[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1766-S1768]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CORONAVIRUS

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, yesterday, the President of the United 
States and the Centers for Disease Control contacted us individually 
and at least through the media to advise us to avoid gatherings of more 
than 10 people. It is a reflection of the national emergency we face 
and the public health crisis that America is facing head-on, as it 
should.
  This morning, as we opened the Senate, there were 18 people gathered 
on the floor of the Senate--3 Senators and 15 staff people. As those 
who follow all the Senate can tell, our staffers come to work, as they 
are expected to, but come under circumstances that are more challenging 
than they were just a few weeks ago.
  I want to thank each and every one of them here on the floor, as well 
as the many who you don't see, behind the scenes, who are necessary for 
the opening of this Capitol and for the protection of everyone who 
works here. There are policemen and there are people engaged in basic 
activities here who keep this magnificent structure functioning, and 
they come here now in the midst of a public health challenge, where 
most every American has been told to stay home: If you can possibly 
stay home, do it; for social distancing, make certain that you stay a 
certain distance between yourself and some other person. Yet they come 
here, and we thank them for it.
  The obvious question is, Why are we here under these circumstances? 
We were called back into a week of legislative activity, which had been 
scheduled to be a week where we were back home in our individual 
States. There is a lot for me to do back home, and I am sure that is 
true for every Senator, from the crises which we had at O'Hare 
Airport--I was working on that on Saturday and Sunday night--to the 
issue of closing schools and feeding children, and all of the other 
issues that are part of this coronavirus challenge.
  But we were told to come back here this week, to make a trip back, to 
fly back from wherever, to come to the U.S. Capitol for two reasons. We 
were told we had to pass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 
reauthorization because it expired as of last weekend. It turns out 
that we have found a way to avoid a necessary vote at the last minute. 
The Senate Republican leader agreed last night, just a few minutes 
before the scheduled vote, to accept a proposal that had been made to 
him by Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah last Thursday. The Senate 
Republican leader did not accept it then. He accepted it last night. 
The net result was we didn't have to be present. We didn't have to make 
the journey for that purpose.

  The second part of our return is equally important and maybe more so 
in light of this public health crisis, and that was to consider the 
measure that was taken up by the House of Representatives and passed in 
the early-morning hours of Saturday. This measure, known as the 
Families First Coronavirus Response Act, is the second piece of 
legislation we have considered and, I am sure, not the last. We are 
already talking about the coronavirus 3 act, which is likely to be 
debated and voted on soon.
  The point I am making is this measure, which was physically sent to 
us last night with technical corrections,

[[Page S1767]]

could have been considered as early as last Saturday. By unanimous 
consent, the Senate can take up a measure before it physically arrives 
from the House. It has happened many times before. It is not 
extraordinary. The physical presence of the document is not necessary 
for this debate or for a vote to consider it.
  We acknowledge the fact that sometimes the movement of paperwork from 
the House may take a little longer than the actual time when we 
physically can take possession of it through other means.
  So the argument that was made this morning that it wasn't until we 
received the document last night that we could consider it is not 
accurate. Under the Senate rules, by unanimous consent, we could have 
considered it as soon as it was enacted by the House.
  The question before us now is, What are we waiting for? There was a 
technical correction bill that was added to it yesterday, after the 
House overcame the objections of a Republican Congressman. After his 
objections were set aside or satisfied, they moved forward with the 
technical corrections.
  We have the package. It is before us now. The obvious question is, 
Why aren't we passing this measure immediately? We should because 
contained in this measure are important changes in the law that will 
help American families respond to this coronavirus crisis--fundamental 
questions: Will we provide, for many American workers, medical leave if 
they decide that they don't feel well and want to keep themselves, 
their family, their coworkers, and the public safe by staying home?
  They are afraid that if they don't get a paycheck, they won't be able 
to meet the needs of their families. So this bill extends the medical 
leave coverage to more workers across America. I am unhappy that it 
doesn't go further, and perhaps we can extend it further with the third 
iteration of our coronavirus legislative package. But there is no 
reason not to pass this and to pass it now and not to wait a day or two 
or three before we get around to it. Let's do it. Let's get it done.
  In addition, we have changes in unemployment compensation. If someone 
literally loses their job because of this public health crisis, we want 
to make sure they have something coming in to help their families as 
quickly as possible. That is a measure I am sure all of us agree on--to 
change the unemployment compensation laws to help these families 
through very difficult times. Why would we wait to pass that?
  We should pass this by unanimous consent today and do it quickly. 
That is something I hope the Senate Republican leader will consider. 
There is just no reason for the delay.
  There are so many other things involved in this. The basic issue of 
feeding America is now in question. Who is going to feed these students 
whose schools have been closed across Illinois and across the United 
States? It is a practical challenge in Springfield, IL, as well as in 
Chicago. Well, we have issues that are raised by this coronavirus 
legislation that is before us that will change and strengthen food 
assistance at this time of public health crisis. Why wait? Let's get 
this done by unanimous consent. We should be doing it and doing it 
right now.
  In addition to that, we provide additional Medicaid benefits to the 
States to deal with the obvious health challenges. We want to make sure 
that the healthcare workers--and God bless them for risking their lives 
for us--are paid. We want to make sure the equipment that is needed by 
hospitals and clinics comes on board as quickly as possible.
  In my State of Illinois, we have challenges, from the city of Chicago 
to rural and small towns. They need help. The Medicaid assistance in 
this bill will provide help for them immediately. Why wait? Let's pass 
this and do it this morning.
  We also have free testing for coronavirus that is set out in the law. 
Whether you have insurance, whether you are covered by Medicare or 
Medicaid, you are going to be able to be tested--when the tests are 
available, I might quickly add--without cost to you. And that is the 
way it should be.

  These are things that are basic. They were agreed to not just by 
Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, but by the Trump White House, 
Mr. Mnuchin. The Secretary came forward and negotiated all the changes 
I have just described. So they are bipartisan in nature.
  There is no reason for us to delay this in any way. We should move on 
it quickly. Putting this off for a day or two or whatever the plan is 
with the Republican leadership is totally unnecessary and unfortunately 
requires staff to wait around here when they have been advised they 
should be home, there should be social distance, and they should be in 
a circumstance where they are not endangering themselves in terms of 
their health or anyone else's. Let's get this done.
  The third issue I want to raise is one which is critically important 
but I believe is timely. We have to think anew about the way the Senate 
does business. If we are telling people to do their work from home when 
possible, teleconferencing as opposed to being physically present at 
work, what are we doing to achieve the same thing?
  There has been speculation, conjecture about a coronavirus aid 
package--the third one in the series. I totally support it. On the 
Democratic side, we have a long list of particulars of things that we 
think will be helpful to get this economy back on its feet by starting 
with families and workers and expanding it to small businesses. It is a 
long list, it is a comprehensive list, and I am sure there are even 
more suggestions that could come before us. How are we going to 
consider those? Are we going to meet as committees as we ordinarily do, 
in the same room, when we have been advised that is not a good idea 
from a public health viewpoint, or are we going to do it by 
teleconferencing and Skyping and using modern technology?
  It is time for the Senate to wake up to the 21st century and to make 
sure we are using technology that allows us to communicate with one 
another without any danger or risk to public health.
  In addition to that, there is a more difficult question about how we 
can vote in the U.S. Senate if we are not physically present. I know 
that is being considered. Senator Klobuchar and I have discussed it. I 
know she is thinking about it from a Senate rules perspective. Senator 
Schatz of Hawaii has raised the same question. Others have too.
  Let's get into this. Let's find a way to do this that protects the 
integrity of our voting procedure but acknowledges the reality that our 
physical presence on the floor may not be required to be actually 
present under the rules of the Senate--at least for the sake of 
counting our votes. We ought to be discussing that this week and make 
sure we have a task force that is working on coming up with answers to 
that as quickly as possible.
  Finally, I think it is time for us to start meeting as committees by 
this teleconferencing and Skyping and talking about this coronavirus 3 
package--the one that really stretches us beyond where we are.
  Let's take a look at the first two measures. With coronavirus 1, 
which was a supplemental appropriation, the President asked for about 
$2 billion. We came up, on a bipartisan basis in just 2 short weeks, 
with $8 billion, primarily focusing on healthcare resources, on 
research, and on developing vaccines. That was a must, and we did it on 
a bipartisan basis.
  The second package talks about families and workers and small 
businesses and how they should respond and how we can help them.
  The third package I think will take a look at the original two to see 
if they need to be changed in any way but to expand our reach even 
more.
  Let's do it in the context that we are preaching to America. As we 
hold the press conferences in Washington and tell Americans ``Avoid 
going to work physically if you can,'' let's try to find ways to make 
the Senate work without putting anyone's health at risk. We can do 
that, but we need to do that together.
  Let me also say that the Senator from Kentucky said that the Senate 
will not recess until significant new measures beyond what the House 
has passed are considered. If there is a plan for that, please let us 
know. Those of us who are here and worried about whether there will be 
transportation back home to our families at some point would like to 
know what the schedule is going to be. If the Senate

[[Page S1768]]

leader, the Republican leader, has a plan, please share it with us too. 
All of us are waiting and anxious to know what our circumstances will 
be for the days ahead.
  I want to stay here and get the work done, but let's do it in an 
orderly, safe, and nonrisky way. Let's try to abide by the same 
guidelines we are preaching to the rest of America. Let's use new 
technology. Let's use our best thinking and come up with bipartisan 
answers. That, to me, is the way to manage the Senate in the midst of 
this national emergency.
  We shouldn't be returning, as we have this week, and facing 
situations like last night where our vote was not even necessary. Many 
of us came here ready to vote and found that there had been an 
agreement that made such a vote unnecessary.
  It is time for a greater spirit of cooperation and communication. 
Just to have the Republican side come up with their list and we come up 
with ours, without dialogue, doesn't lead us to where we need to be. 
Let's have that dialogue and do it in a safe and thoughtful way.
  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. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________