[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 131 (Thursday, August 1, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5294-S5295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EBOLA ERADICATION ACT OF 2019
Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today to draw attention to the
growing risks of an Ebola epidemic in Central Africa and to urge the
Senate to take up and pass S. 1340, my bipartisan bill authorizing
USAID to combat the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo. This legislation passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
in June, and it is time for the full Senate to act.
On July 17, the World Health Organization declared this Ebola
outbreak a ``public health emergency of international concern,'' with
experts predicting the outbreak will last well into 2020.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo, or the DRC, as it is known, has
been battling an Ebola outbreak for exactly 1 year as of today. Despite
the best efforts of the Congolese, the World Health Organization, and
international partners, this outbreak is now the second worst in
history. More than 1,800 people are dead and more than 2,600 confirmed
and probable cases have been identified.
It took just over 7 months to reach 1,000 cases of Ebola, but only 2
months to reach 2,000. According to the World Health Organization, up
to 25 percent of all infections may be going unreported.
The scope of the outbreak continues to grow. Just today, press
reports indicate that there is a third case in the city of Goma, home
to over 1 million people.
Imagine the consequences of an unrestrained outbreak in a city of
over 1 million people. Under the best of circumstances, it would be
difficult, but not impossible, to control the outbreak. However, we are
not dealing with ideal circumstances. Today's Ebola outbreak is
unfolding amid a noxious mix of political mistrust and overall
insecurity.
Consider that eastern Congo has been plagued for years by armed
opposition groups and militias. Dozens of armed groups opposed to the
government operate in the areas most affected by Ebola, periodically
preventing health officials from reaching communities in need of
treatment and prevention. Likewise, criminal gangs operating with near
impunity have made it dangerous for healthcare workers to travel to
Ebola-affected villages without security.
To complicate things further, we have witnessed community resistance
specifically to the Ebola response. Long marginalized by the capital of
the DRC, Kinshasa, communities in eastern Congo remain skeptical that
the crisis is real. They fear the government is using the disease as
another tool of disenfranchising them, especially after the former
government canceled elections. Some actors even oppose medical
interventions and promote disinformation and conspiracy theories
questioning the existence of the Ebola outbreak.
To date, there have been more than 100 attacks on health facilities,
severely hampering the response of the DRC and the international
community. Misinformation, mistrust of the government, and fear of
violence at health centers has resulted in between 25 and 50 percent of
new Ebola deaths taking place outside treatment facilities. This means
infectious patients are less likely to receive lifesaving treatment and
more likely to infect others.
We no longer have the luxury of half-hearted international
engagement. We need a multifaceted, multisectoral, international
response to get this under control. We know all too well that
infectious diseases have no borders. It is one airplane flight away
from coming to our own country. That has happened in the past.
It is in our national and international interest to ensure the United
States uses every resource available to get this outbreak under
control. To date, however, the White House response has not only been
inadequate but downright counterproductive.
In early May, USAID developed a new strategy focusing on basic
assistance for disenfranchised communities to help build trust and
improve access for healthcare workers. This strategy would, for
example, support health interventions for anyone who comes to a
healthcare center in need of care, even if not totally related to
Ebola.
USAID also proposed new programs to increase education, provide clean
water and sanitation in communities, and improve conditions in Ebola-
affected communities. These programs were designed to build trust and
promote resilience in at-risk communities so that health workers can
better stop the spread of the disease.
These were good ideas. Instead of embracing them, the administration
has effectively tied its own hands in promoting a sensible, sustainable
response to the Ebola crisis.
As we all know, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, which I have
been a champion of on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, having
worked with the former chairman, Bob Corker, who felt passionately
about these issues, railed against the administration when they didn't
put countries in tier 3, the most significant consequence under our
law, because they were playing politics with that country for other
reasons and not observing the essence of the law, and made sure that
the TIP Report was transparent and honest in its assessments. So I am
supportive of the harsh sanctions for countries that fail to adequately
combat human trafficking.
As a tier 3 country under the law, the DRC is therefore severely
restricted from receiving U.S. aid. But let's use some common sense
here. This legislation was never, never intended to hurt the most
vulnerable in society or to be used as an excuse to ignore a deadly
epidemic with international implications. In fact, Congress foresaw the
need for exceptions to these sanctions in extraordinary cases in 22
USC, chapter 78, section 4 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
This language that I just cited allows the United States to waive
sanctions and provide assistance when it is in our national interest to
do so. Indeed, the law specifically says: ``The President shall
exercise the authority''--shall exercise the authority--``under section
(4) when necessary to avoid significant adverse effects on vulnerable
populations, including women and children.''
According to the World Health Organization, the Ebola virus disease
has a 50-percent mortality rate. No one can deny its effects on
vulnerable populations. If the people of eastern Congo, including women
and children, are not vulnerable, then I don't know who is.
Yet the White House has refused to exercise the waiver. That is why
we need the Ebola Eradication Act. This simple legislation directs the
USAID Administrator to immediately provide assistance, including
multisectoral, nonhumanitarian, and nontrade related foreign
assistance, to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and other
vulnerable countries to effectively combat the Ebola outbreak,
notwithstanding the sanctions required by the Trafficking and Victims
Protection Act.
Make no mistake, President Trump could have done this himself months
ago. But as a Bloomberg editorial published today points out, President
Trump has failed to respond with urgency. As a result, needless delays
and inaction have hampered our response.
In mid-June, the administration had granted exceptions for all Ebola-
related activities proposed under USAID's new plan, but they have yet
to be launched. To make matters worse, those exceptions were granted
only for fiscal year 2018 money.
Finally, the exception is not a country waiver, creating loads of
redtape for future activities related to combating Ebola. In other
words, we are shooting ourselves in the foot with unnecessary
bureaucratic hurdles that serve no purpose and slow down our response
even as the disease continues to kill more and more people.
Fortunately, the DRC and bordering countries, together with the World
Health Organization, have lessened the overall impact by successfully
vaccinating more than 120,000 people. They have also administered
experimental treatment regimens to over 300 people, which, if caught in
time, can save more lives. But this is a case where, in fact, America
can and must do more.
While there is no magic wand we can wave to change the security
situation,
[[Page S5295]]
we can certainly step up the U.S. response and our support for local
and international efforts. We have a moral obligation to help contain
and combat this outbreak before it becomes an epidemic. Likewise, we
have an obligation to protect the safety and security of the American
public. Our goal must be to save lives and prevent the spread of Ebola
before it stands a chance of reaching America's shores. Ultimately, we
ignore the tragedy unfolding in the Congo at our own peril. It is time
for this body to act.
USAID Administrator Mark Green testified in front of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year and expressed strong
support for this legislation as it is currently written.
I urge my colleagues to work with me in passing S. 1340, the Ebola
Eradication Act of 2019, as it is currently drafted and as the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee passed it in June.
This is an opportunity to ultimately save lives. It is an
opportunity--something we don't always get in this Chamber--for us to
actually save lives. It is an opportunity to stop an epidemic. It is an
opportunity to preserve our own interests by making sure Ebola doesn't
come to the shores of the United States. It should be a no-brainer.
I hope we can work through the one objection I understand that exists
with our colleague from Utah so that we can actually control the
epidemic, save lives, and ultimately ensure our own interests.
With that, I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________