[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 144 (Wednesday, August 12, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5393-S5395]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CORONAVIRUS
Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, returning to the latest coronavirus
emergency aid package--currently, the package doesn't exist. There have
been no bipartisan negotiations on it since last Friday. That is
disappointing to all of us who are here, ready and willing to negotiate
and vote for a strong bipartisan relief package.
The House of Representatives passed its strong package back on May
15, now nearly 3 months ago. Today is August 12. There was some hope
that maybe COVID-19 cases were ticking downward. At the end of May,
there was some hope that maybe the economic devastation was reducing,
but COVID cases did not tick down over the summer as some had hoped. In
fact, they have ticked up in many parts of the country, and the Senate
has not taken any votes on the House bill or indeed on any bill. That
is disappointing.
More than that, it is disappointing for millions of Americans who are
in the midst of hard times right now. They are worried about their own
health or the health of their loved ones. They are worried about
whether they will receive unemployment benefits or how they will make
rent or mortgage or how their children will get an education. We know
in this body we can transcend politics as usual to address the
coronavirus because we did so in March by passing the CARES Act, even
as Members of the body, including me, were getting coronavirus as we
were having those negotiations. Even as staffers were getting it, even
as Senate spouses were getting it, we stayed at the table and found a
bipartisan bill that helped us deal with the challenge for a few
critical months.
But we are here debating this again because the magnitude of the
crisis is not a crisis of a few months. No, it is such that the aid
provided thus far is running out while Americans' hardships continue.
That is why it is essential that we not give up and that we stay here
as long as it takes to come through for the American people.
I have heard some in Congress and, indeed, some in this body say
about more Federal aid for the coronavirus response say: I just don't
see the need for it. Indeed, the majority leader has candidly
acknowledged that approximately 20 Members of the Republican caucus
will not vote for more aid. Well, I want to make the case first that
there is need for it, and the need is undeniable because the
circumstances that people are living in are dire.
Last Friday, we found out that the unemployment rate in July was 10.2
percent, which is a number that is higher than at any point during the
2008, 2009 recession. The President called these ``Great Jobs
Numbers!'' But I don't see anything great about 1 in 10 Americans who
are in the workforce not being able to find work.
More than 30 million Americans are collecting unemployment benefits,
and last week their benefit checks were cut by more than 50 percent. In
Virginia, just as an example, unemployed workers are now receiving a
maximum--a maximum--of $378 a week. That is not enough to pay rent, let
alone rent, groceries, childcare, electric bills, and many other costs
that families face every day.
Because they lost their jobs and other income, millions of Americans
are now at risk of eviction or foreclosure. The $600 Federal
unemployment benefit and Federal eviction moratorium were holding this
off for many, but with those relief measures expiring, families are
unable to continue paying their August or September bills.
One estimate is that 12 million evictions will be filed by October,
and 12 million is essentially the combined population of about 6 or 7
States. There could be that many evictions filed by October. Just in
Virginia there was a State-imposed eviction moratorium that lapsed for
5 weeks, and just in those 5 weeks, nearly 10,000 evictions were filed,
potentially forcing people out of their homes.
Three in ten Virginia renters surveyed a couple weeks ago said that
they were uncertain how they could pay August rent, and it was more
than half of all African-American renters surveyed who said that was
the case. Housing instability is difficult at any point in time, but
imagine losing your housing during a pandemic. What are people supposed
to do during a pandemic? The advice is, if you can stay home and don't
go out and don't be with others, that will help keep your family safe.
But how can you quarantine at home if you are in danger of losing your
home?
Like the majority leader, who quoted from constituents in Kentucky, I
am hearing from Virginia constituents every day.
From Allison in Henrico:
I have now exhausted my savings account and have rent due,
groceries to buy and bills to pay. I am now desperate for
immediate help.
From Rhys in Mechanicsville:
I have three children, one with significant special needs.
My wife cannot work now due to covid-19 and the school
closures. I am behind on numerous bills, including mortgage,
utility, and other bills.
From Dominique in Fairfax:
My rent is now 3 months behind as well as my other bills
and I am receiving letters [threatening] evictions and
services being turned off.
Unfortunately, these examples are now not aberrations, but they are
common. We all know people--we all know people--who are at risk of
losing their home or being hungry or losing healthcare or their savings
being depleted because of the absence of work.
So we have to make sure that people are not removed from their homes
in the middle of a health crisis. We need to make sure they can
continue to pay bills until the health crisis is sufficiently addressed
and the economy gets back to where it was.
Schools and colleges across the country are trying to reopen right
now. It doesn't matter if it is in person, online, or a hybrid model,
we want them to reopen safely right now, and this is the time to
provide schools with the resources they need to deliver quality
instruction, not punish them for following public health guidance and
data.
Working families are struggling to find childcare options. This is
critical to reopening the economy. Childcare providers themselves are
struggling. Virginia, according to national surveys, is at risk of
losing 45 percent of its licensed childcare capacity; that is, 130,000
childcare slots in Virginia without the additional support they would
need to help them stay viable. If we lose childcare capacity, that will
have a significant consequence in terms of the ability of people to go
back to work so that the economy can start to grow again.
On the nutrition front, we are facing an unprecedented rise in food
insecurity as thousands of Virginians and millions of Americans have
newly enrolled in the SNAP program. The Brookings Institute estimates
that nearly 14 million children are living in food-insecure
households--14 million children. That is nearly six times the number of
children who were food insecure just as recently as 2018, and nearly
three times as many who were food insecure at the peak of the great
recession in 2008 and 2009.
I bet all of my colleagues have experienced this because we are all
out in our States talking to folks. Food banks have been slammed with
demand they have never witnessed before, and it has been harder for
food banks to get grocery access because grocery store shelves have
also been ravaged because people are going to grocery stores while
restaurants are closed.
[[Page S5394]]
What do food banks do with increasing demand and fewer donations from
grocery stores? The Capital Area Food Bank purchased 100 semitruck
loads of food in April, which is triple what the food bank purchased in
all of 2019. Just in 1 month, they tripled their purchases compared to
2019. The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank, which serves the western part of
Virginia, saw the number of new families seeking food assistance
quadruple from last year, just as of May.
Americans are in a dire state. Their basic needs are at stake. We
Democrats want to address that hardship. We did address that hardship
in the Heroes Act, which we passed in mid-May. We want to keep people
from losing their jobs, being evicted, and going hungry.
I know there are many Republicans who share these same goals, but the
proposals that have been on the table in this body are simply
inadequate. There are areas that we agree on. Aid to small business is
important. Broadband is important because as people telecommute or get
telehealth or get educational content online, they have to have access
to broadband. Testing is important. Childcare is important to open the
economy. These are important priorities I believe we can come together
on, but the Republican plan that the Senate GOP introduced in this
body, which the majority leader again acknowledges that at least 20
Members of the caucus will not support, has large cuts to unemployment
aid, no State and local government aid to prevent layoffs of first
responders and vital programs and services.
The majority leader characterized State and local government agencies
as a ``slush fund.'' I was a mayor. I was a Governor. I know what is
happening to State and local budgets, and when the revenues to State
and local governments decline, there is about one place they can go,
and the one place they can go is furloughs, waivers, salary cuts, and
cutting personnel.
The overwhelming majority of first responders in this country work
for State and local governments. It is never a good time to cut police,
fire, EMT, ambulance, healthcare workers--never a good time--but the
worst time to do it is in the midst of a global health pandemic. It is
not a slush fund; it is a necessity that the communities where people
live and work have basic services to get through this challenge.
The Republican proposal has inadequate education aid, no aid for the
eviction tsunami that is facing us to provide rent or mortgage
assistance, no nutrition aid in the SNAP program or otherwise to help
the 14 million kids who, today, are living in food-insecure households.
The Republican proposal did include a comprehensive liability shield
to prevent anyone from suing if their employer's negligence causes a
virus outbreak. I thought it was interesting that so often on the other
side of the aisle in this body, when this prospective bill has been
talked about, that has been in the front of the line as if the worry
about lawsuits is the biggest concern that the American people have
right now. No one in Virginia, when they tell me about their concerns,
is putting worries about lawsuits up at the top of the list. We are
talking about food, hunger, healthcare, and housing.
The liability shield proposal in the GOP goes even further than
protecting against liability; it wipes out States' abilities to pass
safety regulations. Virginia became the first State in the country to
do an emergency temporary standard to provide guidance to public places
and employers about safety standards that they could use on the job. It
is good to get advice about safety standards because most businesses
don't have an NIH or CDC or a health department, so advice about
standards that should be followed in workplaces is a great idea.
Virginia became the first State in the country to do that. The
Republican liability shield would not only give people liability
protections, but it would take away the ability of the States to do
what Virginia did to try to create lifesaving protections for workers
and customers. That is unacceptable--unacceptable.
Democrats offered to meet halfway. We knew when the Heroes Act
passed--I mean, we have been around the block a few times. It wasn't as
if Senate Republicans were just going to say: That is a good idea. We
will just vote for it.
That is not the way things work. The Senate Republicans would have
their proposal just as the House Democrats have their proposal. The two
proposals have dramatically different pricetags. The Senate proposal,
together with the White House, came in the neighborhood of $1 trillion
and the House proposal came in the neighborhood of $3 trillion.
There is nothing magic about these numbers, but it is important to
understand that willingness to compromise is something Americans expect
of us right now. Democrats said: OK, you have a package that is worth
$1 trillion, and we have a package that is worth $3 trillion. Let's
split the difference. We will have to decide how to compose the $2
trillion package, but let's split the difference. The White House
refused. The White House got an offer to meet halfway and said: That is
not what we are going to do. We insist on the skinny version.
The skinny version is inadequate to meet the challenge of the moment.
This is the worst economic contraction in the 145 years that we have
had measured quarterly economic growth in this country. This is the
worst pandemic that the United States has dealt with since the Spanish
flu of 1917 and 1918. A narrow bill isn't enough.
If you don't like the Democratic bill because you think the pricetag
is too big, how about meeting us halfway? That is the way negotiations
so often happen. After the White House rejected the notion of meeting
halfway, the President issued Executive orders that he claims break
through the logjam.
Like many things the President does, though, an analysis of the
Executive orders demonstrates there is little substance there. The
President proposed a deferred payroll tax collection. That doesn't
actually give Americans more money; it just gives them a larger tax
bill next year. Because it is a deferral, the President cannot lift the
obligation off either the employers or the employees. It is also very
confusing to employers to suggest: OK, you should defer, but it is
likely to start back up again. That is very, very hard for employers,
especially small employers, to figure out.
We all know that the payroll tax is the main pillar of Social
Security, as every generation pays into the system while they are
working so they can enjoy retirement with dignity in their senior
years. President Trump has said that this isn't just a deferral, but if
he has his way and is reelected, he is going to permanently cancel the
tax. That would undermine retirement security for all future
generations.
The Executive order with respect to housing did actually nothing. It
just ordered agencies to look into delaying evictions and foreclosures,
but no assistance and no dollars for those facing eviction or for those
facing foreclosures. Look into ``can you delay them.''
Governors are already saying that the Executive order dealing with
unemployment aid is unworkable. It would be very difficult for them to
reconfigure their UI systems to do what the President has asked them to
do and asked them to help pay for in the Executive order. Even if
States could figure out how to launch a completely new system, the
benefits would run out in 5 weeks.
On the surface, the Executive order with respect to student loan
relief looks like an extension, but if you dig into it, that is not
what it is. The order still leaves out 8 million Federal student loan
borrowers, and it doesn't even mention whether borrowers' credit
ratings and credit scores will be protected if they take advantage of
what is offered to them under the EO.
What about the millions of students who are struggling to financially
find a way to go back to college, or the schools that are trying to
find a way to still make sure students get an education when they
reopen, or the working families that are struggling to find childcare?
School boards and superintendents around the country have come with a
proposal saying that to open schools safely would cost about $175
billion, and that is what Democrats have put on the table. That is not
addressed at all in the Executive orders, even as we stand at the
threshold of schools reopening.
In sum, the President's Executive orders address virtually none of
the hardships, solve virtually none of the hardships, and lift
virtually none of the burdens that Americans are suffering through
right now. We are having hard
[[Page S5395]]
times. We are having hard times, and it is our duty to try to address
that hardship.
Democrats are willing to compromise. When we say, ``Hey, we have a
plan but we will meet you halfway in your plan,'' and the White House
says, ``No,'' you know, what are we supposed to do? What are we
supposed to do? A skinny version isn't sufficient for the magnitude of
the crisis.
The Senate Republican proposal has some elements that we support, but
it leaves so many others unaddressed that it is not adequate. The
Republican White House has rejected compromise. President Trump's
Executive orders are partly illegal, partly unworkable, and completely
insufficient. It doesn't have to be this way because there are many
areas on which we can find agreement.
I know many in this body are hearing from their home States'
Governors, mayors, local governments, colleges and universities, school
boards and housing authorities, food banks, hospitals, and the chambers
of commerce. You are hearing the same thing that I am hearing from
Virginians.
So, as I conclude, it doesn't have to be this way. We can put
together a good bipartisan deal, but it can't be a ``White House my way
or the highway.'' It has to be a willingness to meet and find
compromise between a Democratic proposal and a proposal that is
acceptable to at least some on the GOP side and the White House.
Any large compromise in a divided government is bound to be
imperfect. I am reminded of a quote from FDR during the Depression
years. You never really had to use quotes from the Depression because
the magnitude of the Depression was different than what I have
experienced during most of my life, but now quotes from the Depression,
I think, bear some revisiting. Here is what FDR said as the
administration and Congress, at the time, were doing everything they
could to figure out a way to help out needy Americans: ``Better the
occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity
than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its
own indifference.''
By now, everybody knows somebody who has gotten COVID-19 or somebody
who has gotten sick or even died or somebody who has lost a job or
somebody who is worried about rent or food. We all know those people,
and many of us have experienced this in our own families. Are we going
to help or are we going to be frozen in the ice of our own
indifference? Let's surprise the Senate. Let's work together and get
this done.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Boozman). The Senator from Nevada
____________________