think, out of 
the Democratic caucus, there are somewhere on the order of 43 of the 47 
Democrats who are cosponsoring the piece of legislation that will be 
called up later this week and be on the floor most of next week.
  So it is something that has been around here for a while. It is going 
to be a major legislative accomplishment. It will be a bipartisan 
accomplishment when it passes.
  So I would just say that the fact that we aren't doing the things the 
Democratic leader wants to do doesn't mean the Senate isn't very busy. 
The things he wants to do, the things he talks about wanting to do, are 
things that we are doing. We are dealing with the coronavirus on a 
daily basis around here.
  I am a member of the Senate Finance Committee. Yesterday, the Senate 
Finance Committee had a hearing in which officials from the FDA, for 
example, critical agencies when it comes particularly to 
pharmaceuticals in this country, attended, and the subject of the 
hearing was the pharmaceutical supply chain and what we need to do to 
shore that up, to make sure that in future pandemics, with lessons 
learned from this one, we aren't dependent upon unreliable supply 
chains in places around the world that, frankly, may not be dependable. 
That is a pretty important issue when it comes to dealing with the 
effects and the impacts of the coronavirus.
  Today, in the Senate Commerce Committee, another committee on which I 
serve, we are going to be examining the impact of the coronavirus on 
our transportation infrastructure and how important this transportation 
has been throughout the course of the coronavirus in ensuring that we 
keep commerce going, that we keep food in the grocery stores.
  We are going to be looking at both the highway aspect, the rail 
aspect--all of those--and how they are impacted by the coronavirus and 
what we might need to do to ensure that they continue to be able to 
provide the services that they do going forward.
  So we are consistently looking at, on a daily basis, the coronavirus, 
the impact it is having on our economy, the impact it is having on the 
health of people in this country, the health emergency, and putting 
measures in place that would deal not only with that health emergency 
but also with the economic crisis created by it.
  In the meantime, we are seeing the economy start to open up again, 
which I think is a very good thing. I am hopeful we will see, as the 
economy opens up, that people will get out, consumers will spend, 
investors will invest, and we will see that economy start to grow 
again, jobs to come back.
  Obviously, we have very high unemployment right now--a major concern. 
We also have a major unemployment insurance piece of legislation that 
was moved by this Congress earlier to provide assistance and help for 
those who, through no fault of their own, have had to go on 
unemployment.
  To suggest for a moment that we aren't focused on the coronavirus is 
completely missing the point--as is to suggest, also, that we haven't 
done a lot already. We passed four major pieces of legislation, 
totaling almost $3 trillion, and that is $3 trillion if you don't 
include the amount of leverage we gave to the Federal Reserve and the 
Treasury to extend credit and create liquidity out there. With the 
power of that leverage, it is somewhere on the order of about $6 
trillion in assistance that we have put out there through different 
legislative vehicles to the American people.
  So you are seeing that translated into the Paycheck Protection 
Program, which is keeping people employed, keeping jobs in this 
country, keeping businesses functioning and operating. It has been a 
very successful program.
  You are seeing it in the form of direct assistance to State and local 
governments. And $150 billion has been put out there, much of which 
hasn't been spent, and that is on top of a lot of other assistance to 
State and local governments, which totals somewhere on the order of 
about $500 billion. Almost half a trillion dollars, so far, sum total, 
has gone out to State and local governments.

  Much of that, as I said, is in the pipeline, hasn't been spent yet. 
It can be used, as the Treasury has pointed out, given the States' 
flexibility, for emergency personnel, first responders, police, all the 
things that the Senator from New York talked about. That is flexibility 
the States have now to be able to meet the needs that they have and to 
work with their local governments and meet the needs of the local 
governments.
  So there is a lot of money in the pipeline, not to mention, of 
course, first and foremost, the money we put out there for investment 
in therapeutics, in vaccines, in diagnostic testing, and all the money 
that has gone out to hospitals and nursing home providers and long-term 
care facilities to help them get through this crisis in the form of 
direct assistance. So there is a lot of money in the pipeline--as I 
said, about $2.9 trillion that has already been authorized, and I think 
about 40 percent, maybe, has been spent. So there is still a lot of 
assistance going out there.
  My friend, the Democratic leader, would just want to put a whole 
bunch more money out there without knowing what the need is, and I 
think, at a time when we are already running a $21 trillion--now $25 
trillion--debt, we ought to be very circumspect and pay attention to 
what is happening in our economy, what the needs are, what we need to 
keep the economy opening up and responding, what we continue to need to 
do to help people who are unemployed, what we continue to need to do to 
help families in this country who are struggling through this crisis.
  But we ought to do that based on the need, not just somebody saying: 
Well, let's just throw a bunch more money out there and hope that it 
has an impact. We have done that. We have flooded the zone with 
dollars. There is a tremendous amount of resources out there right now, 
a lot of which has yet to be spent, and it strikes me, at least, that, 
in the eyes of most Americans, they would view it as pretty important, 
before we spend more tax money--all of which, I might add, is going to 
be borrowed money--that we see how what we have done already is 
working, if it has been effective and is having the desired impact.
  There is so much going on around here dealing with the coronavirus, 
it just completely defies any sort of logic to what the Democratic 
leader suggested was happening here in the Senate.
  He made one other comment, which I think I have to respond to. He 
said that the Senate is in the process--Republicans in the Senate are 
processing rightwing judges who have antipathy for the very civil 
rights issues that we are dealing with right now.
  I don't know how you can make a statement like that. I don't know how 
you can ascribe motive or intent to judges. You don't know who these 
judges are.
  We have a judge we are going to be processing here for the DC 
circuit. It is

[[Page S2663]]

a pretty important circuit in this country. He is the district judge 
from Kentucky. He has been rated as very ``well qualified'' by the 
American Bar Association. The American Bar Association isn't a 
rightwing group at all. In fact, many on our side think they certainly 
drift the other direction. Yet they have said this judge is a well-
qualified judge. Do you think they would be saying something like that 
about a judge who had antipathy for civil rights? I mean, that is just, 
I would say, a reckless and irresponsible statement unless you have 
something to back that up and support it.
  So I just thought it would be important to respond to some of the 
things that the Democratic leader just said with respect to the agenda 
here in the Senate, which, as I pointed out earlier, is a very full 
one. If you compare it to the agenda of our colleagues in the Democrat-
controlled House, which is zilch because they are not here for the 
entire month, it seems to me the Senate is getting a lot of work done.


                                   5G

  So, Madam President, what I came here to talk about--I came down to 
the floor a couple of weeks ago to talk about how the coronavirus is 
highlighting the importance of strong internet networks.
  Despite the surge we have seen in internet traffic that the 
coronavirus has produced, with Americans using the internet for 
everything from work to school to family dinners, U.S. networks have 
held up tremendously well.
  Americans have been able to enjoy the same speed and streaming 
quality that they typically enjoy, something that hasn't happened in a 
lot of other countries, and that is a direct result of the United 
States' light-touch approach to internet regulation, which has 
encouraged American companies to invest in the latest communications 
infrastructure and new technologies to make more efficient use of 
spectrum.
  Our Nation is currently preparing for the widespread adoption of the 
next generation of internet technology--what is known as 5G. We need to 
make sure that our 5G networks will be as strong as our current 
networks, but we still have some work to do to get to that point.
  I come down here frequently to the floor to discuss that work, which 
includes paving the way for the widespread installation of the small 
cells that are necessary for 5G networks, enhancing the availability of 
the mid-band spectrum that is necessary for 5G deployment, and 
investing in a 5G workforce.
  But there is also another aspect we need to think about when it comes 
to 5G, which is sometimes not talked about as much, and that is network 
security. With its incredible speed and connectivity, 5G will usher in 
a new era of innovation: advances in medical care, the large-scale 
deployment of precision agriculture, safer transportation technologies. 
5G will bring all of these things and more.
  But like any new technology, 5G networks will present new risks and 
vulnerabilities. And because 5G will mean a vastly greater number of 
connected devices, the risks with 5G will be greater. That is the why a 
central part of deploying 5G networks has to be looking at how we can 
mitigate security risks.
  We need to ensure that our component parts of our devices and, 
critically, the component parts of telecommunications networks, like 
cell towers and the small cells that will be required for 5G, are 
secure. A primary way to do that is by ensuring that 5G equipment comes 
from trusted vendors.
  Currently, one of the biggest suppliers of 5G equipment worldwide is 
a Chinese company, Huawei, which is supported by the Chinese 
Government. China's 2017 national intelligence law requires Chinese 
companies to support the Chinese Government's intelligence activities. 
American security officials have raised concerns that much of Huawei's 
equipment is built with back doors that give the Chinese Government 
access to global communications networks.
  I don't need to tell anyone that we should be wary of China's motives 
and that China's interests are frequently opposed to those of the 
United States.
  China's handling of the coronavirus is a striking current example of 
the Chinese Government's prioritizing its own interests or pride over 
the public good. As a New York Times article noted in February, ``The 
[Chinese] government's initial handling of the epidemic allowed the 
virus to gain a tenacious hold. At critical moments, officials chose to 
put secrecy and order ahead of openly confronting the growing crisis to 
avoid political alarm and political embarrassment.''
  Whether it was driven by the hubris of the Communist Party or merely 
the callous indifference the Communist state has for the well-being of 
its own citizens, China was not transparent about the grave danger of 
COVID-19. It failed to release accurate information about the nature 
and spread of the virus, and it took active steps to make sure the 
truth did not get out in other ways. Whistleblowers were punished; the 
centers were censored; and journalists were expelled.
  Despite the fact that its negligence undoubtedly contributed to the 
global spread of COVID-19, China still continues to be less than 
forthcoming about the virus. Unfortunately, this is run-of-the-mill 
governing in China, as we saw with the SARS outbreak in the early 2000s 
and as we have seen in many other instances.
  Not content with its role in aggravating the spread of the 
coronavirus, the Chinese Communist Party has also taken advantage of 
the pandemic to strip Hong Kong of its autonomy and freedom. China's 
hope is that our Nation is too preoccupied with this pandemic to notice 
its efforts to undermine what should be Hong Kong's autonomy under the 
one state, two systems construct.
  We have noticed. As many of my colleagues and I have expressed, we 
stand with Hong Kong. We must carefully consider an appropriate 
response, one that will rebuke the Communist Party of China without 
negatively affecting the people of Hong Kong, their well-being, and 
their democratic aspirations.
  We didn't need COVID-19 or China's recent actions in Hong Kong to 
know that giving the Chinese Government a backdoor into American 
communications networks is a bad idea. But it certainly underscores the 
need to make sure that 5G infrastructure is not made by companies 
beholden to the Chinese Government. The United States has taken a 
number of steps to prevent equipment from Huawei and another suspect 
Chinese company, ZTE, from being used in U.S. communications networks, 
but these companies still pose a risk to the United States.
  For starters, some U.S. broadband providers, often in rural areas, 
still have equipment from Huawei and ZTE in their communications 
networks. A number of our allies and trade partners--entities with whom 
we regularly share information, including sensitive national security 
information--have used or are using technology from Huawei and ZTE.
  What can we do? An initiative is already underway to replace suspect 
telecommunications components in U.S. networks with hardware from 
trusted companies.
  In March, the President signed legislation developed by the Commerce 
Committee chairman, Roger Wicker, the Secure and Trusted Communications 
Network Act, to help speed up this process. This legislation, which I 
cosponsored, will help small telecommunications providers with the cost 
of replacing network components that pose a security risk.
  Also, In March, I introduced legislation to help address the other 
part of the problem, and that is the use of Huawei technology by our 
allies and our trading partners. We regularly exchange information, 
including sensitive national security information, with our allies and 
trading partners. And this information can only be secure if networks 
on both ends are secure. That is why the United States has called for 
other countries to reject telecommunications technology from Huawei and 
ZTE.
  A number of countries have committed to using trusted companies to 
build out their telecommunications networks, but other countries are 
still planning to make use of Huawei's technology. My legislation, the 
Network Security Trade Act, would make telecommunications security a 
key objective when negotiating future trade deals.
  We should be using trade agreements to push for enhanced network 
security globally, which would benefit not only our country but every 
country with which we do business.

[[Page S2664]]

  We recently opened negotiations on a new trade deal with the United 
Kingdom, which has been using Huawei technology to build its 5G 
networks. I am pleased that it now looks like the UK is reconsidering 
its use of Huawei components. I hope they will decide to reject the 
suspect technology.
  I hope the trade negotiations will emphasize the importance of using 
trusted companies to build out the UK's telecommunications networks. 
The security of our communications with our trading partners and 
allies--particularly those allies like Britain--needs to be a priority.
  As we move forward into the 5G future, we need to make sure that our 
technological advancements are matched with advancements and network 
security. That starts with keeping Huawei and other suspect technology 
out of our networks and, if at all possible, out of the networks of our 
allies.
  I will continue to do everything I can to ensure that we have not 
only the infrastructure but the security needed to keep American 
networks at the forefront of the telecommunications revolution.
  Before I close, let me just say one more word about China. As I said 
earlier, China's coronavirus deception is undoubtedly partly 
responsible for the fact that this virus has now spread to every corner 
of the world. China's recent actions with regard to Hong Kong 
underscore the hostility of the Chinese Government to the values that 
freedom-loving countries hold dear.
  China has a lot of work to do if it ever hopes to rebuild trust with 
other nations. At a bare minimum, we expect China to uphold its recent 
trade commitments, which are critical to America's hard-hit farmers and 
ranchers. I will be looking, and our entire government will be looking, 
to see if China's word on trade agreements can be relied upon. I hope 
that the Chinese Government will live up to its commitments.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that following my 
remarks, the senior Senator from Oklahoma is recognized.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered


                              Coronavirus

  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I note with some interest that one 
Republican colleague after another comes to the floor--their ``protect 
the President at all costs'' colleagues, no matter what he does, no 
matter what he says, no matter how he acts, no matter how incompetent, 
no matter how divisive--and continues to point their fingers at the 
Chinese for the coronavirus. God knows, China deserves heaps of blame 
for the outbreak in the early spread of the coronavirus. There is no 
question they deserve a lot of blame for the outbreak in the early 
spread, and they are lying about it. But keep in mind that we are 5 
percent of the world's population, and 30 percent of the deaths from 
the coronavirus have been Americans. This President continues to make 
excuses and point fingers. And the compliant, always obedient, 
sheeplike Members of the Republican caucus conference of the Senate 
continue to stay quiet, continue to do nothing about this President's 
behavior and the 105,000 deaths from coronavirus in this country.


                                Protests

  Mr. President, the protests around our State, throughout our country, 
are an expression of fear and grief and frustration and of anger. Black 
communities led the Nation in mourning the killings of George Floyd and 
Breonna Taylor over the last week. They are now leading calls for 
justice and long-term changes to dismantle the systems of oppression 
that hold them back.
  Instead of listening to those calls from the people who built this 
country, instead of offering leadership and rising to meet this 
moment--as every one of his predecessors of both parties did in times 
of trouble for our country--President Trump fails yet again. Instead of 
uniting, he divides. Instead of comforting, he stokes fear. He points 
fingers. He places blame. Instead of healing, he rubs salt in the open 
wounds of Black Americans.
  On Monday night, the President of the United States turned the arm of 
the state on peaceful protesters--we saw the video--tear-gassing the 
citizens he is supposed to serve, all so he could walk across the 
street and stage a photo op at a church he doesn't attend and hold up a 
Bible that he doesn't read. The timid--you choose the adjective--timid, 
cowardly, spineless Republican colleagues in this Senate just remained 
silent. How offended they would have been if a Democratic President had 
done what this President does and fails to do--the tear-gassing of 
citizens he is supposed to serve, the photo op at a church, the holding 
up of the Bible he doesn't read, the excuses, the divisiveness, all of 
that.
  People are tired. People are angry: more Black sons and daughters and 
mothers and fathers killed by police officers--the very people who are 
supposed to protect all Americans; more death, when many are already 
grieving--so many in the Black community already grieving the loss of 
family members and friends for the coronavirus, grappling with the 
economic stress this pandemic has caused.
  The pandemic has been the ``great revealer.'' We know Black and Brown 
communities have been hit hardest by the coronavirus. They are more 
likely to get sick. They have less access to healthcare. They make up 
the communities hurt by Jim Crow laws and redlining and now the locking 
in of those rules and regulations by the Trump administration. Black 
and Brown communities disproportionately make up our essential workers. 
It is not because they don't work as hard. It is not because of 
individual choices. We all work hard. We are all trying to do something 
productive for our families and our communities. We all want to build a 
better country for our daughters and our sons. No; it is because of a 
racist system that is making it harder for their work to pay off and 
putting at risk their lives for generations, long before this virus 
appeared.
  A grocery store worker in Cincinnati said to me: They tell me I am 
essential, but I feel expendable. I don't feel safe at work, and they 
don't pay me very much. I feel expendable.
  Long before this pandemic, millions of Americans knew we had a system 
that treats them like they are expendable. Their hard work isn't paying 
off. For some, it feels like the system is broken. For Black and Brown 
workers, it never worked to begin with.
  In the midst of the trauma and the grieving, millions of those same 
Americans still go to work day after day, week after week, in grocery 
stores, as delivery people, in drugstores, as busdrivers, and the 
people who do the linen and change the beds in hospitals, the food 
service workers, the custodians, the security people, the first 
responders. In the midst of the trauma and grieving, those same 
Americans--millions of them--still go to work day after day, week after 
week.
  Our job is to show the victims of systemic racism at the hands of 
their own government that the same government can and will protect them 
from this pandemic. We hear them. We see them. We fight for them. Their 
lives matter.
  Our response to this crisis must be to stand behind all the people 
who make this country work, all workers, whether you swipe a badge or 
punch a clock, whether you earn a salary or make tips, whether you are 
raising children or caring for an aging parent; all workers, whether 
your hard work isn't paying off now or whether it never paid off the 
way it should.
  Dr. King said:

       One day our society will come to respect the sanitation 
     worker. For the person who picks up our garbage, in the final 
     analysis, is as significant as the physician, for if he 
     doesn't do his job, diseases are rampant. All labor has 
     dignity.

  It is Black and Brown workers who have too often, far too long, far 
too often been robbed of their dignity on the job. If we want to be a 
country where all people have dignity, we need to start by recognizing 
that all labor has dignity. But so far, our response to the crisis is 
not the response of a government that believes that. This Senate, this 
President, can always find trillions of dollars for corporations--for 
tax cuts, for bailouts. But when hard-working families need help with 
rent or to put food on the table, President Trump and Leader McConnell 
say we can't afford it.
  The President and the administration have already made racial and 
economic inequality worse and undone

[[Page S2665]]

civil rights protections. They have been pretty clear that they are 
willing to put American workers' lives at risk--to reopen stockyards or 
just to juice the stock market.
  President Trump and his administration believe that millions of 
Americans are expendable. It is not a coincidence that many of the 
people they consider expendable are Black and Brown workers.
  Since the President is unwilling to protect people--whether that is 
protecting their lives or protecting their financial future--we in the 
Senate must fill the leadership void. As we do that, we work for 
change. We need to be clear that part of leading is listening.
  The best ideas don't come out of Washington--the solutions we need to 
fix the justice system, to address wealth inequality, to reverse 
disparities in healthcare, to help communities that have been hurt by 
redlining and Jim Crow laws and so much more.
  Whenever we talk about this, whenever people bring up the ways the 
system has failed so many Americans on the Senate floor or at a protest 
march, there are always naysayers--almost always White, usually men, 
often pretty well-off--who say: How can you be so negative? Why do you 
want to dwell on all the worst parts of our history? Don't you love our 
country?
  My response to our country's naysayers and sunshine patriots is this: 
How can you be so pessimistic as to believe that this is the best our 
country can do? Do you really think the American people, with our 
ingenuity and our optimism and tenacity--do you really think the 
American people can't create a fair economy and a more just government? 
Do you truly believe we can't have a society that works for everyone--
Black and White and Brown, women and men--no matter who you are, no 
matter what kind of work you do? Protesting, working for change, 
organizing, demanding our country do better--those are some of the most 
patriotic things any of us can do.
  I love my country. If you love this country, you fight for the people 
who make it work, all of them.
  I yield the floor
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair would remind Senators that under 
rule XIX, it is provided that ``no Senator in debate shall, directly or 
indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other 
Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.''
  The Senator from Oklahoma is recognized.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I want to respond to the accusations 
that were made. And I worded that carefully not to violate any rules. I 
am going to do that.
  I see kind of an active desperation that is creeping in on statements 
and things that are said about other people. And right now, we are 
experiencing some things that actually are a success.
  I want to respond to some of the accusations that were made. First, I 
have something else to do that is kind of an awkward thing to be doing 
at this time because I am going to go back to talk about something that 
happened not yesterday or this week but back in 1983. I think it is 
important that we do this. About every 10 years I do this. And we are 
going to be successful now because I have a commitment from the 
President that he is going to stay hitched on an issue--a huge issue in 
the past.
  In 1983, not much was known about Iran's efforts to train and arm the 
radical proxies and to kill Americans and to kill our partners and our 
allies. People know now. In fact, only a few years earlier, Ayatollah 
Khamenei led a violent revolution in Iran. Khamenei's regime introduced 
himself to the world by taking American diplomats hostage for 444 
days--444 days. We all remember when that happened. That was something 
unprecedented. It was all tied into Khamenei. Of course, he used other 
people. Nothing has changed since that time.
  Nonetheless, for the next decade, until his death in 1989, Khamenei 
was the ruthless face of an Iranian regime that applied a brutal 
version of religious law, murdered innocent people, suppressed 
religious and ethnic minorities, and supported radical Islamists.
  He hated Western value, and he hated the freedoms that we enjoy. 
Almost 4 years into his rule as Supreme Leader, October 23, 1983, 241 
Americans, both U.S. marines and other service personnel serving a 
peace mission in Beirut, were attacked at their barracks by a truck 
that was carrying 2,000 pounds of explosives by terrorists who were 
armed and trained by Iran. That was in 1983. Two hundred and forty-one 
died.
  These terrorists later became what we know as Hezbollah. That is the 
first time they surfaced and were identified as they are today, as an 
arm of Iran. Hezbollah struck.
  In 2003, 20 years after the attack on our marines, the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in a civil suit 
brought by the families of the victims--the 241 who were killed--that 
Iran had used Hezbollah as a proxy to bomb the Marine barracks in 
Beirut on that October day.
  Not much has changed with Iran, unfortunately. It is the same way 
they operate now. They don't play by the rules. They never have. They 
are terrorists. They are worse than terrorists. They are the ones who 
are training the terrorists. That became even more apparent when we 
began to learn more about their ties to Islamist terror organizations 
and how they use proxy organizations, with no true allegiance but on 
behalf of a twisted interpretation of Islamic religious text, to murder 
and then sneak back into the shadows. That is the way they operated, 
and that is the way they operate today.
  It happened under Ayatollah Khamenei, and it happens under the 
current Supreme Leader as well. Nothing has really changed. A lot of 
years have gone by. A lot of people have died.
  As I speak here on the floor, Iran is providing weapons and cover for 
the Houthi rebels, who are committing unthinkable atrocities in Yemen. 
Iran has continued to support terrorist groups that threaten our 
personnel in Iraq. It has repeatedly attacked our partners across the 
region. What is even worse is Iran seeks a nuclear weapon capability, 
and President Obama's Iran deal would have, ultimately, let it have 
exactly what it wanted.
  Fortunately, we now have a President who takes a strong stance 
against Iran with the imposing of sanctions and the pulling out of the 
flawed Iran nuclear deal that the previous administration put us in.
  By the way, I had a joyful conversation for a half an hour yesterday 
with Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel. He was reminding me that 
I was in Israel and in the Prime Minister's office at the very moment 
that President Trump pulled out of the Iran deal, and I had never seen 
him so jubilant. We just talked about that yesterday.
  Go back now to October 23, 1983, when 241 Americans were killed by an 
Iranian-backed suicide bomber. It was a terrible day in U.S. history, 
and, in 2003, a U.S. court ruled that Iran was responsible. That suit 
against Iran, brought by the victims' families--the families of the 241 
who died--provided punitive and compensatory relief in the form of 
Iranian assets. In 2007, the district court judge awarded just over 
$2.5 billion to the families of those murdered in that atrocity.
  Our work isn't done now. You would think that it would be, but it is 
not because there is nearly $1.7 billion in laundered Iranian assets in 
a Luxembourg bank named Clear Street, and we need to make sure that it 
stays there. Yet I have this gnawing feeling that, once something is 
over in Luxembourg or someplace like that, all of a sudden, you wake up 
and find that Iran has $1.7 billion it is not entitled to in order to 
spread terrorism throughout the world.
  In last year's NDAA--now, the NDAA is the largest bill we do each 
year. I chair the defense authorization. It is called the National 
Defense Authorization Act. We pass it every year. We included language 
that made those assets available to the victims' families, and the 
President signed it. I talked to the President, and he is anxious to do 
this. We have one obstacle that we have to get past, which is some 
activity by the second circuit where it is now being played out.
  President Trump has been a firm leader against the aggressive Iran, 
and I certainly stand with him. That is why this is a clear opportunity 
to continue President Trump's maximum pressure campaign against the 
current Iranian regime so as to ensure these assets do not return to 
Iran, where they would surely be used to help the proxy organization, 
such as Hezbollah.

[[Page S2666]]

  I trust our Department of Justice with this, and I am glad we have a 
President who has made this a top priority--making sure the families of 
those 241 victims who were killed in Beirut receive this money as 
opposed to having the money go back.


                                Protests

  Mr. President, in responding to a couple of things that were said a 
few minutes ago, we all know this is a really trying time for our 
Nation. I begin with the obvious, which is what happened to George 
Floyd was a crime. It was a horrible crime, and it has caused a 
groundswell of people joining together and standing against injustice 
and hate, not just for George Floyd but for so many others.
  Protests are meaningful and positive events--standing up for dignity 
and respect for all people. Protesting is a cherished part of our 
democratic society that is enshrined in the First Amendment. The rights 
of peaceful protest should be supported and celebrated, period. We 
understand that. Yet those protests are not the same as the dangerous, 
destructive activity we have seen in many of our cities just in the 
last couple of days. Emotions are high, and tensions are high, which is 
understandable. We need law and order if we are going to move forward, 
and I think every reasonable person agrees with that.
  We are trying to have tough conversations about inequality, but we 
are facing a lot of misinformation, especially when it comes to our 
military. If we let this misinformation spread, it will just make 
things worse. All of the people out there--I am talking about the 
``hate Trump'' people--are using this to try to lie to the American 
people. So I would like to correct the record, and I hope every 
American here understands and believes these words. This is very 
important. Here is what is happening.
  Right now, the National Guard has not been federalized for response. 
Right now, Active-Duty troops have not been sent into any city, 
including DC. I was here last night. I was visibly looking around and 
making sure that this was not the case, and it was not. There were no 
Active-Duty troops in spite of things you have heard to the contrary.
  Right now, local and State law enforcement are being supported by the 
National Guard but only when they are requested by their States. The 
Department of Defense believes that, and by and large, they are doing a 
fine job. I agree with that. Our military is prepared to step in if the 
situation deteriorates dramatically and only if our President finds he 
has to step in. To be crystal clear, the President hasn't done that 
yet.
  I ask my fellow Americans to slow down and understand what will 
happen if and only if the President does so. It doesn't mean that our 
streets will immediately be flooded with uniformed and armed troops. 
There is a process that has to be followed just as it was in 1992 with 
the LA riots, in 1998 after Hurricane Hugo, and at every other time 
before that.
  First, this is the process. What has to happen is the President must 
issue a proclamation ordering any insurgents to disperse within a set 
period of time. Now, that is really important because that is the 
warning shot. He says this is going to happen, but only you can keep 
this from happening. The President has to issue the proclamation 
ordering any insurgents to disperse within a set period of time. It 
will mean that our Nation's military and security leaders, including 
our Commander in Chief--the President--will have determined that the 
situation will have deteriorated in a way that local officials will not 
have managed on their own. In virtually every case, local officials 
have agreed with that.
  We are not there now. We are not there at all, and I hope we don't 
get there. This will only be as a last resort. If we do, I am confident 
this decision will be made with the advice of the top civilian and 
military officials who have all been confirmed with wide bipartisan 
support and margins


                         General Mark A. Milley

  Mr. President, I would like to say a little something about simple 
military relations. This is something I care a lot about as chairman of 
the Senate Committee on Armed Services. In particular, I want to speak 
about General Milley.
  General Milley is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In this 
job, General Milley is the President's top military adviser. Don't 
forget he doesn't have any command authority over the military forces. 
This is important. This is not what you hear people talking about when 
they misrepresent the situation. This is very important. He is there as 
the adviser to the President of the United States, and he doesn't have 
any command authority. There has been a lot of criticism about his 
wearing his battle dress uniform--his BDU, as they call it--on Monday 
when the President spoke. Here is another area in which I want to set 
the record straight.
  General Milley was getting ready to visit with troops around DC--I 
know that. I was talking to him that day--who were also in their BDUs. 
That was the dress uniform for their function at that time. Then he was 
called to the White House. We all know why he was called to the White 
House. He is the adviser to the President. I think everyone can agree 
that we want that voice at the table in situations like this to provide 
the best military advice, as is his statutory authority and 
responsibility.
  On Monday, after General Milley walked outside with the President, he 
assessed the situation and immediately removed himself. Now, this isn't 
just me talking. I know that he did because I was with him shortly 
before that and also after that. So that was a fact. He also told me 
that he intended to honor his oath and uphold the delicate balance 
between civilians and the military. I fully believe him. He has always 
done that in the past and always will do that.
  The accusations against General Milley are especially troubling to me 
because I know, from working with him, of his commitment to our Nation, 
to the Constitution, and to the American people--of keeping them safe 
and giving his best military advice. It is striking below the belt to 
make these accusations and to try to scare the American people. It is 
my duty as chairman of the Committee on Armed Services to have strong 
oversight over this issue. We have oversight over it. If what they are 
saying is true, we still have the oversight.
  I assure you, right now, we are watching what our military is doing 
and what it has always done, which is its duty within the law and 
constitutional limits, and that is exactly what General Milley has done 
and is doing right now. We are seeing a lot of finger-pointing and 
blame going around. We owe it to ourselves and our neighbors to believe 
the very best in each other, not assume the worse. We need to recognize 
everyone's inherent value and dignity and treat each other with respect 
and dignity as Christ calls us to do. Only then can we listen with both 
of our ears and with our hearts. That is what I am asking the American 
people to do.
  Many of those in the protests are in a group that has been referred 
to as antifa. Certainly, George Floyd's death was a tragedy and went 
beyond unthinkable dimensions, but did any of them know who he was? I 
suggest, no, they really didn't. So I would only say this: I think, in 
answer to the accusations that were made, that I would quote only one 
or two sentences out of a speech that our President made 2 days ago in 
the Rose Garden. This is very self-explanatory and does explain the 
situation in response to the accusations that have been made falsely 
about him.

       We cannot allow the righteous cries and peaceful protesters 
     to be drowned out by an angry mob. The biggest victims of the 
     rioting are peace-loving citizens in our poorest communities. 
     And as their President, I will fight to keep them safe. I 
     will fight to protect you. I am your President of law and 
     order and an ally of all peaceful protesters.

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse). The Senator from Tennessee
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I first thank my friend, Senator 
Leahy, for allowing me to speak, for we are all dealing with the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  I ask unanimous consent that Senator Leahy be recognized as soon as I 
finish my brief remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I want to say just a couple of things 
to Tennesseans and to Americans.
  All are expressing their rage and grief over the murder of George 
Floyd

[[Page S2667]]

in Minnesota. I will tell you that this event of May 25 cannot be 
written off as a simple use of force or as being unfortunate or 
regrettable. We all know that, on that day, George Floyd was killed by 
a police officer while other officers looked on and heard his begging 
for life and his cries for help. The officers responsible should be 
prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
  I offer my prayers and condolences to the Floyd family, just as so 
many other Members of this Chamber have done, and I support the 
President's call for the Justice Department to investigate this death.


                               Censorship

  Mr. President, our country was built on the premise of dissent, and 
we have seen the power that peaceful protests have in their ability to 
bring change to every level of government. Unfortunately, over the past 
week, we have also seen what happens when criminals and shadowy 
professionals exploit these public expressions of frustration and pain.
  Every single day, Americans are waking up to find that their 
neighborhoods have been destroyed, and they watch news reports that are 
dominated by lawlessness. Many activists and members of the mainstream 
media have attempted to force us into choosing between solidarity and 
maintaining law and order. This is a false choice. It is one that we 
ought to reject. Instead, we should fight for accountability, 
compassion, and understanding. At the same time, we must condemn 
racism, hatred, and the violence that has torn apart so many 
neighborhoods this very week.
  We should also celebrate and defend our right to peaceful 
disagreement in the streets, in the classroom, and online just as well 
as in this very Chamber. Unfortunately, too often, this right is not 
celebrated. Over the years, we have documented Big Tech's history of 
censorship, particularly the censorship of dissenting conservative 
voices. During the 2018 election cycle, a series of pro-life ads that I 
sponsored on social media were taken down for having content the 
platform labeled as ``inflammatory.''
  For years, conservatives have been fighting a losing war against 
content moderation policies that act as a dragnet for dissenting 
opinions. Last week, Twitter rolled out a new ``fact-checking'' feature 
and almost immediately botched a fact check on one of President Trump's 
tweets. Unfortunately, for Twitter, the President was not afraid to 
point out how easy it is for private companies to make mistakes that 
turn moderation into speech policing. We know that social media 
companies have subjectively manipulated their algorithms to capture 
conservative opinions and conservative elected officials. They have 
been doing this for too long for it to just be a mere mistake. These 
are not unintended consequences.
  Last week, President Trump signed an Executive order to bring some 
much needed attention to the issue, and we thank him for that. As head 
of the Judiciary Committee's Tech Task Force, I look forward to working 
with the White House and the Justice Department to preserve free speech 
online for all Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.


                                Protests

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, we know that America is hurting. It is 
reeling from a deadly pandemic that has taken more than 100,000 lives 
and then from witnessing the broad daylight murder--murder--of yet 
another Black man by an officer of the law. It seethes with rage and 
sorrow about the racial injustices that still plague our society. 
America is suffering from unprecedented political divisions that are 
routinely worsened and deepened by a President whose every utterance 
only tears us further apart. In my decades in the U.S. Senate, I have 
never seen our country so in need of healing.
  I was a prosecutor. So, when I first saw the video of George Floyd's 
murder--a human being who was pinned down by the neck, cried ``I can't 
breathe,'' and desperately called out for his mother--I was shocked to 
my core. For millions of Americans and for me, that shock swiftly 
turned into anger.
  How could a police officer, who has sworn an oath to protect and 
serve, so casually take a human being's life? Why did his fellow 
officers who witnessed the murder that we all witnessed on video stand 
there and do nothing to stop it? How could this happen in plain sight 
when multiple onlookers begged the officer to relent--stop his 
murderous conduct--as George fell unconscious?
  I was left sickened and shaken.
  I do not know and did not know George Floyd, but imagine if he were 
your neighbor or your friend. Imagine if George Floyd were your 
brother, your son, your husband, or your grandchild. Imagine if George 
Floyd simply looked like your loved one and shared the same skin color. 
Imagine the concern you would have for such a person who lived in 
constant fear of those who are responsible to protect us all. So it is 
no surprise that protests swept our Nation in the wake of this murder. 
Communities of color and all those who sympathize with them are fed 
up. They are sick and tired of the fact that African Americans are 
nearly 2\1/2\ times as likely as White Americans to be killed by police 
officers. No one of good conscience can sit idly by while African-
American lives are treated with less worth. Our country long ago 
promised equal rights and equal justice.

  Now protesters are aching for real accountability for officers of the 
law who engage in lawless violence. It is not simply justice for George 
Floyd; it is justice for Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice. The 
list goes on and on, which is why the protests go on and on. Too often, 
people feel the police officers who take Black lives are treated like 
they are above the law. They feel the justice system has been fueled by 
a culture of impunity that shields the same officers who abuse the 
public's trust. Too often the accountability comes after 
incontrovertible evidence, such as a damning video, happens to surface 
and the public demands justice.
  I can say, as one who served proudly in law enforcement and has 
served proudly in the Senate, ultimately accountability will require 
dismantling this culture of impunity, as well as ensuring that law 
enforcement agencies have training and policies in place to serve to 
rebuild trust in communities of color.
  The protesters demand more from our justice system. They demand more 
from a nation that promises that nobody is above the law. Well, I stand 
with them, and Congress has to, too. None of us condone, and indeed I 
have strongly condemned, the looting and violence that has sadly taken 
place alongside the peaceful protests and the extremists and 
opportunists who have co-opted the peaceful process. They are not 
serving justice. They are not going to bring the change our country so 
badly needs.
  My hero, a dear friend who has called me his brother, Representative 
John Lewis, said just a few days ago:

       [L]ooting and burning is not the way.
       Organize. Demonstrate. Sit-in. Stand-up. Vote. Be 
     constructive, not destructive.

  I hope everybody will listen to what Representative Lewis said. I 
hope our fellow Americans will heed his wise words. I refuse to partake 
in efforts seeking to delegitimize all protesters and create even more 
distrust and division. Demonstrators demanding accountability are not 
thugs, as President Trump has called them. No one should threaten 
state-sanctioned violence against protesters, as this President and 
some of his allies have. I strongly oppose any efforts to invoke the 
Insurrection Act to unleash our military against these domestic 
demonstrations, as President Trump has absurdly threatened.
  Our military is one of our Nation's most sacred institutions. It 
serves to safeguard our constitutional rights against enemies abroad. 
They should never be ordered to American streets as the battlefield, 
which would only incite further chaos and deprive Americans of their 
right to peacefully assemble. That is not the America we know and love. 
It is not the America I know and love.
  Unfortunately, President Trump has proven that he is incapable or 
perhaps he is uninterested in healing and uniting our Nation. At every 
turn his instinct is to divide and escalate. During every crisis he 
manages to manufacture another of his own making. When Americans are in 
desperate need of a consoler in chief, a role that I have seen every 
past President play during my years in the Senate--every one of

[[Page S2668]]

those Presidents, Republican and Democrat alike--President Trump, 
instead of being consoler in chief, shows that he knows only how to be 
instigator in chief. He has revealed himself really to be a President 
of his country in name only. I never imagined I would say that of any 
American President of either party, certainly not of all the 
predecessors I have had the honor to know.
  So we must instead look to ourselves and each other. How do we heal 
our country? At the local, State, and national levels, we must carry on 
the cause of criminal justice and police reform. We must push for 
systematic law enforcement reform. We must elect leaders who will 
prioritize racial justice and work tirelessly to achieve some measure 
of that. We must work to build bridges in communities so that we better 
empathize with the struggles faced by those who have been marginalized 
for decades on end.
  On Monday, Terrence Floyd, George's brother, stood on the spot where 
his brother died. He made an emotional appeal to the hundreds of people 
watching and to the Nation. He pled for the protests to remain 
peaceful. He pled for those who believe they are marginalized and 
disenfranchised not to give up hope, that their voice matters, and he 
pled for justice.
  His brother died because he needed a breath. His family now asks to 
take a breath for justice, a breath for peace, a breath for our 
country, and a breath for George. We should honor his memory by heeding 
their anguished advice.
  There is so much to do. Congress must get to work. During my years in 
the Senate, I have seen America in crisis. But every time, without 
exception, I have seen America emerge a more just and stronger nation. 
The crises America faces today feel overwhelming, historic--some would 
say existential. But if we stay true to the values that define our 
Republic--equality, justice, the rule of law--I am hopeful we will make 
it through as a slightly more perfect union.
  I weep for our country; I pray for our country; and I look for better 
days.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon


                       Nomination of Michael Pack

  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, this week our majority leader is asking 
the Senate to vote on the nomination of Michael Pack to serve as Chief 
Executive of the U.S. Agency for Global Media.
  Mr. Pack's nomination should trouble all of us in this Chamber. It 
raises the question of whether the U.S. Senate is committed to being 
the check and balance on the qualifications of those potentially vested 
with substantial responsibility into positions in our executive branch.
  His nomination draws into question the challenge we have, the 
responsibility we have to ensure that only individuals of talent, 
experience, and of integrity serve America in the executive branch. 
Hamilton commented on this in the Federalist Papers. He said:

       To what purpose then require the co-operation of the 
     Senate? I answer, that the necessity of [the Senate's] 
     concurrence would have a powerful though, in general, silent 
     operation. It would be an excellent check upon the spirit of 
     favoritism in the President, and tend greatly to prevent the 
     appointment of unfit characters.

  Those words should resonate in this Chamber now. The individual who 
will come before us, Michael Pack, set up a nonprofit called Public 
Media Lab, or PML, apparently for the sole purpose to channel contracts 
to his for-profit operation known as Manifold Productions. Over a 
period exceeding a decade, he channeled $4 million from the nonprofit 
to the for-profit. Not a single contract went anywhere else--no other 
contracts.
  Utilizing a nonprofit to launder for-profit contracts, in the process 
of which providing tax subsidies to your customers and advantage over 
your competitors, raises both ethical and legal issues. The legal 
issues, including potential criminal conduct, have not been resolved. 
Mr. Pack is, at this moment, under investigation by the attorney 
general of the District of Columbia.
  Mr. Pack, in tax filings to the IRS in 2011 through 2018, did not 
accurately disclose a relationship between his nonprofit and his for-
profit. When he was asked if, in fact, there were common officers 
between the two, he answered no when the answer was clearly yes. He did 
not disclose that his for-profit benefited from the setup of the 
nonprofit.
  Mr. Pack did admit to the Committee on Foreign Relations that he made 
oversights; that is the term he used--``oversights.'' But he has 
refused to correct his tax filings.
  Mr. Pack, when he was renominated in 2020, inaccurately stated in the 
records to the committee that his tax returns were complete and 
accurate. He has refused to provide critical documents to the committee 
and, in that sense, to the Senate to examine these significant issues. 
He has refused to provide the agreements between PML and Manifold, his 
nonprofit and his for-profit, to examine the propriety of the 
relationship. He has said simply that those documents are confidential 
and proprietary.
  But we should realize that serving in the executive branch is a 
privilege. We asked for information so that we can exercise our 
constitutional responsibility. When an individual confronted with 
substantial ethical and legal issues simply says ``I will not provide 
them'' and if the Senate committee says ``That is OK,'' then we are 
failing in our constitutional responsibility to examine the 
qualifications of the individual. This is no light responsibility we 
bear in this Chamber. This is a very significant check and balance of 
the U.S. Constitution, which each and every one of us swore to uphold 
when we took our oath of office.
  Mr. Pack, when he was president of the Claremont Institute, directed 
significant funds to his for-profit company for fundraising. His 
company is not a fundraising company; his company is a film company. So 
we have asked him to provide the details and documents related to that 
work to see if there was an inappropriate transfer of funds from a 
position of responsibility to the personal profit of Michael Pack. But 
Mr. Pack has refused to provide details. He has refused to provide 
documents related to that work.
  In addition, he prematurely resigned from his role at the Claremont 
Institute, and it is shrouded in mystery. We do not know if the board 
found ethical issues. We do not know if they found criminal conduct 
because he has not responded to our request for documents related to 
his premature resignation.
  Given the gravity of these issues, it makes sense, when he was 
renominated, that he would reappear before the committee to help clear 
up these concerns and these issues. Well, we have not had such a 
hearing.
  To summarize, when an individual makes false statements to the IRS 
and refuses to correct them, when they make false statements to the 
committee, not in the first time before the committee but the second 
time before the committee, when they refuse to provide relevant 
documents to provide significant issues of ethical conduct or potential 
criminal conduct, when there is an active investigation into that 
potentially criminal conduct, then we should simply say to the 
President: Send us a different name.
  This man may be well qualified, but he does not wish to provide the 
information necessary for the Senate to do its responsibility as a 
check and balance on potentially unfit individuals. To exercise advice 
and consent in accordance with responsibilities charged to us, we must 
insist on upholding the standards for records and documents and 
truthfulness to the committee. We must insist that outstanding 
investigations be completed when they involve potentially criminal 
conduct. We must insist that verifiably false statements be corrected. 
These are not high or exceptional standards; these are fundamental, 
basic, elementary responsibilities that we carry.
  That is why I have written a resolution declaring that the Senate 
should not vote on a nominee who has made verifiably false statements 
to Congress or the executive branch and who refuses to correct those 
statements. Until those statements to both the Foreign Relations 
Committee and to the IRS are corrected, Michael Pack's nomination 
should be set aside. We should simply tell the President and exercise 
our responsibility, for which we have taken an oath of office, to send 
us someone else. This individual is not prepared to provide the 
information necessary for the Senate to proceed with his nomination. 
That is what we should be saying, and we should still be

[[Page S2669]]

saying it at this late date. I urge my colleagues to do the right thing 
by supporting this resolution


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 604

  Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 604, 
which was submitted earlier today. I further ask that the resolution be 
agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or 
debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of Florida). Is there objection?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, what you are 
seeing here today is a pure, unadulterated exercise in politics--
politics that are steeped with the difference of political philosophy 
between the two parties.
  With relation to the complaint that my colleague has just made that 
this nomination hasn't been adequately vetted, this nomination was made 
2 years ago tomorrow, June 4, 2018.
  Mr. Pack came before the committee. He has been before the committee 
twice. He has produced numerous documents due to the complaints of the 
Democrats on the committee. He has been looked at by the White House. 
His business dealings have been looked at by the Justice Department, by 
the Internal Revenue Service, and he has been cleared of anything.
  The U.S. Agency for Global Media is an important agency because it is 
charged with supporting international broadcasting outlets around the 
world in the face of the kinds of misinformation and things that are 
put out by other countries that are untrue.
  The real reason for the objection to Mr. Pack's nomination is that 
this man is a patriot. This is a man who makes documentary films that 
portray the greatness of America.
  Anyone who disagrees with that ought to spend the time to look at the 
documentary he just made, which was run on public TV within the last 30 
days, regarding Clarence Thomas and what he had to go through to get on 
the Supreme Court. It was a superb representation of what happened in 
that. If you watch that, you will see why the Democrats are absolutely 
opposed to Mr. Pack.
  But don't take our word for this. RealClearPolitics, after this whole 
thing started, did its own investigation into this, and they noted that 
the business arrangements of Mr. Pack used to make these documentaries 
are very common for documentary filmmakers and, like Pack, filmmakers 
and television producers also use nonprofits to collect contributions 
from donors and then set up a for-profit company to make these films. 
This is exactly what Senator Merkley was objecting to.
  Having said that, they went on to interview others, including 
attorneys and everything else. Another producer with no business ties 
to Pack told RealClearPolitics ``that he set up the same two-pronged 
way of funding films last year on the advice of counsel, who told him 
it was standard operating procedure.''
  This has been looked at. It has been reviewed. Look, the committee 
has had this in its hands for almost 2 years. I have been really 
patient. Every time that I set this for a hearing and they wanted more 
time, I let that go.
  Finally, the last time, I was really, really disappointed in the 
Democrats' engagement of the political system, enjoining it with the 
potential criminal justice system, to try to stop this.
  The night before the business meeting, I got a letter from the 
attorney general for the District of Columbia--obviously a partisan 
individual--that says that he is going to look at this and, therefore, 
he is investigating it. The Democrats then said: Well, we can't go 
ahead with this because he is being investigated by this partisan 
person from DC.
  Look, I am on the Ethics Committee. There are six of us. Half of us 
sit on the Foreign Relations Committee. In every instance I can think 
of on the Ethics Committee where the U.S. Justice Department has asked 
us to stand down because they were doing a legitimate criminal 
investigation, we have done so.
  In this particular case, it was a partisan agency of the District of 
Columbia that noticed that they were going to do this investigation.
  I started my career as a prosecutor. I have always felt that the 
justice system and the prosecuting system should be above politics, but 
to get a partisan individual to send a letter--after 2 years--on the 
eve of the business meeting, that he was going to open a business 
meeting again, after many delays, was just too much.
  But I did delay the business meeting for 1 week, and after that 1 
week we had a business meeting. The Democrats made motion after motion 
to delay. Again, I was as patient as I could be.
  I said during these motions that we were only going to go on so long 
with this. Finally, as was noted by some of the attorneys in the room, 
had this occurrence happened in a court of law, the attorneys would 
have been held in contempt of court for making repetitive motions that 
were obviously delay motions and done spuriously.
  So, after the eighth motion, I declared the motions out of order, and 
we went to what democracies do. We went to a vote. To no one's 
surprise, it was a straight party-line vote: 12 votes to send Mr. 
Pack's confirmation to the floor for confirmation and 10 votes against 
that.
  This is a democracy. The way we do this is we have disagreements, 
particularly when it comes to political matters such as this, but to 
try to engage the justice system in this I find just really, really 
disheartening.
  We are going to have a vote on Mr. Pack, and it is very simple. If 
you don't want Mr. Pack to take this job, then you vote no, and if you 
do, then you say yes. But this has been investigated back and forth. 
Regardless of the breast-beating and the rending of garments over what 
an awful person he is and how awful his businesses have been, keep in 
mind, this is all politics. If you see the kind of work that he has 
done, he makes America proud when he makes a documentary.
  So I would object to the resolution that has been proposed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from New Jersey
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask to speak for up to 5 minutes 
before the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I want to, first of all, thank Senator 
Merkley for his leadership on the resolution and for his thoughtful and 
substantive contributions as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee and to express our deep disappointment that our Republican 
colleagues are blocking his resolution, which basically says that we 
should not move forward on a nominee--in this case, this nominee--when 
there are false statements to the IRS and to the Foreign Relations 
Committee for which he refuses to correct the record, which would have 
consequences. Those are indisputable.
  It is abundantly clear that we need to formalize some standards that 
apply equally to all nominees, Democrat and Republican alike, and we 
should think of it as a floor beneath which the Senate should not fall.
  Now, it is amazing to me that I know my Republican colleagues used to 
care about tax issues. As a matter of fact, they denied a previous 
distinguished majority leader of the Senate--on some arcane issue--the 
opportunity to become the Secretary of Health and Human Services. They 
have done it a bunch of times.
  This issue is a $4 million tax issue in which Mr. Pack took his 
nonprofit, totally controlled by him--totally controlled by him--and 
had all the moneys that were solicited to the nonprofit then sent to 
his for-profit company, totally controlled by him--totally controlled 
by him. And no other disbursements were made from the nonprofit for 
anyone else, for any other entity.
  I didn't hear until now that the Justice Department and the IRS has 
reviewed this. It should be forthcoming, then, that they have cleared 
this, that this is now in the course of business. We can create a 
nonprofit; go ahead and get moneys from people; they will get their 
deductions; and then we can send it to ourselves for profit. That is 
one heck of a process.
  Now, the chairman continues to say ``2 years.'' Well, 2 years ago 
there was a Republican chairman of the committee--our colleague Bob 
Corker. He

[[Page S2670]]

did not move this nomination 2 years ago. So with this constant refrain 
of 2 years, I guess you want to blame former Senator Corker for not 
moving it during that period of time.
  At the chairman's request, I met with Mr. Pack. While he may not have 
been my nominee, I agreed to have a hearing, which is one of the 
standards we have in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. There is 
an agreement between the chair and ranking. That has been violated for 
Mr. Pack. He actually went to a vote before the committee without my 
agreement, so that comity has been violated for the future.
  At the end of the day, we have someone who will not ultimately--he 
says: Yes, I made a ``mistake''--it is a $4 million mistake--and, yes, 
I should have answered differently.
  Well, why not correct it? If it is so simple, if it is so benign, why 
not correct it? The reason you don't want to correct it is that there 
are consequences that flow from that correction, including probably an 
IRS investigation.
  Finally, it is interesting that, I guess, when Attorney General Barr 
does something, it is not political, but when the attorney general of 
the District of Columbia does it, it is political. I didn't know we 
were going to start choosing and picking which law enforcement entities 
are political in this country.
  The attorney general of the District of Columbia had an investigation 
that was preceding before any action of the committee--preceding before 
any action of the committee or any information brought to the attention 
of the attorney general. Evidently, he considers it significantly 
serious enough--potential IRS violations on taxes.
  So here are our Republican colleagues who, in the past, railed 
against anyone who had violations of the IRS Tax Code, saying they are 
not worthy of being a nominee, to going ahead and ramming through 
someone who ultimately has some serious issues to the tune of $4 
million, and that is not a problem. Under investigation--that is not a 
problem.
  So I urge my colleagues to consider what you are doing here. Not only 
was a precedent set at the committee, but you will set a precedent on 
the floor, and it will be very hard for you to get up and rail about 
somebody's tax liabilities and what they did and didn't do honestly 
with the taxes at the end of the day.
  With that, I yield the floor.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The bill clerk read as follows

                             Cloture Motion

  We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of 
rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, do hereby move to bring 
to a close debate on the nomination of James H. Anderson, of Virginia, 
to be a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense.
         Mitch McConnell, David Perdue, Jerry Moran, Rob Portman, 
           Michael B. Enzi, Deb Fischer, Kevin Cramer, John Thune, 
           John Boozman, Shelley Moore Capito, Marco Rubio, Todd 
           Young, John Barrasso, James Lankford, Tim Scott, James 
           E. Risch, Cindy Hyde-Smith.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
nomination of James H. Anderson, of Virginia, to be a Deputy Under 
Secretary of Defense, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. 
Hoeven), and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. 
Hoeven) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from 
Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), and the 
Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote or change their vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 74, nays 18, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 108 Ex.]

                                YEAS--74

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Capito
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Lee
     Loeffler
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--18

     Baldwin
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Heinrich
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Schumer
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Cramer
     Hoeven
     Markey
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Smith
     Tester
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 74, the nays are 
18.
  The motion is agreed to.
  The Senator from Illinois.


                       Unanimous Consent Request

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, I came to the floor of the 
Senate to ask for consent on the simple, timely Senate resolution 
sponsored by nearly half of the Members of this Chamber. What did the 
resolution call for? Well, it urged the United States to join global 
coronavirus vaccine and treatment efforts. That doesn't sound like a 
radical idea, does it? In the midst of a global pandemic that is 
causing so much suffering and so many deaths, it would seem that asking 
the United States to join other countries of the world in searching for 
therapies and vaccines is just common sense.
  We don't know where or when a vaccine will be discovered. We don't 
know if an effective treatment will be discovered in the United States 
or in some other place. Certainly, with the respected medical and 
scientific leadership in the United States, you would hope that it 
would be here, but let's be honest. If a safe and effective vaccine 
against the coronavirus is discovered in some other country, the United 
States would want to be there and be part of the discussion about its 
production and distribution. Wouldn't we? That is all this resolution 
says.
  Why not team up with allies around the world since we are all looking 
for the same thing--a safe and effective vaccine. Whether that vaccine 
is stamped ``Made in the USA'' or is made in some other country is 
secondary. Is it safe? Is it effective? Will it save lives? Do we 
really want the American people to be left out of such an effort? It 
was a global effort to eliminate smallpox, Ebola, polio, and so many 
other deadly diseases we took for granted. We were all in it together.
  These viruses and diseases don't know any boundaries. People around 
the world have the same fears and concerns that we have in the United 
States about what we are paying in price of suffering and death until 
we find a way to avoid it. This resolution would just call on the 
United States to be part of a global effort to find a therapy and a 
vaccine, but this resolution was blocked here in the Senate. Since 
then, since the 2 weeks that have passed, we have lost over 100,000 
American lives. Sadly, the number still grows. This has been 100,000 
lives in just a few months--the same number of American casualties in 
the wars of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan combined.
  What was President Trump's response? Was there empathy or a message 
of national unity or healing during this tragic moment? No. Once again, 
President Trump refused to take any responsibility for leadership 
during this crisis. Sadly, he has cast blame in every direction and 
ignored his own responsibility amid a deadly global pandemic that has 
had devastating consequences for the American people.

[[Page S2671]]

  Sadly, we lead the world in infections and death, but President Trump 
has decided that now is the moment in history for the United States to 
pull out of the World Health Organization--the same body that is 
heading the global pandemic response. What is he thinking--that we 
would walk away from the organization that has called to the table 
countries from around the world in an effort to find a safe and 
effective vaccine? Here we are, on the 40th anniversary of the World 
Health Organization's historic achievement in eradicating small pox, 
stumbling along with a President who is more interested in settling a 
score, casting blame, and finding ways to divide us. Once again, the 
majority of his party here in the Senate is not chiming in and joining 
us in this effort to pass this resolution.
  While we continue to have some of the world's best researchers and 
experts, it is plausible that a vaccine will be found and developed 
elsewhere. In a rush to research and validate a vaccine, ramp up 
production, address global allocation and supply needs, ensure 
affordability and access worldwide, and make sure the United States 
gets its fair share of any safe and effective vaccine, where will we 
stand if the President insists on being on the sidelines, unengaged? 
When the United States pursues this Trump go-it-alone approach while 
the rest of the world is working together, where does that leave us? 
Pride cometh before the fall.
  Just as with the smallpox effort, a global, collaborative approach 
makes obvious sense, and it will save American lives. Joining forces 
with other countries around the world will help to speed the 
development and eventual distribution of the coronavirus vaccine we 
desperately seek.
  Do you want to know what one Republican Senator from Tennessee said 
about this? He said: ``I disagree with the President's decision.''
  Withdrawing U.S. membership from the WHO could, among other things, 
interfere with clinical trials that are essential to the development of 
a vaccine. No one knows where this vaccine will eventually be perfected 
or produced. God willing, it will be soon. Yet why shouldn't we be 
joining in this global effort? Why? Why, at this moment in history, has 
President Trump said we are stepping away from the organization that 
leads this effort?
  Given this President's--sadly, I hate to use the word--``obsession'' 
with blaming everyone but himself for mishandling this situation, maybe 
his dereliction of duty should come as no surprise, but what a bitter, 
bitter disappointment it is.
  I return to the floor to ask unanimous consent on a straightforward 
resolution--a simple resolution that should have passed without any 
fanfare by a voice vote unanimously in the Senate. This resolution 
calls on the United States to join in the global effort to find a safe 
and effective vaccine--something that we have done consistently 
throughout our history until this President took office.
  Ultimately, let's remember that this is a pandemic that affects the 
world, and any solution has to be a worldwide solution as well. We 
cannot isolate ourselves from the international ways of finding 
treatments and the development of a vaccine. Doing so not only wastes 
time but risks there being a loss of life.


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 579

  Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further 
consideration of S. Res. 579, a resolution encouraging the 
international community to remain committed to collaboration and 
coordination to mitigate and prevent the further spread of COVID-19 and 
urging renewed United States leadership and participation in any global 
efforts on therapeutics and vaccine development and delivery to address 
COVID-19 and prevent further deaths; that the Senate proceed to its 
immediate consideration; 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.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Romney). Is there objection?
  The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  First of all, let me commend my good friend from Illinois for 
bringing this. I know he is frustrated, as all of us are, with what has 
happened with this pandemic that came out of China and swept the world 
and caused all the grief that it has for America and for every other 
country on the planet.
  It is important to note, I think, as we start, that the United States 
has been the single most generous donor of global health assistance 
around the world. We do hear people, from time to time, criticize the 
foreign assistance that America gives out. Probably the pandemic that 
we have just gone through, with this COVID-19 from China, is the best 
indication that there is for why certain foreign assistance is so 
crucial. This foreign assistance we give in the healthcare area is 
given, amongst other reasons, to keep those things from spreading to 
the United States.
  Last year alone, we, the United States of America, we American 
taxpayers, provided over $9 billion in global health assistance through 
the State Department and USAID. That $9 billion does not account for 
the amount that the CDC spent in global health efforts. So it is well 
over $9 billion that we Americans have put out there.
  We strengthen health systems; we train health workers; we build 
supply chains; we connect health networks; we support cutting-edge 
research and innovation; and, yes, develop and expand access to 
therapeutics and vaccines, which is what my good friend from Illinois 
is addressing here when it comes to vaccines. I am going to talk about 
that in a minute.
  We led the international efforts to combat AIDS, malaria, 
tuberculosis, polio, Ebola, and other viruses that came out of China. 
We are the single largest donor to the Global Fund and U.N. agencies, 
including UNICEF.
  I hope that there isn't a suggestion that we are withdrawing from 
collaborative efforts to develop a COVID-19 vaccine because we did not 
directly participate in the EU pledging conference. In reality, leading 
partners in that effort include the Global Fund and Gavi, where we are 
the major donors, so we will be participating in the collaborative 
effort to develop vaccines for COVID-19.
  I think it is also important to note that the President has made a 
historic--a historic 3-year pledge and is strongly supporting Gavi's 
COVID-19 efforts. Gavi stands for the global alliance for vaccines. It 
was essentially the brainchild of Bill Gates. He and Melinda, of 
course, in my judgment, are on an equal level with Mother Teresa for 
what they have done with global health. We are participating with Gavi 
and, like I said, the President has made a historic 3-year pledge to 
that.
  I appreciate the feelings the good Senator from Illinois has about 
the President of the United States, and he did indeed put the brakes on 
WHO because he felt there were shortcomings with WHO when it came to 
WHO's work with China and their failure really to get after China at 
the very beginning of this to do what it really should have done.
  I am going to object to this resolution not because the effort by the 
good Senator from Illinois isn't well-taken. It is well-taken. We had a 
similar one 2 weeks ago and they came out here and objected to it and 
the Senator is frustrated because he feels we should be doing more.
  First of all, during the 2 weeks--we obviously were gone for 1 week--
but let me tell you what was going on during that week and the 
subsequent week. I promised, at that time, that the Foreign Relations 
Committee was going to take this issue on because it is of such 
importance that we don't go through this again, and there is a lot more 
that we can do than simply pass a resolution.
  It is my ambition to create a very significant piece of legislation 
that will be bipartisan, that creates a vehicle to address a fast-
moving virus like this. We can all argue about the WHO and what they 
did or didn't do, their connections to China and that sort of thing, 
but that is not going to help us as we go forward. What we do know is 
that WHO has done good work in the past. They were a really good 
partner with us, as the Senator knows, when it came to implementing 
PEPFAR and doing great things in the battle against AIDS. They were 
very helpful with Ebola and very helpful with smallpox, but this was a 
different virus. This was

[[Page S2672]]

a house on fire. WHO is simply not, at this time, geared to be a 
fireman. When the fire bell rings, we need a vehicle to address a 
virus.
  This is going to happen again because in the Wuhan district, there is 
a vast bat population, and they are carrying about 2,000 different 
species of virus. Unfortunately, and frighteningly, we don't know what 
all those viruses can do. Heaven help us if we get one out of there 
that is worse than COVID-19 that we have had, but we need a fire 
department that can address this.
  I hope we are going to be able to engage China. If not, we are going 
to have to find ways of dealing with this. Where is that vehicle going 
to be carried? Is it going to be a new part of WHO? Is it going to be 
part of the CDC? Is it going to be a new international organization? I 
can't answer that, but I can tell you this. On a bipartisan basis, 
Senator Murphy, who is also on the Foreign Relations Committee, and I 
have introduced a bill to address a number of these things, including 
the vaccine question and including working on getting a vehicle to do 
what I have described.
  I think everyone is working on this in good faith. The bill that will 
be introduced is written on paper. It is not written on stone. We are 
wide open to suggestions as to what kind of a vehicle it is that will 
address this like firemen and not in a slower fashion like other health 
challenges have presented.
  Senator Murphy and I have had a number of discussions on this. We are 
both committed to reach the goals that I know Senator Durbin and that I 
think this whole body wants to reach. We are going to hold a series of 
hearings as to how to do this, how best to do it, how it should be 
funded, how it should be organized, and how the management should take 
place. What it is not going to focus on is the finger-pointing for what 
happened after COVID escaped from a bat into a human being in Wuhan, 
China, and what happened after it left Wuhan, China, and went around 
the world. We have really good information on that already.

  There is going to be a lot of other investigations and hearings and 
that sort of thing. We want to talk about, what do we do when this 
happens in the future? How can we create an agency that just like the 
fire department, when the bell rings, they pull their boots on; they 
slide down the pole; they get on the truck; and they go put out the 
fire.
  I guarantee Senator Durbin that we will continue to work on this. My 
staff tells me--and I am glad to hear that Mr. Durbin's staff is 
working with them on the language on this particular resolution, and I 
thank the Senator for that and I invite him and commit to him that we 
will work with him as we develop this new legislation and as we go 
through the hearings.
  So, again, please don't take this as combative. It is not. It is 
intended, in the best spirit, to help us all move forward to get to a 
piece of very significant legislation that will hopefully take us 
forward like PEPFAR did and as some of the other monumental pieces of 
legislation did that can address this incredibly difficult situation 
and hurtful situation not only for America but for the world.
  And I state to the Senator that I invite your participation, 
encourage your participation, and assure you that we will work in good 
faith to try to reach these goals.
  With that, I object for the reasons stated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I have respect for my colleague and thank 
him for his positive statement about the work to be done in the Foreign 
Relations Committee. There is nothing in this resolution that preempts 
or tries to impact on anything he mentioned. The operative language is 
a few words, ``urging renewed United States leadership and 
participation in any global efforts on therapeutics and vaccine 
development and delivery to address COVID-19 and prevent further 
death.''
  How we do that, whether we create an agency or not, this is simply an 
expression of policy that I hope we can embrace. I will be back if we 
don't move forward with alternatives. Lives are at stake, and we should 
be part of the international conversation to avoid it.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, would the Senator yield for a few moments?
  Mr. DURBIN. Certainly.
  Mr. RISCH. Thank you. I appreciate these comments. There is nothing 
that the Senator just stated that I disagree with. One point, in 
passing, and I say this in the spirit of trying to get to the objective 
that I laid out, and that is, it is my intent to engage the second 
branch of government, not only the agencies that are responsible for 
this--Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the State 
Department, USAID--but also the White House. The President has to have 
a role here. He has obviously undertaken the role. I have already 
spoken to him about this. I intend to have other lengthy conversations 
about this. I am engaging the President to assist us. This is not a 
partisan issue.
  As Mr. Durbin has pointed out, and rightfully so, this virus doesn't 
care whether you are a Republican or Democrat; it doesn't care whether 
you are an American or not an American. It doesn't care if you are a 
President of the United States or, in the case of some countries around 
the world, a member of the highest authority there is in that country. 
The virus just doesn't care.
  In order for us to accomplish this, it is going to be a bill--it is 
not going to be a resolution--and it has to be approved by the second 
branch of government. They fully understand what we are trying to do 
here. They have committed their resources and their input to this, and 
I am convinced they are working in good faith, just as everyone here 
is, to try to reach these goals of doing something better in the future 
than what we have experienced just recently.
  Senator, again, thank you for your attention to this. Thank you for 
your input, and I commend to you that we will work together on this as 
we go forward
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.


                                Protests

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Monday, President Trump stood in the Rose 
Garden and called for the use of military force against individuals who 
have been gathering across the country protesting racism and police 
brutality against Black Americans. This historic call for empowering 
the Commander in Chief to militarize law enforcement in our Nation 
pushes this President's reach for new Executive authority to the most 
extreme level.
  This follows the President's tweets since last week, threatening to 
turn ``vicious dogs''--his words--on protesters outside the White House 
and quoting the racist phrase from the 1967 Miami police chief, 
stating: ``When the looting starts, the shooting starts,'' bringing to 
mind, sadly, for many, shameful moments in our Nation's struggle for 
civil rights.
  President Trump said nothing to address the anguish felt by many in 
this country, particularly people of color, and instead called on 
Governors to ``dominate the streets,'' as though the Americans, who 
peacefully exercise their right to protest, are an enemy force.
  Initially, Defense Secretary Esper went even further when he referred 
to cities as a ``battlespace.'' I am heartened by the fact that he has 
made it clear that he does not support the President's suggestion of 
militarizing the police forces and police across America. These calls 
by the President to militarize cities across America ignore that for 
far too long he urged law enforcement to ``dominate,'' as the President 
often says, rather than to protect and serve, which is exactly what is 
contributing to the challenge we face today.
  The other night, minutes before Mayor Bowser's 7 p.m. curfew came 
into effect, the President used law enforcement personnel to use tear 
gas and rubber bullets on peaceful demonstrators in LaFayette Square 
across the street from the White House. They even beat these peaceful 
demonstrators with batons and shields. There are conflicting reports as 
to whether the National Guard participated in the violence. I have made 
a direct inquiry to the Department of Defense, and they have denied it.
  According to press reports, the assault began with law enforcement 
kneeling, not to express any solidarity

[[Page S2673]]

with any racism efforts as we have seen some police officers do across 
the country; instead, they were kneeling to put on gas masks to protect 
themselves from the weapons they were readying to fire.
  As soon as this gathering was dispersed, the President marched across 
LaFayette Square to St. John's Episcopal Church. The Attorney General, 
the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
all followed--only the battle that they were witnessing was against 
Americans using their voices to stop racism who got in the way of a 
Presidential photo opportunity.
  I simply cannot understand what the President and each of these 
senior officials were thinking, if they were consciously deciding to be 
part of this by taking a stroll in the aftermath of the violence in 
Lafayette Square and whether they approved of that treatment of their 
fellow Americans.
  The Rt. Rev. Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, DC, 
said she was not even given a courtesy call by the White House ahead of 
the President's action. In fact, the bishop was outraged by the use of 
physical force and tear gas in the shadow of her church to remove 
peaceful protesters so that the church and the Bible could be used for 
some photo opportunity.
  President Trump has ``not acknowledged the agony of our country right 
now,'' she said in an interview. ``Everything he has said and done is 
to inflame violence.''
  President Trump's actions violate the sanctity of our First Amendment 
freedoms and represent an abuse of his authority. We know this 
President well after more than 3 years. As shocking as Monday night's 
events were, they represent through and through who this President 
really is. It is wrong.
  The American people will have the last word in November, but I am 
encouraged to see that in my home State of Illinois officials have 
rejected the use of military force and are committed to American's 
right to protest. Governor Pritzker said the President's call to send 
troops to Illinois is ``illegal'' and ``ridiculous.'' Chicago Mayor 
Lightfoot has called to ``turn our pain into purpose'' and to ``learn 
from this moment and move forward together.''
  In my hometown of Springfield, IL, on Tuesday, three high school 
students, young African-American women, sponsored a Black Lives Matter 
rally, and 1,000 people in Springfield, IL, gathered peacefully to 
demonstrate against racism in law enforcement. No windows were broken. 
No one was arrested. They exercised their constitutional rights, and I 
am damn proud of them. They speak for me and for America; that we still 
have the right to stand up and express ourselves, and they did so 
effectively.
  Right now those around the President should look themselves in the 
mirror and ask whose agenda they are serving and whether it is the 
right agenda for America. The collective leadership of our military, 
civilian and uniformed alike, needs to decide what kind of leaders they 
want to be for the men and women in uniform they command and what 
legacy they want to be associated with. Monday night was not the legacy 
this country deserves.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Washington Post 
article and the statements of the Episcopal bishop of Washington be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                       [From the Washington Post]

 Episcopal Bishop on President Trump: `Everything He Has Said and Done 
                        Is To Inflame Violence'

            (By Michelle Boorstein and Sarah Pulliam Bailey)

       The Right Rev. Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of 
     Washington, was seething.
       President Trump had just visited St. John's Episcopal 
     Church, which sits across from the White House. It was a day 
     after a fire was set in the basement of the historic building 
     amid protests over the death of George Floyd in the custody 
     of Minneapolis police.
       Before heading to the church, where presidents have 
     worshiped since the days of James Madison, Trump gave a 
     speech at the White House emphasizing the importance of law 
     and order. Federal officers then used force to clear a large 
     crowd of peaceful demonstrators from the street between the 
     White House and the church, apparently so Trump could make 
     the visit.
       ``I am outraged,'' Budde said in a telephone interview a 
     short time later, pausing between words to emphasize her 
     anger as her voice slightly trembled.
       She said she had not been given any notice that Trump would 
     be visiting the church and did not approve of the manner in 
     which the area was secured for his appearance.
       ``I am the bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington 
     and was not given even a courtesy call, that they would be 
     clearing [the area] with tear gas so they could use one of 
     our churches as a prop,'' Budde said.
       She excoriated the president for standing in front of the 
     church--its windows boarded up with plywood--holding up a 
     Bible, which Budde said ``declares that God is love.''
       ``Everything he has said and done is to inflame violence,'' 
     Budde of the president. ``We need moral leadership, and he's 
     done everything to divide us.''
       In a written statement, Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, 
     head of the Episcopal denomination, accused Trump of using 
     ``a church building and the Holy Bible for partisan political 
     purposes.''
       ``This was done in a time of deep hurt and pain in our 
     country, and his action did nothing to help us or to heal 
     us,'' Curry wrote.
       ``The prophet Micah taught that the Lord requires us to `do 
     justice, love mercy and walk humbly with our God,' '' he 
     continued, calling on Trump and others in power to be moral. 
     ``For the sake of George Floyd, for all who have wrongly 
     suffered, and for the sake of us all, we need leaders to 
     help us to be `one nation, under God, with liberty and 
     justice for all.' ''
       Budde and Curry are among the pantheon of progressive 
     religious leaders who have long been critical of Trump's 
     political agenda. The Episcopal Church's policies include 
     supporting abortion rights, refugee resettlement, an 
     expansion of health care and other issues that Trump has 
     opposed or not embraced. According to the Pew Research 
     Center, 49 percent of Episcopalians are Democrats or lean 
     Democratic, compared with 39 percent of church members who 
     are Republican or lean Republican.
       Trump's longtime religious allies, who are far more 
     conservative on both domestic and foreign policy, saw his 
     walk to St. John's much differently. ``What kind of church I 
     need PERMISSION to attend,'' tweeted Pastor Mark Burns of 
     South Carolina after Budde and others said Trump should have 
     let them know he was coming. ``Jesus welcomes All.''
       Johnnie Moore, a spokesman for several of Trump's 
     evangelical religious advisers, tweeted favorably about the 
     incident as well.
       ``I will never forget seeing @POTUS @realDonaldTrump slowly 
     & in-total-command walk from the @WhiteHouse across Lafayette 
     Square to St. John's Church defying those who aim to derail 
     our national healing by spreading fear, hate & anarchy,'' he 
     wrote. ``After just saying, `I will keep you safe.' ''
       Trump did not enter St. John's on Monday evening. No one 
     associated with the church was present for his visit.
       Andrew Whitehead, a sociologist at Clemson University who 
     studies Christian nationalism, said the president's 
     appearance was an attempt to promote the idea of America as a 
     distinctly Christian nation after his Rose Garden speech.
       ``Going to the church, not going in it, not meeting with 
     any clergy, holding up a Bible, but not quoting any 
     scripture, after an authoritarian speech, was about using the 
     religious symbolism for his ends,'' Whitehead said.
       ``It was a signal to the people that embrace the idea of a 
     Christian nation, that he will defend Christianity in the 
     public sphere,'' Whitehead said. ``He said he'll make America 
     safe. That raised the question, for whom? It's largely for 
     white, mostly Protestant America.''
       Budde--who spent 18 years in as a rector in Minneapolis 
     before being elected bishop of the Washington diocese--said 
     the Episcopal Church disassociates itself from the messages 
     offered by the president.
       ``We hold the teachings of our sacred texts to be so so 
     grounding to our lives and everything we do,'' she said. ``It 
     is about love of neighbor and sacrificial love and justice.''
       Following a tradition set by President Franklin D. 
     Roosevelt, Trump attended a service at St. John's before his 
     swearing-in ceremony in 2017. He visited the church again 
     that year to mark a national day of prayer for victims of 
     Hurricane Harvey and in 2019 on St. Patrick's Day.
       Budde said she learned he was headed back to the yellow, 
     19th-century building on Monday by watching the news.
       ``No one knew this was happening,'' she said. ``I don't 
     want President Trump speaking for St. John's.''
       The Rev. Robert W. Fisher, the church rector, said he felt 
     blindsided by the visit. Usually, the White House gives the 
     church at least 30 minutes' notice before the president comes 
     by.
       ``We want St. John's to be a space for grace, as a place 
     where you can breathe,'' he said. ``Being used as a prop, it 
     really takes away from what we're trying to do.''
       Earlier in the day, Fisher said, he and other clergy were 
     outside the church handing out water bottles and granola bars 
     to protesters, and expressing solidarity with their cause. He 
     said he left the area to be interviewed on television about 
     the damage from the fire the previous night and later watched 
     images of the protest being dismantled ``with disbelief.''
       Fisher, 44, became the rector of St. John's in June 2019 
     and has not yet hosted a presidential visit. The church 
     usually draws

[[Page S2674]]

     about 400 people on a typical weekend. But it has been closed 
     since mid-March due to the broad shutdown restrictions in 
     place to combat the novel coronavirus.
       Damage to the building from Sunday night's fire and 
     vandalism will cost at least $20,000, Fisher said. But he 
     said the destruction should not become the focus of what has 
     been happening in the streets outside the White House.
       Fisher said that when people have talked about the church 
     being burned, he has tried to redirect them, saying it was 
     likely one person who does not represent the majority of 
     people protesting.
       ``That has pulled away from the more important message that 
     we have to address racism in this country,'' he said.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.


                                Protests

  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I rise at a time of crisis. For several 
months now, our Nation has been dealing with two simultaneous crises: a 
global health pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 100,000 
Americans, over 300,000 people across the globe, and an economic crisis 
that has cost over 40 million Americans their jobs.
  And in the midst of these two crises, we are now faced with yet 
another crisis: a crisis of anger, a crisis of racial division, flames 
that are pulling this country apart.
  This crisis was precipitated by the wrongful death of George Floyd in 
Minneapolis, MN. At this point, most, if not all, of us have seen that 
horrifying video: Mr. Floyd, in handcuffs, facedown on the pavement, 
incapacitated, not posing a threat to anyone, and a police officer with 
his knee on the neck of Mr. Floyd, pressing down hard on the neck of 
Mr. Floyd and keeping that knee there for 8 long minutes.
  Mr. Floyd begs the officer, pleads with the officer, says he can't 
breathe. He is in obvious and serious physical distress. Other officers 
are standing there, watching a defenseless, handcuffed man, pinned to 
the ground for 8 long minutes, with a knee pressing down on his neck.
  As we all know, those actions took the life of Mr. Floyd, and, 
rightly, following what happened, the U.S. Department of Justice opened 
a civil rights investigation into the police officers' conduct. Also 
rightly, I believe, the local prosecutor opened--began--a criminal 
prosecution, a homicide prosecution, against the officer for his 
conduct.
  Now, anytime you have an officer-involved shooting, it is easy for 
people to let rhetoric get carried away. It is easy to jump to 
conclusions. And too many players in the political world, I think, 
quickly move to demonize the police officer and assume the officer is 
wrong in every circumstance. That is not how responsible leaders, that 
is not how responsible Americans should behave. We should wait to see 
what the facts and circumstances are.
  But here we have a video, and we can see what the facts and 
circumstances are, and there are zero legitimate law enforcement 
justifications for what happened to George Floyd--none. We witnessed 
police brutality and abuse of power, and that is why the officers are 
being prosecuted.
  Those should be propositions that bring all of us together. Watching 
the death of Mr. Floyd, for so many Americans, brought forth the long 
history in this country of racial discrimination, a history that began 
with centuries of slavery in America, a history that has seen Jim Crow 
laws, that has seen the Ku Klux Klan, that has seen overt and also 
implicit discrimination.
  Young African Americans too often fear interactions with law 
enforcement, fear that their rights will not be protected. Our Nation's 
journey toward civil rights has had many troubled stops along the way, 
but I, for one, agree with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that the arc of 
history bends toward justice. I also agree with the vision that Dr. 
King put forth standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, to an 
assembled crowd and an assembled protest, that he wanted to live in a 
nation where we would be judged--all of us would be judged not by the 
color of our skin but by the content of our character.
  That is a vision that has animated America on our journey toward 
justice, and outrage at what happened to George Floyd prompted 
Americans across this country to speak out, to exercise their First 
Amendment right to speak out for racial justice, to speak out against 
police brutality, to speak out against abuse of power. All of that is 
legitimate. All of that is protected by the Constitution.
  But then we saw things take an ominous turn, a dangerous turn. What, 
for some, was legitimate First Amendment speech, speaking out for 
justice, became co-opted, became taken over by violent criminal 
radicals.
  Now, let's be clear because so much of the news media does not like 
clarity in this regard. When I say that, I am not saying that everybody 
speaking is a violent criminal radical. Indeed, there are a great many 
people speaking out whose heart cries for justice, cries for the 
justice that has been the many-centuries-long journey of this country.
  But there are radicals who cynically took advantage of these protests 
to sow division, to sow fear, to engage in murder, to engage in violent 
assaults, to engage in looting, to engage in theft, to engage in 
intimidation, to engage in fear.
  The First Amendment protects your right to speak; the First Amendment 
protects your right to peaceably protest; but none of us has a right to 
violently assault another person. None of us has a right to murder 
another person. None of us has a right to burn the cars of police 
officers, to shatter the shop windows of shops throughout this country, 
to engage in acts of terror, threatening the lives of our fellow 
Americans.
  To those radicals who cynically tried to co-opt these protests, I 
will say their actions were profoundly racist because they were making 
a decision to take what should have been a unifying moment to say this 
will not stand in our Nation. Our law protects everyone, regardless of 
the color of their skin. Every American--African American, Hispanic, 
White, Asian American--it doesn't matter; our laws protect everyone. 
That should have been a unifying moment, and the cynical, violent, 
radical criminals decided to co-opt these protests to turn them into, 
in far too many instances, riots--violent riots, terrorizing their 
fellow citizens.
  George Floyd was a native Houstonian--my hometown. I love the city of 
Houston. George Floyd was active in his church in Houston. Next week, 
Mr. Floyd will be coming back to Houston for the last time to be buried 
in Houston. I am proud that last night, in the city of Houston, 
thousands came out to protest, and there wasn't violence last night; 
that the people of Houston demonstrated that you can speak, you can 
speak for racial justice, you can speak out against brutality without 
engaging in violence.
  But there has been too much violence across the country and, sadly, 
too many politicians who are complicit in violence, who have made the 
political judgment to turn a blind eye to rioters, to thugs, to 
murderers, to those terrorizing communities.
  The riots must stop. The violence must stop. The first responsibility 
of government is to keep people safe. Right now, in too many of our 
cities, government is failing in that task.
  Across the country, we see the lives which have been taken. To date, 
6 U.S. States and 13 U.S. cities have declared a state of emergency 
because of the riots they are facing. Chicago police superintendent 
David Brown said that over the weekend, 132 police officers were 
injured, there were 48 shootings, and 699 arrests.
  In Las Vegas on Monday night, rioters shot a police officer who is 
right now on life support. Over the past 3 days, Las Vegas police 
officers have arrested 338 rioters.

  In St. Louis, four police officers were shot on Monday night. 
Fortunately, their wounds appear not to be life-threatening, but a 
beloved retired police captain, David Dorn, was shot and killed by 
looters at a pawn shop that same night.
  Mr. Dorn joined the St. Louis police force in 1969. He was a 
dedicated law enforcement officer for nearly 40 years. His wife and the 
St. Louis community are grieving his loss. Mr. Dorn was also African 
American.
  The phrase ``Black lives matter'' has become fraught with politics. 
It is absolutely true that Black lives matter. We should be horrified 
at what happened to George Floyd, but we should also be horrified at 
what happened to David Dorn. To those with political agendas seeking 
demagogue that tear this country apart, somehow David Dorn--another 
Black man, a different

[[Page S2675]]

Black man--who doesn't fit the political story they are trying to tell, 
disappears from their narrative.
  It has become politically controversial to make a statement that 
every life matters. How far have we gone? Our country was founded on 
that proposition. The Declaration of Independence tells us we hold 
these truths to be self-evident that all men--not some men, not just 
White men or White women, but all men--of every race, of every creed, 
of every religion--are created equal and are endowed by their Creator 
with certain unalienable rights that, among them, are the right to 
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
  Now, our country has not always delivered on that promise for every 
American, but that is the journey we have traveled toward that vision.
  David Dorn's life matters. For every reporter fanning up division who 
doesn't stop to honor David Dorn, shame on you. His life mattered, and 
he didn't need to be murdered by violent looters exploiting the 
tensions and division.
  In protests Monday night in Buffalo, NY, three police officers were 
run over by a car, breaking a leg and shattering the pelvis of one of 
the officers.
  In New York City, almost 2,000 people have been arrested since the 
rioting started, and 700 people were arrested just on Monday night. At 
least two New York City police officers were hit by cars on Monday and 
nearly 50 New York Police Department officers have been injured since 
the protests began.
  In Salt Lake City, 21 police officers were injured over the weekend, 
including an officer who was hit in the head with a bat.
  On Sunday, during the riot that took place outside the White House 
when the historic St. John's Church was burned, when arsonists burned 
the church, 14 Secret Service agents were injured.
  In San Francisco over the weekend, at least 20 fires were set, 33 
people were arrested for looting, and 2 police officers were attacked.
  On Friday night, David Patrick Underwood, an officer in the 
Department of Homeland Security, was shot and killed during protests in 
Oakland, CA.
  David Patrick Underwood, like David Dorn, was African American. 
George Floyd's life matters. So does David Dorn's. So does David 
Patrick Underwood's. No elected leader should sit idly by while David 
Patrick Underwood or David Dorn or George Floyd is murdered. If Black 
lives matter, then all Black lives matter, not just those which are 
politically convenient for politicians.
  It has been reported that at least 25 cities in the United States 
have seen deadly, destructive riots in the last week. According to the 
Claims Journal, which reports and analyzes the property claims 
industry, 75 businesses in Madison, WI, have been looted; 50 businesses 
in Seattle; 50 businesses in Pittsburgh; and 45 properties in Chicago 
have suffered damages. In New York City, iconic stores up and down 
Broadway and Fifth Avenue have been vandalized and looted.
  In Atlanta, everything from big-box stores to small businesses have 
been destroyed, looted, and damaged. In Atlanta, a Black-owned small 
business, a clothing store, was completely looted in the wee hours of a 
Saturday morning. To store owner Kris Shelby, the loss was devastating.
  Mr. Shelby told the New York Times that ``as a black man, and this is 
a black-owned business, it's just sad.'' Looting and destroying Mr. 
Shelby's business does not further the cause of racial justice. It is 
the act of a cynical, violent thief and a thief willing to be a bigoted 
racist on top of it.
  In Philadelphia over the weekend, nearly 250 businesses were 
burglarized, over 375 fires set ablaze. Pause and think about that 
number. One city, Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love--370 fires.
  This is wrong. This is shocking. This is horrifying. You are not 
exercising your First Amendment rights when you are lighting a police 
car on fire. You are not exercising any constitutional rights when you 
are burning and terrorizing and assaulting your fellow citizens. 
Eighteen law enforcement officers were injured in Philadelphia--some 
hit by Molotov cocktails, others by rocks and bricks. Ross Martinson, 
the owner of a small business called the Philadelphia Runner, told the 
Philadelphia Enquirer: ``What is left is mush'' after rioters attempted 
to light three fires in his store, stole clothes, stole shoes, smashed 
the windows, and left the store flooding from the sprinklers.
  In Los Angeles, the rioting and looting has brought back painful 
memories of the 1992 Rodney King riots that resulted in 50 deaths, 
thousands of arrests, and the destruction of over 1,000 businesses and 
buildings.
  One Santa Monica furniture store, the owner named Roman, told the 
L.A. Times that over the weekend, ``we lost everything in 10 minutes.'' 
Roman said that 10 minutes of looting resulted in $6 million in 
damages.
  Mind you, all of this is happening after months of small businesses 
being on the verge of bankruptcy from the coronavirus pandemic and the 
economic catastrophe we are facing.
  Now we have local politicians saying: We are not going to let police 
officers protect your store. We are not going to let police officers 
protect your livelihood. Everything you own can be taken and destroyed 
by violent criminals.
  In New York, according to ABC7 New York, businesses, such as delis, 
pharmacies, beauty supply stores, were destroyed and multiple fires set 
in Fordham in the Bronx on Monday, while the flagship Macy's store and 
scores of other retail stories were burglarized, looted, damaged, in 
downtown Manhattan over the weekend and Monday. And throughout it all, 
New York police department officers are calling for the politicians to 
take the handcuffs off them, to let them actually protect their city 
and protect their fellow citizens. But too many politicians have a 
different agenda.
  If you are not willing to say that what happened to George Floyd was 
wrong, it was unacceptable, it was criminal, then you should get the 
hell out of public office. But if you are also not willing to say that 
what has happened to these store owners, what has happened to these 
police officers--the stores that have been looted, the officers who 
have been murdered and assaulted--if you are not willing to say that is 
wrong, it is criminal, it is unacceptable, and it must stop, then you 
need to get the hell out of public office. This ain't complicated. 
Protect people's lives. Protect their rights.
  In Minneapolis, where George Floyd was killed, Tiwana Jackson, an 
African-American small business owner with an eyelash extension studio, 
told a Business of Fashion reporter that her store had been looted and 
vandalized during the riots. Tiwana said: ``Burning stores down, 
stealing things--how is that going to get justice for George Floyd?''
  She continued: ``It almost took my focus away on why this whole thing 
started in the first place, which was racism.''
  In Richmond, VA, David Waller saw the jewelry store that he runs--
that his grandfather founded in the year 1900--ransacked by rioters 
over the weekend. Waller and Company is one of the oldest Black-owned 
businesses in Richmond. How is that justice?
  In Washington, DC, not only was the historic St. John's Church 
burned--where every President we have had has worshipped--but the 
Lincoln Memorial was vandalized, as well as the World War II Memorial 
was vandalized, and the Victims of Communism Memorial was vandalized. 
That is not standing up for justice.
  The Lincoln Memorial--Abraham Lincoln led this Nation during the 
bloodiest war we have ever encountered, the Civil War. Six hundred 
thousand Americans died in the Civil War. And Abraham Lincoln's vision, 
restoring this country and ending the abomination of slavery--I have to 
say, the Lincoln Memorial is my favorite place in all of Washington to 
go and stand and read the words etched in stone, to read the Gettysburg 
Address, to read the second inaugural of the President who signed the 
Emancipation Proclamation, the President whose leadership through that 
Civil War, whose leadership to end slavery cost him his life at the 
hands of an assassin. Yet vandals defaced it.
  The U.S. Park Police reported that the protests on the National Mall 
and at Lafayette Park across the street from the White House resulted 
in 51 injured U.S. Park Police officers. Eleven of those injured 
officers had to go to

[[Page S2676]]

the hospital for treatment, and three had to be admitted because of 
their injuries.
  In my home State of Texas, we have seen riots in Austin, San Antonio, 
Dallas, and Houston, my hometown--the hometown of George Floyd. In 
Austin, over the weekend, protesters tried to block a highway and 
destroyed multiple businesses, including a gas station, a Food Mart, a 
hotel, a Target, a Foot Locker, and other stores and businesses.
  In Houston, another group of protesters closed down Highway 59, and 
rioters destroyed businesses and injured police officers.
  This must stop. There are a host of tools that can be used to stop 
it. The first lines of defense when it comes to violent crime are the 
brave men and women of our police departments who are risking their 
lives every night as they engage with rioters and violent criminals.
  Just as it is a slander to say that every protester is a violent 
rioter, it is also a slander--an absolute vicious lie--to paint every 
police officer as a racist, to paint every police officer as someone 
who commits abuse of power and police brutality, as we saw with George 
Floyd.
  Yes, there are some who break the law, and that is why the officers 
are being prosecuted. The rule of law extends to everyone. If a police 
officer breaks the law, he or she should be prosecuted. But when we are 
looking to protect our own families, when we are looking to protect our 
spouse, when we are looking to protect our children--the people we call 
on to be our first line of defense are the men and women in blue.
  Local officials who have decided politically that they are not going 
to let the police officers arrest the rioters, but they are going to 
release the rioters; the media that turn a blind eye and don't report 
on the police officers being murdered; the Hollywood celebrities who 
virtue signal and raise money to pay the bail for the people being 
arrested for violent looting--every one of them is contributing to this 
problem.
  We also have Federal resources. I have spoken with U.S. attorneys in 
the State of Texas who are directing Federal resources. There are 
Federal laws on the books against rioting: 18 USC, section 2101, makes 
it a crime to travel in or use interstate commerce to incite a riot or 
participate in a riot; 18 USC, section 231, makes it a crime to 
``obstruct, impede, or interfere'' with a law enforcement officer 
performing his or her duties ``in any way'' that affects commerce; 18 
USC, section 844, makes it a crime to ``maliciously [damage] or 
[destroy], or [attempt] to damage or destroy, by means of fire or an 
explosive, any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property 
used in interstate or foreign commerce''; 18 USC, section 1962, the 
RICO statute, makes it a crime for anyone associated with an enterprise 
to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity where racketeering 
activity includes arson and robbery; 26 USC, section 5861(d) makes it a 
crime to possess a destructive device, which is defined in a way that 
includes a Molotov cocktail; and 18 USC, section 2314, makes it a crime 
to transport interstate or sell goods that are stolen.

  All of those are Federal laws that are available for Federal 
prosecutors, that are available to the FBI. The message that needs to 
come clear--loud and clear--from every elected official is if you 
engage in violence, if you engage in looting, if you destroy shops, if 
you shatter windows, if you light police cars on fire, if you commit 
acts of violence, if you physically assault your fellow citizens, if 
you physically assault police officers, if you kill your fellow 
citizens, if you kill police officers, you will be prosecuted. You will 
be prosecuted, and you will go away to jail for a very long time.
  There are organizations that are promoting this, that are funding 
this, that are coordinating this--organizations like antifa. For 2 
years, I have been calling on the administration to designate antifa as 
a domestic terrorist organization. They have engaged in acts of 
violence all across this country. But this past week has been antifa's 
most shameful act.
  This week, the President rightly announced that antifa would be 
designated as a terrorist organization. That means we can use law 
enforcement resources to track down--if you are providing funding and 
organizing, you will be prosecuted. We will use the RICO laws against 
you, the same laws that take down drug dealers.
  If you are handing out bricks to young African-American men, trying 
to incite them to commit acts of violence, that is a criminal activity. 
It is also a cynical, bigoted activity. This must stop.
  Our first responsibility is to protect our fellow citizens, to 
protect their lives, to protect their safety, to protect their rights. 
The President has that responsibility. The Attorney General has that 
responsibility. Every U.S. attorney in the country has that 
responsibility. The FBI has that responsibility. The Governors of all 
50 States have that responsibility. Mayors have that responsibility. 
Police chiefs have that responsibility.
  It is time for this to stop. It is time for us to come together. And 
it is time for the demagogues who peddle the vision, who seek personal 
benefit in fanning the flames of racial animosity, to stop playing 
games with people's lives.
  If you are a Hollywood celebrity and want to make a contribution, 
make a contribution to a fund rebuilding the small businesses, the 
African-American businesses, the Hispanic businesses that have been 
looted and burned and destroyed. Make a contribution to a fund to the 
families of the police officers murdered. Don't pay to bail out the 
criminals assaulting those police officers, burning those African-
American small businesses, looting those African-American small 
businesses. You are not a social justice warrior. If you are lining up, 
seeking accolades for your support of violent criminals who are 
deliberately targeting the African-American community, I will tell you 
right now, you are not advancing racial equality if you are supporting 
violent criminals who are destroying far too many African-American 
communities and Hispanic communities. That is not helping the problem.
  We need to keep America safe. We need to protect every American, 
regardless of race, regardless of skin color. We need to come together 
and keep America safe
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Loeffler). The Senator from Iowa.


                              Coronavirus

  Ms. ERNST. Madam President, for months, as our Nation has confronted 
this pandemic together, everyone in America--every single one of us--
has been asked to make serious sacrifices, whether that has meant 
working overtime in a hospital caring for the afflicted, temporarily 
closing a family business, euthanizing hogs and cattle, or forgoing 
important life events like a high school prom or a college graduation. 
COVID-19 has brought with it very challenging times.
  While we have missed milestones and time together, Americans across 
the country have stepped up to help slow the spread of this virus and 
its toll on the lives of our fellow citizens. While we cannot return to 
life as usual just yet, we are entering a new phase. Step by step, 
State by State, America is safely reopening.
  In Iowa, Governor Kim Reynolds has led our State with a steady hand 
during this critical time. Under Governor Reynolds' thoughtful plan and 
guidance from public health officials at the local, State, and Federal 
level, Iowa communities and businesses are starting to safely reopen, 
and many activities are carefully resuming. Iowans can once again 
participate in America's great pastime and play golf. Places of worship 
are opening for services while taking smart precautions. And while they 
will not be as crowded as they once were, restaurants and bars are 
taking the first steps in opening again, as well as are places that we 
all grew up going to in Iowa--our amusement parks, racetracks, outdoor 
performance venues, movie theaters, and museums--all with important 
public health guidelines in mind.
  All of this is contingent, of course, upon having smaller groups of 
people and continuing to practice social distancing--simple precautions 
that can make a big difference.
  While we all yearn for life to return back to how it was a few months 
ago, we must be smart about taking the appropriate steps. Certainly, we 
want to see our elderly relatives, gather with our family and friends 
once again, and

[[Page S2677]]

return to work and school. But, folks, the pandemic is not over. Let's 
take this one step at a time and keep in mind that while restrictions 
are being loosened, they are not eliminated, and there is a good reason 
for that.
  As this process moves forward, Washington can make this transition 
more safe and successful. Working in partnership with the 
administration, State leaders, and the private sector, we can continue 
to increase testing and ensure those who may be infected are following 
proper guidelines and getting the care and information they need to 
limit the spread of the virus. We need to make sure our essential 
workers and others returning to the workforce have the personal 
protective equipment--the PPE--necessary to allow America to get back 
to work while ensuring the safety of our great workers.
  In addition, these frontline essential workers should absolutely be 
able to keep more of their hard-earned paycheck--something I am working 
on closely with the administration and my colleagues. Our small 
businesses must be protected from predatory lawsuits so that Iowa's 
mom-and-pop shops can continue to provide paychecks to their hard-
working employees.
  Of course, we must continue to support our families--our moms and 
dads who are struggling to purchase diapers; our childcare providers 
and workers who have continued to look after our kids; our family 
caregivers who are helping Iowa seniors and those who are most at risk 
during this pandemic--and make sure we are prepared for whatever might 
come next.
  Let's not only focus on the immediate needs but on the long-term 
national priority for critical medical supplies and other materials to 
be produced right here in the United States of America. We should never 
again depend on a foreign nation to protect our citizens, especially 
one like the Communist Party of China, which has been continually and 
unsurprisingly deceptive about this threat from the very beginning.
  Folks, while we still have a ways to go before we can return to life 
as we know it, we will get through this, and when we do, we will revive 
the great economy we have built together and prepare for an even 
stronger future together.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue). The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my colleague 
from Iowa to highlight the need to responsibly reopen America and our 
economy as we continue to fight this COVID pandemic.


                                Protests

  Mr. President, before I talk about reopening America, I would like to 
address a deep tragedy--the brutal death of George Floyd.
  It is clear that our entire country is united in horror and 
opposition to the violent killing. Racial discrimination has absolutely 
no place in this country whatsoever. This senseless murder is 
unacceptable, and those responsible should be held accountable. I am 
anguished at the death of George Floyd. I am anguished at the violence 
we are seeing all across our streets today. There is no question that 
we must do our part to change racist attitudes that, unfortunately, 
exist today, and this must be done in a peaceful way. Looting and 
violent riots are not the way to do this, and it is not the way to 
honor George Floyd or those who are protesting peacefully, which is the 
great majority of people.
  The other day, George's brother encouraged all of us to peacefully 
protest. He said that violence will not bring his brother back. No, it 
will not bring his brother back.
  It makes me sad to see businesses and monuments that honor some of 
our bravest heroes destroyed and violence happening in cities across 
the Nation. In my State of West Virginia, there have been protests. 
However, they have been peaceful. I commend my West Virginians for 
peacefully protesting, and I encourage them to continue this. Instead 
of violence, we need to come together as a nation, to listen to one 
another, and to learn from one another. This is how real change can 
happen.
  President George W. Bush and Mrs. Laura Bush published a statement 
yesterday, and I would like to read the last paragraph because I found 
it really quite moving as to how we are going to address this issue.

       The rule of law ultimately depends on the fairness and 
     legitimacy of the legal system. And achieving justice for all 
     is the duty of all. This will require a consistent, 
     courageous, and creative effort. We serve our neighbors best 
     when we try to understand their experience. We love our 
     neighbors as ourselves when we treat them as equals, in both 
     protection and compassion. There is a better way--the way of 
     empathy, and shared commitment, and bold action, and a peace 
     rooted in justice. I am confident that together, Americans 
     will choose the better way.

  I appreciate so much the entire statement. Those last several words, 
as I said, really touched me.
  On the matter before us today, many communities in our country are 
beginning to open, including in my State of West Virginia. As 
everywhere, COVID has had a terrible impact on many of our communities 
all across the country. The disease has affected every part of our 
lives. More than 105,000 of our fellow Americans have lost their lives 
because of this terrible virus. That includes 78 West Virginians. The 
unofficial unemployment rate is 14 percent in this country, but in my 
State of West Virginia, it is a shade over 15 percent, and we expect 
those numbers to rise when the May numbers are published later this 
week.
  State and local officials across the country closed much of our 
economy in order to slow the disease. Our goal as a nation was to bend 
the curve in order to prevent our hospitals and other medical providers 
from being overrun. In West Virginia, as in most of the country, we 
have been successful in bending the curve and reducing the spread of 
this terrible disease. It is important, as we move now to responsibly 
reopening our economy, to continue to follow the guidelines that have 
been prepared by our public health experts--washing our hands, social 
distancing, avoiding touching your face, and wearing your mask. 
Following these guidelines will help to make America's reopening 
successful. It will protect your health and the health of your 
community. Hindering the spread of the disease while allowing 
businesses to remain open as they follow the guidelines will aid in our 
economic recovery as well.
  Most Americans understand there is no way to choose between public 
health and a strong economy because you cannot have one without the 
other. We can't have a strong economy if we are not protecting people 
from becoming sick, and we will not be able to make the necessary long-
term investments in public health if we don't have a strong economy. 
That is why a responsible, step-by-step approach to reopening the 
economy that is driven by the data in States and local communities is 
so very important.
  West Virginia's cumulative percentage of positive tests now stands at 
2 percent, which is less than one-fifth of the national average. As of 
this morning, our daily positive test percentage was 0.88 percent. This 
is despite the fact that West Virginia has tested a higher percentage 
of our residents than the national average and all of our neighboring 
States. Even more encouraging is that, even as we began reopening our 
businesses in May, our cumulative percent of positive tests has 
remained below 3 percent since April 25.
  Yet we have faced challenges. Outbreaks at our long-term care 
facilities in Monongalia County, Wayne County, Jackson County, and 
Kanawha County have resulted in 43 deaths, but do you know what? Our 
State responded quickly and tested every resident and every staff 
member in the nursing homes in our State. We were the first State in 
our Nation to do this and set the example that many have followed. Just 
last week, we had an outbreak at one of our prisons, where we had 118 
positive tests. So we know that this is still there and that it still 
presents a danger, but I am really proud of the way we have pulled 
together during this crisis and addressed these challenges.
  The progress reflected by the statistics is only possible because our 
State's residents have followed the guidelines. I thank all of the 
medical professionals, the first responders, and the frontline workers 
who have gone beyond the call of duty to protect public health and keep 
our communities running during this most difficult time.
  Opening our economy is paramount, and opening it responsibly must be

[[Page S2678]]

done. Even though the COVID is still with us, we must continue working 
together and following the guidelines so we can protect both our 
economy and our health.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.


                              RESTART Act

  Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, last week, I traveled around the great 
State of Indiana on my RESTART tour.
  I visited small businesses up and down the State--eight cities, in 
fact--where we have seen so many Hoosiers adversely impacted by this 
pandemic. Like many other States, Indiana is starting to open up our 
economy, and I know so many Hoosiers welcome that. Our Governor, Eric 
Holcomb, has been implementing a five-stage plan for safely reopening 
Indiana's economy.
  The cities on my tour have businesses that are in various stages of 
reopening. Restaurants like Catablu Grille in Fort Wayne, Arni's in 
Lafayette, and Woody's Library in Carmel are open at 50-percent 
capacity right now. The nonprofit Terre Haute Children's Museum remains 
closed, unfortunately, and is struggling to pay its employees. I 
visited Zimmer Biomet Hibbard, which is a medical device company in 
Valparaiso. I enjoyed the tour and visiting with the employees, but I 
discovered that its sales had dropped 95 percent in March. Fortunately, 
it received a Paycheck Protection Program loan, and that enabled it to 
keep all 23 of its employees on the payroll.
  It is clear that we need to continue evaluating additional relief 
measures for small businesses and Indiana's nonprofits. My RESTART Act 
is a viable approach to help keep our hardest hit businesses and 
nonprofits going. The RESTART Act is a bipartisan measure I introduced 
with Senator Bennet. The effort here is to build upon the success of 
the Paycheck Protection Program. We have seen that more than 74,000 
Hoosier businesses have benefited from PPP, with loans totaling nearly 
$9.4 billion in the State of Indiana. Just for context, that is an 
average loan of about $130,000. These are for small businesses like 
those that we see up and down our State.
  The Paycheck Protection Program requires funds to be spent in just 8 
weeks, but most restaurants, gyms, boutiques, and so many other 
businesses were not permitted to be open during part or all of that 8-
week period. So the first part of the RESTART Act merely extends the 
timeframe to 16 weeks for our Nation's hardest hit businesses.
  Secondly, we know that the PPP was meant to be a bridge to reopening 
the economy, but many small businesses have much longer bridges to 
cross. That is why our new RESTART Program would provide loans that 
would cover up to 6 months of payroll and fixed operating expenses. 
That is just for those businesses that have taken a substantial revenue 
hit during this coronavirus pandemic. My RESTART initiative would 
provide needed funds with the flexibility for employers to pay bills 
and to implement social distancing measures, like with those Plexiglas 
dividers I have seen at so many businesses. Most importantly, it would 
bring employees back to work, which is exactly where they want to be.
  Over the last several weeks, I have spoken to more than 22,000 
Hoosiers by using Zoom teleconferencing capabilities, having conference 
calls, and other means. I have to say I am truly inspired by the way 
Hoosiers have come together to help one another during this pandemic. 
Everyone has done his part. Hoosiers want to work, and business owners 
are eager to pay them. The RESTART Act can help make sure this happens, 
and I hope my colleagues will give it strong consideration in the 
coming days
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Braun and I be allowed to complete our remarks prior to the rollcall 
votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                              Coronavirus

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I have to say that Tennesseans are 
enjoying being out and about. They are so thrilled to see the restart 
of our economy. Whether you are going to hair salons, restaurants, 
shopping centers, office parks, or manufacturing facilities, what we 
are hearing from Tennesseans is: Thank goodness we can get back to 
work. They are grateful that they have had the PPP to help them bridge 
from the shutdown to the restart. There has been $8.8 billion that has 
made its way into our State through the PPP program, and our Governor, 
our Tennessee General Assembly, and our mayors are really working 
diligently to be certain that our economy opens up, that people are at 
work safely, and that we continue to defeat this COVID-19.
  Over the past few months, we have seen Congress push forward, putting 
about $3 trillion into the economy for a restart, and State and local 
governments have already put over $139 billion worth of aid to good use 
by supporting local healthcare, helping to rescue businesses, and 
keeping companies working and local payrolls going--keeping people on 
the job.
  Our Governor and general assembly in Tennessee have just announced a 
new program that they are doing in conjunction with local businesses. 
Now, imagine for a moment what it was like to watch the economy tumble 
from the perspective of a community that was already struggling and 
trying to make ends meet. The pandemic caused catastrophic damage to 
the traditional economy and also to many of the service organizations 
that were there to meet needs. In Tennessee, as in many States, 
struggling communities depend on these nonprofit groups. This is why we 
fought so hard to include eligibility for nonprofits in the rescue 
funding packages.
  I will tell you that this is making a difference in Tennessee for 
some of our nonprofit organizations, like the East Tennessee-based 
Appalachia Service Project. ASP teams travel throughout Central 
Appalachia. They repair homes for low-income families. Mayors in the 
communities that ASP visit are running on tight budgets, and they 
depend on volunteers to fix up unsafe or uninhabitable homes. You can 
only imagine how it felt to the people at ASP to watch their funding 
evaporate, knowing that the leaky roof that needed attention over in 
Sneedville would end up turning into a rotten floor and a moldy wall 
and would be a safety hazard for the individuals who lived there. 
Fortunately, ASP was able to get an SBA loan that gave it a little bit 
of breathing room. Although it has had to cancel its volunteer program, 
its essential staff and contractors will be able to continue working 
all through the summer.
  The various rescue programs that Congress agreed to implement were 
not perfect by any means, but did they have a positive effect? From 
what we are hearing in Tennessee, they did, and they have been put to 
good use.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. BRAUN. Mr. President, I am a Main Street entrepreneur. I have 
spent my career building a little business into a large one over many 
years in my hometown. My wife, as well, has operated a home accessory 
and gift store on Main Street, literally. I am elated to see the 
American economy starting to get off to a smart restart.
  I addressed, in a couple of floor speeches before we left in March, 
the question of how to reopen our economy. I believe businesses are 
disciplined and ready to pay attention to the rules--the new normal--to 
make sure their employees and their customers stay safe. Business 
owners will follow the rules. It is in their own best interests to do 
so. They have much to lose from a new spike in the coronavirus. 
Businesses are always more adept, more agile than government, and I am 
heartened to see the innovative approaches many businesses are taking 
across our country to address this challenge.
  The virus does not affect all populations, industries, and areas of 
our country in the same way. So, naturally, the reopening in 
Indianapolis will be different from that on Main Street in Jasper, IN.
  We should remember that although this presents challenges, a one-
size-fits-all is rarely the best policy course of action, and decisions 
that affect citizens are best made by the level of government closest 
to them--mayors,

[[Page S2679]]

town councils, and State governments. We cannot use the blanket 
approach the government took in shutting down the economy to reopen it. 
Instead, we need to provide the tools to empower local leaders and 
businesses who know their communities best to reopen safely so that our 
country can function again.
  I believe that through the perseverance and innovation that American 
business has always exhibited, we can get our economy back on the path 
to recent heights without yielding back any territory to the virus.
  I yield the floor.


                      Vote on Anderson Nomination

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All postcloture time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Anderson 
nomination?
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from 
Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), and the 
Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cotton). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 78, nays 17, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 109 Ex.]

                                YEAS--78

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Capito
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Loeffler
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--17

     Baldwin
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Heinrich
     Klobuchar
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Schumer
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Markey
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Smith
     Tester
  The nomination was confirmed
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the 
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________