[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 44 (Thursday, March 5, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1514-S1522]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




CORONAVIRUS PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2020

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 6074, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 6074) making emergency supplemental 
     appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, 
     and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.


                            TRUE EQUITY Act

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, at the end of fiscal year 2021, the 5-year 
authorization for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, our 
Nation's foundational prekindergarten through 12th grade law, is due to 
expire.
  While I understand that previous reauthorizations took 13 years and 
allowed an entire generation of students to matriculate through school 
systems around our Nation, I am here today to stress that our kids 
can't wait for the needed transformational changes to our Nation's 
Federal, State, and local education policies and additional funding 
investments.
  To provide a stronger Federal partnership to States and local 
communities that have worked together to support transformational 
change that will ensure educational equity and quality for all public 
school students, I introduced the TRUE EQUITY Act. It stands for the 
Transformational Reforms and Updates to Ensure Educational Quality and 
Urgent Investments in Today's Youth Act.
  My home State of Maryland has been long recognized as having one of 
the best public school systems in the country, according to the 
independent newspaper Education Week. This ranges from having entire 
county-based local school systems ranked as near the top in the Nation 
to individual schools producing national leaders in academic 
achievement. In addition, Maryland was one of the first States to offer 
half-day preschool for 4-year-olds, has broad access to Advanced 
Placement courses for high schoolers, and pays for dual-enrollment 
courses for high school students at our local community colleges.
  I am proud of these accomplishments. However, not all of our students 
have found success.
  In 2016, the Maryland General Assembly and the Governor of Maryland 
established the Maryland Commission on Innovation and Excellence in 
Education, chaired by the former chancellor of the University System of 
Maryland, William ``Brit'' Kirwan, to identify the policies and 
practices so that Maryland's schools perform at the level of the 
world's highest performing school system. The commission was charged 
with a number of tasks, including a review of the current funding 
formulas and accountability measures utilized to ensure educational 
equity and equality, how Maryland schools prepare students for 
postsecondary education in the workforce, and to make recommendations 
for the State on needed funding improvements across the State and local 
school districts.
  These reviews are necessary to support growing populations of 
children with disabilities, how to improve and expand programs 
supporting postsecondary credential attainment, and

[[Page S1515]]

other policy changes to address the academic achievement gap that has 
persisted along racial, ethnic, and income levels of students of color 
and low-income students compared to their higher income and White 
peers.
  To meet this expansive charge, the commission included stakeholders 
from across our State, including representatives of the Maryland 
General Assembly, including our now speaker of the Maryland House 
Delegates and our now State Senate president, the Governor's office, 
county elected leaders, education leaders, including State and local 
school board representatives, our State and local superintendents, 
leader of our State's public university system, teachers, business 
leaders, and leading education advocacy organizations, such as the 
Maryland State Education Association, Maryland Parent Teacher 
Association, and Maryland Family Network.
  In addition to the members of the commission, the commission actively 
sought input from the public with numerous meetings soliciting public 
comment held across our State. In January 2019, the commission 
unanimously released their interim report that found Maryland students 
scored in the middle of the pack on the National Assessment of 
Educational Progress, known as the ``Nation's report card,'' which is 
given to representative samples of 4th, 8th, and 12th graders in every 
State.
  The gaps in achievement between socioeconomic, racial, and children 
with disabilities were far too large in a State like Maryland that has 
committed resources and established policies that are meant to provide 
a world-class public education system.
  The commission also reported that less than half of kindergartners 
entering our school system were ready to learn, and fewer than 40 
percent of students who are graduating from high school truly are 
``college or career ready.'' This is in spite of the estimates that by 
2022 nearly two-thirds of the jobs in Maryland will require at least 
postsecondary credentials, whether they be nationally recognized 
industry certificates or 2-year or 4-year college degrees.
  For instance, in 2017, just under half of all students across 
Maryland high schools received a proficient score on their English 10 
exam. That exam helps evaluate the students' readiness for college or 
career. Disaggregated data shows the continued struggle to close 
academic achievement gaps among racial and socioeconomic groups. Along 
racial lines, 77 percent of Asian students and 67 percent of White 
students were proficient. However, only 34 percent of Hispanic students 
and 29 percent of African-American students earned proficiency scores.
  The commission's interim report highlighted that despite Maryland 
being ranked as one of the top five States with the highest household 
median income, a large number of Maryland students are living in 
poverty. Forty-three percent of Maryland students are low income and 
eligible for free or reduced-price school meals, meaning that they come 
from families at or below 185 percent of the Federal poverty line. For 
every 10 public schools across our State, there is a concentration of 
poverty where enrollment consists of at least 55 percent of students 
living in poverty. These schools are in all of our subdivisions except 
one.
  In 15 percent of Maryland schools, at least 80 percent of children 
are low income. Students attending schools with a concentration of 
poverty receive less funding per pupil than other school districts. For 
example, 53 percent of African-American students attend schools with 
concentrations of poverty, while only 8 percent of White students 
attend these schools.
  The academic achievement gap between Maryland students with means and 
our low-income students is stark. On the English 10 exam, 62 percent of 
economically advantaged students earned a passing score, while 28 
percent of those students who are on free and reduced-price meals were 
deemed proficient. These statistics are stark. We know we have a 
problem. We have to deal with it.
  The commission reported that these academic achievement disparities 
continued into college enrollment, with fewer students of color and 
low-income students enrolling in college than their higher income and 
White peers.
  We will find similar numbers throughout our Nation. We need to do 
something about this. Concerns about the state of education in Maryland 
was not limited to student performance. The commission's interim report 
also found that students face a rotating carousel of teachers 
throughout their time in schools. With the average salary for teachers 
in Maryland approximately 25 percent less than professionals with 
comparable levels of education, it is difficult to attract to the 
profession. Sixty percent of our new teachers are recruited from 
outside our State each year. This is a common problem we have 
throughout the country.
  Once those individuals arrive in the classroom, 47 percent will leave 
by the start of their third year. The turnover is tremendous. It is 
salary issues. It is working conditions. It makes it difficult to get 
the true professionalism and commitments that we need in education. 
This difficulty in recruiting individuals and the constant churn leaves 
Maryland students and local education systems facing shortages in 
critical need areas, such as special education, language, and the STEM 
fields.

  In order to address these inequities in education, the commission 
unanimously agreed on a proposal with five transformative policy 
recommendations in their interim report that would provide significant, 
additional investments in Federal, State, and local funding and modify 
policies for Maryland's prekindergarten through 12th grade education 
system.
  The five main policy recommendations would first invest in high-
quality early childhood education and care through a significant 
expansion of full-day preschool, to be free for all low-income, 3- and 
4-year-olds, so that children have the opportunity to begin 
kindergarten ready to learn.
  Second is to invest in teachers and school leaders by elevating the 
standard and status of the teaching profession, including a 
performance-based career ladder and salaries comparable to other fields 
with similar educational requirements.
  Third, it creates a world-class instructional system with an 
international benchmark curriculum that enables most students to 
achieve ``college or career ready'' status by the 10th grade and then 
pursue pathways to include early college, Advanced Placement courses, 
or a rigorous technical education leading to industry-recognized 
credentials and higher paid jobs.
  Fourth, it provides support to students who need it the most, with 
broad and sustained support for schools serving high concentrations of 
poverty, with after-school and summer academic programs and student 
access to needed health and social services.
  Finally, it ensures excellence for all through an accountability 
oversight board that has the authority to ensure that transformative 
education system recommendations are successfully implemented and 
produce the desired improvements in student achievement.
  These reforms would be implemented over a 10-year period, creating a 
sustained and coordinated effort to transform Maryland's public 
education system into a world-class system, elevating the teaching 
profession, and eliminating educational inequities. An independent 
analysis conducted in November 2019 confirms that the cost to implement 
the commission's recommendations will pay for themselves shortly after 
the 10-year implementation period.
  Last year, the Maryland General Assembly recognized that our children 
could not wait to implement the commission's recommendations and 
established the Blueprint for Maryland's Future to lay the groundwork 
for the implementation of the commission's recommendations.
  Starting this year, the Blueprint for Maryland's Future is assisting 
low-income families' access to expanded services and early childhood 
education, including free prekindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds from 
low-income families.
  The Blueprint for Maryland's Future is assisting in the recruitment 
of new teachers to the profession through increased teacher pay and 
career ladders for exiting teachers to help train the next generation. 
A newly established career readiness standard will allow Maryland high 
school students to succeed in dual-enrollment courses offered by local 
community colleges.
  The ``Blueprint'' addresses Maryland's education formulas to better

[[Page S1516]]

target resources to students who need additional assistance, including 
children with disabilities, English learners, and students in schools 
with high concentration of poverty. This is all done while increasing 
accountability to ensure that the additional investments are properly 
implemented and help our students succeed.
  That is the path that we are on. I agree with advocates and elected 
leaders who understand our kids cannot wait for adoption of these 
recommendations at some point in the future. We need to act now. We 
need to implement these recommendations now and view them as a national 
model for other States to aspire to. Without transformative change, we 
will continue to hope for significantly different results with only 
incremental changes, or we can be bold and change the future of our 
children and our country and every child with the high-quality 
education skills training that they need to be successful and climb out 
of poverty.
  I reject the arguments from those who would claim that the 
recommendations are too costly to implement. Without the full 
implementation of the commission's recommendations, we are failing in 
our primary goal in government of providing a better future for our 
children, allowing them to slip behind their national and international 
peers.
  These arguments also fail to see that the investments in our children 
can lead to a lifetime of reduced costs in public safety and healthcare 
costs, as children can grow and support themselves and their future 
families through the education they receive in public schools. These 
investments will pay back dividends in a stronger economy that will 
benefit all of us.

  I believe we should not allow States and local communities to make 
these transformative changes on their own. The Federal Government 
should be a strong Federal partner in ensuring accountability and in 
addressing educational inequities for our children.
  That is why I introduced the TRUE EQUITY Act. This legislation, which 
is purposely modeled after the commission's recommendation, establishes 
four new, supplemental Federal grant opportunities for State and local 
school districts that are committed to addressing educational 
inequities while holding States and local school districts accountable 
for failing to properly support their students.
  In strengthening the Federal Government's commitment as a partner in 
education, the four new TRUE EQUITY grants would provide an additional 
$1 of Federal funds for every $2 of State and local funds that are 
committed to education beyond their fiscal year 2019 spending levels.
  State and local school districts that receive grants would be 
required to meet a maintenance of effort to ensure that the State and 
local educational spending is maintained and would not allow the 
Federal Government's funding to backfill reductions in State and local 
commitments to educational funding.
  As a requirement to receiving one of the four new TRUE EQUITY grants, 
a State would be required to have an independent oversight board to 
ensure that the State and local districts would be meeting their State-
designated educational equity goals, and the oversight board would have 
the ability to hold the State and local school districts accountable 
for not meeting their targeted goals.
  These grants are flexible to allow local communities to meet their 
needs over a several-year period, whether it be through the 
establishment of a college and career readiness pathway to support a 
high school student's dual enrollment at a local community college and 
provide a jump-start on college; additional funding to expand the 
number of early learning hubs in the State--in Maryland, these are 
known as Judy Centers--or training for teachers on how to address the 
needs of our children with disabilities.
  As Congress begins to look at the next reauthorization of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, I urge my colleagues to listen 
to the voices of the Marylanders across our State who know that our 
kids can't wait for the implementation of these recommendations and 
support the TRUE EQUITY Act.
  I congratulate the members of the commission who thoughtfully 
researched and crafted this national model for States to be able to see 
transformative change and raise their educational systems to that of a 
world-class school system. We owe our children nothing less than to 
provide them with the best possible outcome in our Nation's public 
schools.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of Florida). The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 1506

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I call up my amendment, No. 1506, and I ask 
that it be reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Paul] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1506.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To rescind unobligated balances for certain international 
programs to offset the amounts appropriated in this bill to respond to 
                       the coronavirus outbreak)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. RESCISSIONS.

       (a) Educational and Cultural Assistance Programs.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all amounts made 
     available for fiscal year 2020 for the East-West Center under 
     title I of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and 
     Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2020 (division G of 
     Public Law 116-94), the Inter-American Foundation under title 
     III of such Act, and educational and cultural exchange 
     programs under title I of such Act that remain unobligated as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act are rescinded.
       (b) Proportional Rescissions of Other Unobligated 
     Discretionary Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided under paragraph (2), 
     after rescinding the amounts required under subsection (a), 
     the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall 
     rescind, on a proportional basis, such amounts as may be 
     necessary to fully offset (in conjunction with the 
     rescissions under subsection (a)) the amounts appropriated by 
     this Act from the unobligated amounts appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2020 for--
       (A) the Economic Support Fund under chapter 4 of part II of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2346 et seq.); 
     and
       (B) the United States Agency for International Development.
       (2) Exclusions.--In making the rescissions required under 
     paragraph (1), the Director shall not rescind any amounts 
     appropriated for--
       (A) global health programs under title III of the 
     Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 
     Appropriations Act, 2020 (division G of Public Law 116-94); 
     or
       (B) assistance to Israel.

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, my amendment would pay for the emergency 
funds for the coronavirus.
  I think that we should not let fear or urgency cause us to lose our 
minds and cause us to act in an irresponsible fashion. I, for one, have 
looked at foreign aid over the years as welfare that we send to other 
countries that really is not particularly in our best interests anyway. 
If you follow foreign aid through the years, what you will find is that 
it goes from middle-class folks in rich countries to rich people in 
poor countries. Frankly, people enrich themselves at our expense. They 
steal our money. The Mubarak family in Egypt is now worth billions of 
dollars, which it skimmed off the top. The history of this throughout 
the Third World is legion and is well known.
  My amendment would basically take the $8 billion from the welfare we 
give to foreign countries in order to pay for this. I see no reason we 
shouldn't do this. I am not opposed to the emergency funding, but I 
think that the emergency funding should be gotten from elsewhere in the 
budget and that this is the responsible way to act.
  Every day, people across the country are confronted with unexpected 
expenses. We budget and we plan, but things happen. When they do, we 
adjust and plan accordingly. Sometimes we confront an expense that is 
not only unexpected but is urgent, and that is where we find ourselves 
today. We want to respond and make sure we are providing resources to 
our medical professionals and researchers. That is important, and I 
fully support that, which is why we should use this moment to

[[Page S1517]]

ask ourselves whether it is really necessary to keep spending on 
wasteful things.
  If we don't consider this now, when will we ever consider this?
  We want an all-hands-on-deck response, so we should be cutting out 
waste and moving those resources to something that is of more immediate 
concern. So, if the coronavirus is of immediate concern--and I think it 
is--let's address that situation now, but let's do so by taking money 
from less urgent things and money that we are wasting overseas--money 
that is often stolen by Third-World dictators. That is exactly what I 
am proposing today.
  We have the money. We don't need to borrow more money. We just have 
to start setting our own priorities. For example, we shouldn't spend 
another dollar in developing a foreign economy this year. That spending 
should be stopped, and the money should be spent here to buy supplies, 
to help expedite research, and to support our communities. The funds I 
am proposing to keep at home have been used abroad for all kinds of 
unnecessary and wasteful things. I will give you a few examples.
  We send U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund kids from Pakistan to go to 
space camp in America. We spend money on combating student truancy in 
the Philippines. We have been funding the Peruvian Green New Deal. We 
actually send money to help deported illegal immigrants start up 
businesses in El Salvador. What business is it of the U.S. taxpayer to 
be funding small businesses in El Salvador for people who broke the law 
by trying to break into our country? It is insane. At this point in 
time, I think this money would be better spent on research on the 
coronavirus and on a response to this epidemic should it become worse 
in our country.
  The list doesn't stop there. I don't know why we can't agree to spend 
this money on the coronavirus instead of spending it abroad. We spend 
over $50 billion a year in Afghanistan--building their roads, building 
their schools, trying to create a nation where there really is no 
nation. We need to spend that money here at home. Besides, it is the 
law.
  We have a law called pay-go, or pay as you go, which is supposed to 
require Congress to pay for new spending. It has been around for a 
couple of decades. Yet we have broken the law thousands of times. What 
do they do? They see something they want. You know, they are kids in a 
candy store. They want to spend. They want to give you, give you, give 
you free money, so they just ignore the law. So what happens every year 
is that they exceed the pay-as-you-go, and they don't do the thing they 
are supposed to do, which is to offset this with a spending cut. Then 
they just write a small, little note in there, reading they have agreed 
to ignore the pay-go rules again. That is what will happen in this 
case.
  The other way they ignore the rules on pay-go is they declare things 
to be emergencies, so everything is an emergency. They say: Well, what 
would we do if we didn't have this--if it weren't an emergency?
  We already spend billions of dollars and have spent billions of 
dollars over the years to prepare for epidemics. We fund the CDC, and 
we fund the NIH. There is a lot of money out there.
  Once again, I am not against giving additional money, but we should 
just make a decision. We should be mature people and say we are not 
just going to print up the money or borrow it from China but are going 
to take it, maybe, from something less necessary.
  When we don't want to pay for new spending, we just simply waive 
these rules on pay-go. We declare the spending to be emergency, and we 
get around the requirement. That is how we got a $23 trillion debt. We 
actually borrow $2 million every minute.
  People say: Well, we have to do something. People are running around, 
acting crazy--we have to do something. Well, who is going to do 
something about the $23 trillion debt?
  Do we not have 5 minutes to take a vote? In 15 minutes, we will be 
taking this vote, and people could simply vote and say that we are not 
going to borrow more money and that we will take the money from 
somewhere else in the budget that is less pressing.
  Mark my words--there is no fiscal responsibility up here among either 
party. It will be a small minority of us who will say that this funding 
should be offset by taking it from somewhere else in the budget.
  In times of emergency, Congress scrambles to put together new 
spending, but we should be working just as hard to pay for the cost 
that comes with emergencies.
  Which is a higher priority--spending millions of dollars to stabilize 
the supply chain of medical supplies and treatments here at home or 
spending millions on international arts festivals? Which is a higher 
priority--spending millions to train frontline medical professionals 
here at home on how to limit exposure to the coronavirus or spending 
millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars, paving roads in 
Afghanistan? My amendment gives us a chance to set priorities.
  We can support our communities and give our medical system the 
resources its needs, and we can do it without adding to the debt. That 
is the responsible way. My amendment would do exactly that, and I 
encourage the other Senators to consider fiscal responsibility.
  I thank the Presiding Officer.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I know other Senators have already spoken 
on this, but I would hope Members would oppose the Paul amendment.
  The amendment would cut, among other things, $7.3 billion from the 
Department of State and the USAID. It would decimate programs that fund 
the foreign policy priorities of both the administration and the 
Congress. A cut of that size would be about two-thirds of the total 
funding appropriated for these purposes, some of which has already been 
spent.
  I remember when James Mattis was the Secretary of Defense. He is a 
man I admire for his work as a four-star general with the Marine Corps 
and as Defense Secretary. He is not a man who looked at the world or 
the needs of our military in an abstract fashion; he dealt with it 
every day. He came before our Committee on Appropriations and said: If 
you want to cut foreign aid, buy me more bullets.
  He made it very clear that there are areas in the world where what we 
do keeps us from having to go to combat.
  The Paul amendment would practically eliminate the remaining budget 
for programs to strengthen democracy, combat corruption, promote 
economic growth, improve water and sanitation, aid victims of war and 
natural disasters, and support our allies and partners in countless 
ways.
  The reason the State Department and USAID need supplemental funds is 
that the resources provided in fiscal year 2020 are not sufficient to 
meet the unanticipated public health, economic, and humanitarian 
challenges presented by the coronavirus. Yet the Paul amendment would 
cut billions from the same accounts for which additional resources are 
needed.
  The funding for the programs that would be cut by the Paul amendment 
is how we make our presence felt around the world. It actually totals 
less than 1 percent of the Federal budget.
  Senators of both parties--of both parties--voted overwhelmingly to 
include this funding in the fiscal year 2020 State, Foreign Operations 
appropriations bill.
  In case anybody has forgotten when that was, that was just 3 months 
ago.
  The Paul amendment would also eliminate $475 million that Congress 
enacted less than 3 months ago for educational and cultural exchanges, 
including $160 million for the Fulbright Program--so no more Fulbright 
Program, no more International Visitors Program, no more exchange 
programs for young leaders in Africa, Southeast Asia, or Latin America. 
These programs enrich the lives of Americans and directly benefit the 
economies, in every State of the Union, and create lasting ties between 
U.S. and foreign communities, universities, and governments--but not if 
the Paul amendment passes.
  The amendment would eliminate all funding for the Inter-American 
Foundation, which, with a budget of just $37 million, supports hundreds 
of projects to combat poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean.
  It would eliminate funding for the East-West Center, which has a long 
history of strengthening relations and building understanding between 
the

[[Page S1518]]

United States and the Asia/Pacific countries.
  Both the Inter-American Foundation and the East-West Center were 
established by acts of Congress. It is in our national interest to 
fight poverty in Latin America and support engagement with countries in 
the Far East.
  The coronavirus represents a serious public health threat. We have to 
respond now. We have to treat this as the emergency it is.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the U.S. 
Global Leadership Coalition, addressed to Senator Graham and myself--
incidentally, they represent more than 500 U.S. business and 
nongovernmental organizations--opposing this amendment be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                            U.S. Global Leadership


                                                    Coalition,

                                                    March 5, 2020.
     Hon. Lindsey Graham,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on State-Foreign Operations, Committee 
         on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Patrick Leahy,
     Ranking Member, Subcommittee on State-Foreign Operations, 
         Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Graham and Ranking Member Leahy: On behalf of 
     the more than 500 business and NGO members of the U.S. Global 
     Leadership Coalition (USGLC), including business, military, 
     and faith-based leaders in all 50 states, I write in strong 
     opposition to an amendment proposed by Senator Rand Paul that 
     would offset emergency funding to address the growing 
     coronavirus threat by canceling over $8 billion in 
     congressionally approved funds for the International Affairs 
     Budget.
       If enacted, this amendment would cancel critical funding 
     for State Department, USAID, and other development programs 
     around the world, undermining our national security and 
     economic interests and placing America's global leadership at 
     risk. Cuts of this magnitude would have devastating 
     consequences on our ability to confront unprecedented global 
     challenges--including countering China's growing influence 
     around the world, supporting partners in the fight against 
     extremism, and addressing the impacts of the Venezuelan 
     refugee crisis on key allies like Colombia.
       There is a strong bipartisan legacy in the Senate of 
     rejecting deep and dangerous cuts to America's development 
     and diplomacy programs. I urge the Senate to once again take 
     decisive action and reject Senator Paul's shortsighted 
     amendment. Doing so will ensure that resources already 
     approved by Congress can be fully deployed to support cost-
     effective programs that advance America's interests.
       Thank you for your unwavering support of America's 
     international affairs programs and your commitment to 
     strengthening the critical resources needed to advance 
     America's global leadership.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Liz Schrayer,
                                           President & CEO, USGLC.

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I do not see another Senator seeking 
recognition, so 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. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all debate 
time be considered expired.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                            Motion to Table

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I move to table the Paul amendment, and I 
ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Markey), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 81, nays 15, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 65 Leg.]

                                YEAS--81

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Harris
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Jones
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Manchin
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--15

     Blackburn
     Braun
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Loeffler
     Paul
     Perdue
     Risch
     Toomey


                             Change of Vote

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I request unanimous consent that I be 
permitted to change my vote on the rollcall vote earlier today. The 
vote was No. 65. I voted no. It was my intention to vote aye. It will 
not affect the outcome.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Enzi
     Markey
     Sanders
     Warren
  The motion to table was agreed to; the amendment was tabled.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 1:45 
p.m. shall be equally divided between the leaders or their designees.
  The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, I come to the floor to speak about the 
ongoing crisis of the novel coronavirus outbreak and to urge all of us 
to pass this supplemental as quickly as possible.
  As of this morning, there are 163 confirmed cases in 17 States across 
the country, but no State has been more hard hit than the State of 
Washington.
  We now have 39 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and more than 230 people 
under public health monitoring. We have lost 10 of our citizens. Our 
thoughts and prayers are with those families who have lost loved ones, 
and there are still families who have loved ones in nursing homes and 
who are trying to make sure they get the appropriate care in this 
ongoing crisis.
  I would also like to thank the workers who are on the frontlines of 
this healthcare crisis and are doing everything they can to help keep 
our citizens safe.
  What is clear in this supplemental is that we need more resources for 
testing. The testing capabilities will help our communities understand 
the community transfer of this virus and what else we need to do to 
help stop its spread.
  Some of the funding in this supplemental can be helpful for our 
smaller public labs to do more testing to help our public health 
officials respond to this crisis, and, as I urged yesterday, for the 
CDC and others to make it clear through our public health sites exactly 
how the public can go about getting access to testing.
  This is so critical because I know there are people in the State of 
Washington who feel ill, who feel they might be subject to this 
coronavirus and aren't getting tested. We want to make sure the public 
clearly understands what their paths are for getting those tests, and 
we want to make sure that every lab--commercial and academic--in the 
United States is getting prepared to help us in the advent of the 
spread of this virus. Why? Because helping to identify these early 
cases is what will help us be successful in understanding these 
patterns and further the community separations that we need to do.
  Why is this so important? Well, today in the State of Washington, 
they are taking major steps. Major employers are encouraging their 
employees, if possible, to work from home. These are companies like 
Microsoft and Facebook and Amazon--major employers.

[[Page S1519]]

  We have 23 schools that have closed and 2 school districts that are 
entirely shut down. Why are they doing this? Because they are taking 
precautions for people who have been exposed to the coronavirus in 
those schools, and they are doing everything they can to make sure that 
they respond correctly.
  In addition, King County has recommended that anyone over the age of 
60, anyone with a preexisting medical condition, or anyone who is 
pregnant should avoid public places and gatherings as much as possible.
  We are taking all these steps now because we are at the epicenter of 
this crisis, but I want people to know that there are other things that 
other States can be doing to learn from what we have done in 
Washington.
  The fact is that we had a flu lab that actually was a collaboration 
among our academic and scientific and health communities to get people 
who thought they simply had the flu to also be tested, and we found 
cases of the coronavirus. That actually is something you have to set up 
and get permission for. I hope that every State will follow suit and 
set up such a cohort of people working together to share that 
information so that we can help prevent the spread.
  Washington State will receive $11.5 million in funding to help the 
Department of Health respond to this crisis. I know the Vice President 
is visiting our Governor in Olympia, WA, today. I hope these funds in 
this bill we are passing today will increase access for public lab 
testing, help pay for isolation and quarantine, help pay for sanitizing 
in public areas, better track the areas and those who might come into 
contact with it, help labs that are trying to identify hot spots, and 
limit exposure.
  As part of this package, Washington State will also be helped with 
reimbursements since the outbreak of this virus--and I can tell you 
that they are many--and to help us push through the protocols that 
would help us establish better responses.
  Yesterday, we had a hearing in the Aviation Subcommittee to talk 
about what is needed for an aviation protocol. I know that some 
airlines in our State are doing everything possible to clean planes on 
every turn of the trip and to do deep cleaning. They are 
communicating--and we have encouraged them to communicate more--with 
their passengers exactly what they are doing to help with the 
mitigation of this virus. But that is not a substitute for the 
Department of Transportation, federally, and the CDC, collaboratively, 
to work in giving guidance to airlines on what standards they should be 
meeting to help mitigate the spread of this virus.
  My colleagues and I are calling on them to do that, not simply to 
think of this as other agencies' responsibilities but to work 
collaboratively to get this done.
  I want to thank the Appropriations Committee for getting this 
legislation to us today and all of our colleagues who have worked so 
quickly on making it happen. I can tell you that we need these funds; 
we need them now; and we need other States to heed the early testing 
that would have been helpful in our State and now may be helpful in 
yours.
  Let's get as aggressive about testing as possible. Let's get 
aggressive about sharing information about the flu and tracking this 
virus. Let's get aggressive about trying to mitigate the impacts of 
this deadly disease.
  I thank the Presiding Officer.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                        Prescription Drug Costs

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, a new study showed that from the years 
2007 to 2018, prices for, actually, hundreds of drugs rose many times--
many times faster than the rate of inflation. List prices on 602 
medicines rose by 159 percent. That would average out to 9 percent 
annually. After discounts and rebates, net prices increased by 60 
percent or 4.5 percent annually. That is 3.5 times the rate of 
inflation.
  These are drugs for multiple sclerosis, cholesterol, rheumatoid 
arthritis, chemotherapy, diabetes, and many other debilitating and 
life-threatening conditions. Put into real terms, these price increases 
mean that if one of these drugs cost $100 a month in 2007, that same 
drug would cost $259 in 2018.
  Meanwhile, you have to consider the working American. Wages for the 
average American over the same time period increased about 30 percent 
in the private sector. That means wage growth is about half the rate of 
the growth of prescription drug prices, even after the rebates and even 
after the discounts.
  For many, increased drug costs are wiping out progress that these 
workers are making in their wages. Some families are even going 
backward financially after paying for their prescriptions. This doesn't 
take into account at all the many other increases in the cost of living 
from college to housing, to insurance.
  Now, we Americans are surely fortunate, aren't we, to see the 
significant wage growth that we have had in this country for our 
workers under President Trump--great progress.
  The President and Republicans in Congress can rightly take credit for 
the country's booming economy, but all that wage growth doesn't mean 
much--or at least as much--if it is spent on the same prescription drug 
refills every month. That is something that ought to concern every 
Member of this Congress, and for most, I am sure it does because we 
hear about it constantly from our constituents. In fact, during this 
election season, polls show that it is one of the top three or four 
issues that are most on people's minds.
  Let me be clear. These price hikes aren't because the medicines got 
better or there was a significant increase in research and development. 
No, this is because the pharmaceutical companies could do it, and in 
doing it, they could get away with it because, in many cases, consumers 
don't have a choice; consumers don't have options or alternatives. That 
is because we don't have a healthy marketplace that drives costs down 
for pharmaceuticals.
  Right now, pharmaceutical companies can essentially charge Medicare 
whatever they want, and taxpayers don't have much recourse. Right now, 
every single working American who pays Federal taxes is subsidizing Big 
Pharma's record profits through the drugs that the Federal Government 
pays for through various programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
  Now, there has to be a solution for this situation, and Ranking 
Member Wyden and I are working to put some common sense back into this 
whole system of buying pills. In the Finance Committee, we have passed 
bipartisan legislation to put an end to unlimited corporate welfare for 
Big Pharma. The vote of that bill out of committee was 19 to 9--a 
bipartisan effort.
  We are closer than ever to lowering drug prices for tens of millions 
of Americans, and these Americans have been crying for this help from 
Congress for quite a few years. But here we are. Big Pharma and its 
paid allies are out in force trying to kill any reforms that might 
endanger their profit margins. They are using scare tactics, deploying 
terms like ``socialism'' and ``price controls,'' as if these subsidies 
to Big Pharma are not a form of socialism.
  I have been around long enough to recognize the political games that 
are being played now. You see it quite regularly on the television 
advertisements. So let's set the record straight. The last thing Big 
Pharma wants is a free market. After all, these were the same folks who 
loved ObamaCare so much because they knew it mandated another revenue 
stream for their products. Now, we all know how ObamaCare has turned 
out. Yet they made a deal with the White House to back that bill.
  Now, Big Pharma is also warning that any reforms would hurt research 
and development. In fact, my bipartisan legislation with Senator Wyden 
would result in less socialism, a more competitive marketplace, and 
wouldn't put a damper on innovation. That is according to something 
that I call ``God'' around here--the independent Congressional Budget 
Office. These are professional people making these judgments. They 
judge most all of our legislation, particularly if there is a monetary 
cost to it.
  For those who may not believe a politician, let me point to the work, 
then,

[[Page S1520]]

that the professionals at CBO have done on Grassley-Wyden:
  First, the updated Grassley-Wyden bill will save more than $80 
billion and result in no fewer cures.
  No. 2, CBO says it will reduce patient out-of-pocket spending in Part 
D of Medicare by around $50 billion.
  No. 3, CBO says it will reduce premiums by about $1 billion for tens 
of millions of seniors and Americans with disabilities on Medicare.
  No. 4, CBO says that is all on top of out-of-pocket expenses that we 
put a cap on and an end to the dreaded doughnut hole that has been part 
of Part D since 2003.
  No. 5, we have also, according to the Congressional Budget Office, 
created a new way to spread out payments for those out-of-pocket 
expenses so that paying the bills every month becomes a bit easier for 
those on fixed incomes.
  No. 6 and lastly, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the 
bipartisan Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act--that is the title 
of our bill--would protect taxpayers from being put on the hook for 
unlimited price hikes that have no basis in a functioning free market.
  So, without reforms, big pharmaceutical companies will continue to 
receive tens of billions of dollars in excess taxpayer subsidies, and 
they will also have no incentive to keep prices from rising many times 
faster than inflation.
  Currently, prescription drug manufacturers can charge Medicare more 
and more every year, and they do. When the government is paying and you 
have entitlement programs, taxpayers are forced to foot the bill. So 
Grassley-Wyden enacts accountability and ends corporate welfare without 
harming medical innovations.
  Now, Senator Wyden and I are looking forward to reintroducing our 
bipartisan bill very soon. So far, a dozen Senate Republicans have 
announced publicly that they support this bipartisan bill. Others will 
announce their support in the coming days, and a dozen more Republican 
Senators have indicated to me that Grassley-Wyden is going in the right 
direction, implying that they would vote for it on the Senate floor. So 
I am optimistic that we will continue to gain support as Senators learn 
more.
  I was really pleased with President Trump announcing his willingness 
to sign a bill in his State of the Union message. The next morning, 
Vice President Pence was on cable TV saying that he supported Grassley-
Wyden. Secretary Azar has endorsed the bill. Not only that, but 
Secretary Azar and a gang of people in domestic policy at the White 
House have been working with us on this legislation, even prior to its 
coming out of committee.
  So, with all of this work and with all of this support--and with the 
interest on the part of the voters as being one of the three or four 
most prominent issues that will determine how people vote--it seems to 
me it deserves a vote on the Senate floor and very soon. So I am here 
today to urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, if they have 
any questions about this bill, to visit with me about it and learn how 
it will help all of our constituents.
  The six points I made about the bill based upon what the 
Congressional Budget Office said about it isn't all that that bill 
does. There is a lot more to it.
  Maybe I had better back up. I have read enough comments of my 
colleagues--colleagues I haven't even talked to--that said what an 
important issue this is. So, in one way or another, without even 
signing on to this bill, without even being on the Finance Committee, 
it seems like we have all pledged to lower prescription drug prices. So 
I think we should follow through on that pledge.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Tribute to Ronnie Anderson

  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes talking 
about a friend of mine from Louisiana who is a fine American and a fine 
Louisianian, and he is retiring. His name is Ronnie Anderson.
  I want to celebrate his 51 years of service. That number is correct. 
I know some of our pages here can't imagine someone being in a single 
job for 51 years, but Ronnie has served 51 years, and he has devoted 
those years, in large part, in service to our State's Farm Bureau.
  He has led the Louisiana Farm Bureau to greater influence, to growing 
membership, and that is not a small feat, because America was born on a 
farm. In some respects, Louisiana was born on a farm, and farming is, 
as you well know, Madam President, a challenging yet very rewarding 
vocation and profession.
  For 31 of the last 31 elections, the Louisiana Farm Bureau members 
have chosen Ronnie as their president. So he has won 31 elections in a 
row by our farmers in Louisiana, which is almost as good as the 
President's electoral record.
  Farmers from East Carroll, in my State, to Beauregard Parishes and 
elsewhere in between have come to trust Ronnie as someone who knows 
them, who cares about them, who cares about their farms, and who was 
willing to rack up 71,000 miles driving his truck across the State of 
Louisiana in an effort to win their confidence, as Ronnie did 
repeatedly.
  Ronnie spent most of his 71 years on this Earth working alongside the 
farmers whom he represents. He grew up caring for dairy cows in East 
Feliciana Parish. In Louisiana, as you may know, we call our counties 
parishes.
  Along with Ronnie's wife, Vivian, Ronnie still produces horses, hay, 
beef cattle, and timber. All the while he was doing this, he helped 
widen the arms of the Louisiana Farm Bureau and double its membership 
to nearly 150,000 women and men over the course of Ronnie's three 
decades as the organization's president.
  Louisiana is a very diverse agricultural State, where each region is 
distinct, and Ronnie has represented every nook and every cranny of our 
farming and ranching community.
  I am not alone in standing in awe of Ronnie Anderson's service. I am 
in awe, and I wish Ronnie and Vivian, in their next chapter, the chance 
to enjoy life. I know they have both enjoyed the 51 years of service to 
the Farm Bureau, but now will enjoy life in a different way.
  I wanted to come here today and celebrate Ronnie's service and that 
of Vivian's, his life partner, as well.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Young). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                               H.R. 6074

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, we face a serious global crisis today with 
the spread of the coronavirus. We all know that. The American people, I 
believe, expect us here in the U.S. Senate to set aside politics and 
set into motion a swift and sweeping response to this danger. Yesterday 
was a big step in that direction.
  I and Vice Chairman Leahy, who is on the floor here with me, in 
conjunction with the leaders on both sides and with our House 
counterparts, introduced a comprehensive plan that provides our experts 
and agencies on the frontlines with the resources they tell us they 
need to combat this crisis.
  The package we introduced includes $7.8 billion in discretionary 
appropriations for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the 
State Department, the USAID, and the Small Business Administration. The 
package also authorizes an additional $500 million in mandatory 
spending for telehealth through Medicare. Combined, this emergency 
supplemental provides $8.3 billion in resources to attack the crisis at 
the local, State, Federal, and international levels.
  In situations like this, I believe no expense should be spared to 
protect the American people, and in crafting this package, none was. It 
is an aggressive plan, a vigorous plan, that has received an 
overwhelming positive reaction in the House and in the marketplace. It 
is

[[Page S1521]]

the Senate's responsibility today to keep the momentum going.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yes and demonstrate to the American 
people that we here in the Senate are unified and have their backs on 
this crisis.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I agree with what Chairman Shelby has said. 
We have tried to set an example. The two of us are from two different 
parties, from two different parts of the country and, I think it is 
fair to say, have two different political philosophies. Yet we have 
come together on this, as we have on so many other issues on 
appropriations, to show, as an example to our colleagues, what we think 
is best on this bill.
  This week, Congress showed strong, decisive leadership in addressing 
the novel coronavirus. As appropriators of both parties often do, and 
as Members of Congress have proven still capable of doing even in the 
most partisan of times, we have put our labels aside and have come 
together for the American people.
  I was concerned that this was something the President was not doing. 
We saw the President spread misinformation on national television that 
downplayed the potential risk to the American people. I was concerned 
that he was worried more about the market impacts than about human 
lives. His administration's initial proposal for $1.25 billion of new 
spending, plus the authority to divert $1.25 billion from such things 
as Ebola prevention and low-income heating assistance, was reckless and 
devoid of substance.
  Those in the administration sought vague transfer authorities to 
allow them to move other money around in unidentified ways. It showed 
how little thought was given to what was needed and to how much was 
needed. I thought it was the latest attempt to undermine Congress's 
power of the purse--the power of the purse that Republicans and 
Democrats have always tried to protect.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the end of 
my remarks a letter from Russell T. Vought, Acting Director of the 
Office of Management and Budget.
  I asked to submit the acting OMB Director's request letter as an 
example of what not do in an emerging crisis.
  Fortunately, there are those who remain in our government who are 
very forthcoming with me and with our bipartisan staff members--my 
staff and Senator Shelby's staff--about the real needs of confronting 
the coronavirus, needs that are based on facts and science. I do thank 
the staffs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
National Institutes of Health, the Office of the Assistant Secretary 
for Preparedness and Response, and the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Financial Resources. Their help was invaluable in 
producing in only 9 days the package we are going to be voting on 
today. During those 9 days, there was a lot of evening and weekend work 
by our staffs and by the Senators involved. We did it in 9 days because 
of the emergency, and their help was invaluable.
  The crisis is real. Worldwide, there are now 92,000 confirmed cases 
and 3,200 confirmed deaths. Here in our country, that number is rising 
as there have been more than 150 confirmed cases and 11 deaths. The CDC 
has told us that the public health system will be able to test up to 
75,000 people by the end of the week and that we should expect the 
number of cases here to rise. So I strongly support this $7.8 billion 
package and the other money that is available.
  This package is going to provide nearly $1 billion directly to State, 
local, and Tribal governments to support public health preparedness and 
response; over $3 billion in the research and development of vaccines, 
therapeutics, and diagnostics; nearly $1 billion for healthcare 
preparedness, pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, and community health; 
$1.25 billion to support our needed response overseas; $7 billion in 
low-interest loans for small businesses; and nearly $500 million to 
enhance the availability of telehealth services across the country. 
This is, certainly, something very important to those who might have 
rural areas in their States, and, frankly, we all do.
  The American people are looking for leadership, and they want 
assurance that their government is up to the task of protecting their 
health and safety. I think we have to provide this leadership.
  I am pleased that Congress included language in the bill--supported 
by both Republicans and Democrats--that specifies that the funds can 
only be used to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the coronavirus. 
If there is a cynical effort, for any reason, by the President to shift 
funds from the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, or the Public Health Social Services Emergency 
Fund, which are the agencies at the epicenter of this crisis--to divert 
funds, for example, to activities along the southwest border--it will 
violate the law.
  As I have said several times on this floor, I thank Chairman Shelby 
and his staff, as well as the majority and Democratic leaders, for 
their cooperation.
  I will submit a list of committee staffers who worked through 
weekends and late into the nights to make this possible. It is a long 
list, but it shows some of the most professional people we have working 
in the Senate. I know that Senator Shelby has a similar list from his 
office.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the list of the 
committee staffers' names.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       Charles Kieffer, Chanda Betourney, Jessica Berry, Jay 
     Tilton, Hannah Chauvin, Shannon Hines, Jonathan Graffeo, 
     David Adkins, Margaret Pritchard, Dianne Nellor, Morgan 
     Ulmer, Patrick Carroll, Ellen Murray, Reeves Hart, Andrew 
     Newton, Alex Keenan, Kelly Brown, Meghan Mott, Kathryn 
     Toomajian, Laura Friedel, Jeff Reczek, Tim Rieser, Alex 
     Carnes, Kali Farahmand, Paul Grove, Katherine Jackson, and 
     Adam Yezerski.
                                  ____

         Executive Office of the President, Office of Management 
           and Budget,
                                Washington, DC, February 24, 2020.
     Hon. Michael R. Pence,
     President of the Senate, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: In late December 2019, China identified 
     a novel coronavirus which was causing human-to-human 
     transmission and has subsequently been named COVID-19. On 
     January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a 
     public health emergency of international concern due to 
     widespread transmission of the virus. As of February 23, 
     2020, there are 78,811 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in 
     approximately 30 countries worldwide; the total number of 
     COVID-19 related deaths is now over 2,500 people, the 
     majority of which are in China. In the United States, there 
     have been 14 confirmed cases of COVID-19 presenting in seven 
     states (not including 39 persons repatriated to the United 
     States who have tested positive).
       The President's priority is protecting the homeland, and 
     the Administration is working aggressively to minimize the 
     risk of the virus spreading in the United States. The 
     President has created a Coronavirus Task Force to direct the 
     U.S. response. This Task Force is led by the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services (HHS) and is composed of subject 
     matter experts from across Government, including some of the 
     Nation's foremost experts on infectious diseases. On January 
     31, 2020, the Secretary of HHS declared a public health 
     emergency. HHS has tapped into the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention's (CDC) Infectious Diseases Rapid 
     Response Reserve Fund to help combat the virus. In addition, 
     fiscal year (FY) 2020 funds are being re-prioritized across 
     HHS as necessary to address the virus.
       The Government has taken unprecedented steps to minimize 
     the risk of travelers spreading COVID-19 to the United 
     States. The President suspended entry into the United States 
     of certain foreign nationals who have recently traveled to 
     China and who pose a risk of transmitting the virus and 
     directed inbound flights from China to 11 airports where 
     enhanced screening now takes place.
       The Government has conducted numerous charter flights to 
     evacuate American citizens from Wuhan, in the Hubei Province, 
     China and the cruise ship Diamond Princess back to the United 
     States. All passengers were screened for symptoms before the 
     flights, and medical professionals continue to monitor the 
     health of all returning passengers.
       At the direction of the President and under the auspices of 
     the Task Force, several Federal agencies are contributing 
     significant resources and personnel to support the domestic 
     and international response. To this point, no agency has been 
     inhibited in response efforts due to resources or 
     authorities. However, much is still unknown about this virus 
     and the disease it causes. The Administration believes 
     additional Federal resources are necessary to take steps to 
     prepare for a potential worsening of the situation in the 
     United States, and requests an appropriation of $1.25 billion 
     of emergency funding in the

[[Page S1522]]

     Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund at HHS to 
     continue supporting critical response and preparedness 
     activities. In addition, the Administration is requesting 
     that the Congress permit the $535 million in emergency 
     supplemental funding appropriated in the Agriculture, Rural 
     Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 2020, to the Public Health and 
     Social Services Emergency Fund at HHS for the prevention and 
     treatment of Ebola to be used for COVID-19 response. 
     Tremendous progress has been made on Ebola and the current 
     national response priority should be COVID-19. These two 
     proposals would make $1.8 billion in new resources available 
     for the current response.
       This funding would support all aspects of the U.S. 
     response, including: public health preparedness and response 
     efforts; public health surveillance, epidemiology, laboratory 
     testing, and quarantining costs; advanced research and 
     development of new vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics; 
     advanced manufacturing enhancements; and the Strategic 
     National Stockpile. Funds would also be made available, as 
     necessary, to affected States that are making contributions 
     to the current national response.
       Because this funding arises from an unforeseen, 
     unanticipated event and is necessary for the protection of 
     human life, these supplemental resources should be designated 
     as emergency funding. In addition to these emergency 
     supplemental appropriations, the Administration is seeking 
     enhanced authorities to use existing resources most 
     effectively and to create additional flexibility for 
     directing resources toward the response. These flexibilities 
     include the ability for HHS to transfer funds to CDC, the 
     National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug 
     Administration, the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and 
     Response, and other components as necessary to carry out 
     further response activities. This also includes enhanced 
     transfer authority for the Secretary for the COVID-19 
     response, similar to the authority already provided for the 
     HHS Refugee and Entrant Assistance account. In addition, the 
     Administration seeks an increase of the authorized funding 
     level, to $10 million, for the repatriation program within 
     the Administration for Children and Families for potential or 
     future response activities.
       With the appropriation of new emergency funding, as well as 
     the repurposing of FY 2020 Ebola resources, reprioritization 
     of other FY 2020 funding across HHS, and contributions from 
     other Government agencies, across the Government we expect to 
     allocate at least $2.5 billion in total resources for COVID-
     19 response efforts.
       Thank you for your consideration of these funding needs. I 
     urge the Congress to take swift action to provide the 
     additional funding requested to support the United States 
     response to COVID-19. I stand ready to work with you to 
     achieve this goal.
           Sincerely,
                                                Russell T. Vought,
                                                  Acting Director.

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote 
that is scheduled to begin at 1:45 p.m. begin immediately.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays are ordered.
  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) 
and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 1, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 66 Leg.]

                                YEAS--96

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Braun
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Harris
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Loeffler
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     McSally
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--1

       
     Paul
       

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Enzi
     Sanders
     Warren
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 96, the nays are 1.
  The 60-vote threshold, having been achieved, the bill was passed.
  The bill (H.R. 6074) was passed.

                          ____________________