September 16, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 160 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session

[Pages S5642-S5646]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Coronavirus

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss 
this unprecedented obstruction that American families are facing from 
the Democrats. In a time when Congress really should be working toward 
bipartisan solutions on coronavirus, Democrats keep obstructing--over 
and over and over again.
  It does seem to be their singular focus. It seems to me that they are 
going to continue to obstruct all the way until November 3, election 
day, putting politics first and American families last.
  The obstruction has reached levels that has even made Members of 
their own caucus ``uncomfortable,'' ``alarmed,'' and ``frustrated.'' 
Now, those are not my words; they are the words of Democrats sitting in 
Congress, in the United States, in this very building. Democrats are 
telling their leaders that the leaders are failing them by failing to 
compromise and work together toward solutions that would benefit the 
American people.
  So the bad news for American families is that, last week, Democrats 
in this body, in the U.S. Senate, blocked, obstructed a targeted 
coronavirus aid package with policies, amazingly, that the Democrats 
had at one time supported. But they came here to the floor of the 
Senate and voted, in lockstep, no--no to children, no to jobs, no to 
paychecks, no to fighting the disease.
  They actually blocked relief that would, one, have gotten kids back 
to school so kids wouldn't fall further behind from the school they 
have already missed, and it would have let parents get back to work. 
They voted no. They blocked people getting back to work safely. They 
blocked paycheck protection money so that paychecks could continue to 
go and businesses--small businesses--could remain open.
  They blocked money for vaccines and treatment, for testing, so we 
could put the disease in the rearview mirror.
  Now, the good news is that the majority of the Senate did support the 
legislation to help children and their parents and workers and the 
small businesses and the medical personnel fighting against the 
disease. But all those votes came from the Republican side of the 
aisle. Republicans are united. The Republican bill received 52 ``yes'' 
votes. All 52 were Republican. Not one single Democrat voted yes, even 
though the majority of that body had backed the relief efforts.
  When you talked to them, they said, oh, yes, they are for this and 
this and this, but they voted on the U.S. Senate floor to block it. It 
is interesting. They even blocked allowing the Senate to discuss these 
issues. All we did was

[[Page S5643]]

come to the floor and say: We have some proposals. Let's discuss them. 
If you don't like them, offer amendments. We can discuss those, debate 
those.
  They even blocked a motion to move to get that bill to the floor of 
the Senate--step 1 of legislating. They said no. So they may say they 
want to help the American people, but that is not what happened on the 
floor of the U.S. Senate.
  The New York Times had a headline that said: ``Hopes Dim for More 
Stimulus as Democrats Block Narrow GOP Plan.'' Well, they are right; it 
is a narrow plan because it is targeted. It is targeted to kids and 
schools, to workers, jobs, and the disease.
  It doesn't include all of the extraneous things that Nancy Pelosi and 
the House put in: money for environmental justice; money for the 
National Endowment; money for this, that, and the next thing; money 
for--you name it--direct paychecks to illegal immigrants. That is just 
the tip of the iceberg when you take a look at their entire list. To 
me, it was Nancy Pelosi living on ``Fantasy Island.''
  POLITICO said of the vote: ``Senate Democrats block Republican COVID 
relief proposal''--Senate Democrats block--once again, blocking the 
things that the American families all across this country are asking 
when they look to Congress for help and relief.
  USA TODAY had the headline: ``Senate Democrats block $300 billion 
coronavirus stimulus package, leaving little hope for relief before 
November''--$300 billion. That is a huge amount of money that could do 
so much to help our schools, to help our students, to help small 
businesses, to help our workers, and to help fight the disease.
  Unfortunately, this has been the record that we have seen coming from 
the Democrats ever since the pandemic began. While the virus was raging 
in March, Democrats delayed help for Americans by blocking the CARES 
Act.
  The New York Times headline at that time, on March 22, said: 
``Emergency Economic Rescue Plan in Limbo as Democrats Block Action.'' 
So they were blocking it back in March, and they were blocking it last 
Thursday.
  In April, as small businesses were forcibly shut down by the 
government, they were fighting to, one day, reopen their doors--that is 
all they wanted to do, get back to business; they wanted to keep 
employees on the payroll--Democrats, once again, blocked funding for 
the Paycheck Protection Program.
  This is a wonderful program, Mr. President. Thirteen thousand of 
these loans were taken in the State of Wyoming by small businesses. I 
am sure, in your home State of South Dakota, similar small businesses 
took advantage of this opportunity. Our average loan was about $78,000. 
These are small businesses that just needed help making the payroll, 
keeping people working, keeping people on the payroll, looking forward 
to the days that they could return to business as usual.
  What was the NPR, National Public Radio, point on this on April 9? It 
was this: ``Senate Democrats Block GOP Efforts to Boost Small Business 
Aid''--Senate Democrats blocking aid for small businesses all across 
the country.
  Then, in August, as unemployment insurance was set to expire, 
Republicans asked for consent on this floor to extend the program. 
Democrats came to this very floor and, once again, objected.
  So, today, with an opportunity to finish the fight against 
coronavirus, the Democrats have a full roadblock in place against any 
further relief. The cold, hard truth that we face is that they have 
delayed aid, and they have divided this country all year long.
  I would go so far as to say this has hurt the country; it has hurt 
families; it has hurt our students; it has hurt our schools; it has 
hurt our healthcare providers; and it has certainly hurt people trying 
to recover from the disease.
  Remember that the year started with the Democrats' completely 
partisan impeachment farce. We sat here, day after day, listening as 
the Democrats brought forth charge after charge against the President. 
That is how we started the year, and now we are ending with their 
blocking of coronavirus relief.
  Let me assure the country, Republicans will not let you down. 
Republicans will continue working to put the virus in the rearview 
mirror and deliver what we are seeing right now, and it is the great 
American comeback. It is people getting back to work--over 10 million 
Americans back to work over the last 4 months. It is an unemployment 
rate down below 9 percent. It was over 9 percent for 4 months.
  It is businesses reopening, kids going back to school, a vaccine on 
the way--great, optimistic ideas and thoughts regarding the vaccine. I 
met with the Secretary of Health and Human Services earlier today. I am 
very encouraged and optimistic about a vaccine being available to many 
at the end of the year.
  So there is a lot to be optimistic about as the country comes back 
from the coronavirus because this is the great American comeback.
  I yield the floor.
  (Mr. BARRASSO assumed the Chair.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I am here on the floor this evening to 
talk about what Congress needs to do right now to help the American 
people with regard to this coronavirus pandemic. We are not out of the 
woods yet. People are still struggling, with the economy being weak, 
and we still have a real healthcare crisis to deal with.
  Since this crisis began, Congress has come together as Republicans 
and Democrats both here in the Senate and over in the House, working 
with the White House, to pass five coronavirus bills--five. Legislation 
addressed both the healthcare crisis and the economic free-fall that 
were caused by the virus and also by the government-imposed shutdowns. 
The biggest of these bills was the one you hear most about; that is, 
the roughly $2 trillion in the CARES Act that was passed by a vote in 
this Chamber of 96 to 0--totally bipartisan.
  Unfortunately, since May, when the last of these bipartisan bills was 
enacted, partisanship has prevailed over policy, and Washington has 
been paralyzed, unable to repeat the coming together for the public 
good.
  Democrats in this Chamber have consistently insisted that the only 
way forward is a bill called the Heroes Act. This is a $3.5 trillion 
piece of legislation that passed the House of Representatives 4 months 
ago along partisan lines.
  By the way, $3.5 trillion would be the most expensive legislation 
ever to be enacted.
  When this bill passed the House 4 months ago, POLITICO and others in 
the media accurately called it a messaging bill that had no chance of 
becoming law.
  It is disappointing that Democrats have continued to push this ``my 
way or the highway'' approach because this bill is a nonstarter for a 
lot of reasons, including the price tag and the fact that it includes 
non-COVID-related provisions. To name one example, it repeals the State 
and local tax deduction cap. That is a $135 billion Tax Code change, 
and most of the benefit is going to go to the top 1 percent of wage 
earners. What does it have to do with COVID-19?
  Now is not the time to give tax breaks to the wealthy, to make 
changes to our immigration policy, or impose unprecedented mandates on 
State election procedures that are normally in the province of the 
States, not us--all of which are part of the Heroes Act. Instead, this 
should be a time where we focus on what the American people need right 
now and help them to handle this healthcare and economic challenge they 
are facing, but that hasn't happened.
  Last week I spoke on this floor about all the things in the targeted 
bill that was voted on last Thursday in this Chamber, where there is 
bipartisanship, where Democrats and Republican actually agree.
  I talked about the need to extend the PPP program--Paycheck 
Protection Program--which is helping small businesses keep their doors 
open, but it expired on August 8. A lot of small businesses are saying 
to me back home in Ohio: I am barely holding on. When is this coming? I 
need an extension to this program.
  Yet we can't seem to get our act together here even though it is 
totally nonpartisan, as far as I can tell.
  The bill we voted on last Thursday also has more funding for 
something

[[Page S5644]]

desperately needed in my home State of Ohio and other States around the 
country, which is more money for testing. It also has more money, by 
the way, for developing a vaccine more quickly and effectively and for 
getting these anti-viral therapies up and going. All of this is stuff 
we should be able to agree on, right? No, we haven't been able to.
  Another thing that was in that bill last Thursday was providing 
funding for the schools so they can reopen--K-12 but also for our 
colleges and universities. These schools are starting to reopen, and 
they need the help badly. Actually, it had enough funding in there that 
it was slightly more than the funding that was in the Heroes Act, the 
Democrats' proposal, for the same purpose--$105 billion. Why couldn't 
we get together?

  What else did it have? It had something very important for a lot of 
people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. It had an 
extension of the current Federal supplement for unemployment insurance 
in the States. It had a $300-per-week, Federal-taxpayer-paid additional 
supplement on top of the roughly $350 that States already provide on 
average for unemployment. Yet that was rejected.
  We couldn't even have a good vote to proceed on the bill, to have a 
debate on the bill so we could have an honest debate and say, oh, $300 
is too much, or it is not enough, or maybe the PPP program needs to be 
slightly changed this way or that way, or maybe there is less money for 
schools needed or more money for schools.
  We couldn't even get on the bill because you need 60 votes to do 
that, and we only had 52, which is a majority of this Chamber, but it 
is not the 60-vote supermajority. Fifty-two Republicans supported it. 
Unfortunately, no Democrats were able to support it. I don't get that 
because all we were saying was, let's get on this bill and have a 
debate, and if later on in the process you don't like where we ended 
up, there is another 60-vote margin, and you can filibuster it again.
  We couldn't even get on the bill to have a debate. To me, that is 
really sad because the American people weren't given the opportunity to 
get some help, but also they weren't given the opportunity to see what 
the differences are and have this out in the open.
  That is legislation that 52 Republicans supported. We are ready to 
go. Let's have the discussion. Let's have the debate.
  The Federal funds to help the unemployed get by was a particular 
concern of mine, and I want to focus on that tonight. That unemployment 
benefit is a classic example of where Senate Democrats have blocked 
what I think is a reasonable compromise--I will explain why I think 
that--and instead have decided to provide nothing. Nothing.
  What we should do instead is we should embrace a compromise together 
for these families who continue to struggle to make ends meet because 
some people can't go back to work still because their movie theater or 
their bowling alley or their motor coach company can't hire them. 
Either they are shut down or they simply can't hire them back. There 
are people who are unemployed who still need our help.
  Early on in this pandemic, both Republicans and Democrats recognized 
this. We recognized the need to bolster the State-run unemployment 
insurance programs to help offset the massive job losses we saw in 
March and April. That is why the CARES Act we talked about earlier--
this bipartisan bill--contained an unprecedented $600-per-week 
additional Federal supplement on top of the State supplement for 4 
months.
  By the way, the State benefit in Ohio on average is $360. The $600 
was on top of $360, coming up to $960 per week. We did that for a 
period of 4 months. That provided an important income source for a lot 
of people. It made a huge difference in the lives of a lot of people 
who early on couldn't work because the government was actually closing 
down businesses, saying: You can't open.
  Some say that was too much. We will talk about why they say that. But 
it was a big help, and it was appropriate in a sense at the time to do 
something that big because the government itself was saying: You are 
going to lose your job through no fault of your own. We the government 
are saying you have to shut down, so we are going to provide you an 
unemployment benefit.
  It was also used for other things--to pay rent, to pay that car 
payment, to just get by.
  As the year has gone on, we have made progress now on slowing the 
spread of the coronavirus, adding testing, adding more personal 
protective gear, and so on. Many parts of our economy have been able to 
reopen in a safe and sustainable manner. And that is good. Without the 
help we provided in the legislation--the five bills we passed--we 
wouldn't be so far along. They helped. They helped keep the doors open 
at a lot of small businesses. They helped provide the money for our 
healthcare system, for testing.
  With that reopening around the country, hiring picked back up, and 
now we have far fewer people on unemployment than we did at the 
beginning of this pandemic. So there are fewer people who need 
unemployment insurance. Unemployment is at about 8.4 percent. That is 
what it was last month. That is down from over 15 percent in the 
spring. Now, 8.4 percent is still too high, particularly compared to 
the record lows we saw just before this pandemic. It is more than twice 
what it was then. But it is undoubtedly a step in the right direction. 
Unemployment claims are either holding steady or dropping now in most 
States. That is good.
  With this positive progress we were seeing, I think it was fair for 
Congress to want to take another look at the original unemployment 
insurance supplement, which expired at the end of July, and see whether 
there was a new supplement that we could continue to help those in need 
while better reflecting this improved economy and the need for workers 
rather than a situation where the government was actually imposing 
shutdowns of much of our economy.

  That is where things broke down. At the end of July, the $600 
supplement ended. Everybody knew it was going to end then. But 
Republicans and Democrats couldn't agree on how to best structure an 
additional UI supplement.
  By the way, having differences isn't unusual around here. We have 
debates all the time. That debate was a big part of the negotiations in 
July and August. What is disappointing to me and to many of my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle and to so many people we 
represent is that instead of taking us up on our offer that we 
offered--to extend the $600 per week to be able the negotiate 
something, for 2 weeks, which would have put a lot of pressure on the 
negotiations--think about it--the Democrats said no. I don't know why 
they said no, but Democrats would not even allow us to extend the $600 
to put pressure on negotiations. Deliberately, they allowed these 
benefits to expire. It went from a $600 benefit on top of the State 
benefit to zero Federal benefit.
  Let me repeat that. Rather than work to agree on a weeklong extension 
of a lifeline for so many people to buy time to work something out, 
Democrats instead chose to let these benefits expire and allowed 
millions of Americans to go without benefits.
  When we hit this impasse on the UI issue that Congress just couldn't 
break, the Trump administration stepped in, and President Trump quickly 
signed an Executive order on August 8--so a week after the benefit 
expired--which authorized FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency, to begin distributing an emergency lost wage assistance 
unemployment check.
  So the government stepped in at the executive branch and said: You 
guys in Congress can't figure this out. The $600 has gone to zero, so 
you just have the State benefit now, and you have a lot of people still 
unemployed through no fault of their own. It is tough to get by on 360 
bucks a week.
  So President Trump and his administration stepped in and said: We 
will provide it temporarily--temporarily, because that is all the money 
they had through what is called the Wage Assistance Program. Under this 
program, $44 billion from the Disaster Relief Fund was made available 
to States to use as a supplement to their unemployment insurance 
programs--still leaving $25 billion, by the way, in that fund for 
natural disasters.
  I spoke to Labor Secretary Scalia on Friday. I asked him: Is there 
any money left in that fund?
  Remember, this was done on August 8, and they had a limited amount of 
money.

[[Page S5645]]

  He said: No, Rob. Actually, it was a temporary program, meant to be a 
bridge so Congress would get its act together between August 8 and now.
  So basically, in a month and a week, surely Congress would do 
something here, but we haven't. Now, that money has run out. Now, 
people who were getting the $600 benefit, down to zero, and then back 
up to $300, which most are getting in a lump sum because it takes a 
while to process this money--that $300 is now ending. No more $300-per-
week Federal supplement.
  By the way, almost every State and territory except for two has 
applied for and received some of this funding from the Feds. Ohio was 
able to receive enough funding to cover 6 weeks of lost benefits, so 
basically from August 1 until now. Ohio got $1.4 billion from the fund. 
It is sending out its unemployment insurance benefits this week. Next 
week it ends because they have run out of money. They have used the 
Federal money.
  The $300 supplement has now ended. It is surely time for us to act. 
It would be timely this week and next week to now do something to 
provide for a supplement for people who lost their job through no fault 
of their own.
  We could have solved this last Thursday with the targeted relief bill 
that came to the floor for a vote that I talked about. The timing was 
perfect. We could have done that because part of the negotiations that 
we had among ourselves, Republicans, over this and with some Democrats, 
I suppose, was, what is the right level? What we came up with was $300. 
That was part of the bill that got 52 votes last Thursday but needed 
the 60 votes, and Democrats blocked it. Even though it got the majority 
of the Senate, it didn't get the supermajority of 60 that it needed. 
Again, we couldn't even get on the legislation to talk about it. That 
$600 supplement in this bill was changed to $300, which was consistent 
with where the administration has been over the last 5 or 6 weeks. That 
helps the vast majority of unemployed individuals make ends meet 
without driving our deficit even higher.

  The $600-a-week supplement was not sustainable over time, in part, 
because people were actually making more money on unemployment 
insurance than they were with their jobs. You were being paid more not 
to work than to work at $600 on top of the State benefit. In fact, 
under that supplement of $600, the median wage earner in America 
received 134 percent more of his or her previous wages, making it 
harder, therefore, to jump back into the workplace and get our economy 
moving again.
  By the way, I heard this all over Ohio, and I know every single one 
of my colleagues has. They heard it from businesses, particularly small 
businesses but also larger businesses. The Ford Motor Company told me 
they had a 25-percent absenteeism rate when I visited them over the 
August break because people weren't coming back to work because of the 
benefit that they had been getting of $600. So it was felt in small 
businesses, yes, but also midsize and larger businesses and also a lot 
of nonprofits.
  I heard it from hospitals. I heard it from people who provide 
addiction services, recovery services, treatment programs. Nonprofits 
are having a hard time getting people to come back because, again, the 
$600 on top of the State benefit average of the, say, $350--$950 a week 
was more than they were able to pay them. People were making more on 
unemployment insurance than they were at work. This was as the economy 
was starting to pick up. We needed jobs.
  We said: How about $300? Why did we pick $300? Well, again, $600 is 
so generous that it is paying people more. By the way, the 
Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan group here in Congress, 
analyzes these things. They analyzed it and said, if you continue the 
$600 until next year, which is what the Democratic proposal is in their 
legislation, the Heroes Act--if you continue the $600 until next year, 
that would result in 8 out of 10 people on unemployment insurance 
getting paid more on unemployment insurance than they would at work, 80 
percent. That is from the CBO.
  What is the right number instead of having 80 percent paid more by 
not working? Well, I think $300 is about the right number. Some could 
say that is too high, too, but the $300 on top of the State benefit was 
what was rejected last Thursday by my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle.
  By the way, when 80 percent of people are making more money by not 
working, it hurts everybody. It hurts these businesses. Small 
businesses and these nonprofits are not able to get people to come to 
work. Look at the ``Help Wanted'' signs you may see in your own 
community. It hurts the economy when you don't have this workforce and 
you don't have these jobs coming back.
  It also hurts the workers. I think all of us should want to reconnect 
people to work. That is where people get their healthcare. If they have 
it, they are likely to get it at work. That is where about 80 percent 
of us get it. It is where people get their retirement, if they have it. 
We want more people to have that, but a 401(K) is going to be through 
work. This is where people get the training they need to keep up with 
what is happening with their job. It is where people connect with other 
people. It is where people get self-respect and self-esteem by working. 
We should be encouraging work.
  Again, I think somewhere there is a number there where you are 
helping people who need the funds to be able to get by because they are 
unemployed through no fault of their own, yet you are not offering such 
a high benefit that it is more advantageous not to work.
  The $300-a-week amount offered last Thursday is generous compared to 
regular unemployment insurance. In Ohio, with the supplement, you go 
from $360 a week State benefit to $660 per week. It is a big change. It 
makes a big difference in people's lives. It would cover 90 percent of 
the lost wages for the median worker nationwide. The $300 per week 
covers 90 percent of the lost wages, helping particularly low- and 
middle-income wage earners get by without creating, again, this $600 
disincentive to work.
  Even if $300 wasn't the perfect solution, it was certainly a starting 
point. It was a policy point that could have been debated and amended 
on the floor had we gone to the legislation. Again, we were blocked 
even to go to the bill to talk about it. Democrats blocked us from 
debating it, and so people got nothing. They don't get the $300, which, 
again, 90 percent of lost wages for the median-wage worker would have 
been replaced by that. But they get zero. All people are left with is 
the State benefit now.
  Again, unfortunately, in this place, politics was put ahead of the 
interest of struggling families who need extra help. It is stunning to 
me that this is the point we have reached in Congress's work to address 
this coronavirus pandemic.
  Early on, there were so many bipartisan victories we achieved because 
Republicans and Democrats alike said: This is a crisis. We have to 
address this not as our party might want to do but as Americans--
recognizing the severity of the challenge we were facing. It was 
encouraging to see us come together to craft the CARES Act, which 
passed 96 to 0 and made a big difference.
  I had hoped we would be able to recognize from that victory the 
importance of hashing out our disagreements and coming up with a 
solution, finding common ground to be able to help those we represent. 
Unfortunately, the opposite has happened. Politics seem to have taken 
over. On the other side of the aisle, the Speaker of the House and 
others may think this is good politics for them not to move forward 
with something. Maybe they are right. Maybe it is good politics 
somehow, but it is not what is best for the American people.
  By opposing a reasonable compromise on unemployment insurance, as an 
example, what this Congress is doing is leaving the American people 
high and dry at the exact time that funding for these benefits has run 
out.
  Again, the short-term bridge that the administration provided, $300 a 
week, is running out. It doesn't need to happen. Let's come to the 
negotiating table this week and next week. We are going to be here next 
week. We are supposed to vote on a continuing resolution, the funding 
program. We will be here. We know what the differences are. We know 
what the similarities are. We know how to put together a package. We 
know what it has to be and

[[Page S5646]]

what the compromise is. For Republicans and Democrats alike, it is now 
on us to come up with that bipartisan solution on unemployment 
insurance and the other pressing issues we face as the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.