August 6, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 140 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session
All in Senate sectionPrev14 of 103Next
Coronavirus (Executive Session); Congressional Record Vol. 166, No. 140
(Senate - August 06, 2020)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S5231-S5233] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] Coronavirus Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, the news this morning about the actions taken by Facebook and Twitter in relation to statements made by President Trump is incredible. We now have a decision by these two major sources of social media to draw down and to remove statements made by the President of the United States on the issue of the national health emergency which we currently face. They believe--and certainly, on its face, it is clear--that these statements by President Trump misrepresented medical fact in terms of the immunity of children to COVID-19 and the state of play in America when it comes to this pandemic. The numbers 5 and 25 tell a real story. America has roughly 5 percent of the world's population and, sadly, 25 percent of the COVID infections in the world. How could a great and strong nation like ours have reached this point where this medical crisis has reached a point where many parts of America are facing recordbreaking infection levels? Part of it has to do with the lack of leadership: a President who has refused to acknowledge experts like Dr. Fauci and others, who, when they say things that disappoint him, are banished from appearing on television with him or making public statements in contradiction of his bizarre point of view. We also know, as well, that the President has downplayed, from the start, the threat of this COVID-19. One of the reasons Facebook and Twitter removed his statements is that the President continues to diminish the severity of this crisis. We know, as well, that he has failed to tell us the truth and has speculated on medical theories that are just pure quackery. Who can forget the President's famous press conference talking about ingesting disinfectants, his theories about ultraviolet lights, and this hydroxychloroquine fantasy that he continues to enjoy telling the American people? We know, as well, that he has failed to take action when it was needed Initially, Governors, including my own in the State of Illinois, were desperate for the equipment that they [[Page S5232]] needed to protect healthcare workers and to save the lives of those who were infected with the coronavirus. At this moment in time, many people are asking me basic questions on my website. One of the questions from a lady this morning said: Why is it that the United Kingdom has a rapid test and we don't in the United States? I wish I could answer that, but I can't. The fact is, if you are taking a test to see if you are positive for the coronavirus and the results aren't available for 5 days or even 12 days, they are almost pointless. At that point in time, it is just a data point in history, not something that you could rely on in terms of your own conduct. How do the Republicans in the Senate explain the nonchalance many of them have displayed when it comes to the challenges we face? This is the worst national health crisis we have faced in 100 years. We know that people are dying. Over 150,000 have died already in this country, and we know that number is likely to grow. Despite that, when it comes to putting money into testing, Democrats have called for a dramatic investment to make that happen, and the Republicans--just $16 billion for a nation that needs so much more. When it comes to the economy, I can't understand the position of the Republicans. They refuse to come forward with their own plan to rescue our economy, to help unemployed families, and to put businesses back in business, and they seem to lack a sense of urgency as to the situation we currently face. The American people take this situation very, very seriously. We have recently done surveys and found that they overwhelmingly believe we still have major challenges ahead, and they start with the coronavirus. Why hasn't this President used the resources of this government to come up with a quick, rapid-results test so that people can learn whether they are positive for coronavirus in a quick fashion? We can't realistically expect to open the economy or open our schools until we have that available across the United States of America. Yet the President doesn't seem to want to take on that responsibility. For those who believe that we can say to the unemployed ``If you would just work a little harder, you would find a job,'' they ought to face the reality. The reality is we have four unemployed workers in America for every job opening. The reality, as well, is that employers who wish to fill their positions are doing it at a faster pace than at any time. And this notion that if you are receiving an unemployment check you are going to stay home and not go back to work--in the last few months, of the people who have returned to work in America, 70 percent of them were being paid more on unemployment than they were on the jobs that they returned to, but they wanted to get back to work. They believe in work. They know that unemployment is a temporary help and that they have to get back on their own feet as quickly as possible. Plus, there are benefits to working. One of them is health insurance, and many people returned to work to get back to the health insurance that they particularly think is right for their family. So why would the Republicans be suggesting a reduction in the weekly benefit by some $400? They ought to sit down and talk to the people who are receiving these unemployment checks, as I did last Friday in Chicago. Let them tell their stories. What are they spending these unemployment checks for? Overwhelmingly, the basics of life: food, paying utility bills, rent and mortgage payments. People aren't salting this money away. Almost half of the unemployed in America have exhausted all of their savings. Some of them have resorted to selling some piece of property they own, some goods or articles that might raise enough money to help them pay their bills. It is a desperate situation for the 30 million Americans who are unemployed. I don't understand why the Republicans don't engage with us in addressing this problem directly. How can we possibly explain that, in the negotiation over the next rescue package for America, we have the President's Chief of Staff; the Secretary of the Treasury; the Speaker of the House, Democrat Nancy Pelosi; Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate; and two empty chairs? Senator McConnell does not participate in this negotiation, nor does Leader McCarthy from the Republicans in the House. They should be there. That is their job. This notion that they can stand off on the sidelines and just criticize things that are being discussed is not productive. America needs more. America needs a better approach when it comes to this. Another issue that comes up every time I open any conference call to questioning from an audience is our Postal Service. In July, Postmaster General DeJoy eliminated overtime for postal employees even though parcel volumes were up almost 60 percent in June compared to last year. Usually, about 20 percent of all the work by mail handlers, city carriers, and postal drivers is done in overtime. In the July memo announcing these operational changes, the new Postmaster acknowledged that employees--listen to this quote--``may see mail left behind or mail on the workroom floor or docks . . . which is not typical.'' Postmaster General DeJoy routinely compares the Postal Service, a 245-year-old government agency that performs a service, to U.S. Steel as an example of the need to adapt to the new market realities. Postmaster DeJoy does not seem to understand that the Postal Service is an essential service provided by the government, not a luxury and certainly not a routine business. Americans rely on the U.S. Postal Service to deliver needed packages, medications, Social Security checks, and other benefits. Many small businesses would absolutely fold if they couldn't use the U.S. Postal Service and its daily operations, and rural Americans especially know that many for-profit delivery services will not come to their addresses in smalltown America. The Postal Service will be there. We are less than 100 days from an election where mail-in ballots delivered by the Postal Service will be vital to ensuring people of all political persuasions that they can safely exercise their right to vote while following public health experts' recommendations to reduce the spread of COVID-19. When contacted to schedule a call with the Postmaster General, his office's response was this: ``Currently, he is not taking calls or meetings as he is focusing on understanding the organization.'' Understanding the organization? The Heroes Act that passed the House of Representatives 11 weeks ago included $25 billion in emergency funding to cover revenue losses over the next 2 years. I believe in the Postal Service, and I thank the employees. My own mail carrier in my neighborhood back in Springfield, Greg, works late hours, usually delivers our mail at 7 p.m. He tells me he is delivering a lot of packages now. He said: Senator, I just delivered a package of duct tape to one of your neighbors. I want to make sure I deliver your mail every single day, as promised. He is a dedicated public servant. You can tell it in his manner and his gait and his attitude. He takes his job very, very seriously, and he does it well, as so many do. We need to support our Postal Service. This is not something we can afford to skimp on at this moment in American history. I hope the Republicans will join us in believing that the Postal Service is worth an investment today, and I hope that we can include that in anything that we move forward. There is another provision I would hope to include in any rescue package, and it addresses an issue that we all feel intensely. Across America, many communities routinely face the harsh reality of too few doctors or nurses, dentists, or behavioral health providers. It means delayed healthcare in many communities, gaps in accessing lifesaving services, and, ultimately, worse health outcomes, especially in low- income rural and urban areas. Our Nation is projected to face a shortage of up to 120,000 doctors within the next 10 years and a shortfall of hundreds of thousands of nurses for each of the next several years. If you ask the question, you will find that many hospitals and clinics in smalltown America resort to contract nurses. These are nurses who are available in an emergency, but they are expensive, sometimes charging two or [[Page S5233]] three times what a nurse is usually paid at the same place--and that was before the coronavirus rampage across our Nation. This pandemic has magnified these shortages in our system. In my State of Illinois, Governor Pritzker had to call providers out of retirement from other States to deliver surge care while fourth-year medical students at the University of Illinois at Chicago were graduated early so that they could go to work. Over the past 6 months, America's healthcare workers have faced incredible strains on the frontlines in our fight against the coronavirus. Hundreds of healthcare workers have, tragically, died from COVID-19, tens of thousands have been infected, and countless more endured trauma and burnout from intense patient care. The crisis has also compounded alarming health disparities for Black and Latinx Americans, who are three times more likely to get sick and die from COVID-19 than White patients. A lack of minority physicians and health professionals of color contributes to this unconscionable inequity. In 2018, only 4 percent of incoming medical students in Illinois were Black men. A recent study found that there are fewer Black male medical students today than there were in 1978. That is 42 years ago. The simple economics of American medical education pose a barrier to our health workforce needs. We take our most promising students, put them through years of rigorous education and training, license them after a backbreaking residency on one condition: They have to be prepared to assume a student debt of, on average, more than $200,000 to be a doctor in America. The burden of paying off these loans steers some of our best and brightest minds into higher paying specialties and communities, leaving many areas with gaps and vulnerable to the challenges we are facing today. To address these health workforce challenges and medical disparities and to bolster surge capacity for future emergencies, I have partnered with Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. Together, we have introduced Strengthening America's Health Care Readiness Act, immediately restoring our pipeline of doctors, nurses, and other providers. How do we do it? We provide scholarships and loan repayment funding through the National Health Service Corps and Nurse Corps to those who commit to serve in needy areas. In 27 States, more than 70 percent of inpatient hospital beds are full. One of the major issues with this capacity strain is the lack of providers to actually staff these health units. Our bill would help to surge tens of thousands of clinicians into these communities. To narrow disparities that I mentioned earlier, our legislation would emphasize recruitment from populations historically underrepresented in healthcare, and our bill would enhance our emergency preparedness by providing loan repayment for clinicians who serve in a reserve capacity--similar to our National Guard--who could be deployed from the private practice to serve in disaster locations. Representative Schakowsky--Jan Schakowsky of Chicago--is our partner in the House. We are pleased to have the support of the American Medical Association, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the National Association of Community Health Centers, and many more. Senator Rubio and I are working to include this policy in the next coronavirus relief package. We urge our colleagues to support it.
All in Senate sectionPrev14 of 103Next