>> margaret thank you so much. >> thank you, margaret. >> and the senate about to gavel back in. no votes are currently scheduled as talks continue off the floor on another coronavirus relief bill. take you live now to the senate floor. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate with prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, our star of hope, continue to be the light that enables us to see the way. lead our lawmakers to accomplish your work on earth making them your agents for justice, truth,

and freedom. inspire them to be stewards of your will as you answer their cries for help. lord, listen to their fervent prayers as they wait expectantly for your deliverance. keep our senators on the right path of your prevailing providence and surround them with the shield of your love. defend them with your heavenly grace and give them the courage to face perils with total trust in you. we pray in your sovereign name.

amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. grassley: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: one minute for morning business, please. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. grassley: you watch the news or read the newspapers and you know that there's a lot of deliberations going on to help with the problems that we have of people being unemployed, the pandemic we're fighting, and getting the economy up and running. while those negotiations are going on, every once in a while some of us on this side of the aisle try to get things to help people that have need. so a few days ago the democratic leader objected to one of these attempts which was a short-term extension of the federal unemployment supplement that was created by this body as part of the cares act. and remember, the cares act passed unanimously by this body back in march. so those things are running out and we're trying to get them extended. this effort to get this

short-term extension was to provide for americans who need the continued help while talks continue about a longer extension and even more relief. common sense ought to play a role. there doesn't seem to be any downside to a temporary extension, but there apparently was a political upside to the other side blocking it. i hope we can work together and that the democrat leader will let his members work with republican colleagues on a path forward. this partisan my way or the high way approach just doesn't work, particularly in a body where it takes 60 votes to get things done. so these objections are not how we got the cares act passed in the first place. it's not how we'll continue to deliver for the american people now if we don't get more

cooperation. i yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: first, madam president, i extend the senate's condolences to the people of lebanon following yesterday's horrific explosion in beirut. reports indicate that at least a hundred have died and more than 4,000, 4,000 others were injured. the lebanese people have seen more than their share of tragedy. civil war, syrian occupation, terrorism, and assassination, violence, economic and political corruption, the burden of caring for more than a million refugees fleeing syria.

now, unfortunately, once again in the wake of great tragedy, the lebanese armed forces will have to demonstrate they serve the state of lebanon and its people, not a political party or sect. since the end of syrian occupation, the l.a.f. has demonstrated it can be unifying national force largely free from sectarianism that corrodes other lebanese institutions. now it must do so again. the people of beirut are beginning the hard work of rebuilding their city. their nation continues its hard work to restore its democracy and sovereignty. on these fronts the senate and the american people stand with them in their journey. now, on an entirely different matter, stop me, madam president, if the story i'm about to tell sounds familiar. the speaker of the house, the democratic leader, some of --

summoned president trump's representatives to the capitol. they meet for a long while. the democrats say they had a few meters of progress but the deal is still far off leaving millions of americans in the lurch. they continue to push their $3 trillion wish list that even their own democratic colleagues brushed off as absurd. we've had variations on this theme daily for more than a week now. the speaker of the house called their far left proposal a well developed strategic plan. but even members of their own caucus know that's not true. back when the speaker's wish list was rammed through the house, one democratic member came right out and said the so-called heroes act, quote, isn't a plan. it's a wish list. another said that members of her caucus had taken the bill as, quote, an opportunity to make political statements that go far beyond pandemic relief and has no chance at becoming law.

others said it was not focused and, quote, partisan gamesmanship. these are democrats i'm quoting. even the speaker's own rank and file know it's comical to say your strategic plan for covid-19 involves sending taxpayers checks to people here illegally. paying people more not to work than essential workers earn by working. soil help programs, so-called environmental justice grants, and a massive tax cut aimed directly at wealthy people in new york and california. the last point needs special attention. now in ordinary negotiations, members of congress like to bring things home for their core supporters. but it's a little too on the nose for the speaker from san francisco and the democratic leader if new york city to be holding up a frill dollars in emergency aid for the entire country unless they get big tax breaks for millionaires in their

own towns. economists across the political spectrum say this demand of theirs is a bad idea. 94% of the benefit would flow to people who make north of $200,000. in the words of one progressive economist who ought to be on their side, quote, this is not a good idea. it would not help the economy heal and it would not benefit the people who need help. but my friends in the democratic leadership are not deterred. more than a week into the talks they're still threatening to block all relief for struggling people unless big city penthouses get these tax cuts. the democratic leader said just yesterday he's still holding out for this. now, this isn't the only bad policy they're hung up on. the speaker and the democratic leader continue to insist that federal unemployment assistance should pay people more not to work than the essential workers who kept working. let me say that again. the democratic position has been

that these millions of laid off people should get nothing unless they get a higher salary than the people who are still working. this isn't just bad economics if you're trying to reopen a country. it's also just simply unfair in the simplest terms. republicans want to keep providing some supplemental federal unemployment. we just don't think it's remotely fair for the federal government to tax essential workers who kept working every day so that uncle sam can pay their neighbors a higher salary to stay home. let me say that again. we just don't think it's remotely fair for the federal government to tax essential workers who kept working every day so uncle sam can pay their neighbors a higher salary to stay home. outside of the democratic leader and the speaker of the house, even democrats can see that the boyd upside down to pay people more not to work. last week the house democratic majority leader said, quote,

it's not just $600 or bust. our colleague, the senior senator from maryland, has said, quote, we certainly understand we don't want to have higher benefits than what somebody can make working. and just yesterday the senior senator from west virginia stated plainly that speaker pelosi's position was untenable. quote, i don't think we're going to stay at the $600. let's bare in mind even $200 would be eight times what democrat, put in place with union -- unified control in the last crisis in 2009. it's unthinkable they would hold every bit of relief hostage unless we land back at $600 and pay workers a bonus, a bonus if they do not help to reopen our country. maybe the speaker and the democratic leader will get the memo from their colleagues sometime soon. and then there's democrats' demand for a trillion more dollars to hand out to state and local governments even though they've only spent one-fourth,

one-fourth of the money we sent them back in march. yesterday i received an urgent letter from the city of malibu, california. and i promise i'm not making this up. they asked congress for hundreds of billions of dollars for state and local government because they have had to delay their conversion to an all-electric city fleet. i guess that's an emergency in malibu when they can't keep buying grand mu -- brand new electric cars as quickly as they would like. well this emergency is hitting most of america very differently. my constituents in kentucky have bigger problems. they need actual relief straight to struggling families and frankly, they need it yesterday. not a trillion dollar slush fund for bureaucrats that haven't spent what we sent them back in march. those are just some of the fantasy items that are in the democratics' demands.

i haven't even gotten to all the important things they left out. their bill costs three times as much as senate republicans' heals act but they kip over -- skip over major serious things we took care of. democrats propose fewer resources than republicans for the fund to help schools reopen safely. democrats completely shortchange the successful collins-rubio paycheck protection program where our bill would have fund a whole second round. democrats have no real equivalent to our proposals to strengthen domestic supply chains for p.p.e. and critical resources. and they propose no legal protections at all for the doctors and nurses who fought these unknown -- fought this unknown enemy or the schools, universities, churches, and businesses trying to reopen. apparently those soil health experiments and diversity initiatives didn't leave enough room for the critical policies that would actually help the

country. but remember our democratic colleagues told us from the beginning their goal was never a targeted plan for covid-19. in march one of the speaker's top lieutenants said democrats should view this deadly disease and mass unemployment as, quote, a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision. speaker pelosi herself called this crisis a wonderful opportunity. and it's clear they view it that way because while americans are struggling, the democratic leaders have moved about one inch, one inch in eight days. for the sake of the millions and millions who need more help, let's hope they decide to get serious soon. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for

up to ten minutes each. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the minority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be removed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: now, negotiations on the next round of covid relief continued yesterday and will continue again today. speaker pelosi and i are making progress with the white house, but we remain far apart on a large number of issues. as i mentioned yesterday, the fundamental disagreement between our two parties is the scope and severity of the problem. this is the greatest economic crisis america has faced in 75 years, the greatest health crisis in 100. there must be a relief package commensurate with the size of this historic challenge. a skinny package, a package that doesn't solve so many of the

problems america faces would hurt the american people, and we cannot have it. but our republican friends are wedded ideologically to the idea that government shouldn't take forceful action, that we should leave the welfare of the american people to the whims of the private sector. it just doesn't work like that, especially in a time of national emergency. the private sector cannot do it. so while we have started to generate some forward momentum, we need our partners in the white house to go much further on a number of issues, let alone the republican senate, where 20 or so republicans, by the majority leader's admission, don't want to do anything. one example, the administration has finally come around to the view that we should extend the moratorium on evictions, but they continue to refuse to provide actual assistance to the renters themselves. what good does that do? we can prevent americans from

being kicked out of their apartments for another few months, but if they can't pay the rent they'll be right back at square one when the moratorium expires with even more unpaid bills piled up. extending the moratorium only solves half the problem. republicans continue to stonewall support for state, local, and tribal governments who have already shed more than a million public service jobs this year and will continue to lay off teachers and firefighters and more if congress does nothing. in the early days of the crisis state and local governments fought this virus on their own. the donald trump administration couldn't be bothered to provide more zeros. they put zero into their proposal for state and local,

the republicans. i'd like to go home and tell their mayors, we want zero for you. it's not acceptable. on unemployment insurance, a few senate republicans have belatedly accepted the view we should extend the enhanced benefit at $600 for an extended period of time. as democrats have proposed and voted for in the house. of course many senate republicans, most senate republicans still object to that, but at least a few have come around. at the moment, however, the white house is not there, and we are not going to strike a deal unless we extend the unemployment benefits which have kept nearly 12 million americans out of poverty. the same goes for health care. testing and tracing. how is it that everyone in the white house can get tested, everyone in the nfl can get tested but average americans still cannot access tests easily or get results back fast enough?

more than seven months into the crisis, this administration does not have the adequate -- does not have a plan for the adequate capacity for testing and contact tracing. it's a shocking failure on the part of the trump administration and the republican senators. so democrats are insistent that we provide enough resources to finally slow the spread and defeat this disease. the single-most important thing to our recovery. the american people know that the trump administration and the republican adherents in the senate are to blame for this huge failure in testing and tracing. they demand we act and act fully now, not with some half-baked, poorly funded plan that won't do the job, which is where the administration seems to be at right now. and americans are -- and democrats are insistent that every american should be able to

vote this november safely and confidently in person or by mail. covid has affected how we will vote. many more will vote by mail. there will be a need for polling places, maybe more of them. and a need to space people out as they vote. we are not going to stop fighting until state election systems and the post office, which is part of getting the mail there on time, get the resources that they need. elections are a wellspring of our democracy, and the only answer as to why neither the republicans in the senate nor the white house want to do anything about it is they fear a free and fair election. that is inimitable to the core of this republic. we're going to keep fighting. and there have been alarming reports about recent failures at the post office, about

residents in michigan and pennsylvania not getting their medicines or their paychecks for three weeks or more. the postal service is vital and not just for elections, but every single day. the new postmaster, a big donor to president trump, which many believe is his main qualification as to why being chosen, has enacted new guidelines at the post office that experts say will cause severe delays in mail delivery, and then he refused for weeks to even hold a phone call with democrats, including myself, about this issue. i called three times. mr. dejoy evidently didn't have concern to call back when i was concerned about mail delivery in new york and the rest of the country. so we insisted to mr. mnuchin and mr. meadows on meeting with mr. dujoy which will take place later today. we need to resolve the problems at the post office. there is lack of funding and

there are new regulations that get in the way to the timely delivery of mail. we must resolve those in a way that allows mail to be delivered on time for the election and for the necessities that people need. each and every one of these issues is critical, and there are many more. we need answers and movement on all of them, not just on one or two. but some of our republican friends seem content to pass a bill, any bill, so they can check the box and go home. we cannot do that. we cannot agree to an inadequate bill and then go home while the virus continues to spread, the economy continues to deteriorate and the country gets worse. so we're going to keep slogging through step by step, inch by inch, until we achieve the caliber, the extent, the depth and breadth of legislation that the american people need, deserve, and want. in stark contrast, the

republican leader has decided that he would rather just lob partisan potshots from the floor each morning rather than join in productive negotiations. it is difficult to listen to the republican leader spin such a malicious fiction about why congress has yet to pass another round of relief when he can't even sit in the room with us and negotiate, when he can't even create a modicum of unity in his disturbingly divided caucus. for three months leader mcconnell and senate republicans put the senate on pause when it came to the coronavirus. as covid spread throughout the south and west, as states hit daily records for new cases and hospitalizations, as 50 million americans filed for unemployment, the senate republican majority merrily hummed along as if it were living in a different universe. leader mcconnell scheduled confirmation votes on right-wing judges.

the chairman of judiciary and homeland security held hearings on the president's wild conspiracy theories about the 2016 election and conducted desperate fishing expeditions, hoping to dig up dirt on the family of the president's political rival. when the republican majority did put legislation on the floor, it wasn't even remotely related to covid. all through that time democrats came to the floor to practically beg our colleagues to consider covid relief legislation. we asked consent to pass urgent relief no fewer than 15 times and every single time republicans blocked our request. one senate republican -- once senate republicans decided to write a bill it was the legislative equivalent of a dumpster fire. republicans bickered among themselves for over a week and a half before finally giving up. they didn't even release a coherent bill, just a series of nibbling proposals rife with corporate giveaways and k street

carve-outs. republicans proposed a tax break for three-martini lunches but no food assistance for hungry kids. $2 billion for the f.b.i. building to boost the value of the trump hotel but not a dime to help americans afford the rent. and then to top it all off, almost as soon as the senate republican plan on covid was released, it became clear that even senate republicans didn't support it. president trump called it semiirrelevant. semi-irl relevant is what he called the republican proposals. leader mcconnell basically gave up and left democrats and the white house to negotiate the next bill. so it's strange reason for leader mcconnell to criticize those of us who are actually engaged in negotiations while he is intentionally staying out of them. his alice in wonderland rhetoric, flipping everything on its head and accusing the other side of the sins that

leader mcconnell is in fact committing is extremely counter productive. since senate republicans clearly cannot reach a consensus, any agreement is going to require a lot of democratic votes. suffice it to say, the republican leader's rhetoric and positions are not helpful in that regard. while republican leadership continues to sit on the sidelines, democrats are in the room working hard. that's what the american people expect of us. they want to see us working to get something done in this time of extraordinary challenge. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the minority whip is recognized. mr. durbin: madam president, i want to thank the senator from new york and thank him for the negotiations that he's engaged in. it is nothing short of amazing that the republican leader of the united states senate comes to the floor of the senate every morning and criticizes senator

schumer and speaker pelosi who are sitting in a room day after day after day trying to hammer out an agreement to help america in this time of need while there are two empty chairs at that table. kevin mccarthy, the house republican leader, does not attend the meetings. and sadly, the republican leader of the united states senate is also boycotting these meetings. i can't remember a time when this has occurred. ever. no time in history when there was a critical national decision to be hammered out between the parties, and the leaders of the republican party in congress refuse to attend the meetings. senator mcconnell gives polished speeches on the floor criticizing senator schumer and speaker pelosi. they should be polished. he has time to practice them all day instead of going into the negotiations which could actually make a difference in the future of america. americans are genuinely

concerned, and they should be. we face a national health emergency. this pandemic, sadly, where the infections are spiking across america, it is still amazing to consider two numbers numbers -- the number five. the united states has about 5% of the world's population. 25 -- the united states has generated 25% of the covid infections in the world. 5% of the population, 25% of a reported covid infections in the world. how did we reach this point where this great, developed, civilized, and strong nation has been brought to its knees by this pandemic? we reached this point by lack of leadership. the american people know that there has been leadership failures at the top. they know that this president refuses to listen to is experts.

if the exerts say something that he doesn't like to hear, he banishes them, as dr. fauci has found. we also know that this president is down playing the threat that sadly is taking american lives, thousands by the day. just yesterday or the day before he branded this pandemic as all but over. really? there's hardly anyone in america that would agree with that statement. certainly no one who is paying any attention to the sad realities facing families. and this president has failed to tell the truth. he's been engaged in medical quackry. this hydroxychloroquine or whatever that he just clings to has been discredited by the sources that test it. it just isn't the answer. the president should know better. for goodness sakes, he doesn't have the competence to make a medical judgment along these lines. that won't stop him.

but many people across america are just fed up with it, whether it's lysol, cocktails or ultra violet insertions, lord only knows what they'll come up with next. at a time when people are literally sick and dying, when our health care heroes are risking their lives every day, this president goes off on these flights of medical fantasy, and the american people are fed up with it. and this president has failed to take the action that america desperately needs. we cannot reopen this economy. we cannot consider reopening schools until we dramatically invest in better, quicker testing. that's a reality. as senator schumer said earlier, americans wonder how the president meantions to test everyone who -- manages to test who crosses the threshold of the white house every day, how

major league players can get tested every few hours when americans are standing in lines and are waiting for results that are irrelevant when they get the results of the test. when you want to see your grandchildren today? that is the reality of testing in america. and what has this president done about it? he's made statement after statement that all the tests we possibly could want are available to every american. we know better. all across america we know better. testing has improved and increased but it's not where we need it. that should be the highest priority of this administration. but they failed when it came to providing personal protective equipment and they failed when it comes to providing testing. but the biggest failure is the attitude of the senate republican leader and the president when it comes to the crises america faces. first the coronavirus crisis and second, the economic crisis.

the biggest tragedy is the fact that they believe that we should do little or nothing, little or nothing when we are facing some of the greatest challenges of our time, some of the greatest challenges in american history. the american people expect us to take it seriously and to aggressively go after this coronavirus and its spread and aggressively help this economy back to its feet. we've come up with a plan which senator mcconnell has come to the floor and mocked every single day. it passed the house of representatives 11 weeks ago, 11 weeks ago. speaker pelosi passed it and sent it to the senate. what has happened in that 11-week period? speech after speech after speech deriding the efforts of the house of representatives and literally nothing on the other side to show for it. finally last week we started strickling out a few ideas here and there and they weren't very

good. they refused to participate, will not even attend the negotiations sessions with the white house and come to the floor each day and mock and criticize democratic efforts to deal with the issues before us. as far as recovery is concerned, it's essential that we dedicate ourselves to it, but first coronavirus. first get the infections under control and save the lives of those who have already been affected -- infected. that is the first thing that needs to be done. the republican approach is too little and too late. we've come up with a $3 trillion plan. they've come up with a trillion-dollar plan and said we may not even spend that much. and particularly troublesome for me is this attitude toward the unemployment compensation being paid to americans. i couldn't believe the senator from kentucky when he came to the floor today and tried to pit our health care heroes against

the unemployed saying they're going to work every day. why should we give any money to those who don't go to work every day. really? we have four unemployed americans, four unemployed americans for every single job opening. i don't believe that doctors, nurses, and medical professionals who are fighting covid every single day resent those who are unemployed. i think they understand full well the devastation of this pandemic, not only on the individuals they treat but on the economy at large. when it comes to these health care heroes, the democrats have stepped up and called for hazard pay. will the republicans join us? we think these health care heroes deserve it. that and more. our gratitude and more for all that they have given to the united states. let me say a word about those who are receiving unpolite benefit -- unemployment benefits. i met with five of them in chicago last week, heard their stories, asked them a few questions, learned a little bit

about their lives. and i wasn't surprised at the hardship they face. many of them have been out of work for four, five months already. it's no surprise that almost half of the people out of work have exhausted all of their savings at this point, even with unemployment benefits. i asked those who are unemployed what do you do with these checks that you sent to you each week. well, it's pretty obvious to them what you do with it. you pay the mortgage if you have one. you pay the rent, the car payments so it's not possessed, taken away from you, repossessed. you try to keep food on the table. you try to keep the people issuing the credit cards at bay. these are the basics that people face every single day. but the republicans don't seem to get that. they don't understand it because they don't get to know these people or ask them what life is like. they're not on any bed of roses with $600 a week when you

consider the debts that they face, when you consider the expenses that they face, and you consider the fact that many of them are struggling to pay for their own health insurance at this point. a family trying to pick up the cost of their health insurance that their employer once provided half of finds themselves spending $1,400 to $1,700 a month on that alone. that's the reality. and for the record, of those who have returned to work in ameri america, we're grateful that they're back to work. we're happy that they're back to work. 70% of them were making more money on unemployment than they made returning to work. where would -- why would they do that? because they're not lazy people. they're people who take pride in work, believe there's dignity with work and are prepared to return even if they made more on unemployment. they know that unemployment is a temporary help. they want to get back to work, a place where they can prove their

worth as individuals and feel some satisfaction that they're going to work and doing their best. that is part of the reality. let me also address for a moment this issue of reopening schools. there's a debate raging across the country right now about what this autumn will look like for our nation's schools, the schoolchildren, teachers, and school staff. you've heard the president who has literally threatened those who don't reopen their schools, that they may lose federal funding if they don't reopen schools. what is that funding spent for? special education, school lunches, help for kids in poor schools. the message has been reiterated by the loyal education secretary betsy devos. she, too, has joined in the threats on schools that don't reopen. now the republicans in the senate have taken their threat and turned it into legislation

with their proposal in the next relief package. let me be really clear. there is a concern about empty classrooms. those who study childhood behavior worry that lack of socialization takes its toll on childhood development. teachers are often sentinels for child abuse which may be going unreported. remote learning works well for others but not for others. -- for some but not for others. but that's not the concern for this president. he wants schools back so he can claim some kind of false victory over the coronavirus. last week i led 24 of my colleagues in writing to the majority and democratic leaders opposing putting children and teachers in any danger by conditioning funding on schools reopening in person. recently i had the opportunity to visit the little village academy in chicago with the chicago public schools chief janice jackson, some wonderful people are there each day passing out lumples to the kids

-- lunches to the kids in the neighborhood who come around the school. they haven't reopened for classes. they hope they will but that decision is still to be made. i can tell you in chicago and around my home state of illinois, school boards, administrators, teachers, parents and others are facing these decisions honestly. they have to provide a safe and effective learning environment for students and for teachers whether that be in person, in school, or at home. unlike president trump who's nicely insulated in the bubble of the white house with the multiple daily covid-19 tests for everyone who just might come in contact with him, these educational professionals in my home state of illinois have to answer directly to the families and their communities. it's a decision that local officials are best suited to make. without intimidation or threats from washington, d.c. but washington, d.c. does have a role to play. the best thing we can do is to help local school districts

through this difficult fall and beyond is to provide the federal assistance and support they need to ensure the path they choose is one that keeps students and staff safe while allowing the learning and development to continue effectively. it's why as we negotiate a fourth coronavirus response package, i'll be pushing for the inclusion of the coronavirus child care and education relief act being led in the senate by senator patty murray of washington. in addition to supporting child care, early education and higher education, the bill provides $175 billion to elementary and secondary schools to help meet technology, cleaning, staffing, and other needs of schools. it provides funds to school districts based on their share of lowe inco-- low-income children and it's similar to the cares act which brought more than $200 million to chicago public schools and a total of $512 million across our state of illinois. compare that $175 billion to the $70 billion being offered on the republican side, another classic

example. we believe this is a serious national issue when it comes to education. the republicans do not. the amount of money that they are proposing is a fraction of what we offer and it's conditioned on the schools actually reopening in person regardless of what is the safest thing for the school and the teachers and the students in any given area. congress shoontsz put state and -- shouldn't put state and local officials in the position of choosing between desperately needed federal assistance and the safety of students and school personnel. congress shouldn't incentivize schools to reopen in person prematurely or penalize those where the public health situation makes it dangerous. the argument from the administration seems to go well if schools don't reopen, they either don't deserve or don't need any help. that's just not the case. even schools that are not able to reopen in person need assistance ensuring their students, especially those from

low-income families have the ability to participate in remote learning. they need help keeping staff on payroll, preparing the building so that they can return in person in the future, and addressing any number of difficulties this pandemic has created. school buses. if there's going to be social distancing of the kids on the buses, will there be a need for additional buses and bus drivers? in addition to funding, the federal government should also ensure that schools have science-based guidance to support safe reopening, free from political influence and presidential quackery. they also need the flexibility to continue serving critical meals to our students regardless of what the school year looks like this fall. chicago public schools have done an incredible job providing 18 million meals since march. we need to ensure that the u.s. department of agriculture provides the range of alternative options needed to make sure that no kid in america goes hungry. schools in chicago and around our state don't need any more tweets or self-congratulatory

briefings, mr. president. they need federal resources and guidance based on the best science our government has to offer. and that's why i'm fighting for this relief package to be at a level to meet the challenge we face across america. let me close by saying this. the majority leader comes to the floor regularly and talks about special interests. perhaps he can explain to us why the republican proposal for relief for the covid-19 virus includes a $2 billion allocation for a new f.b.i. building across the street from the trump hotel. perhaps he can explain the $30 billion wish list from the department of defense trying to make up for cuts that were made when the president raided their accounts to build his almighty wall on the southern border. and perhaps the majority leader can explain to us the liability immunity which is being proposed by the republican side as a red

line, take it or leave it, we'll walk away if you don't like it approach. it would be one thing if the republican leader were in the room actually negotiating, but he just makes a red line and walks away. that red line is a subsidy to the largest corporations in america giving them liability from immunity -- liability immunity when it comes to possible court suits. wouldn't we want a standard to make sure all businesses and every individual or group or business is doing its best to keep america safe? when we say that don't worry about any liability in court if you ignore public health reality, that's no guarantee it's going to be a safe environment for america when we reopen this economy. madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. thune: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority whip is recognized. mr. thune: madam president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we're not. mr. thune: madam president, last week senate republicans did introduce a new coronavirus relief bill called the health, economic assistance liability protection and schools act. this bill was a $1 trillion piece of legislation focused on getting americans back to work, getting kids and college students back to school, and providing health care resources to help defeat the virus.

and as the title says, the health, economic assistance, liability protection and schools act, it does have liability protections in there. i just listened to the senator from illinois attack the idea of including those types of protections in the legislation, but i think it's really important, madam president, to point out that those types of protections are critical if we are going to get the economy reopened again. businesses who are doing all the right things, following the c.d.c. guidelines, adhering to all the laws, all the guidelines and restrictions that are out there shouldn't have to worry about lawyering up and spending thousands and in some cases millions of dollars to -- to try and defend themselves against frivolous lawsuits which are being filed as we speak by the thousands. and the implication,

madam president, given by the senator from illinois that somehow this is all about big corporations or big businesses is just not consistent with the facts on the ground. in fact, i had a conversation two days ago with the school administrators in my state of south dakota, all of whom are very interested in getting their schools opened up and getting kids back in school, which, again, is one of the priorities of our legislation ft it should be i think one of the priorities of the country as we head into the fall. and one of their big issues was ensuring that they had protections against liability, a liability shield, if you will, not against gross negligence, not against intentional misconduct, those types of things would not be covered, but protections if, in fact, they are doing all the right things consistent with the guidelines, following the rules that had been put in place, that they should have at least some protections.

that's going to be true not just of schools and small businesses, madam president, but it is also going to be true of health care providers. we have people on the front lines who are sacrificing every day to try and get people better, heal those who have contracted the virus, and also protect those who are on the front lines from getting it, and they, too, are going to need those very types of protections that are called for in our legislation. so this is not something that is put -- was put in there on a whim just because, you know, we knew that the democrats wouldn't like it. it was put in there because of feedback we received from states, local governments, school districts, health care providers, hospitals, nursing homes, and, yes, some small businesses, all of whom are going to be essential if we're going to get the economy up and going again and get people back to work, kids back to school,

and americans back on their feet. so it is an essential part of the legislation, one which so far the democrats have demonstrated no interest in including, and frankly no interest in even having a conversation about, which is unfortunate because it is a critical element feature of any bill that we should be working on right now to provide coronavirus relief. when we introduced this bill, madam president, we knew this wouldn't be -- this version wouldn't be the final draft. i think everybody conceded that. we knew we would need to negotiate with our democratic colleagues, just like we did with the cares act, which was our largest coronavirus relief bill back in march. back in march, the model that was used was having committee chairmen and ranking members get together and compromise and work out differences and end up with a strong bipartisan bill. was it a perfect bill? well, no, of course not. no bill is. did everyone get everything that

he or she wanted? no. but it was a strong bipartisan bill that was praised by democrats and republicans alike. in fact, reflected by the unanimous vote. mr. president, i'd like to say that what we are -- that we are engaging in those same types of negotiations right now, but unfortunately i can't say that. i can't say, in fact, what is happening right now is even negotiations. negotiations involve both sides being willing to give something up to compromise and to try and move toward a solution. and while republicans are willing to make compromises to ensure that we can deliver another coronavirus relief bill to the american people, democrats apparently aren't willing to make any. back in may, house democrats proposed and passed a massive $3.4 trillion piece of legislation that they called a coronavirus relief bill. subsequently, it's been endorsed by senate democrats who have gone so far as to offer up

unanimous consent requests here on the senate floor to adopt the house-passed bill. in reality, that house-passed bill, $3.4 trillion bill, mr. president, was a lengthy liberal wish list which even members of the democrats' own party dismissed as dead on arrival. in fact, democrats had some work to do to persuade members of their own caucus in the house to vote for the bill. as "politico" put it at the time, and i quote, as of late thursday evening, the house democratic leadership was engaged in what a few senior aides and lawmakers described as the most difficult arm twisting of the entire congress, convincing their rank and file to vote for a $3 trillion stimulus bill that will never become law. unquote. that's from "politico." the house bill includes various, quote, coronavirus priorities like funding for diversity and

inclusion studies in the marijuana industry, tax cuts for blue state millionaires, federalizing elections. just a few of the items that were included in the house-passed bill, mr. president. that is very hard that they have anything to do with defeating the coronavirus. in fact, the house bill mentions the word cannabis more often than it mentions the word job, which tells you all you need to know about the seriousness of that proposal. despite all that, mr. president, democrat leaders have taken the house bill as they are starting and, -- as their starting and, yes, their ending point for negotiations. they are insisting that republicans sign off on pretty much everything in their bill, from the tax cuts for wealthy americans to major changes in election law. and they are not bridging on the price tag either. mr. president, as i said, republicans have proposed a

$1 trillion piece of legislation i can tell you from being a member of the republican conference and the discussions that we have what a stretch it is for a lot of republicans who already have voted for multiple coronavirus relief bills to the price tag of about $3 trillion so far to do another trillion dollars knowing that every one of those dollars is a borrowed dollar, every one of those dollars is going on a federal debt which is already upwards of $25 billion and will ultimately have to be paid back by our children and grandchildren. well, that said, the trillion-dollar legislation that was put forward by republicans is nowhere close to the price tag for the democrats' bill, which is $3.4 trillion, as i said. now, i think even an elementary school student would realize that compromise lies somewhere between those two numbers, more

than perhaps the republicans' bill and less than the democrats' bill, but apparently that's not something that democrats are willing to entertain. a senior correspondent for cnn talked to speaker pelosi yesterday who claimed she wanted to reach agreement on a bill this week. the correspondent asked the speaker what price tag she was willing to agree to. her answer -- $3.4 trillion. in other words, mr. president, after more than a week of negotiations, the speaker of the house hasn't budged from her original position. she hasn't budged, nor have the senate democrats who every time something has come up on our side to try and address this crisis have answered with, well, let's just pass the heroes act of the house, the $3.4 trillion

boondoggle. well, mr. president, that's not a compromise. that's not a negotiation. and if we emerge from this process without a coronavirus relief bill, responsibility will rest squarely on the shoulders of the democrat leadership. let's suppose for a moment that republican negotiators agree to every single thing the democrats are insisting on. tax cuts for millionaires, diversity studies for the marijuana industry, a trillion-dollar pot of money for states, who i might add haven't even come close to spending the coronavirus money the government has already given them. let's suppose republican negotiators agreed to everything. what would happen then? well, mr. president, the bill would never pass the senate. in the senate, you need 60 votes to pass a bill. and there simply aren't 60 votes in the senate for the democrats'

liberal fantasies. in fact, mr. president, it would be lovely if, as democrats seem to think, the government drew its funding from a magical pot of gold that never runs out, but it doesn't. every dollar the coronavirus relief -- of coronavirus relief that we have already provided has been borrowed money which continues to drive up our national debt. now, arguably, it was money that needed to be borrowed, but, mr. president, there has to be a limit. the higher we drive our national debt, the greater the danger to the health of our economy. democrats may be fine with jeopardizing our economic health to pay for diversity studies in the marijuana industry, but i can tell you the republicans are not. republicans know that we're going to have to borrow some additional money to meet the demands of the coronavirus crisis, and we have offered legislation to do just that. but we are not going to further endanger our already-battered economy by signing off on every

unnecessary spending item on the democrats' liberal fantasy list. now, are republicans going to have to agree to some of the things that we're not crazy about? of course we are. but democrats are going to have to accept that they can't dictate every word of the bill. the bill which passed the house, i might add, was 1,800 pages long. the bill that we have proposed here in the senate is 165 pages. mr. president, the ball is in the democrats' court. republicans want to pass a coronavirus relief bill, and we are ready to negotiate. the democrats are going to have to decide if they want to come to the table. our way or the highway is not a negotiating position. and if democrats continue to insist on getting everything that they want, they are going to be responsible for congress' failure to deliver additional relief.

i hope, i really hope that the democrat leadership will remember what it means to negotiate and will work with republicans to arrive at a compromise bill that can make it through both houses of congress and actually become law. mr. president, i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. young: mr. president, freedom is the freedom to say two plus two make four. if that is granted, all else follows. so wrote novelist george orwell. in the late 1980's, i traveled to the former soviet union as part of a youth soccer program..

the shelves were barren, citizens drank from communal water fountains. the items most in demand and hardest to find were american items -- blue jeans, levi straus , and bubble gum. of course, those weren't the only things common in indiana that were contraband behind the iron curtain. for decades, news, literature, art, or entertainment that was not broadcast or approved by the state was scarce and available only by bootleg. the monuments towering over russia were built to honor those who controlled it. the same men who regularly erased parts of russia's history to suit their own political purposes, not to serve others.

this was a society where ideas and dialogue existed only underground. where watching american movies was a jailable offense. where free thinkers weren't found in newspapers or airwaves but locked away in labor camps. where information protected the state instead of empowering individuals. where history was constantly purged and revised. by the time i visited, though, soviet leadership in self-preservation mode, had gradually allowed citizens access to information and media as new technologies emerged. it was only a ray of sunlight through a very small crack, but through it people all across the former soviet union and the eastern bloc could finally see and hear what had long been

hidden from them. jazz, rock and roll, star wars, chuck norris, dr. zhivago, robinson caruso. history once erased was restored. the truth of stalin's murders was revealed. inevitably the fatal conceit of a centrally planned communist economy was exposed and large numbers of russians realized just how poorly their quality of life compared to the free western alternative. they were even permitted rights to express dissatisfaction with their circumstances. now a totalitarian regime's greatest ally is darkness and silence. keeping a people in the dark is the surest way to guarantee they

never demand their god-given rights. because just a trickle of information, just a hint of truth, a small offering of differing perspectives and a touch of freedom of expression helped lead to the soviet union's demise. the freedom to say that two plus two make four. free people become and stay free through open dialogue, because of the free exchange of information and ideas, even ones we disagree with, because of patience with perspectives that are not our own, because we study our history, celebrate its highs and learn from its lows, that is why, that is why it was painful to read recently that over 60% of americans are now scared to admit their

beliefs or air their opinions for fear of offending others and the consequences that will come with it. painful to learn, but easy to understand. this is the logical reaction when americans are regularly canceled, as we say today, for things said or written decades ago, with no chance of grace or allowance for growth. it's not just people who are being canceled. it's words, it's music, classrooms and libraries are banning huck berry fin and "to kill a mockingbird." rather than encouraging students to understand an author's words or messages. hamilton has fallen from grace now for the sin of acknowledging america was created in 1776.

whole parts of our american story are being whiepped away. -- being wiped away. communities have a right to determine who and what adorrancr streets. in the same manner lenin and stalin were once removed at the end of the cold war. our entertainment industry is getting in on the act too. american movies once inspired freedom seekers. today they're self-censored to appease another authoritarian regime in beijing. america is a good nation. those who call it home are decent and kind. we're not perfect, but our

imperfections are not irredeemable. 2020 has made it clear, though, that much work remains in the task of building a more perfect union, and that effort is ongoing. every generation since our founding has worked towards it, and every generation has made hard-earned progress. in our own work to create a more just future will be no less difficult, certainly more so than knocking down bronze and marble men or waging war on books or on each other across social media. every time our nation has moved closer to better realizing the promise at the heart of our declaration of independence that all men are created equal endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights,

it's been because the founders dared to dream that was possible and left us the means to do so. the freedom to raise our voices and state our opinions, to disagree and respectfully debate, the gift of free inquiry, the right to challenge our country on towards what martin luther king jr. memorably called its noble dream, through words, music, art, or expression, all free from censorship and recrimination, these liberties, unparalleled in human history, were, one, preserved and handed down to us by many of those whose memorials are falling. now out of gratitude, we must remember the men and women who came before us.

we must see their faults but not lose sight of their virtues and aspire to the high ideals they set for us, even if they often fell short of realizing them. what will we have without these freedoms, without memory and understanding of our past? desolate public spaces, empty bookshelves, silenced, timid citizens with nothing to strive for other than self-preservation but with these freedoms and inspired by our history, valuable debate and dialogue will flourish, daring ideas will be welcome and great ideals will live. and the work we are in, the work of building a more perfect union from a -- in a freer and

fairer nation will be possible. let this be the path we choose. now it would be natural to close with a quote by one of our several generations of founding fathers, washington, lincoln, king. but today i feel like it's more appropriate to remember another nation's founder and a good american friend, a man who lived behind the iron curtain and knew well the dangers of censorship and the power of free expression. as a play wright and a musician, he suffered under censorship. as a public leader, he helped his nation gain the power of free expression. it was exactly 30 years ago today that vaclev havel, then

president of czechoslovakia, spoke in this building. you have thousands of problems of all kinds, as other countries do, he observed of america. but you have one great advantage, he reminded us. you've been approaching democracy for more than 200 years, and your journey toward that horizon has never been disrupted by a totalitarian system. fellow americans, our journey continues on towards that horizon, and only we have the power to disrupt it. in this nation, two plus two must always equal four. we can take a positive step forward in one respect, and here's how. beginning today i'll be regularly recognizing notable pieces of indiana's history,

and maybe through a floor speech or a resolution or a social media posting. the purpose here will be to celebrate and better understand my state's part of america's story and to remember the hoosiers who through and because of freedom of action speech and expression wrote that story. they will not be erased. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: we have been talking here in the senate for months now about what needs to be done with covid-19. we are debating behind the scenes right now a fifth bill dealing with covid-19. we have already passed four through the house and the senate that the president has signed.

many americans know the effects of those previous bills. they have received a deposit from the treasury of $1,200. they have received assistance from the paycheck protection program. their schools have received assistance. their hospitals have received assistance. their states have received assistance. their local jurisdiction has received assistance. there has been wide support from multiple areas for housing and health, for testing and vaccines, all of those things that happened in the previous four bills. when we passed the last set of bills, there was a lot of thought about what would happen next, how would the virus spread, how long would this last, and would americans continue to just stay sequestered in their homes away from everyone else? now, after months of dealing with this covid-19 not only in the united states but globally, we know a lot more now of not only how we are going to respond, how to treat the disease, but also what we're dealing with. covid-19 doesn't affect everyone

the same way. healthwise, or economically. there are some people who get covid-19 and they literally never know it. they experience no symptoms at all. and others end up in a hospital in i.c.u. or on a ventilator or even fatalities. economically, we're at the same spot with covid-19. some businesses in america and some individuals in america are literally making more money now than they ever have before. they are in one of those businesses that's in high need. maybe home improvements as lots of folks are staying at home and they are doing home improvements. the price of lumber has skyrocketed. replacement windows. all kinds of people installing pools in their homes because they are not going on vacation this year, so they are doing things to be able to fix up their home. so construction and home improvement has skyrocketed. retail sales and craft businesses and things to be able to do at home has skyrocketed. a lot of other businesses that

we've seen have actually increased dramatically, not just grocery stores and department stores and such, but online retailers have done a really good business. many small towns in my state, their income to their community is higher now than it ever has been in the history of their city. because people aren't driving in to other towns to go shop. they are staying at home, and they are shopping local or they are shopping online and that revenue is coming back in from tax revenue back into the city. so literally they are doing better now than they ever have been. other communities and other businesses are having a horrible effect during this time period. if you're a hotel or convention center or restaurants around the convention center. if you are businesses that deal with travel, transportation, vacations, all of those are struggling horribly during this time period. and there are multiple others. so the challenge that we have

is, is our response now to be the same as it was in march, to just pretend that this has struck everyone exactly the same or should we pay attention to the realities economically around the country? i think we should be more strategic, understanding that what we're spending is other people's money. it's not just printed monopoly money that we can throw out of here. it's debt on our future or it's literally taking money from the person next door or from your house. so what do we need to do on a bill and what are the needs at this point? well, some of them are very obvious. for the next bill that's coming, we need to focus in on vaccines, tests, therapeutics. what are we going to do with telehealth? how are we going to be able to help? this is first and foremost a health crisis. it's amazing to me the number of topics that are being discussed for the next bill that have nothing to do with covid-19, nothing to do with it. my friends on the other side of

the aisle came forward with the heroes act. great name. a $3 trillion bill that a full trillion dollars of it has nothing to do with covid-19. unrelated completely. a trillion of it because it's a big bill and we want to get other things in we want to be able to do and just throw it in there. well, why don't we start with this as a health crisis, and let's focus in on the health issues there. vaccines, testing, therapeutics, telehealth. what can we do for rural hospitals? what needs to happen in urban and suburban hospitals? those are basic questions that should be there. one of the most successful programs that we have put forward in the cares act was the paycheck protection program. now it's it its headlines, as some folks have said there have been people that have abused it. well, welcome to government. every single program that comes out of government will be abused by someone at some time. we've seen that in the unemployment system where unemployment insurance has gone

out and it has been widely abused. so has some portions of the paycheck protection program. but we have all seen the long lines at unemployment offices around the country. the reason this was put in place was the paycheck protection program was to do whatever we could to be able to help shorten lines at the unemployment offices, for people to not leave and go on unemployment but to be able to stay connected to their small business or not for profit. that has worked. in my state, 65,000 businesses and nonprofits have taken advantage of the paycheck protection program, about $5.5 billion of assistance just in my state. but there are some things that need to be done with it. the forgiveness system on it is just coming out, much delayed, much to our frustration. but there are some straightforward things that can be done. if you're an entity with a loan that's $150,000 or less it should be a very straightforward pros of testimonially, a single

page to fill out to complete it. we want to see this. we want to see businesses with the highest needs, businesses with 35%, 40%, 50%, some of them, 70% loss in revenue from the previous year should have an eligibility to be able to get through this. some businesses took the paycheck protection program and they had a 5% loss over last year. to me, that is fine because at the beginning of this, no one knew who was going to survivor. many business owners were in the process of saying i'm going to have to lay everyone off or i can keep them on the paycheck protection program. they kept them on the paycheck protection program. that helped those families have a stable time where they knew where their check was coming from. it helped those businesses be able to reopen, and many of them are reopening now. it kept them off the unemployment assistance. now if we do a second round of paycheck protection, it needs to be focused in on those businesses that are significantly off on revenue that will not survive without some additional help.

we need to be attentive to how we handle this and be more strategic. we're not in the same situation that we were in march. we had to look at businesses that were funded with private equity. it makes no sense to me that if a business started and got their loan from a bank they can get a pb pb. -- get paycheck protection program. but if they got their capital from private equity they're not eligible for this. the employees that work there don't know where the capital came from to start the business. they just know they work there. but for some reason, there's a continual pushback to say if they were funded with private equity rather than a bank, then they're evil. no, they're start-up companies doing technology, innovation, health care. that's the kind of companies that are out there that are being funded with private equity, but yet we've told their employees you can just go to unemployment, and literally the business next door to them, no, you can get paycheck protection. that makes no sense. we should fix that.

we should put into this next bill some help for schools that are reopening. not every school is reopening. they're not going to need the same level of help. some schools are not reopening or they're choosing not to. i understand that. we gave additional funds, $30 billion of funds across the country from the previous cares act to be able to help schools transition to online learning, to be able to help them get through the process of finding cleaning supplies, do additional training, $30 billion sent out to do that. additional dollars should be helping schools that are reopening that will have additional expenses. they're going to have to run additional bus routes to be able to make sure they keep kids separate. they're going to have to do a and b schedules to open up classrooms. it's going to be greater expenses for them so we should be able to help schools opening through the process. that's common sense in this. there's been a request for additional assistance check for those that need it. there are families struggling to be able to make their payments and they're going to be evicted. the $1,200 sent out earlier this

year went out to be able to help stop that earlier in the year and some families are still unemployed and still struggling through this. what are we going to do to help with that? there are strategic ways to get out additional assistance but we should target it to families with greatest need, and that should be the same with their unemployment assistance. unemployment assistance passed in march, there was an additional $600 per week per person that was sent out in unemployment assistance in addition to the normal state unemployment assistance. for many individuals in my state, that meant you made more on unemployment than you did on employment. that's a problem long term. this program was set up to be short-term, that it would be assistance until the end of july, which has now passed. that's a week ago. but individuals applying for unemployment assistance this week are still getting unemployment assistance from my state, exactly as they were in february of this year, exactly

as they were in november of last year, exactly as they were in august of last year. unemployment assistance is still happening in my state just like it's happening in every other state. but the debate is do we want to do above and beyond unemployment assistance that literally takes people to the spot that they make more staying at home than they do at work. there are some folks that are saying that doesn't actually incentivize work. really? tell that to the folks that i've talked to that work in manufacturing, that they're at the job working every day, and the person that usually works a pod away from them is at home because they talked to them, and they're saying i'll come back once my unemployment goes away. so this person's busting their tail working, making less than the person that's staying at home. and the person staying at home is telling their friend, i'll come back when the benefits run out.

that's not right for either one of those folks. that tells that person working, you're a sucker for not just staying home and getting somebody else's money. we should not incentivize people not working. we should help people get through a very difficult time, and that's what this is. but not discourage engagement in work. that's not fair to the guy or the lady that is still working. that's not fair to the employer that's opened up and saying i've got jobs available but no one will apply. and that's not right for that family that's staying home taking money from their neighbors when they know they could come back and work. now the law says if you're offered a job and you're on unemployment, you have to take it. but we know of way too many cases already where individuals are not taking the job that

they're offered, and the employer knows that's one of their employees, that's a good employee, they want him to come back, so they hate to turn them in. so it puts everyone in a quandary, the employer and the employee, because the employee is breaking the law by staying home, teaching their family to do the wrong thing because it gets them more money. we shouldn't put them in that spot and we shouldn't encourage people to be in that spot. in this bill, we should deal with unemployment, but we should make sure we're helping people through this season, not incentivizing them to break the law. we should deal with nursing care and senior living. we should deal with hospital care in this bill. those are the areas that have been the hardest hit in all of america, the largest number of fatalities that we've had in the greatest amount of expense are in that area. we should do something to be able to come alongside of that.

we should do something in this bill about liability protections. i have letters and phone calls from universities in my state and from businesses in my state saying they're terrified to be able to reengage for fear of what's going to happen with lawsuits coming in the days ahead that they can't stop. they want to be able to serve their students at school. they want to be able to serve their customers this their business and the families that depend on that but they're afraid of an entrepreneurial lawyer that will file lawsuits and will push them to be able to settle or push them into bankruptcy at a very difficult time for them only because this body won't step up and do basic liability protections. if there's gross negligence, we should never protect that company. but if they're doing the best that they can, why wouldn't we have basic liability protections for our universities, our schools, and our places of business? we need to have in this bill

some help for the postal system. there's a lot of debate of what that should be. is this a total reform of postal system? no, that's not what this is about. just like we helped the state department in the cares act, we should help usps in this bill as well. we've had some pushback on helping some of the areas on immigration. many of the entities in immigration are totally fee-based. when someone applies to be able to come into the country with their visa system they pay a fee to be able to do that. obviously they're not coming in right now, so those areas of our immigration policy are really struggling right now. we should come alongside and be able to help. that is a unique situation in the federal agency. we should deal with election issues, maybe not like some people in this body want. in the cares act, we included $350 million to the states to be able to help them in their elections for this fall. $350 million. almost none of that has been used by states because in the

bill itself, it also required their state legislature to add matching dollars and to be able to come into session. and when we put that out from this body, those state legislatures were going out of session or they were locking down because they didn't know what their expenses would be. and so almost no one has taken those funds because their legislature wasn't in session to be able to vote for it, and because they didn't have any ability to be able to anticipate what funds would be this session, and so there's $350 million of unused money from the last bill that we should just take the strings off of and to make it clear to states, you could use these funds for the election coming up for this fall. there's a big push to say let's add another $350 million. come on, people, let's read the last bill that we wrote and bring it forward into this bill and fix the problems from the last one. it shouldn't be that difficult. our states are going to need help on the elections this year.

there will be much greater expenses, bough we -- but we wat the elections to go smoothly. we've allocated dollars. let's allow them to be able to use it in the way they can during this session. but that shouldn't be for mass mailing of every ballot. just printing off ballots and mailing it to every house doesn't solve the issue. it complicates the issue. but we should be able to help people with their election systems. and while i speak on state funding, this whole issue of state funding does need to be addressed. during the cares act that passed in march, this body gave the states $150 billion. it was also an allocation for health care of $260 billion. there was an allocation for education of $30 billion. why do i bring that up? the three most expensive aspects in any state budget are education, public safety, and

health care. those are the three most expensive portions from any state budget. this body allocated $260 billion towards health care, $30 billion towards education, $150 billion towards public safety and covid expenses. just to be able to put that in perspective, the total budget for every state in america is $900 billion. every state's total budget combined spending that they do in a year, $900 billion. my democratic colleagues want us to give almost $1 trillion to the states for covid expenses. their total budgets for every state in the entire country for the entire year is just over $900 billion, and they're willing to give $1 trillion to them on top of it.

that is more than replacing every state budget in america. that is absurd. and that is why these negotiations are so difficult, because it's not reasonable. they can just throw a number out and say everybody needs this. that's replacing the budget of every state in america is reasonable? i don't think so. especially when we've already allocated $260 billion towards health care, $30 billion towards education and $150 billion towards public safety and covid response. the real issue is with the public safety and the covid expenses because so many of the states, now with this whole with defund the police movement, don't want to allocate their public safety dollars towards public safety. they want to be able to use it for other things. not public safety. well, that's a decision states can make, but they have the flexibility already to be able to use that dollar.

literally they could pay for every single law enforcement officer in their state, for their salary and their benefits would be fully taken care of. but they're saying i don't want to pay our law enforcement. i want to use it for other things. well, those funds have been allocated. and they need to make a decision on what they're going to do with that. there's a lot that could be done with this bill, but my challenge for us is let's focus on the things that are essential to be done, not the long wish list of what people want to cram into a bill because it's getting big and they could hide something in it. let's keep it focused and let's continue to remember this is a health crisis, and we should be able to work across the aisle to be able to solve things that are common sense and not ignore the

problem. with that, i would yield the floor. madam president, i have eight requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: madam president, i rise today to address a topic that washington has been ignoring for taxi -- for decades. for years, republicans fought against wasteful spending under the obama administration. my party argued that our debt and deficits were unsustainable, and that we are leaving a burden that our children and grandchildren simply can't afford.

unfortunately, my party has shown an almost equal disregard for the dangers of a growing national debt and annual deficits, as have the democrats. congress spends taxpayer money with no accountability. something you would never do in business or in your personal life. and our federal government is borrowing an unprecedented amount of money. congress borrows money with no plan to pay it back. our families and our businesses can't do that. congress is leaving debt for the next generation. parents and grandparents don't do that. this year, between march -- mid march and late june, the treasuries' total borrowing rose by about $2.9 trillion, and the federal reserve's holdings of u.s. treasury debt rose by about $1.6 trillion. the federal reserve is creating an artificial market for

treasuries to keep interest rates low. this is not sustainable and will have dire consequences. there will come a time when they can't purchase any more treasuries and rates will increase. when the federal reserve can no longer keep interest rates low, everything from car loans to student loans to mortgages become more expensive for the american people. and the interest on our debt, which is already the fourth largest expenditure in the federal budget, will become our largest expenditure. for every 1% increase in our interest rate, we are going to spend almost $2 trillion over ten years. that's more money that taxpayers will get no return on. even during the economic boom we are experiencing, our federal government could not live within its means. our federal government was set to spend approximately

$4.6 trillion this year while collecting only $3.6 trillion in taxes. in one of our greatest economies ever. now, as we continue to address the coronavirus pandemic, the federal government this year will spend more than $7 trillion and collect much less than $3 trillion. the market is telling us that lenders are not confident this pandemic is being handled in a fiscally responsible manner. we are seeing the price of gold at a record high, and the dollar devaluing, and this is just the beginning. now congress wants to spend more even though we still don't know how much has already been spent from previous relief packages. what's happened in washington, d.c. is wrong. it's unfair to americans that work hard every day to take care of their families. for months, i made a weekly video called washington waste

wednesday to highlight all the ways washington is currently wasting taxpayer dollars. it wasn't hard to find examples. officials in washington have failed to make the tough decisions that will put our nation on a fiscally successful path. it's the most inefficient place you can imagine. these poor choices mean a day of reckoning is coming. if our financial system comes crashing down because of excess, government spending, and borrowing, history suggests we will have runaway inflation where the price of goods skyrocket. that will hurt the poorest families and those living on a fixed income. with inflation, fixed incomes will stay the same while the prices for necessities go up month after month. for hourly workers, wages won't go up fast enough to cover the ever-increasing cost of goods and services. this happened in the united states in the 1970's. and let's not forget about our mandatory spending programs that

congress takes no accountability for. medicare is running out of money. when medicare runs out of money in 2026, either doctors and hospitals will be paid significantly less or medicare recipients will receive less care. medicaid costs are increasing by about 5% a year. social security will run out of cash reserves by 2035. at that time, there will be an automatic 20% reduction of social security payments. our country is like a failing business without a plan. we can't accept this fate. i ran for governor of florida in 2010 because i could not stand to watch the fiscal mismanagement by politicians anymore. over my eight years as governor, we made the tough choices to turn the state around. we grew the economy by over 30%, added almost 1.7 million new jobs, paid down almost one-third of state debt, and cut taxes by

more than $10 billion. i was the first governor in 20 years to actually pay down state debt. i ran for the u.s. senate to do the same thing at the federal level. i was retired of watching career politicians in washington spend other people's money without a care. washington seems to have forgotten that trillions of dollars in new spending means trillions in tax increases somewhere down the road. they want short-term solutions, regardless of consequences. career politicians say they care about you. when they run huge deficits, do they care about you? when they raise your taxes, do they care about you? when they overpromise benefits for social security without a funding source, do they care about you? when they overpromise medicare benefits without a funding source, do they care about you? may be the intentions are good, who knows, but unfortunately you can't pay for social security

with good intentions, you can't pay for medicare with good intentions, you can't build a lethal military with good intentions, and you can't open a business with just good intentions. these good intentions have created $27 trillion of debt that our children and grandchildren will have to answer for. now they want to spend another $3 trillion. it's time to wake up. we can fix this and put our nation on a fiscally responsible path. we fix this by doing what i did in florida. we need to focus on growing the economy, cutting taxes and burdensome regulations and streamlining permitting. we fix this by helping every american get a good job. we fix this with a focus on buying american with the understanding that buying products made by our adversaries like communist china hurts american jobs and manufacturing

and threatens our national security. we fix this by making good trade deals with other freedom-loving countries. and we fix this by getting a return on every taxpayer dollar we spend. turning around a failing business is hard. i've done that. turning around a failing state is also hard, even harder. i've done that. turn around the future of our nation sounds impossible, but it's not. if elected leaders don't want to do the hard work, it's going to be hard, then they should go home. they can no longer hide behind the cowardice of political expediency. politicians in washington are afraid to tell you the truth, so here it is. if we want a country to survive -- our country to survive and thrive, continue to be a beacon for freedom, prosperity, and hope around the world, we need to make tough choices. we need to be more productive, and we cannot rely on government programs paid for through more

borrowing. we will need to reassert the fundamental principle of conservatism that the private sector and individuals, not the government, should be the driving forces behind our economic stability and success. as long as i'm a member of the u.s. senate, i will fight to reign in the out-of-control spending that is putting our children and our grandchildren's future at risk. thank you. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: history has a way of repeating itself. if we don't learn from the mistakes of the past, we're apt to repeat them. as the november election draws near and as foreign adversaries again seek to meddle in our democracy, let's review our history so we can better identify and prevent future threats. in late july 2016, obama's f.b.i. opened an investigation

into the trump campaign that ended up spiraling out of control for years -- four years. the investigation was ultimately based in large part on what's known as the steele dossier, which was a bunch of unverified claims from russian government sources. it happens that that dossier was paid for by the democratic national committee and by the clinton campaign. we know that its author, christopher steele, simultaneously pitched those same unverified claims to the united states media outlets which then reported on them without even testing their

veracity. that is not responsible vurnlism. -- journalism. we know that members of this sean publicly seize -- senate publicly seized on those unverified media reports to attack their political rivals. they even made references to the secret f.b.i. investigations to give the unverified foreign-sourced claims of an air of credibility. we know that those unverified claims became part of a focus of a sweeping and unnecessary multiyear investigation by some of the justice department's most aggressive prosecutors. in the end they found no crime by the campaign or president

trump despite the dossier's allocations. all show -- also, that shameful and damaging episode was propelled by selective leaks from government officials and breathless broadcasting by the press and the opposing political view. of course, now it's undergoing a post-mortem, and what we're finding out isn't very pretty, and the people behind it ought to be ashamed. ought to be very ashamed. we've learned that some of those now-debunked claims of collusion with a foreign adversary were

actually sourced to the same foreign adversary. in other words, those claims were assessed to be russian disinformation. so democrats got duped into falsely accusing their political rivals of doing the very thing that they were actually complicit in. we've learned that senior f.b.i. officials had such disdain for president trump that they pushed the unverified information, despite repeated warnings of flaws. they wanted to believe so badly in the politically convenient narrative that they failed to do their jobs. they lied to a court to spy on the campaign.

they leaked memos to launch a special counsel investigation. they even doctored paperwork, all to advance an investigation rooted in lies, innuendos, and foreign disinformation. i could go on about the harmful consequences from the hysteria that consumed the last few years, but the lesson from it all is very simple. our adversaries will do anything to hijack our political differences to sow discord and distrust. our adversaries want us at each other's throat. so long as we're fighting amongst ourselves, they win.

now, why do i bring this up now? because exactly four years later, we're watching the same group run the same play today, and if we aren't careful, they will win again. just like in 2016, foreign sources are pushing unverified material about political candidates. just like in 2016, that material has reportedly found its way into the u.s. intelligence reviews. and just like in 2016, political rivals in congress and the press are using the unverified foreign sources and their claims to suggest collusion between

republicans and foreign adversaries. so just remember what i said. just like in 2016. so in the last few weeks, democrats have falsely accused me and senator johnson of receiving packets of information, including tapes, from a ukrainian. that's false reporting based on leaks from a letter written by senators schumer, warner, speaker pelosi, and representative schiff -- which is itself based on cherry-picked innuendo from classified documents. this ukrainian claimed that he also sent the information to several democrats.

these democrats have also denied receiving anything. again, what's this all about? the goal is to sow as much confusion as possible. the claims are baseless. neither i nor anyone on my staff had anything to do with him. we never reached out to him or received anything from him. we never received or reviewed anything like what was described in the democrats' leaked documents. here's the rub. but that didn't stop the press from reporting the story anyway. remember 2016, 2017, and 2018? and it didn't stop the press from reaching out to this

ukrainian to present him with the partially leaked -- the partially leaked -- the apparently leaked, classified information from the letter. let me be clear. my investigation with senator johnson is based on how the obama administration formulated its ukraine policy, which then-vice president biden oversaw while his son was on the board of a corrupt ukrainian natural gas company that was under investigation. did the corrupt firm get special access or special treatment because of its ties to the vice president's son? we should know that. did the obama administration appropriately address any conflict of interest? we should know that. in fact, the american people should know that.

in pursuit of those facts -- now, following the leads where they take you -- so i say in pursuit of the facts, we've requested records from the state department, national archives, department of justice, some other federal agencies, and the u.s. consulting firm blue star strategies. we've also talked with current and former u.s. government officials. now, isn't this odd? apparently obama administration records and speaking with obama administration officials is, to our democrat friends, foreign or russian disinformation. isn't that odd? as senator johnson and i noted

to our democratic colleagues in a letter when we answered their letter, if it is, then that means the obama administration routinely peddled in it as well. now, democrats have suggested that the cause of their concern is andre telizhenko. in 20, the homeland security and government affairs committee sought to subpoena him only for records from his year-long employment with blue star strategies, a democratic consulting firm that lobbied the united states government on behalf of the biden-connected ukrainian energy firm. blue star also had contracts at the highest levels of president

obama's administration. notably, mr. telizhenko had working relationships with obama administration officials. i don't recall ever any democrat raising concerns about mr. telizhenko being a national security threat while he was meeting with obama administration. but apparently he suddenly becomes one when republicans ask for records involving his time at a democrat lobby shop. truth be told, the democrats should know a thing or two about russian disinformation. investigative work by me and senator johnson has revealed now-declassified intelligence reporting that parts of the

steele dossier were parts of the russian disinformation campaign. now, i'm not aware of the democrats commenting publicly on this very disturbing revelation. where's their outrage about concerns of actual russian disinformation contained in the steele dossier and, at the same time, russian disinformation paid for by the democratic national committee and hillary clinton? the steele dossier is the very, very definition of election interference, and yet we hear no objection from democrats. did the democrats and the clinton campaign know that the dossier was filled with russian

disinformation and run with it anyway, knowing that it would cause damage to trump, his campaign, and administration? is russian disinformation synonymous with democratic national committee disinformation? maybe the democrats don't want to look under the hood of the fake russian investigation because -- because they would be front and center. i'd like to remind my democratic colleagues that i ordered my staff to interview donald trump, jr., and republican officials during my time on the judiciary committee. and we did so s at the same time, ask yourself if i ever

requested an interview with hunter biden. if i did that, how would the democrats react? my fellow americans, this is where we're at now. the democrats live by the motto do as i say, not as i do. and yet they accuse me and my colleague, senator johnson, of playing politics and engaging in a disinformation campaign. the hard truth is that it is the democrats who are engaged in a disinformation campaign, all because the facts don't fit into their political narrative. their silence regarding the steele dossier and fake russian

investigation. yet complaints about my legitimate oversight investigation is proof of that. in conclusion, these recent media reports hinge on the leak of democrats' classified documents, which they hadn't shared with their republican colleagues. only after the stories were published and -- i want to emphasize, only after the stories were published were me and my staff able to review the democrats' documents. their letter is full of cherry-picked lines designed to shoehorn republicans into warnings of a very real threat that faces all of us. their letter attempts to cast republicans as unwitting pawns

in foreign disinformation, but it appears that the democrats are playing the role as a useful i had i don't think -- useful ir foreign adversaries. the leaks only further distort the content of their letter. in no conceivable way do the facts support the democrats and the media's preposterous narrative. now, here's what is really bothers me most here. my democrat colleagues have known me for a very long time. they know who i am. they know where to find me, and they know that if they were so concerned about what i was allegedly up to, they should have just raised all those issues with me.

this nonsense of orchestrated leaks to plant stories falsely accusing me of dealing in disinformation based on actual disinformation that i wasn't even privy to serves only the interests of our shared adversaries. this happens to be the behavior of cowards, and, of course, it should stop. now where i started out my remarks today, we've seen this movie before. it didn't end well for those who relied on disinformation dossier in 2016. finally the truth is slowly starting to come out and the f.b.i., the media, and the members of congress who touted the disinformation look pretty

bad today. so i started out by saying we need to learn from history. i believe that was george satiana said something like that maybe 100 years ago, or you're going to retiree the mistakes of -- going to repeat the mistakes of the past of the let's not repeat the past. let's learn something from it. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, i want to talk about two topics today -- the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. blunt: i move that we vitiate the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blunt: i want to talk about two topics today. one i was reminded of when i was in st. joseph, missouri, in kansas city, missouri and springfield and joplin over the weekend talking to health care providers and volunteers, frankly, of all kinds who are trying to do what they can to help us emerge from this pandemic stronger than we were to start with. certainly first comes t m