July 1, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 121 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session

[Pages S4138-S4144]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Ms. Klobuchar, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. 
        Casey, Mr. Reed, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Markey, Ms. Harris, Ms. 
        Hirono, Mr. Carper, Mr. Van Hollen, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 
        Merkley, Ms. Smith, Ms. Warren, and Mr. Cardin):
  S. 4132. A bill to establish the Commission on the COVID-19 Pandemic 
in the United States; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the 
Coronavirus Commission Act. Representative Adam Schiff has introduced 
companion legislation in the House.
  This bill would establish a commission on the coronavirus pandemic to 
better understand the vulnerabilities it has revealed in our national 
security and healthcare system and improve our preparedness for future 
crises.
  It is crucial to improve our understanding of pandemic threats and 
health issues that the United States could face in the coming decades 
to better protect our population and mitigate the risk of a similar 
human and economic catastrophe.
  Nearly 130,000 Americans have died from COVID-19. Hospitals have 
struggled to secure enough personal protective equipment to keep health 
workers safe, testing levels remain inadequate, and a breakthrough 
therapeutic, let alone a vaccine, has yet to be developed.
  More than 41 million Americans have been laid off, and the 
unemployment rate is likely well over 20 percent. Large numbers of 
businesses have permanently closed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
  The commission that would be created by our bill would conduct a 
comprehensive review of the government's coronavirus response and make 
recommendations on how we can be better prepared in the future. The 
commission would complement other oversight efforts in Congress and 
elsewhere.
  The coronavirus commission would examine U.S. Government preparedness 
in advance of this pandemic, the Federal Government's response to it, 
and provide recommendations to improve our ability to respond to and 
recover from future outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics.
  This legislation is modeled after and closely mirrors legislation 
enacted in 2002 that created the 9/11 Commission.
  The Coronavirus Commission would be composed of 10 members, with the 
same partisan balance as the 9/11 commissioners and prohibited from 
being current Federal officials, with a variety of backgrounds in 
relevant fields, including public health, epidemiology, emergency 
preparedness, armed services, and intelligence; provide a full 
accounting to the President, Congress, and the American people of the 
facts and circumstances related to the outbreak in the United States, 
including our preparedness, the intelligence and information we had 
available before the virus reached the United States, and how Federal, 
State, and local governments, as well as the private sector, responded 
to the crisis; hold hearings and public events to obtain information 
and to educate the public; possess subpoena power to compel cooperation 
by relevant witnesses and materials from the Federal Government, as 
well as State and local governments; make specific recommendations to 
Congress and the executive branch to improve our preparedness for 
pandemic disease; have adequate staffing and resources to be able to 
complete expeditiously the monumental task at hand so we can be 
prepared for the next epidemic or pandemic to hit the nation; and the 
commission would be established after February 2021, hopefully when the 
pandemic has been overcome and after the presidential election.
  The coronavirus showed just how unprepared and slow we were to 
respond to a major outbreak, and that lack of readiness has endangered 
lives.
  We were unable to ramp up testing, we had insufficient safety 
equipment for doctors and nurses, and we lacked any kind of consistent 
Federal guidelines for States and cities.

[[Page S4139]]

  We know this will not be the last outbreak, so a 9/11 Commission-
style panel is necessary to fix these mistakes going forward and apply 
the lessons from this pandemic to future crises.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill.
  Thank you.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Reed, Mr. Cardin, 
        and Mr. Merkley):
  S. 4139. A bill to encourage support by international financial 
institutions for a robust global response to the COVID-19 pandemic; to 
the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 4139

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Support for Global Financial 
     Institution Pandemic Response Act of 2020''.

     SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR A ROBUST GLOBAL RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 
                   PANDEMIC.

       (a) United States Policies at the International Financial 
     Institutions.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     instruct the United States Executive Director of each 
     international financial institution (as defined in section 
     1701(c)(2) of the International Financial Institutions Act 
     (22 U.S.C. 262r(c)(2)) to use the voice and vote of the 
     United States at that institution--
       (A) to seek to ensure adequate fiscal space for world 
     economies in response to the global coronavirus disease 2019 
     (commonly referred to as ``COVID-19'') pandemic through--
       (i) the suspension of all debt service payments to the 
     institution; and
       (ii) the relaxation of fiscal targets for any government 
     operating a program supported by the institution, or seeking 
     financing from the institution, in response to the pandemic;
       (B) to oppose the approval or endorsement of any loan, 
     grant, document, or strategy that would lead to a decrease in 
     health care spending or in any other spending that would 
     impede the ability of any country to prevent or contain the 
     spread of, or treat persons who are or may be infected with, 
     the SARS-CoV-2 virus; and
       (C) to require approval of all Special Drawing Rights 
     allocation transfers from wealthier member countries to 
     countries that are emerging markets or developing countries, 
     based on confirmation of implementable transparency 
     mechanisms or protocols to ensure the allocations are used 
     for the public good and in response the global pandemic.
       (2) IMF issuance of special drawing rights.--The Secretary 
     of the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive 
     Director of the International Monetary Fund to use the voice 
     and vote of the United States to support the issuance of a 
     special allocation of not less than 2,000,000,000,000 Special 
     Drawing Rights so that governments are able to access 
     additional resources to finance their responses to the global 
     COVID-19 pandemic.
       (b) Report Required.--The Chairman of the National Advisory 
     Council on International Monetary and Financial Policies 
     shall include in the annual report required by section 1701 
     of the International Financial Institutions Act (22 U.S.C. 
     262r) a description of progress made toward advancing the 
     policies described in subsection (a).
       (c) Termination.--Subsections (a) and (b) shall have no 
     force or effect after the earlier of--
       (1) the date that is one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act; or
       (2) the date that is 30 days after the date on which the 
     Secretary of the Treasury submits to the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Financial 
     Services of the House of Representatives a report stating 
     that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is no longer a serious threat to 
     public health in any part of the world.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. Wyden):
  S. 4143. A bill to extend the unemployment insurance provisions of 
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act for the 
duration of the economic recovery, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, now on the main topic this morning, I am 
proud to support Senator Wyden and Senator Bennet. As the number of 
COVID-19 cases accelerates across much of the country, the economic 
toll of this pandemic continues to fall hard on American families and 
American workers. Over 33 million Americans--at least one-fifth of the 
entire workforce--have now applied for unemployment assistance since 
the pandemic began.
  Democrats secured a crucial enhancement of that unemployment 
assistance in the CARES Act--an extra $600 a week, which, according to 
a study by Columbia University, prevented as many as 12 million 
Americans from slipping into poverty. By the end of this month, those 
emergency unemployment benefits will expire, but unfortunately the high 
levels of unemployment will not. Without an extension of enhanced 
benefits, Americans struggling without work will have their legs cut 
out from under them at the worst possible time, in the middle of a 
raging pandemic.
  I am joining with my colleague, Ranking Member Wyden of the Senate 
Finance Committee, to introduce a bill that will serve as both a short-
term solution and a bold long-term strategy to keep American workers 
and the American economy afloat. I thank Senator Wyden for his help and 
Senator Bennet for his help. Together, we put together a very strong 
piece of legislation.
  Our bill, the Schumer-Wyden American Workforce Rescue Act, would do 
something very simple: It would tie the extension of enhanced 
unemployment benefits to economic data, not arbitrary political 
deadlines. As long as unemployment remains very high--over 11 percent--
the enhanced benefits will stay in place. When unemployment goes down, 
the benefits will phase out appropriately.
  This automatic stabilization for unemployment benefits would be one 
of the first programs of its kind, but at its core, this policy is 
basic common sense. When Americans truly need the benefits, the 
benefits will be there. When the economy gets better, those enhanced 
benefits will be reduced. The impetus for this legislation is common 
sense. We should not allow the economic security of the American people 
to depend on the political whims of the legislatures--Federal or State.
  When we passed the CARES Act over 2 months ago, Democrats knew the 
extra $600 in weekly unemployment assistance was only a temporary salve 
for struggling Americans. We had hoped the economy would be able to 
bounce back and unemployment would quickly go down. Clearly, that is 
not the case today.
  Experts are warning us that the economic drag from this crisis will 
take years, if not a full decade, to fully abate. Further action is 
very much needed and very, very necessary. But for months, Republicans 
have doubled and tripled down on their strategy of delaying action on 
COVID-19 relief legislation. They have kept the American people 
needlessly wondering if the help they rely on will remain in place much 
longer.
  We need to take the next step and tie unemployment benefits to 
economic triggers that will ensure that so long as Americans are 
hurting, a safety net will remain in place--whether it is COVID-19 or 
any other economic disaster in the future that causes unemployment to 
rise. That is how you give the American people the kind of peace of 
mind they need that they will not needlessly fall into poverty this 
year or next year or the year after.
  No doubt, this is a new idea. It would be one of the first programs 
of its kind. But we need to take this bold step forward to guarantee 
that the Federal Government effectively serves the American people in 
times of crisis.
  There is a long road ahead before the U.S. economy gets back on its 
feet. In many parts of the country, States are reimposing restrictions 
on businesses, restaurants, and other places of employment to halt a 
renewed spread of the disease. Americans will continue to wonder, when 
can I get back to work?
  I am proud to join my colleagues and champion this legislation to 
provide unemployment benefits for as long as Americans need them--
provide unemployment benefits for as long as Americans need them.
  Before I yield, I want to thank my colleague Senator Wyden for 
championing this legislation as well. He has been a leading and fierce 
advocate for this policy in our caucus, and I am both grateful and 
proud to stand with him this morning. I also thank Senator Bennet, who 
is always thoughtful and thinking on to the future--one of the first 
Members to alert this Chamber and the country of the disparities in 
income and wealth distribution--and has had vital input as well. We 
thank him.

[[Page S4140]]

  This policy is smart, it is timely, and it is forward-thinking. So it 
is no surprise that my colleagues, Senator Wyden--one of the authors--
and Senator Bennet have had great input.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Wyden and then 
Senator Bennet be allowed to speak immediately after me for as much 
time as they may consume.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, it is a pleasure to be with Senator Schumer 
to advance the Schumer-Wyden legislative proposal today, and I am very 
pleased that we are joined by Senator Bennet, a particularly valuable 
member of the Senate Finance Committee, who has worked on these issues 
for many, many years.
  As Senator Schumer outlined, we are talking about a fresh approach as 
we look to extending supercharged unemployment benefits for as long as 
our economy suffers under the COVID-19 pandemic. As the ranking 
Democrat on the Finance Committee that produced the $600 extra benefit 
each week until July 31 and the breakthrough to cover for the first 
time gig workers and the self-employed and part-timers and others, I am 
going to take a few minutes to explain why this next step to create a 
dependable safety net in America is a no-brainer.
  We know that tens of millions of Americans are out of work due to 
COVID-19. The pandemic is, in fact, getting worse. Dr. Tony Fauci 
yesterday talked about the prospect of having 100,000 new confirmed 
cases per day nationwide. We don't even want to imagine what the 
unemployment situation is going to look like with 100,000 new 
coronavirus cases every day. You cannot have a healthy economy in a 
country suffering from mass death.
  I know the President got up in the Rose Garden and celebrated the 
last jobs report like it was the greatest news since the end of World 
War II, but you have to be living in a country club fantasy land to 
believe this economic crisis is anywhere close to ending.
  Tens of millions of Americans today are out of work in States with 
COVID hotspots. There are reports that people who went back to work in 
the spring are getting laid off for a second time. The numbers show 
that it disproportionately harms Black and Hispanic people suffering in 
this crisis, and the layoffs are hitting those Americans especially 
hard in industries that pay modest wages. This is a recipe for 
injustice and for long-term economic hardship. Our proposal is 
desperately needed because the country is not on a straight line to 
recovery.
  Democrats demanded the supercharged unemployment benefits because 
workers are not to blame for the crisis. Doctors don't yet have a cure 
for COVID-19, but the Congress does have a way to address the financial 
strain of joblessness. That is why Democrats demanded full wage 
replacement during the negotiations on unemployment benefits in the 
CARES Act.
  Secretary Scalia told those of us negotiating this issue that State 
UI systems--unemployment systems--were too outdated to make it work 
anytime soon. These are Federal benefits, but under employment law, the 
States administer the program and get the benefits out.
  We knew that there would be some challenges, and we proposed a simple 
solution: $600 extra per week across the board, adding up to full wage 
replacement for the typical worker. It was clear that was the only 
possibility of getting the supercharged benefits out to millions of 
workers quickly.
  It hadn't been easy. In a number of States, the unemployment systems 
run on Bronze Age technology. In some other cases--and Leader Schumer 
and I are inquiring into these right now--it is a case of Republican 
sabotage. That is why, for the long term, it is certainly worth looking 
at a Federal approach for administering unemployment benefits as a 
better strategy.
  But in today's economic conditions, dealing with the suffering we are 
seeing right now--the suffering that Tony Fauci talked about yesterday 
that could hammer this country from sea to shining sea--if you are 
dealing with today's conditions and you want to get full-wage benefits 
out on time, there is no alternative to $600 per week across the board. 
Furthermore, there is no good argument for cutting or eliminating 
benefits as long as the pandemic is raging and getting worse.
  On the one hand, we heard Secretary Scalia and other Republicans 
repeat the old line. They have been talking against unemployment for 
ages, and they always say the problem is lazy workers dependent on 
government are going to drag the economy down by collecting 
unemployment instead of going back to their jobs.
  On the other hand, Republicans have repeatedly said the economy is 
roaring back to full employment so there is no need for extending 
benefits any longer. You can't have it both ways. You can't have it 
both ways, that these workers are dragging the economy down and then 
talk about how everything is booming.
  Regardless of how these arguments conflict, neither one holds any 
water to begin with. I believe it is an insult to American workers to 
say they would rather sit at home than work hard and earn their pay. 
Our workers have a strong working ethic, and how could anybody believe 
in the greatness of America, as the President is always talking about, 
and think so little of its workers?
  Second, it is time to quit pretending to know whether the crisis is 
anywhere near over. The number of people filing new unemployment claims 
every week, even now, is two and three times higher than the worst 
single week of the Great Recession.
  Senators have a right to stake out whatever ground they want on this 
issue. I will tell you, the American people overwhelmingly support 
extending supercharged unemployment benefits. You see it in polls--
polls done by centrist organizations. But more importantly, you hear 
about it when you are home.
  Americans don't buy Secretary Scalia's line about lazy workers or 
dependence on the government. I can tell you, based on the 
conversations I had with Oregonians, they don't want any handouts. They 
understand the country is facing a severe historic crisis of 
joblessness, and they want the Congress to act. You cannot have a 
healthy economy in a country suffering from mass debt, particularly in 
the middle of a pandemic.
  It would be an act of sabotage and, I think, unthinkable cruelty to 
slash these benefits and send all these jobless families into 
destitution. That is why Senator Schumer and I have outlined this 
proposal to extend these supercharged unemployment benefits in a manner 
that is tethered to economic conditions on the ground.
  We always hear our colleagues talk about policies and the need for 
policies that really mirror what is going on in the real-world economy, 
in the private sector. That is what this proposal does. This proposal 
says we are going to tie the economic benefits; we are going to tether 
them to economic conditions on the ground.
  I saw our colleague from South Dakota, a Member of the Republican 
leadership, Senator Thune, say that maybe the benefits ought to taper 
down when unemployment goes down. I looked at that, and I said that 
Democrats share that view. That is what our trigger proposal is all 
about. You have to have them in a way that is going to make sure people 
can pay rent and groceries, which is what the $600 benefit made 
possible and will in the future.
  But when unemployment tapers down, then, under our proposal, we make 
an accommodation for that. What we are going to do is common sense. It 
provides certainty and predictability for American workers, but it will 
also send a message across the country that there is a policy that will 
make a more dependable safety net. Yet it will also do what the head of 
the Federal Reserve just said, which is to make sure that family 
budgets, which are the ones that drive the American economy, are ones 
where people can pay the rent and buy groceries.
  The bottom line is we have a moral obligation to not turn our back on 
those who are suffering. I am telling you, the Senate is going to go 
home here in a day or so for several weeks, and Senators are going to 
hear loud and clear that workers are concerned about whether, after 
July 31, they are going to be able to pay the rent and be able to buy 
groceries. I think they are worried, and I hear it from all parts of my 
community--about a tsunami of evictions and people simply not being 
able to feed their families. I think

[[Page S4141]]

those who disagree with the Schumer-Wyden proposal ought to come out 
here and say what they going to offer those people who are hurting.
  Influential objective thinkers about the economy, like Jerome Powell, 
are saying that these kinds of benefits are absolutely key to making 
sure that the family budget, which drives the American economy, is 
going to be positioned to pay the rent and buy groceries.
  I gather from Leader Schumer's remarks that I can yield to our 
Senator from Colorado, a particularly valuable member of the Finance 
Committee, who has been working on safety net issues for many, many 
years.
  Mr. BENNET. I would like to thank Leader Schumer and the ranking 
member of the Finance Committee, Senator Wyden, for bringing this 
commonsense proposal to the floor.
  I have long advocated for the idea that we should tie benefits to the 
conditions of the economy rather than simply politically convenient 
dates or inconvenient dates that don't matter, don't make any sense to 
working people in our country, and create idiotic fights here that 
don't help the people we all have been sent here, in theory at least, 
to serve.
  Right now, we are facing an unprecedented set of conditions in our 
country. We are being racked by an economic downturn. It is different 
from any that we have ever seen before and at the same time, we are 
facing this incredible health crisis. One in six workers in this 
country is unemployed. One in six workers is unemployed today.
  But for once, thankfully, we were able to come together in a 
bipartisan way in March and pass the CARES Act, which is benefitting 
these workers in two ways.
  First, we expanded unemployment benefits to cover almost 10 million 
self-employed workers, gig workers, and others who are usually left 
behind in circumstances like this. That is something we should have 
changed a long time ago, but we finally got it done, and we did it in a 
bipartisan way.
  Second, as Leader Schumer and Senator Wyden said, we added $600 per 
week to normal unemployment benefits for all 30 million workers 
claiming benefits. That $600 weekly benefit has prevented a level of 
severe hardship that is almost impossible to describe. It has paid rent 
and prevented evictions. It has kept food on the table so families 
don't go hungry. It has kept the lights on and paid for the internet so 
our kids can learn. The bottom line is that the $600 weekly payment has 
been an essential lifeline to families in the middle of the worst 
economic crisis since the Great Depression.
  In Colorado alone, over 450,000 workers are receiving the expanded 
benefit, and it has put a total of nearly $2.5 billion into our 
economy. Nationwide, the numbers are staggering. One analysis showed 
that these additional payments help keep 12 million Americans out of 
poverty and keep poverty rates from rising. Without these payments, 
wages across the entire economy would have declined by 10 percent from 
February to May. We completely offset that decline.
  You know what that means is that working people actually were able to 
continue to buy things in this economy. The leader might be interested 
to know that I was talking to an economist recently, Raj Chetty, from 
Harvard, who has done a study, including other places, of New York. 
That study shows that the biggest loss in terms of consumer spending 
has come from the wealthiest areas in New York. That resulted in the 
biggest unemployment.
  In other words, if you have a small business in a wealthy area in New 
York, your small business is cratering because wealthy people aren't 
spending money on services because they are scared of getting COVID.
  In other parts of New York, there has been much less destabilization, 
and that is because of these unemployment benefits--directly because of 
these unemployment benefits--because where the unemployment rate has 
gone up, people's incomes have been able to be stable.
  I am the first to say that not everything we have done with the CARES 
Act has been perfect. As we know, the CARES Act left out too many 
families, and too many States have been too slow to get these benefits 
out. That is the result of delivering benefits through 50 different 
systems that have been underfunded and undermined for 50 years. But 
once they have gotten out, these benefits have made a transformational 
difference. Everyone in the Senate should be proud of that.
  I come out here all the time and complain how terrible this place is. 
I was amazed to hear the majority leader this morning talk about the 
``incompetence'' of local officials. There is no body in the world more 
incompetent than this Senate. But here is a moment when we can actually 
be proud of something that we did here. Even President Trump has been 
running campaign ads touting these benefits. Even as he is running 
these ads--which, as Senator Wyden said, he is running because this 
unemployment benefit is popular--he is threatening the take away the 
benefit by allowing the $600 to sunset at the end of July. That would 
be a profound mistake.
  Right now, even with these enhanced benefits in place, 17 percent of 
American families can't cover 3 months of basic expenses. Without the 
extra benefits, that number wouldn't be 17 percent. It would be 43 
percent, almost half of the families in our country. Today, nearly 10 
percent of Americans can't make the rent. Without the extra benefits, 
that number would double or triple.
  If we let these benefits expire, we are going to throw tens of 
millions of Americans who rely on them into a profound financial 
crisis. We will be cutting their monthly income by $2,400. If we go 
     over that cliff and completely cut off benefits, not only 
     will it cut incomes by 50 percent or 60 percent or 70 
     percent for literally millions of Americans who can't go 
     back to work, but it will cause extreme damage to the 
     economy.
  Nothing has kept our economy afloat more than this investment in 
unemployment. Allowing these benefits to expire would remove $50 
billion a month from the economy, reducing the GDP by 2.5 percent in 
the second half of this year. That would lead to 2 million jobs lost 
and a significant increase in the unemployment rate. So we would be 
right back here again. We shouldn't be doing that, at this point, with 
this very fragile economy and when COVID-19 is spreading in far too 
many places.
  Some of the industries are facing extreme crises in my State as well 
as across the country. Hotels are projected to suffer revenue losses of 
almost 60 percent in 2020. Between March and May 2020, total restaurant 
sales were down more than $94 billion from expected levels, and 90 
percent of independent concert venues are at risk of permanently 
closing down in a few months without receiving additional relief. We 
can't tell people who are working in all of these industries--when 
there is no way these businesses will even be close to being 100 
percent in the near future--that they are just on their own.
  That is why we need to pass an expanded unemployment benefit that 
continues after July. We should tie that expanded benefit to the 
unemployment rate, as Senator Schumer and Senator Wyden have designed, 
so that it steps the benefit down as the economy heals. That makes 
sense. Nobody here wants to be in a place at which the unemployment 
benefit disincentivizes people from working, which is why they step it 
down, but it needs to stay in place until this economy heals.
  It is the wrong approach for the country and for the working people 
in this country to send them over the cliff right now, and it will be 
the wrong approach to send them over the cliff in 6 months or even in 2 
years if the unemployment rate is still elevated. We need to extend 
expanded unemployment benefits, and we need to do it until the economy 
recovers. It is the right thing for the workers and families who are 
wondering how they are going to get through one of the most difficult 
challenges of their lives. It is the right thing to do for the broader 
economy in order for it to come back as strongly as it can as we work 
toward a vaccine.
  I thank my colleagues again for their tremendous leadership. I hope 
that we will be able to work on this in a bipartisan way, as we did 
before, and that we will be able to pass these extensions for the 
American people.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.

[[Page S4142]]

  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 4143

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Tile.--This Act may be cited as the ``American 
     Workforce Rescue Act of 2020''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Extension of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation.
Sec. 3. Extension and expansion of the pandemic emergency unemployment 
              compensation program.
Sec. 4. Extension of pandemic unemployment assistance.
Sec. 5. Extension of additional unemployment compensation provisions.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT 
                   COMPENSATION.

       (a) Extension.--Section 2104(e) of the Relief for Workers 
     Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title 
     II of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Applicability.--
       ``(1) In general.--An agreement entered into under this 
     section shall apply to weeks of unemployment--
       ``(A) beginning after the date on which such agreement is 
     entered into; and
       ``(B) ending on or before the applicable end date described 
     in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Applicable end date.--
       ``(A) In general.--The applicable end date described in 
     this paragraph with respect to a State is the date that is 13 
     weeks after the first date (after the date the State entered 
     into an agreement under this section) that the State is not 
     in an extended benefit period described in subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a State shall be considered to be in an 
     extended benefit period, as of any given day, if such a 
     period would then be in effect for such State under the 
     Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 
     (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `6.0' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.''.

       (b) Revision of Amount.--Section 2104(b) of the Relief for 
     Workers Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A 
     of title II of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-
     136)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by inserting ``(or, for weeks of 
     unemployment beginning after July 31, 2020, and ending on or 
     before the applicable end date described in subsection (e)(2) 
     the amount described in paragraph (3))'' after ``$600''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Amount of federal pandemic unemployment 
     compensation.--
       ``(A) Tiers.--The amount described in this paragraph is, 
     with respect to a State, the following amount:
       ``(i) First tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning in 
     a first tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(i), $100.
       ``(ii) Second tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning 
     in a second tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(ii), $200.
       ``(iii) Third tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning 
     in a third tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(iii), $300.
       ``(iv) Fourth tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning 
     in a fourth tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(iv), $400.
       ``(v) Fifth tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning in 
     a third tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(v), $500.
       ``(vi) Sixth tier amount.--In the case of weeks beginning 
     in a fourth tier high unemployment period described in 
     subparagraph (B)(vi), $600.
       ``(B) High unemployment periods.--
       ``(i) First tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(i), a 
     first tier high unemployment period described in this clause 
     is, with respect to a State, any period during which an 
     extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `6.0 percent but less 
     than 7.0 percent' for `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; 
     and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(ii) Second tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(ii), 
     a second tier high unemployment period described in this 
     clause is, with respect to a State, any period during which 
     an extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `7.0 percent but less 
     than 8.0 percent' for `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; 
     and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(iii) Third tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(iii), 
     a third tier high unemployment period described in this 
     clause is, with respect to a State, any period during which 
     an extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `8.0 percent but less 
     than 9.0 percent' for `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; 
     and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(iv) Fourth tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(iv), 
     a fourth tier high unemployment period described in this 
     clause is, with respect to a State, any period during which 
     an extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `9.0 percent but less 
     than 10.0 percent' for `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; 
     and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(v) Fifth tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(v), a 
     fifth tier high unemployment period described in this clause 
     is, with respect to a State, any period during which an 
     extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `10.0 percent but less 
     than 11.0 percent' for `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; 
     and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(vi) Sixth tier.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)(vi), a 
     sixth tier high unemployment period described in this clause 
     is, with respect to a State, any period during which an 
     extended benefit period would be in effect for the State 
     under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation 
     Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--

       ``(I) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(II) such section 203(f)--

       ``(aa) were applied by substituting `11.0 percent' for 
     `6.5' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(bb) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(C) Special rules.--
       ``(i) Minimum period on a tier before moving to a lower 
     tier.--Once a State is in a high unemployment period tier 
     described in clause (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), or (vi) of 
     subparagraph (B), the State may not move to a lower high 
     unemployment period tier (resulting in a lower dollar amount 
     under subparagraph (A)) before the State has been in the 
     existing high unemployment period tier for a period of at 
     least 13 consecutive weeks.
       ``(ii) Deemed first tier.--For purposes of determining the 
     amount of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation during 
     the 13-week period described in subsection (e)(2)(A) with 
     respect to a State, the State shall be deemed to be in a 
     first tier high unemployment period described in subparagraph 
     (B)(i) during such period.''.

     SEC. 3. EXTENSION AND EXPANSION OF THE PANDEMIC EMERGENCY 
                   UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION PROGRAM.

       (a) Extension.--Section 2107(g) of the Relief for Workers 
     Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title 
     II of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(g) Applicability.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), an 
     agreement entered into under this section shall apply, with 
     respect to a State, to weeks of unemployment--
       ``(A) beginning after the date on which such agreement is 
     entered into; and
       ``(B) ending on or before the applicable end date described 
     in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Applicable end date.--
       ``(A) In general.--The applicable end date described in 
     this paragraph with respect to a State is the later of--
       ``(i) March 27, 2021; or
       ``(ii) if, as of the date under clause (i), the State is in 
     an extended benefit period described in subparagraph (B), the 
     first date after the date under clause (i) that the State is 
     not in an extended benefit period described in subparagraph 
     (B).

[[Page S4143]]

       ``(B) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a State shall be considered to be in an 
     extended benefit period, as of any given day, if such a 
     period would then be in effect for such State under the 
     Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 
     (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `5.5' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.

       ``(3) Transition for amount remaining in account.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), in the case 
     of an individual who has amounts remaining in an account 
     established under subsection (b) as of the last day of the 
     last week (as determined in accordance with the applicable 
     State law) ending on or before the date described in 
     paragraph (1)(B), pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation shall continue to be payable to such individual 
     from such amounts for any week beginning after such date for 
     which the individual meets the eligibility requirements of 
     this section.
       ``(B) Limitation.--No compensation shall be payable by 
     reason of paragraph (1) for any week beginning after the date 
     that is 4 months after the date described in paragraph 
     (1)(B).''.
       (b) Expansion.--Section 2107(b) of the Relief for Workers 
     Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title 
     II of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph 
     (3) as paragraph (2); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(3) First-tier pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation.--The amount established in an account under 
     paragraph (1) shall be equal to 13 times the individual's 
     average weekly benefit amount, which includes the amount of 
     Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation under section 
     2104, for the benefit year.
       ``(4) Second-tier pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, at the time that the amount added to 
     an individual's account under paragraph (3) (in this section 
     referred to as `first-tier pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation') is exhausted, or at any time thereafter, such 
     individual's State is in an extended benefit period (as 
     determined under subparagraph (B)), such account shall be 
     augmented by an amount (in this section referred to as 
     `second-tier pandemic emergency unemployment compensation') 
     equal to 13 times the individual's average weekly benefit 
     amount, which includes the amount of Federal Pandemic 
     Unemployment Compensation under section 2104, for the benefit 
     year.
       ``(B) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a State shall be considered to be in an 
     extended benefit period, as of any given time, if such a 
     period would then be in effect for such State under the 
     Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 
     (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f) did not include the requirement 
     under paragraph (1)(A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(C) Limitation.--The account of an individual may be 
     augmented not more than once under this subsection.
       ``(5) Third-tier pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, at the time that the amount added to 
     an individual's account under paragraph (4) is exhausted, or 
     at any time thereafter, such individual's State is in an 
     extended benefit period (as determined under subparagraph 
     (B)), such account shall be augmented by an amount (in this 
     section referred to as `third-tier pandemic emergency 
     unemployment compensation') equal to 13 times the 
     individual's average weekly benefit amount, which includes 
     the amount of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation 
     under section 2104, for the benefit year.
       ``(B) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a State shall be considered to be in an 
     extended benefit period, as of any given time, if such a 
     period would then be in effect for such State under the 
     Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 
     (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `7.5' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.

       ``(C) Limitation.--The account of an individual may be 
     augmented not more than once under this subsection.
       ``(6) Fourth-tier pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, at the time that the amount added to 
     an individual's account under paragraph (5) is exhausted, or 
     at any time thereafter, such individual's State is in an 
     extended benefit period (as determined under subparagraph 
     (B)), such account shall be augmented by an amount (in this 
     section referred to as `fourth-tier pandemic emergency 
     unemployment compensation') equal to 13 times the 
     individual's average weekly benefit amount, which includes 
     the amount of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation 
     under section 2104, for the benefit year.
       ``(B) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), a State shall be considered to be in an 
     extended benefit period, as of any given time, if such a 
     period would then be in effect for such State under the 
     Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 
     (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `8.5' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.

       ``(C) Limitation.--The account of an individual may be 
     augmented not more than once under this subsection.
       ``(7) Coordination of pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation with regular compensation.--
       ``(A) In general.--If--
       ``(i) an individual has been determined to be entitled to 
     pandemic emergency unemployment compensation with respect to 
     a benefit year;
       ``(ii) that benefit year has expired;
       ``(iii) that individual has remaining entitlement to 
     pandemic emergency unemployment compensation with respect to 
     that benefit year; and
       ``(iv) that individual would qualify for a new benefit year 
     in which the weekly benefit amount of regular compensation is 
     at least either $100 or 25 percent less than the individual's 
     weekly benefit amount in the benefit year referred to in 
     clause (i),
     then the State shall determine eligibility for compensation 
     as provided in subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Determination of eligibility.--For individuals 
     described in subparagraph (A), the State shall determine 
     whether the individual is to be paid pandemic emergency 
     unemployment compensation or regular compensation for a week 
     of unemployment using one of the following methods:
       ``(i) The State shall, if permitted by State law, establish 
     a new benefit year, but defer the payment of regular 
     compensation with respect to that new benefit year until 
     exhaustion of all pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation payable with respect to the benefit year 
     referred to in subparagraph (A)(i).
       ``(ii) The State shall, if permitted by State law, defer 
     the establishment of a new benefit year (which uses all the 
     wages and employment which would have been used to establish 
     a benefit year but for the application of this subparagraph), 
     until exhaustion of all pandemic emergency unemployment 
     compensation payable with respect to the benefit year 
     referred to in subparagraph (A)(i).
       ``(iii) The State shall pay, if permitted by State law--

       ``(I) regular compensation equal to the weekly benefit 
     amount established under the new benefit year; and
       ``(II) pandemic emergency unemployment compensation equal 
     to the difference between that weekly benefit amount and the 
     weekly benefit amount for the expired benefit year.

       ``(iv) The State shall determine rights to pandemic 
     emergency unemployment compensation without regard to any 
     rights to regular compensation if the individual elects to 
     not file a claim for regular compensation under the new 
     benefit year.''.

     SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE.

       Section 2102 of the Relief for Workers Affected by 
     Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title II of 
     division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A)(ii), by striking ``December 31, 
     2020'' and inserting ``the applicable end date described in 
     section 2107(g)(2)''; and
       (B) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
       ``(2) Limitation on duration of assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--The total number of weeks for which a 
     covered individual may receive assistance under this section 
     shall not exceed 39 weeks and such total shall include any 
     week for which the covered individual received regular 
     compensation or extended benefits under any Federal or State 
     law, or pandemic emergency unemployment compensation under 
     section 2107, except that if after March 27, 2020, the 
     duration of extended benefits, or pandemic emergency 
     unemployment compensation under section 2107 is extended, the 
     39-week period described in this paragraph shall be extended 
     by--
       ``(i) the number of weeks that is equal to the number of 
     weeks by which the extended benefits were extended; and
       ``(ii) in the case of an extension of pandemic emergency 
     unemployment compensation under section 2107, by the number 
     of weeks that is equal to the additional number of weeks 
     (through augmentation) available

[[Page S4144]]

     with respect to the State in which the individual resides 
     under paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of section 2107(b).
       ``(B) Extension of assistance.--For the purpose of an 
     extension of the 39-week period under subparagraph (A), the 
     following rules shall apply:
       ``(i) Transition period.-- Section 2107(g)(3) shall apply 
     to any extension of assistance under subparagraph (A).
       ``(ii) Accounts and grandfathering.--In determining the 
     number of weeks available for a covered individual under an 
     extension described in subparagraph (A)(ii), the Secretary 
     shall apply rules that are similar to the rules described in 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of section 2107(b), including 
     with respect to accounts and grandfathering.'';
       (2) in subsection (h), by striking ``section 625'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``part 625''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Unemployment Rate Calculation for Certain 
     Territories.--In the case of Guam, American Samoa, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Federated 
     States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, 
     and the Republic of Palau, the following rules shall apply:
       ``(1) For the purposes of subsection (c)(1)(A)(ii) of this 
     section, the Secretary shall determine the total unemployment 
     rate of the territory in a manner similar to the manner under 
     section 2107(g)(2).
       ``(2) For the purpose of subsection (c)(2)(B) of this 
     section, the Secretary shall determine the total unemployment 
     rate of the territory in a manner similar to the manner under 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of section 2107(b).
       ``(3) For the purpose of subsection (d)(2) of this section, 
     the Secretary shall determine the total unemployment rate of 
     the territory in a manner similar to the manner under section 
     2104(b)(3)(B).''.

     SEC. 5. EXTENSION OF ADDITIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 
                   PROVISIONS.

       (a) Emergency Unemployment Relief for Governmental Entities 
     and Nonprofit Organizations.--Section 903(i)(1)(D) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1103(i)(1)(D)) is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 2020'' and inserting ``the applicable 
     end date described in section 2107(g)(2) of the Relief for 
     Workers Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A 
     of title II of division A of the CARES Act)''.
       (b) Temporary Full Federal Funding of the First Week of 
     Compensable Regular Unemployment for States With No Waiting 
     Week.--Section 2105(e)(2) of the Relief for Workers Affected 
     by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title II of 
     division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is amended 
     by striking ``December 31, 2020'' and inserting ``the 
     applicable end date described in section 2107(g)(2)''.
       (c) Temporary Financing of Short-time Compensation Payments 
     in States With Programs in Law.--Section 2108(b)(2) of the 
     Relief for Workers Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in 
     subtitle A of title II of division A of the CARES Act (Public 
     Law 116-136)) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2020'' 
     and inserting ``the applicable end date described in section 
     2107(g)(2)''.
       (d) Temporary Financing of Short-time Compensation 
     Agreements.--Section 2109(d)(2) of the Relief for Workers 
     Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title 
     II of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136)) is 
     amended by striking ``December 31, 2020'' and inserting ``the 
     applicable end date described in section 2107(g)(2)''.
       (e) Waiver of the 7-day Waiting Period for Benefits Under 
     the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act.--Section 2112(a) of 
     the Relief for Workers Affected by Coronavirus Act (contained 
     in subtitle A of title II of division A of the CARES Act 
     (Public Law 116-136)) is amended by striking ``December 31, 
     2020'' and inserting ``the applicable end date described in 
     section 2107(g)(2)''.
       (f) Temporary Assistance for States With Advances.--Section 
     1202(b)(10)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1322(b)(10)(A)) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2020'' 
     and inserting ``the applicable end date described in section 
     2107(g)(2) of the Relief for Workers Affected by Coronavirus 
     Act (contained in subtitle A of title II of division A of the 
     CARES Act)''.
       (g) Full Federal Funding of Extended Unemployment 
     Compensation for a Limited Period.--Subsections (a) and (b) 
     of section 4105 of the Emergency Unemployment Insurance 
     Stabilization and Access Act of 2020 (contained in division D 
     of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (Public Law 
     116-127)) are each amended by striking ``December 31, 2020'' 
     and inserting ``the applicable end date described in section 
     2107(g)(2) of the Relief for Workers Affected by Coronavirus 
     Act (contained in subtitle A of title II of division A of the 
     CARES Act)''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JOHNSON (for himself, Mr. Peters, Mrs. Capito, Mr. 
        Lankford, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Carper):
  S. 4148. A bill to extend the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 
Standards Program of the Department of Homeland Security, and for other 
purposes; considered and passed.

                                S. 4148

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM 
                   STANDARDS PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 
                   SECURITY.

       (a) In General.--Section 5 of the Protecting and Securing 
     Chemical Facilities from Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014 
     (Public Law 113-254; 6 U.S.C. 621 note) is amended by 
     striking ``July 23, 2020'' and inserting ``July 27, 2023''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 1 day after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 

  SENATE RESOLUTION 640--TO EXPRESS THE SENSE OF THE SENATE ON UNITED 
        STATES-ISRAEL COOPERATION ON PRECISION-GUIDED MUNITIONS

  Mr. ROUNDS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                              S. Res. 640

       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
       (1) the Department of Defense has cooperated extensively 
     with Israel to assist in the procurement of precision-guided 
     munitions, and such cooperation represents an important 
     example of robust United States support for Israel;
       (2) to the extent practicable, the Secretary of Defense 
     should take further measures to expedite deliveries of 
     precision-guided munitions to Israel; and
       (3) regularized annual purchases of precision-guided 
     munitions by Israel, in accordance with existing requirements 
     and practices regarding the export of defense articles and 
     defense services, coordinated with the United States Air 
     Force annual purchase of precision-guided munitions, would 
     enhance the security of both the United States and Israel 
     by--
       (A) promoting a more efficient use of defense resources by 
     taking advantage of economies of scale;
       (B) enabling the United States and Israel to address crisis 
     requirements for precision-guided munitions in a timely and 
     flexible manner; and
       (C) encouraging the defense industrial base to maintain 
     routine production lines of precision-guided munitions.

                          ____________________