a lot of time looking at this. i think we have been very serious in the senate particularly in considering these issues, and looking at the threats to our election system itself. i'm not going to talk much in the next few minutes about false information and other things. in my view, all you have to do is turn on the television to find some false information and watch the campaign commercials. there's a nugget of truth, perhaps, but many of them have little more than a nugget of truth in them. and, sure you i'm concerned about false information. i'm particularly concerned about it if it comes from foreign governments, from those who wish our country ill. but there's a lot of information out there, a lot more information than there's ever been before everything and people should be very thoughtful -- been before, and people should be very thoughtful about the information they take in. in my view, the election day

system is as secure as it's ever before. the registration system as secure as it's ever before. four years ago the obama administration, a little later than this, said there is a big problem and we're going to declare the election structure a structure of national significance and we're going 0 it play a different role than we ever played before. no anticipation this was going to happen. not much discussion. election officials all over the country immediately said, oh, no you're not. you're not going to just decide in october of election year that you're going to take over the election system and declare it a national -- a system of national significance, a system of critical significance to the future of the nation. of course it is. but it didn't become that in october of 2016. but the message was clear that we needed to build those

stronger ties with local and state election authorities. we needed to do everything we could as we saw the efforts by some foreign actors and some people in their basement to try to see if they could get into the voter registration system and do something with it. and we have done more of that than -- well, we've done all that we can think of, in my view. we did a the love it before 2018 -- we did a lot of it before 2018, and that never stopped. so for 20 years, congress has done all we could think of to help make the system work better. we've spent over $1 billion in the past four years. we've encouraged that we update and have seen updated antiquated systems, systems that didn't have a ballot trail and other things; have generally all been replaced. where they haven't been, i think they're on even higher alert. we've helped them increase their

cybersecurity. we've responded to covid-19 with help to local governments that in some cases was used for establishing polling places and even maybe playing -- paying extra to election judges than we had done before. but while we provided those resources, it has been for a long time and still is up local and state officials who are the closest to the people they work for to do everything they can to secure those elections. i spent about 20 years doing that, part of it as a local election official, a county official, in missouri, and part of it as the missouri secretary of state, the chief election official. earlier this month i had chance to be in kansas city when the county clerks and election authorities were all meeting, most of them there at a distanced meeting to talk about

the election responsibility. others were virtually there to talk, again, about the absolute commitment that they have made to the people they work for to conduct elections in a way that they are both free and fair, and i think that's what's going to happen. now, clearly, again the efforts by foreign adversaries, russia, korea, iran, others to interfere with our elections. but we want to be sure and i believe have been sure that federal agencies have been providing the resources they needed to investigate bad actors, to punish bad actors, to do everything they could to protect the american election system. we're in a much different place than we were four years ago. election authorities -- state and in many cases local -- know the name of the person at

homeland security that they have had now a four-year relationship with, or a two-year relationship with or a one-year relationship with. when they get a call the day before the election, they're going to know that that's a call from somebody who not only is there to help them that day but has been there to help them up until now. the rules committee has held four hearings since the 2018 election, one on election security, one on how we're preparing for the 2020 election and one on oversight of the u.s. election assistance commission. in addition to that, putting people on the federal elections commission to fill vacancies that have been there for a long time. the judiciary committee has looked into things like the social media companies that are trying to drop disinformation. homeland security has drawn out a road map and put the kinds of protections in the system that you'd want to have in the system

for the equipment that counts votes, the registration system that's available on election day, the intelligence committee, as i said before, conducted a three and a half year investigation on foreign meddling in the last election. and the administration is holding those perpetrators accountable. the justice department has secured indictments against three russian companies. 26 people involved with russian influence campaign in 2016 have been impacted by that. the justice department has sanctioned 46 other people and 18 businesses. you know, one of the things that we didn't have in 2016 was a cyber offense. we had a cyber defense, and i think the best in the world at that moment -- i hope it still is -- but we didn't have a cyber offense. i remember being in an intel hearing in 2017 when the

question since -- early 2017, the question put to our intel community, have you ever been told by the president of the united states that you should go -- that you should have offensive action taken against these bad actors? and the answer by all of them was no. but it was march or april of 2017. the president of the united states hadn't given that direction for the previous years was not the current president, who not too long after that did give that direction. and by 2018, when we saw cyber offense, we had our own cyber offense, and they know they are and they know the price they paid and the price they would pay again. thousands of members of the intelligence community have been working to keep an eye on that part of keeping our elections secure. providing federal support to state and local officials is the

right approach. frankly, i was been in favor of providing a little more yet this year, but that appears to be part of a bill that we just can't seem to agree to, even though somewhere between the targeted senate bill and the problem solvers house bipartisan bill in the -- in the house that was released a week or so ago, there is clearly a settlement there that would likely allow a little more election security assistance. but the we're getting pretty late to add much to the system. we need to now be sure that what's in the system really works. we don't need a federal takeoverment. -- takeover. many of you have heard me say before that late in 2016 president obama said, quote, there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig american elections, in part because they are so decentralized in the number of votes involved. now, i think that's right --

that ends his quote, by the way. i think he's exactly right. the diversity of the system is the strength of the system. i personally think the best place to vote is sat a polling place on election day. i don't always get to vote that way. but if you want to have all the information that happens between the start of the campaign and the day you vote, the only way you get that is voting on election day. if you want to see your ballot go into a ballot box or into the counting system and know that happened, you best get that at election day. but many people will vote in other ways, particularly this year. usually the other ways are a little more complicated, but they're still protected by comparison signatures in most states. they're still usually going to include an indication on the voter roll that goes to the

polling place that somebody has already received another ballot. there are safeguards there, and forbe reasons we all understand, more people -- and for reasons we all understand, more people are going to vote early in this election than ever before. i know our election officials in our state -- and i suspect all over the country -- are planning on what they can do to still have the most information available possible on information night. but it's unlikely we're going to know everything we want to know election night. if you don't want to vote at a polling place on election day or can't vote at a polling place on election day, you should still vote. confidence in everything you hear or read should not be complete, but i think confidence that the election system itself is going to tabulate the results that came in and the votes that were cast is a pretty safe bet. republicans can -- politics can

become heated and noisy during an election system, but at the end of the day, the american people need to understand that we're going all we can to give them the ability to cast their ballots with minimal obstacles and maximum confidence that what happens on election day is what the voters voted to do on election day. and with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, may i ask consent to speak as if in morning business for up to 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president this is a time to wake up good news, bad news speech. the good news from last week is on business community support for carbon pricing. what is carbon pricing? well, remember that i.m.f., the

international monetary fund, pegs the international fossil fuel fuel fund in the united states at $600 billion per year. the energy market is dramatically tilted to favor fossil fuels. carbon pricing helps set that right. helps make an even playing field, which economics 101 and carbon pricing makes a lot of accepts. so what happened last week? the business roundtable made up of all of these giant american corporations and more -- these are the top 50 that i could fit on this screen -- on this chart, but there are 200 of them. they came out in support of carbon pricing. their report warned that the consequences of climate change for global prosperity and socioeconomic well-being are significant. the world simply cannot afford the costs of inaction. the business roundtable report went on to urge companies to

align policy goals and greenhouse gas emissions reduction with scientific evidence. listen to the scientists. we could do more of that. and, the b.r.t. said a key component of climate policy should be the price on carbon. here's what they said. a price on carbon would provide an effective incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change, including through the development and deployment of breakthrough technologies. establishing -- i'm still quoting here, establishing a clear price signal is the most important -- the most important consideration for encouraging innovation, driving efficiencicy and ensuring sustained environmental and economic effectiveness, end quote. so this is big news. these are big companies. and this is good news. these companies of the business

roundtable employ more than 15 million people. they have more than $ 7.5 trillion in revenues. their unified voice is a good thing and a big deal. so, with all of that good news from all of these big american corporations, what's the bad news? the bad news is that corporate america often shows one face to the world and a very different face to congress. and the face they show to congress is not at all aligned with this policy they just announced to the world. this discrepancy, this misalinement is a persistent problem, and it needs to be fixed. the problem has three dimensions. one, even those companies don't pay much attention to climate

change in their lobbying and election activities. for most, it's zero attention. and, by the way, that silence is deafening around here. and that silence by these companies is compounded by the trade associations through which they consolidate their lobbying work. most trade associations do nothing on climate. here's coke and pepsi's trade association. by the way, here's pepsi and coke on the list of companies that joined the business roundtable proclimate, procarbon price statement. but when they lobby, here's the american beverage association, the trade association. and as you can see, they haven't been spending much money lately and they haven't bnl --

been spending on climate. in 2009 and in 2010, they spent a lot of money. why? because we were starting to work on obamacare and there was an idea that the companies that sold sugary beverages that created health issues should help pay the cost of the health issues that their sweetened beverages created. so off to battle went the american beverage association with millions and millions of dollars in spending. this, by the way, is just the number of lobbyists. this is their spending. so if they cared about climate change and wanted to put a little bit of lobbying pressure on, this is what they're capable of doing. this is what they are doing. here is a pitch in my hands right here entitled "tech net: remaining legislative priorities for 2020."

this is 30, sorry, 13 pages of advocacy for all the things the tech sector wants from congress through their trade association tech net. 13 pages, the list goes on and on. top priorities and then page after page in small print of all the priorities, of all the things that they want congress to do for them. and not a single mention of climate change. not a single mention of carbon price. what do you think congress will respond to? general noise made to the world or your specific asks to congress? here is the list of companies whose c.e.o.'s signed that business roundtable report and came out for action on climate

and a carbon price, who are also in tech net, which the week before came here with 13 pages of legislative priorities that didn't include either climate change or carbon price. you've got to line things up, you guys. and these are big players. look at them. honeywell, amazon, microsoft, cisco, dell, visa, g.m., oracle, paypal, all on both sides of the issue within the same week here in congress. so those are the trade associations that do nothing on this issue. it gets worse because there are trade associations who are our worst enemies on climate action. and in fact influence map has

done some research and tracked which groups and which corporations are the most climate friendly and which are the most climate hostile. and if you look all the way over right next to marathon petroleum in hostility is the u.s. chamber of commerce. there was actually a tie, the u.s. chamber of commerce and the national association of manufacturers were statistically tied as the two worst climate obstructers in america. so they're out here having worked hammer and tongs to stop climate legislation and prevent a carbon price, and you've got the business roundtable statement supporting action on climate change and supporting a carbon price. so here are the companies that are members of the business roundtable and came out last

week for action on climate change and supported a carbon price who are also members of the chamber of commerce which relentlessly opposes all serious climate action, and specifically a carbon price. look at them all. look at them all. i don't know if the camera can pan in on that, but these are some of america's biggest corporations. and i would bet you that if this group said, hey, we just made a new decision over on the business roundtable wearing our business roundtable hat and went to the chamber and said we're not going to do your opposition any longer, not going to support your opposition to climate action. we are actually serious about being for climate action and a carbon price, if all those companies actually said that to the chamber of commerce and threatened to quit if they didn't clean up their act at the chamber of commerce, that would make a very big difference. and around here that would make

a very big difference because the chamber is the biggest kahuna of lobbying. it's electioneering all the time usually against democrats almost inevitably for the worst candidate on climate. and they're over in courts and on regulatory agencies opposing climate action all the time. so why support that if what you really support is doing something on climate, including a carbon price? so national association of manufacturers was the other group in a tie with the chamber for worst, america's worst climate obstructer. these are all the companies whose c.e.o.'s signed the business roundtable statement supporting climate action and supporting carbon pricing and are members of one of the two worst climate obstructers in america. at the same time. so that creates a little bit of a problem.

now i should go back to the chamber one just briefly and put a caveat in here. we don't know who all the chamber members are. it's a very secretive organization. many of its members report that they are members of the organization, and that's how we can assemble a list like this. but if the company doesn't report that they're members, we don't know. so this is not necessarily complete, but this is all that we can know out of this secretive, very oppositional worst climate obstructer organization, the chamber of commerce. there are some other odd discordances among these business roundtable leaders. back to the business roundtable polyp who signed all this -- membership who signed all this and that is companies like google, amazon, at&t and verizon who are on the b.r.t. list. bing, verizon right there.

who are donors to something called the competitive enterprise institute. the competitive enterprise institute is the group that put that flagrant, some would say almost nutty climate denier my ron e. bell on to the e.p.a. transition team. the competitive enterprise institute is a dramatic antagonist to either anything serious on climate or a price on carbon. and yet, companies that signed this business roundtable statement support the competitive enterprise institute. many people who remember when we came to the floor in groups of senators to talk about the web of denial, the web of front groups that the fossil fuel industry set up to hide their hands and do their dirty work and stop climate action in congress, that's the competitive enterprise right there.

right there. right smack in the middle of the web of fossil fuel-funded climate denial. and google, amazon, at&t and verizon are all supporting that group while supporting the business roundtable. now none of this would matter much if congress was just a sideshow and it was really up to corporations to do their own thing, but that's not the case. action in congress is actually the main event in succeeding on climate. that's why the fossil fuel industry has worked so hard to set up this web to deny climate science and to obstruct climate action here in congress. so when these business roundtable companies -- when these business roundtable companies come to -- there we

go. that's the better one. when these come to congress through their other groups and say don't bother on climate or don't do a carbon price, it matters, and it makes it a little hard to really take action in congress based on their statement that they support climate action and a carbon price when through other groups they're funding the opposition to the position that they claim to support. so to the b.r.t., thank you for what you did. i don't want to underappreciate that. it's a big deal. it's a good, good thing. but now you have to make it real you've got to make it real in congress. no more zero effort from you.

no more zero effort from your trade associations. no more support for our biggest climate obstructers from you. if you want the results of what you asked for, you've got to align your actions in congress with your values. align what you say in that statement with what you do through your groups here in congress. that ought not to be much to ask, to align what you do in congress with what you say you want to do to the outside world. i've got a few suggestions if you're interested s. one think about about commissioning a lobbying and electioneering audit of your own company. if you're the c.e.o., commission an audit of your own company's lobbying and

electioneering so you actually know what your company is doing on climate. i suspect a lot of c.e.o.'s signed this in good faith. they don't know. so commission an audit. learn what your company is really doing on climate and do an audit of your trade associations. if you're a member of a trade association, get in there and see what they're up to. i bet that you will find that what i say is true. three, demand that your trade associations declare where they get their money. it seems obvious that the reason that the chamber of commerce and the national association of manufacturers became the two worst climate obstructers in america is because they were paid to. if you c.e.o.'s on the business roundtable, if you had known

that, this might not have happened. we might not have been here by now. it is very likely that the chamber and the n.a.m. leaders snuck up on you taking floods of fossil fuel money that they didn't tell you about and selling out their organizations to the fossil fuel industry, leaving you high and dry having to explain why you're supporting the two worst climate obstructers in america. so give those trade associations, do your audit and then give those trade associations a deadline to align with your policy, or you'll quit. you'll quit on the deadline if they haven't. don't let them slow walk you through endless discussion and process while they are still loading up on fossil fuel money and running fossil fuel errands in your names. don't let them do that. and finally, finally, recommendation five, ask your

lawyers. ask your lawyers, particularly if you're on the board of climate obstructer groups, if these groups were trafficking in fraudulent information, what is the board's responsibility. that's a lawyer question. if they loaded up with fossil fuel money, how was your due dill yens on the board -- diligence on the board of that organization in detecting that warning signal that your trade association had loaded up with fossil fuel money and was arguing against your position when it came to congress, carrying the water for the fossil fuel industry? your lawyers may have some advice about whether you have met due diligence. so final point -- climate is not really a -- sorry. climate is not really a partisan issue. it wasn't in 2007 to 2009 when senator cardin and i got here

and the senate had multiple bipartisan climate bills. it wasn't in 2008 when republican john mccain had climate on his party platform as the party nominee. it started with citizens united in 2010 when the fossil fuel industry was allowed to trade up its political weaponry from muskets, corporate pacs, to tactical nukes. unlimited spending, phony front groups, the whole apparatus of climate obstruction. today, a result of that, the republican party has been so captured that on climate it is little more than the political wing of the fossil fuel industry. it doesn't have to be that way. so to these big companies who signed this wonderful pledge, fix your politics.

push back on the fossil fuel obstruction. clean up your obstructor trade associations. wake up your sleepers and make climate a real priority here in congress and you will see what looks like magic begin to happen. because for you all it's less -- it's less time to wake up to climate change than it is time to wake up to your own political indifference and presumably unknowing complicity in the political logjam on climate action that the fossil fuel industry has dleebtly created -- deliberately created here in congress. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland.

mr. cardin: first, mr. president, i really want to thank senator whitehouse for his longstanding leadership in the united states senate on addressing the concerns of climate change. he has been there every week, every day leading us to take action to prevent the horrors of climate change. we've made some progress but not enough under his leadership. we've got to do more, as he points out in what he just told our colleagues. but i just really want to thank you as i look at the wildfires in the west, look at the frequency of the hurricanes, when i look at the receding shorelines in maryland, as i look at our efforts on the chesapeake bay, and recognize that if we don't do what we need to do, what science tells us we can do on carbon emissions, we're doing this at our own peril. it's not just america.

it's the global community. it's our leadership globally. senator whitehouse and i traveled with other members of the senate to the climate meetings and we made progress. we've got to get back to it so i just wanted to thank senator whitehouse for his leadership. mr. president, on sunday the washington national cathedral marked the 200,000th american lives lost to covid-19 by tolling the burden bell 200 times, once for every,000 lives lost -- thousand lives lost. near 115,000 people died since may 145 when the house of representatives passed the comprehensive covid-19 relief package known as the heroes act. as of september 20, the seven-day moving average for new deaths was 100,000. put another way, from a fatality standpoint we have the ee live

lent of a 9/11 terrorist attack every four days. the united states which has 4.3% of the world's population that a -- accounts for 1.21% of the covid-19 deaths worldwide. when president trump diferred his -- delivered his inaugural death, he said this carnage stops right here and stops right now. we are one nation, we share one heart, one home and one glorious destiny. so to all americans in every city large and small, mountain to it mountain, ocean to ocean, hear those words, you will never be ignored again. fast forward to last week when president trump, referring to the total u.s. fatalities, said if you take the blue states out, we're at a level that we don't think anybody believes we would be at. talking about covid infection. president trump said many appalling things. defining america during a

pandemic into blue and red states and devaluing lives of americans from blue states may be one of the most appalling things so far. as former secretary of homeland security and republican governor of pennsylvania remarked, it's so unworthy of a president. it's beyond despicable. to try to divide a country on a political basis when covid-19 is really bipartisan. not only was president trump's statement appalling, beyond despicable and soulless, it belies the fact that covid-19 doesn't look at any boundaries. president trump's -- account for more covid deaths than the states he won. the states with the highest number of covid cases are all states that he won. 14 of the 19 states with caseloads above the national average are states that he won. so the grim gap is closing but

it really should not matter because we are the united states of america. i wish president trump could understand that. speaker pelosi has stated that she intends to keep the house in session until congress passes another comprehensive covid-19 relief package and i agree with the speaker. the senate may adjourn as soon as it passes the fiscal year 2020 continuing resolution to keep the federal government open. i fear this will be a grave mistake and. the senate should take up the heroes act the so-called skinny amendment were so inadequate they failed the fundamental test of a bipartisan compromise. even president trump indicated the senate republicans need to do more. i would like to take the next few minutes to outline some of the ethics we need to do to respond appropriately to the twin health and economic crises

our nation faces. remember when president trump promised the novel coronavirus would disappear as the weather got warmer. the weather is starting to get colder again and the flu season is approaching. the next covid-19 supplemental package should increase the federal matching assistance payment and maintain medicaid benefits permanently and permanently expand telehealth accessibility to patients around the country and address health disparities that covid-19 pandemic has worsened. the urban institute estimates 12 million additional americans will turn to medicaid for access to affordable health care amid-the pandemic. in my state more than 45,000 marylanders are newly enrolled in medicaid. at the same time state revenues are plummeting, states are facing deficits that could

amount to $55 billion through 2022. if unaddressed these budget shortfalls would lead states to making dramatic cuts to medicaid as they did in the past economic downturn at a time when those newly and previously enrolled need health care the most. the national governors association has called on congress to further raise the fmap and maintain access to a central medicaid benefits. another important policy that we will -- that will increase access to health care services during covid-19 pandemic is permanently extending telehealth permissionings and privileges implemented under the cares act. specifically congress should permanently remove regulatory barriers so that patients in rural, underserved and urban areas can use telehealth to see their primary care providers, mental health counselors and

chronic disease management teams. reimbursement for these services should adequately affect these services. should adequately affect the care given and allow patients to use their homes for these services. telehealth increases access to care for individuals who live far away from health care facilities have limited mobility or transportation or other barriers to accessing care. mr. president, this is a bipartisan proposal to expand telehealth. it makes abundant sense. we've done it, now let's make it permanent. that helps rural america, that helps people who have a hard time with transportation to get to where they need to be, it's more efficient and it's safer. so let's make sure it's done before we leave. at a time when many unable to visit their health providers in person, we must depend on telehealth to deliver high-quality health care to millions of americans around the country. we have seen how covid-19 has

disproportionately affected communities of color, highlighting how the united states fails to give support and health care access to these communities. according to the data from the c.d.c., communities of color -- black americans, native americans and alaskan natives are five times more likely to be hospitalized than white people are. african american marylanders account for 30% of our state's population, but 41% of covid fatalities. marylanders of latin american account for 17% of the state's population but 21% of its cases. this is why the next supplemental package must focus on and contain policies that address health disparities worsened by covid-19 pandemic. i authored two bills focused on addressing health disparities, one with senator scott of

south carolina and the second the health disparities action act with senator menendez. both have targeted grant programs that will help community-based organizations and local health departments provide culturally appropriate outreach, education, and health services to black, latino, indigenous and other communities of color. both bills are important steps to rectifying the ills of systematic racism from going forward. communities of color have longstanding and tragically appropriate mistrust for the medical community for good reason sadly. our government deliberately misled black patients during the tuskegee study. still today those who diagnose patients of color, the reach act help disparities act should be included in the next covid-19 supplemental to help promote just within the communities of color for future covid-19

responses as we look beyond the pandemic. since the start of covid-19 pandemic, our state and local governments have faced significant financial challenges to meet the -- meet declining revenues as well as emergency costs related to covid-19. it's well beyond time that we listen to those on the ground dealing with the covid-19 and provide them the resources they need. what does this mean for communities back home? for municipalities, it's funding for first responders, community services, for our counties it's funding for schools, for our states, it's funding for health. the revenue losses our state, counties face are mounting and it will affect public safety, public health and other critical and essential services that will affect far beyond the public health battle against covid-19.

our governors issued a bipartisan plea, governor couple mow and a republican governor previous chair of the national governors association respectfully joined with all of our nation's governors, all in april, to say they need help from the federal government. they need help to maintain critical missions of public safety, public health and public education with at least $500 billion for our states and additional funding for our our local governments beyond whee already provided under the cares act. the heroes act, which passed the house provides $875 billion for state and local governments. that amount goes to meet the states needs and $375 billion goes to meet local government needs with one half to the counties and one half to municipalities. this will go to local counties and local got of all sizes.

it will address urgent covid-19 response activities and state and local governments may use it to replace lost revenues to avoid making draconian cuts to essential services. that would go a long way to meeting the needs of our local first responders, our police, our sanitation workers, and our educators. the senate republican heals act does not provide state and local government. it extends the deadline for using care money. that is not adequate. we must do more. this is too little too late. our state and local communities in maryland have allocated the funding for programs who support renters, small businesses and frontline workers who face risk to covid-19. those dollars are spoken for. i ask that i colleagues the laughing harm to fail our -- lasting harm will fail to provide additional funding to

state and local government. if we learned anything when the school year ended so abruptly this past spring, it is that a greater appreciation for our educators and the work they provide to our students in the classroom. it's so difficult to duplicate the interaction between educators and students yet our colleagues across the aisle appear to be unwilling to provide our local school system with the resources they need to allow school systems to educate students safely this fall. our local school leaders are making incredibly difficult decisions while facing political pressure from the trump administration to ignore public health recommendations from federal, state, and local officials. legitimate concerns from educators on the safety of returning to the classroom and questions from parents who need answers on how to continue their child's education while meeting their own work responsibilities. with dwindling state and local government revenues because of covid-19, school leaders have already started to face budget

crunches even as schools' financial needs have increased for things like cleaning supplies now necessary to meet c.d.c. public health guide lines. educational technology, training for educators to meet the new demands of online education. without additional federal resources, we fail to provide our local leaders with the tools necessary to strike the balance between maintaining the highest quality level of education for our children while protecting students and educators' health. the heroes act provides $100 billion for a state-level fiscal stabilization fund for education with $90 billion for states to support their public institutions of education. in maryland, this would provide nearly $900 million for our local school districts for meeting the needs of growing numbers of low-income students and our children with special needs. retaining educators vital to the education of our children, and ensuring that schools have resources to improve the virtual learning environment that

frustrated so many students, parents, and educators last spring. this funding would rightly support the decisions of local schools and public health officials on how schools may reopen in the fall whether virtually or in person or some hybrid. it does not attempt to coerce school districts in reopening their classroom doors in an unsafe manner as the only way to receive critical, necessary federal funds. the federal government should provide local leaders with adequate resources to support well-informed and reasoned public health decisions rather than dangerously mandating school reopenings. in addition, the federal government needs to take the leadership in eliminating the digital divide. access to reliable internet service should be available to every household in america. the best action congress could take to help small businesses is to provide state and local governments, health providers, and first sponders with the resources they need to protect our community from covid-19, as

i mentioned a moment ago. i'm proud to be the ranking democrat in the small business and entrepreneurship committee. i have worked very closely with senator rubio on proposals, but first we have got to get this covid-19 under control. only after it's safe for small businesses to resume full operations and safe for parents to send their children to school will our economy truly begin to recover. getting a virus under control is especially important for small businesses in the food services, hospitality, live events, travel and tourism sectors. businesses in those sectors are especially reliant on large gatherings in order to make a profit. restaurants, for example, have been able to make up for lost indoor dining capacity by increasing their outdoor dining capacity, which will become increasingly difficult in many parts of the country as the weather gets colder and more inclement. similarly, communities that rely on tourism revenues generated during the winter months such as deep creek lake in my home state

of maryland are likely to experience decreased cash flow this year due to the pandemic. and employers on the eastern shore missed their prime summer months. congress cannot leave small businesses and the communities that rely on them out in the cold. in addition to getting the pandemic under control, congress must build on lessons learned during the economic downturn. the most important lesson is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to rescue the economy during a crisis. to help the most employers we can, congress must preserve the multiple support tools in the tool kit. there is already bipartisan consensus that we must provide small businesses with a second paycheck protection program loan. more than three months ago, senator coons, shaheen, and i introduced legislation to create the prioritized paycheck protection program which would provide vulnerable small businesses experiencing significant losses due to

covid-19 with a second capital infusion. our proposal, p-4, would allow small businesses to have 100 or fewer employees to receive a second p.p.p. loan if they can demonstrate a loss of revenue of 50% or more due to the pandemic. the bill would also reserve $25 billion for the small businesses with ten employees or less and extended the deadline -- extend the deadline to apply for the initial p.p.p. loan for the end of this year. also also bipartisan agreement on the need to improve the economic injury relief program eidl. i supported efforts to shore up the eidl program so more small businesses have access to the long-term, low-interest rate loans the program makes available. with their maximum loan of $2 million and a repayment term as long as 30 years, eidl provides small businesses with flexibility capital that they can use to retool their businesses to respond to

covid-19. there is also bipartisan agreement on the need to expand the employee retention tax credit, which is a provision from legislation i introduced with senator wyden which was included in the cares act. the house acted on this bipartisan agreement. the heroes act makes substantial enhancements in this program so they could benefit close to 60 million workers and just over six million businesses. mr. president, if the senate fails to act now before adjourning, the support for small businesses like -- to support small businesses by getting this pandemic under control and providing capital to small businesses, our communities will pay a heavy price for that inaction. as many more small businesses will close their doors and i'm afraid they will do it permanently. studies have shown that maintaining the employer-employee relationship is key to a swift, robust recovery. with tens of millions of americans relying on

unemployment benefits and permanent job losses on the rise, it is critical that we do -- that we do all we can to keep workers connected to their jobs and prevent further layoffs. i am disappointed that despite bipartisan agreement on several of the measures needed to support american small businesses struggling to survive covid-19, the response to the pandemic has turned into a partisan fight. for the sake of our communities and small businesses, i urge my republican colleagues and president trump to accept speaker pelosi and senator schumer's offer to meet democrats in the middle so we can pass a bipartisan bill that helps our communities get covid-19 under control and begin the recovery process. the heroes act also stems the weekly $600 -- extends the weekly $600 emergency unemployment payment. this special benefit lapsed in july. president trump's program to provide $300 a week of emergency benefits through the fema is a weak half measure and congress

must do more. the extra six weeks will expire very shortly, and it comes out of the fema funds which are desperately needed as we know how many emergencies are occurring throughout our country with the wildfires and the hurricanes. the full benefits of the heroes act provides would strengthen a critical safety net for the record number of americans who are unemployed. as america faces its most serious economic challenge since the great depression. by way of example, in maryland we are seeing first-time claims for unemployment benefits at a rate of about 13,000 a week, peaking in early may, with nearly 110,000 new weekly claims filed. we have seen the total number filing since march exceed 1.5 million. these are numbers that cry out for us to extend the unemployment benefits. we really need to do that, and we need to do that before we leave. mr. president, these are some but not all of the issues we

must address immediately and for a sustained period. former president harry truman had a sign on his desk in the oval office that said the buck stops here. passing the buck means something entirely different to president trump. on march 13, 2020, as we began to grasp the magnitude of the impact of the coronavirus, president trump said i don't take responsibility at all. that must -- that may be the most honest and accurate thing he has said since he has become president. we have ample evidence to take him seriously. therefore, it's up to congress to provide the leadership and relief americans desperately need. the house has done its part in passing the heroes act. it's now time for the senate to act. with that, mr. president, i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: is the senate in a quorum call? i can unanimous consent the senate set aside the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lankford: mr. president, here we are again. late september, the budget work has not been completed yet. it seems terribly familiar to this body. and it's frustrating. it's not as if no one knew

september was coming. it was on the calendar when i first looked at it in january of this year. september already existed on the calendar. it's not as if we didn't know what all the deadlines were. everyone knew full well what all the deadlines were. everyone can say it's the pandemic that slowed everything down, except the fact that all of the appropriations work could have already been done, and much of the committee work could have been done, was done some by the house, not completed. can be done by the senate but was not. so here we are again watching the count down clocks towards the government shutdown as we discuss what happens next, but things have been tied up even this week with getting what's called a continuing resolution. this body knows but others may not that a continuing resolution is literally just taking last year's appropriation bills, changing the dates, and moving it over to a new one. this particular continuing resolution stretches until december 11 where we would have to pick it up and pass more

appropriations or another continuing resolution at that time. the fight this week has been over whether we're going to support rural america and agriculture. the house originally drafted a continuing resolution that left out all the agriculture projects the senate obviously threw a fit over that and said why are we supporting everything, including benefits to sri lanka. th -- that got added in but they wouldn't do american farmers. so in the back and forth conversation this week the house had to extend and they did another day, and then they finally put the agriculture projects back in and still left in, by the way, benefits for sri lanka. our ongoing it was continues, though, about airlines. october 1, airlines across the country are going to lay off 100,000 people. 100,000. we've asked for some engagement on the issue of these airlines. back in the cares act in march, we gave an extension to those

airline workers so that airline workers and airlines can still stay connected to each other even in this down time. we're getting very close to a vaccine. it's like we can see the light on the other end of the tunnel and it's not a train this time. it's actually light, and we're going to get through this pandemic. but for whatever reason, they refuse to be able to deal with the issue of how to help airline workers at all. not even half of what was done in the past, not even a portion of what was done in the cares act. and it's been exceptionally frustrating. for the same issue with the house on not wanting to do anything on the paycheck protection program, for the smallest business in america and nonprofits they put out a multitrillion-dollar proposal out from the house and didn't even include anything for the small businesses. we've continued to ask how can we address the issue of small business here? how can we extend the paycheck protection program and give a second round to the hardest hit businesses.

we don't think it's that unreasonable. as we're nearing the end we need to help them bridge the gap at this point. but for whatever reason it's not included either. as we work our way through this process. now i don't know what happens in the next few hours, as we deal with the continuing resolution that comes from the house. but there's no reason we should be talking about a government shutdown again. a year ago senator hassan, the democratic senator from new hampshire, she and i sat down to be able to talk through how can we end government shutdowns forever. so that government workers across the d.c. region and across the country are not living in fear of a furlough, that americans that want to be able to connect with different agencies are able to be able to do that at all times. but we're still able to have the arguments that are needed to be able to resolve budget issues, because it may be surprising to some people across the country, republicans and democrats don't agree on everything on the budget.

shock, i know. we should be able to have that fight, though, on budget, but it should not lead to a government shutdown in the process. government shutdowns cost us money every time that it happens. so senator hassan and i, our simple resolution, resolve the issue by just asking the one question -- who needs pressure applied to them to deal with the issue? and what is the pressure that needs to be applied? our straightforward answer is, members of congress and our staff and the office of management and budget and the white house should have the pressure applied to us to get it done. and the easiest way to apply pressure to all of us is take away our time. it's pretty straightforward. heres' our proposal. if you get to the end of the budget year and the appropriations work is not done, we have mandatory quorum calls in this body at noon every single day seven days a week until we get all the

appropriation work done. none of us can travel. we all stay here in d.c. now i would tell you i really want to see my family on the weekends. i also have people back in my state that i have appointments with that i need to be able to see, and i have responsibilities there. i want to get back to my state of oklahoma and to be able to be with those folks. and i'm sure all of you would love to get back to oklahoma, but you'll probably head back to your state instead. we want to be home. we want to be able to meet with our constituents. we want to take care of the practical needs that are there. the way to do that is get our work done here. i've had folks say take away everyone's money. say no budget, no pay. it makes a great bumper sticker. the problem is as many people in this body know, there are a lot of folks in this body that are multimillionaires, and if they were honest they would say their congressional salary is a rounding error to their investments every month. good for you. but it's not a pressure point. taking away your congressional

salary is not an emphasis to getting the work done. taking away time is to be able to press people to get the work done. senator hassan and i worked it through the committee process, passed it through the homeland security committee, have set it up, it's already been rule 14'd. it's on our calendar now. at any moment, we in this body could determine we're going to end government shutdowns. we will never have one again. if we get to the end of the fiscal year, a continuing resolution will kick in automatically and we will all stay until we finish the negotiations for the appropriations work. however heated, however long that may take, we'll stay and finish it until it's done. it's the right thing for us to be able to do. it's the right way to handle it. and it's not pressure on the federal workers. the federal workers don't get the ability to make the decision here. and some people say those folks in d.c. can just tough it out anyway. it's not just those folks in d.c., though there are a lot of

folks in d.c. that are working very hard for americans all over the country. in my state of oklahoma, there's 4,300 federal employees just in my state that work in agriculture, that work in housing and urban development, that work for the f.a.a., that work for all kinds of entities that take care of families in oklahoma. they also deserve the privilege of continuing their service to their neighbors just as always while we're resolving our differences here. so my request is the same as it was last year. why are we talking about the possibility of a government shutdown again when we could take that off the table forever? with a straightforward, bipartisan proposal that says we will never again have a government shutdown. we will work out our differences because we do have differences, but we will not hold federal workers hostage in the process. we will just stay and work out our differences. i look forward to seeing the vote on the continuing resolution and avoiding a

shutdown again, but i look much more forward to never having shutdowns again when senator hassan's and my bill is finally voted on and passed. with that, i yield the floor. ms. rosen: mr. president, i stand here today to honor the life and legacy of supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. in everything justice ginsburg did from her pivotal role from the fight in gender equality to her storied legal career to serving on the d.c. court of appeals and ultimately as a member of the united states supreme court, throughout her life's journey she used every ounce of her ability to give voice to the voiceless and build a more just and equitable world.

justice ginsburg was a lion on the bench. she ruled on monumental and historic cases, and the decisions she made and even the dissents she wrote have shaped this country and set us on a better path. this remarkable woman inspired countless americans to fight for their the best of us, even when it's hard, even when it's inconvenient. i know i wouldn't be here without ruth bader ginsburg leading the way. we have a responsibility to honor her legacy, her work, and the ethos of justice ginsburg. part of her legacy is her decision to uphold the constitutionality of the affordable care act. and we have seen too many attempts to dismandates -- dismantle this keystone corner of her legacy.

in my time as senator i've met countless nevadans and had the chance to speak with americans from all across the country, and i can say with certainty that there is no issue, no issue that matters more to the american people than their health, especially now. this administration has worked since day one to take health care coverage and critical protections away from millions of americans. they have failed time and time again to dismantle the a.c.a. through legislation, and they have also attempted to destroy and dismantle the a.c.a. through the courts. in one of my first actions as senator, i coled and helped introduce a resolution to defend the affordable care act's constitutionality against this administration's assault. and in my first speech on this senate floor, i called on the senate to take it up and pass

it. i cannot even begin to count the number of nevadans who have shared how they would be affected by the a.c.a.'s demise. everything, everything is at stake if these individuals and these families are denied, denied access to care. justice ginsburg's replacement will help to decide whether or not individuals with preexisting conditions can be denied coverage, and thus, they will be left behind. and let me be clear, what this potentially means is that any of us, any of us with a preexisting condition, we can no longer obtain health insurance. this next justice will decide if we see an end to the tax credits that make health care coverage affordable for middle-class families. this next justice will decide if

we see an end to preventive care without co-pays. this next justice will decide if we see an end to the ability for young adults to stay on their parents' insurance until the age of 26. this next justice will decide if we see an end to expanded medicaid benefits which have helped over 200,000 nevadans to get coverage. this next justice, this next justice is going to decide on health care during an unprecedented and deadly pandemic that has already tragically take be the lives of over -- taken the lives of over 200,000 americans. and this next justice will decide if nearly seven million americans who have already tested positive for covid can be denied health care, denied that coverage because they have contracted a disease that this

administration initially ignored and has been unable or unwilling to combat with a national plan. so much hangs in the balance for the american people. millions could lose health care because of this supreme court pick. we could go back to a world where people with preexisting conditions cannot afford to pay for lifesaving medicine or treatment. using the courts to take away the american people's health care, especially at this moment in our nation's history, is not only cruel, it's dangerous. amid a global pandemic and the worst economy in generations, our top priority right now should be the needs of the american people. relief and care that matches the urgency of this crisis. we can't afford to play political games or threaten the

american people's health coverage when they need it the most. the american people deserve better. they deserve the stability and security of health care coverage for themselves and their loved ones. today i ask that my colleagues truly listen to the american people who need us now more than ever. i hoped that my republicans colleagues would honor their own precedent in this process, the mcconnell rule, and ensure that the american people have their say at the ballot box before filling any vacancy. instead of political gamesmanship, i ask that my colleagues honor the dignity of our democratic institutions and the health of the american people. in 2015, when asked how she would like to be remembered,

justice ginsburg responded, and i quote, as someone who helped to prepare tears in her society, to make things a little better through the use of whatever ability she has. end quote. that is how she wanted to be remembered. we too have the ability to repair tears in our democracy, and we too have the ability to make sure that things are better for all americans by ensuring that their health remains protected. i urge my colleagues to follow justice ruth bader ginsburg's example and to honor her life and her life's work. thank you. i yield back.

ms. rosen: mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. the senate is in a quorum call. mr. portman: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: i'm on the floor today to talk about what the senate and the house ought to be doing before we leave town for the election, and that's helping people who are in need because of the impact of the coronavirus. i know this is the week when we're focused on the passing of justice ruth bader ginsburg, and that's appropriate. there was a lot of discussion also about filling her seat. we should, of course, all take time to mourn our nation's loss. but we are also in the mill of an unprecedented health care and economic crisis. i think we have a responsibility to continue working on covid-19 legislation to respond to those challenges. since this crisis began,

congress has actually come together repeatedly as republicans and democrats, house and senate, and working with the white house to pass five coronavirus relief bills, legislation to address both the health care crisis and the economic freefall that was caused by the virus and the shutdowns. the biggest of these bills was the one you hear about the most, the roughly $2 trillion cares act that was passed by a vote of 96-0. again, these have been bipartisan efforts up until now. unfortunately, since may, when the last of these five bills was enacted, partisanship has prevailed over good policy, and washington has been paralyzed, unable to come together for the public good. last week, i came to the floor to highlight how this dynamic has played out with regard to a single issue that's become very important for so many people in my home state of ohio and around the country. that the expanded federal unemployment insurance supplement included in the cares

act back in march. i had a teletown hall last night. i am trying to do a teletown hall or a facebook live town hall every week during the pandemic in part just to stay in touch with people because it's so hard back home now to visit with people in person. again, last night, i had two callers call in, both of whom are taking advantage of the current $300 per-week federal supplement provided, really, by the trump administration. and talking to me about how they are going to plan for the future. these are individuals who don't have a job to go back to. one, by the way, is a musician who makes his living playing music, the piano and singing and so on at long-term care facilities, nursing homes. and each one of his previous clients has said that he's not welcome to come back now. for good reason. but this makes his -- his life pretty tough because that's what he does for a living.

so his question to me was, you know, look, i really appreciate the 300 bucks. i need it to get by. i have got my rent, i have got my car payment. what are you guys going to do about that? well, the truth is nothing at this point, and that's too bad, because that $300 supplement has now ended. in effect, what the president did to continue some help at the federal level had limits because he did it under the only choice he had, really, which was a disaster relief fund, and that has now run out. so that's where we are. early on in this pandemic, both republicans and democrats recognized the need to bolster the state-run unemployment insurance programs to help offset the massive job losses we saw in march and april. the initial amount was $600 per week, and it was provided by the cares act. it came at a big cost to taxpayers. it also provided an income source that made the difference for a lot of folks in the state

of ohio and around the country. during those early months, you remember the government was actually shutting down, a lot of businesses and workers were losing their jobs through no fault of their own, like this individual last night through no fault of his own not having a job. as the year has gone on, we have made progress. we have slowed the spread of the coronavirus in most states. we have added more testing and personal protective gear. more and more parts of our economy have been able to reopen in a safe and sustainable manner, and that's great. with the reopening, hiring has picked back up, and we now have far fewer people on unemployment insurance than we did at the beginning of this pandemic. unemployment is now about 8.4%. that was the number for august, down from over 15% back in the spring. that's a big change. over four million jobs have been added. at the same time, 8.4% is still high, very high. remember, we were at about 3.5% just in february of this year. by the way, february was the 19th straight month of wage increases of over 3%.

we had record low unemployment for many sectors of our economy, and here we are at 8.4%. so we are not out of the woods yet. we still have a ways to go. ohio's unemployment number just came out the day before yesterday. for august, it was 8.9%. so 10% unemployment is something we are now under. in fact, we are under 9%, which is way, way faster than the projections, but still 8.9% unemployment in ohio is something that we need to focus on. i will say that overall, we're going in the right direction and that unemployment claims i think are now either steadily dropping or holding level in almost every state. that's certainly true in ohio. so it's fair that congress wanted to take another look at that original unemployment insurance supplement which was set to expire at the beginning of august, and it did expire, and we wanted to look at it to see what the new supplement

ought to be, given the changing economy and given some of the improvements that we saw, and also given the need for more workers as more businesses were reopening. now, $600 per week was a relatively generous benefit, to the point that the congressional budget office, the nonpartisan group around here that gives us advice that if you kept that $600 until next year, which is what the democrats proposed in their heroes act, eight out of ten people, eight out of ten people are getting $600 a week would be paid more on unemployment insurance than they would be at their jobs. in other words, you would be making more money unemployed than you would be working. that's not the way unemployment insurance is supposed to work. that's not good for an economy that's trying to reopen. i have been all over my state and talked to employers, small, mid, large-sized employers. talked to the nonprofits. talked to people who are working hard to try to provide care to people in the health care sector. they all tell me the same thing,

that $600 was a problem because some people were not coming back to work because, again, for most of those people, they could make more on unemployment than they could working. so we needed to adjust it. and yet, democrats insisted $600 or nothing, or nothing. and so we got nothing. some of us had proposed $300. in that case, some people would be getting paid more on unemployment, but most would not. in fact, most of us would be getting less and some percentage of their salaries. again, if you lose your job through no fault of your own, because of the government decision to shut down your sector, say a movie theater or a bowling alley or a bar, it seems to me that we ought to be helping. so the $300 that we proposed was to go until toward the end of the year. but democrats said no. kind of a my way or the highway approach. like it's going to be $600 or we're going to give these people nothing. we gave people nothing. to me, that was a big mistake. a number of us came to the floor and actually said let's continue

$600 for a week so we can negotiate something. the democrats said no, we want to end it. we don't even want to have it temporarily at $600 to be able to negotiate something between the republicans and democrats. that's too bad. when congress failed to act, president trump and his administration stepped in, and what they said was $300 is about the right number. we will provide the states a $300 supplement through what's called the disaster relief fund. now, in the cares legislation we talked about earlier which was the $2 trillion legislation that passed 96-0 around here, a lot of money went out for various causes, for hospitals, for schools, for our families through unemployment insurance, but it also provided some funding for what's called the disaster relief fund for covid-19 purposes, so the president took some of that money for covid-19 purposes out of the disaster relief fund and said we're going to for six weeks allow the states to use this $300 supplement if they choose to do so.

they also encouraged the states to provide their own match. what happened was every state but two took the government up on that, and so the vast majority of states said yeah, we'll do it. they didn't add their maximum, by the way, but they did take the 300 bucks, and a lot of people have been helped by that, because over the past six weeks, that funding has been available. unfortunately, sometimes it got paid, it's a lump sum because by the time the state systems figured out how to administer it, we were close to the end of the six weeks. but people knew that was coming, knew they had 300 bucks to prepare for paying their rent, paying their car payment, paying their mortgage, and that was helpful. that was helpful. again, now we're at a point where president trump's emergency lost wage assistance program, which is what that was called, lost wage assistance program under the disaster relief fund, has tapped out. $44 billion was made available to the states, leaving $25 billion in that disaster

relief fund because that $25 billion was what was projected to be necessary to deal with the natural disasters. so that's where we are today. 44 has been depleted. people who have had unemployment insurance since the disaster began are not going to have it now. it's going to end. for many people it ended this week, for some next week, for some the week before, but the point is we as a congress need to act. my view is let's provide some more funding for the disaster relief fund. at least if we can't come together with a big covid-19 package again that helps the schools, that helps small businesses with their paycheck protection program, which i support extending, that helps with regard to getting more money for testing and get a vaccine more quickly and get the therapies up, let's at least provide the administration with some funding in the disaster relief fund so they can continue to respond to this need. let's also provide them that funding because they need it for natural disasters.

what do i mean by that? the other thing that's happened in the last six weeks, as you probably noticed, is we have had a lot of natural disasters in the west with fires, in the south with hurricanes. so that funding left in the disaster relief fund ought to be supplemented for that purpose as well. this is a temporary program meant to provide a bridge while congress acts, and that would be great if congress were to act, but frankly i'm getting kind of discouraged about congress' ability to come together again on a bipartisan basis, as much as i wish we would. i have spoken on this floor about what i think i can see as the points of compromise and the overlap between our two approaches because there is lots of it. you know, we have dr every single republican, save one, 52 members, a majority of the senate voted for a proposal a couple of weeks ago that was viewed as a targeted proposal that did provide help for covid-19, for families, for small businesses, for health care. democrats had their own idea which is $3.5 trillion that they

wanted. ours is about $500 billion. there is something in between there. we could come together with with something that was sensible, but it looks like that's unlikely. so at a minimum, let's move forward with these unemployment insurance supplements that we have been doing. let's give the administration the ability to do it again through the disaster relief fund. this funding shortage would be easy for us to put into the legislation that was likely to come before this chamber in the next 24 hours, which is the continuing resolution. that is the funding that is going to pay for the government to continue operating. you know, congress is supposed to pass individual appropriations bills. there is 12 of them. we didn't do them this year because of the partisan gridlock around here, so once again we're turning to a continuing resolution to provide the funding going forward. the house is acting this week. we're going to act this week or early next week, as i understand it. it would be the perfect place to put more funding into this disaster relief fund for us to

be able to provide that $300 benefit that the administration has been providing to all states but two and to also provide for more help for the natural disasters that are upon us. senator tom tillis and i -- tom tillis and i have proposed legislation to do just that. we had a bill out there that we hoped congress would pass. we are also interested again in adding it as an amendment to the continuing resolution, to the appropriations bill that's on its way through here. so with congress deadlocked on how to come up with a broader solution for covid-19, let's at least do this. let's say to the administration we want you to continue this program. it's now in place. the states know how it states -- it operates. the states have been implementing it. my home state of ohio has provided funding to people through this. we are appreciative of it. our proposal is very, very straightforward. it simply appropriates $86.6 billion to replenish the disaster relief fund. first, to give fema the

resources it needs to fully and effectively respond to the natural disasters that are hitting parts of our country hard right now and those that are yet to come, the money won't be wasted. it will be spent for appropriate things. second it would allow the lost wages assistance program to continue through november 21, giving congress what i hope would be more than enough time to come up with a broader solution to the covid-19 issue. at least through the period of time between now and just before thanksgiving people would be able to know they continue to get the $300 per week supplement to be able to put food on the table, to be able to pay the rent, pay the car payment or pay the mortgage and we, as a congress, would then be able to say to the people we represent we haven't forgotten about you. if you lost your job through no fault of your own, you ought to be able to continue, continue to provide some help during this interim period. this isn't about political wins and losses.

this is about lives and livelihoods are at stake. i hope my colleagues will join me in a bipartisan effort to support this important commonsense legislation so we can bolster our response to the covid-19 unemployment crisis and to the natural disasters that are currently facing our country. i yield back my time.

ms. stabenow: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to pay tribute to one of my personal heroes, justice ruth bader ginsburg. she spent her life in service to the american people quite literally. whether the supreme court was hearing arguments about civil rights, reproductive rights for women, protecting our environment, our precious water and air or standing up for our

workers, justice ginsburg could be counted on to put the needs of the american people first every time. she might not have looked like much of a fighter, but this tiny jewish grad mother in the lace collar punched far above her weight. the american people were so fortunate to have her on their side of the ring. i feel fortunate as a woman in america. my daughter, my granddaughters too have known she was there over and over again fighting for us. and that certainly was the case on health care. you know, i've said over and over again on the floor of the senate that health care isn't political, it's personal for each one of us, it's personal. justice ginsburg understood that in her bones. as a person who had experienced her own health challenges and

health challenges in her family, she knew that when a loved -- when a beloved spouse is diagnosed with cancer or a child has a fever and needs to go to the emergency room, politics is the last thing on your mind. when people tell me their health care stories, they don't start by telling me whether or not they are a democrat or a republican. that's because when it comes to health care and the health of their families, it simply doesn't matter. people in michigan just want to know that if they or their loved ones get sick or are hurt, they are going to be able to take them to the doctor and get the health care that they need. unfortunately with the loss of justice ginsburg, michigan families and families all across the country have extra reason to be very concerned right now. one week after the election, just one week after the

election, the supreme court will hear arguments in the case that could overturn the affordable care act -- overturn everything, all of the protections including, of course, preexisting conditions coverage, all of it. and, by the way. the president of the united states, president donald trump has weighed in this favor of having that happen. everything is at stake -- everything. including coverage for 17 million people through the expansion of medicaid where minimum wage workers right now in states like michigan that have expanded medicaid no longer have to pick between a minimum wage job and not working and having health care. so important. also, the ability for children to remain on their parents' health plans until age 26 has transformed so many families,

opportunities, young people's opportunities, coverage for preventive services like cancer and maternity care. prior to the affordable care act, you know, you had to get extra coverage for maternity care. it wasn't viewed as basic, pretty basic. for me, when i was having my children, for women across the country, pretty basic. it wasn't viewed as basic essential services. it now is under the affordable care act. mental health care, treatment for substance use disorders, lowering prescription drug prices for seniors, protections for people with preexisting conditions. it's estimated that about half of michigan families include someone with a preexisting condition. everything from heart disease to asthma to high blood pressure to cancer. nationwide we're talking about

130 million people -- 130 million people. and how many more people now after covid-19 will have a preexisting condition? in other words, what happens in the next few months, what happens in terms of filling another supreme court vacancy as well as what happens in the election could have life and death consequences -- consequences for michigan families and families across the country. in case anyone has forgotten, we're in the middle of a once in a lifetime pandemic. more than 200,000 americans have already lost their lives and unfortunately that number is going up every single day. in my own state nearly 7,000 people have lost their lives -- 7,000 moms and dads, grandpas and grandmas, brothers and sisters, children, friends.

and even those who have survived covid-19 may be left with long-term health issues from heart damage to breathing difficulties to neurological problems. and as i said before, preexisting conditions. this is not the time to be ripping health care away from american families. there's never a good time, but certainly not now. yet, that's exactly the scenario we could be facing. as justice ginsburg said, health care is not like a vegetable or other items one is at liberty to buy or not to buy. when a michigan single mom discovers a lump and finds out that she has breast cancer, she can't just hope it away. when a michigan senior with

diabetes needs insulin, he can't just wait for a big sale and stock up when the price is right. and when al child spikes -- and when a child spikes a high fever in the middle of the night, her parents can't just tell her, well, you know, the money's tight right now so you're going to have to wait to see a doctor. i mean, that's the horror for all of us as patients that our child will be sick and won't be able to take them to the doctor. health care isn't political, it's personal. it isn't about policy, it is about people -- people. it's about the people in our states who sent us here to fight on their behalf. i sincerely hope that there will be the time that by the time the senate votes on the next supreme court justice, if unfortunately it comes before the people have

their say about who should be making that nomination and confirming that appointment, if that is going to be rushed through, jammed through by this senate. i hope that there will be four united states senators on the other side of the aisle who will have the courage to stand up for people who need health care. and, frankly, that's all of us. one thing i do know for sure is that the american people are courageous. time and time again they've called us and written letters and even come to d.c. to make their voices heard from the amazing little lobbyists to a.l.s. warrior abbe bark inn, to my friend lauren kovac who

fought covid disease. these folks would rather spend their time doing something else. but they understand that health care isn't a luxury. it's a necessity. it should not be political. it is personal to each and every one of us. again and again people across the country have stepped up. they've gotten engaged, they put their passion to work protecting our health care. their voices, the voices of millions of americans made the difference in this chamber. the majority in this chamber saying no to repealing the affordable care act and ripping health care away from millions of americans and that only happened because people stood up and made their voices known and were actively engaged in saying what was important for them and their family. you know, it's easy always to throw up our hands and give in.

it would be easy to let the sadness and tiredness and feelings of loss for justice ginsburg and all of the us frustrations and the chaos that has happened to take over all of us, but r.b.g. never let that happen. no, if she was here now, she would say, no, no, no. this is the moment to focus and engage and to fight even harder. when as a harvard law student she was asked by the dean why she felt entitled to take a slot that otherwise would have gone to a man, she didn't let that phase her. when she struggled to land a job with a law firm after graduation, she turned to teaching at rutgers school of law and hid her second pregnancy under baggy clothes until her contract was renewed. she later challenged the new

jersey law that forced pregnant teachers to quit their jobs. and when she was diagnosed with cancer for the first time in 1999, she fought back and kept on fighting for more than 20 years. it's time now for us to fight -- all of us who care about our freedoms and rights and our very way of life in this country. it's time to fight like our beloved r.b.g., like she did every day of her life for us. justice ginsburg once said this, fight for the things that you care about but do it in a way that will lead others to join you. i'm asking the american people right now to join us in this fight. this is not a done deal. it is not over. and we all, as senators, will be held accountable for what we do. call your senators, write

e-mails and letters, talk to your friends and neighbors, let them know what is at stake from health care and reproductive rights for women to protecting our air and clean water to the capacity to be able to collectively bargain for wages and safety and benefits to voting rights, civil rights. we could go on and on and on. it's all on the line right now. we need to step up and fight and not assume anything's a done deal. we need to hold our republican colleagues accountable. don't let them get away with taking health care away from millions of families. we did it before when we stopped the repeal of the affordable care act, and i think we have to fight now to do the same thing.

and vote like your life and the lives of your family depend on it because they actually do. justice ginsburg dedicated her life to making our country more fair, more free, and more just. now it's time to continue her fight for our future, for our children, for our grandchildren. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, as we all know, president trump will announce his nominee to fill the seat discriminated by the death of -- the seat vacated by the death of ruth bader ginsburg. the senate is prepared to

examine the qualifications of that nominee and hold a vote here on a timely basis. this, of course, is set in line with the precedent set by presidents and senates that were elected long before we became members of this body or were even born. and we are prepared to follow suit. 29 times when there was a vacancy during the election year where the party occupying the white house and the majority of the senate were the same, 29 times there were confirmation processes, and it will be the same again this year. -- with the 30th. as always, we will be thorough. as a member of the judiciary committee, i've had the privilege of participating in a number of confirmation hearings for supreme court justices. i know every member of the committee takes this job very seriously. our role of advice and consent under the constitution. we won't rush the process.

every member of this body will have an opportunity to vote for or against the nominee once the nominee is voted out of the judiciary committee. but it seems for our friends on the other side of the aisle, precedent is not enough. prospect of another trump-appointed nominee has launched an attack that has been months in the making on our very independent judiciary. one of the hallmarks of our constitution and our democracy is an independent judiciary, an empire, if you will -- an umpire, if you will that will mediate the fight between the executive and legislative branch and rule on the very constitutionality of the laws that are passed. long before this vacancy even existed, though, our democratic colleagues were sounding the alarm, suggesting they would expand or pack the supreme court

with liberal justices that will rubber stamp the political results they could not achieve through legislation. during the presidential primary this year, candidates were especially eager to share their vision for a larger and solidly liberal supreme court. a number of our senate colleagues were among those open to the idea, including the current democratic candidate for vice president, the senator from california. over the last several months, democrats in both the house and the senate, including house judiciary committee jerry nadler, have expressed an interest in upending the integrity of the supreme court and its role in leading the independent judicial branch. once a supreme court vacancy went from a possibility to a reality, these comments have now turned into threats. over the weekend, the junior senator from massachusetts tweeted, when democrats control

the senate in the next congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the supreme court, close quote. the senator from new york, the minority leader, himself reportedly told his members on a call this weekend that was reported in social media, nothing is off the table. now, mistreatment of conservative nominees to the courts is nothing new, including two years ago when democrats waged an all-out smear campaign against justice kavanaugh. but now, even before the nominee is announced, our democratic colleagues are taking aim at the institution itself. we know this isn't the first time that our colleagues have floated institutional changes to shift the political tide in their favor. when they lost the senate majority, they decided they wanted to add new states. they are uninterested in

bipartisanship, so they want to end the legislative filibuster. and now they threaten to pack the court with liberal justices to give them a political outcome. they are taking the saying, if you can't win the game, change the rules, to a whole new level. but, mr. president, this isn't just political gamesmanship anymore. it's an assault on the constitution itself. along with the integrity of our article 3 courts and our system of checks and balances, this court-packing threat isn't new. it preceded the deaths of justice ginsburg -- the death of justice ginsburg and the creation of the vacancy that we will soon consider. but they're now trying to rebrand the reasoning behind it. since the idea was previously viewed as too radical by members of their own party, with even justice ginsburg opposing it, they're trying to shift the blame to republicans by

following the precedent of 29 judicial confirmation hearings occurring during an election year and undermining or challenging the senate's constitutional duty to provide advice and consent, our democratic colleagues claim that it is we who are responsible for an attack on democracy. they in effect are holding the supreme court hostage and saying, don't make me kill the hostage. democrats aren't just trying to prevent a single conservative justice from joining the court. they're trying to dismantle the very institution itself. the supreme court has had nine justices for more than 150 years. as the balance has shifted in many different directions over the years, members of congress have respectfully refrained from

engaging in such dangerous threats. this isn't just about a conservative justice or a liberal justice. it's about preserving one of our most basic institutions -- a free and independent judiciary. mr. president, on another matter, by virtually any measure, our economy was booming at the start of last year. -- of this year, i should say. successful reforms under the tax cuts and jobs act allowed workers to keep more of what they earned and gave job creators the freedom to create new economic opportunities for the american people. but then the first two -- within the first two years of these changes, we experienced record gains in employment and increases in household income for families across the country. including hispanic and african american households. new census data points a --

paints a clear picture of just how strong the economy was in 2019. ed median household -- the median household income reached an all-time high, a 6.8% increase over the previous year. not only that, if you look at the that amount alower class it's almost double the next highest double amount in annual growth. as i said, black and hispanic americans each experienced a higher-than-average growth rate and historically low unemployment rates. median earnings increased 7.8% for women compared to 2.5% for men, representing progress in the fight to close the pay gap. the benefits of our booming market, though, didn't stop there. the new jobs and opportunities created during this boom drew more workers who'd been on the sidelines into the labor market and the result was spectacular.

the poverty rate dropped to 10.5%, the lowest since 1959. every population group made gains, regardless of race, gender, age, disability status, or marital status. each group experience add decline in the poverty rate. -- experienced a decline in the poverty rate. we still have a long way to go to ensure that no family in america police in poverty, but we also -- in america police in poverty, but re-- in america lives in poverty, but we also ought to be -- there is no doubt the american economy was humming. then of course the pandemic hit. slid after years of adding new jobs and creating economic opportunities for millions of americans, it felt like the gains we made were erased in the blink of an eye.

through no fault of their own, businesses were forced to close their doors to help slow the spread of the virus. with no tables to wait on, customers to servings, or travelers to accommodate, millions of workers were left without a way to earn a living. well-meaning employers, sadly, handed their workers pink slips and said they hoped to have jobs for them to come back to once the pandemic was in the rearview mirror. until that could happen, millions of americans relied on unemployment benefits, winded -- which ended -- enhanced benefits which ended the end of july including an extra $00 a week in federal benefits. but there are still families across texas struggling to make ends meet and there are workers waiting to return to their jobs with no end in sight. and while we have made progress against the virus, we have to make progress too in recovering our economy. in the beginning, restaurants

and retailers began adding curbside service and delivery to regain some income. throughout most of texas now these businesses are able to open to 75% of capacity. gladly, we're seeing in order and more workers returning to work. our children returning to school. in texas, unemployment has steadily declined from a peak of 13.5% to 6.8% in august. i think a lot of that progress is due to the success of the cares act and especially the paycheck protection program. which sent more than $41 billion to more than 417,000 different loans to small businesses in texas alone. i'm still hoping that we can come to an agreement on another coronavirus relief bill that will extend the paycheck protection program and provide some enhanced level of federal employment benefits. but those measures alone won't support our economic recovery.

and we know regaining lost ground won't happen overnight. it's going to take time for our country to return to the prepandemic economy that the president and republican senate fought so hard to achieve. as we consider the most effective ways to tune up our economic engine, our guiding principle should be that of the doctor-patient oath, hippocratic oath, first do no harm. raising trillions of dollars in taxes, as a number of democrats have suggested, would be counterproductive. it wouldn't grow the economy. it would kill the economy. in 2009, as the nation was fighting to recover from the 2008 recession, president obama was asked about the possibility of raising taxes, and he didn't mince words. he said, the last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession. and that's exactly right.

but that's exactly the opposite of what the leading democratic candidates, including the democratic nominee for president, are advocating. they're advocating a huge tax increase, even as we are hopefully closer to the end of the pandemic than we are the beginning. it's just the wrong medicine for what ails our economy, as president obama noted. families we know are still struggling. workers are still hurting. and the american people need more money in their paychecks, not less. we need to look at what made the 2019 economy such a success and try to ensure that those changes prop us up for a strong comeback. i think the best place to start is with the success of the tax cuts and jobs act. after it passed almost three years ago i traveled across my state and met with business owners and employees who were

reaping the immediate benefits. those were in the form of new hires, bonuses, raises, 401(k) match increases. employees at every business of every size were seeing the benefits of the tax cuts and jobs act. while some of the provisions of that law are permanent, others are set to the expire in 2025, and without action, things like lower income tax rates for individuals and the increased child tax credit were expire. as we work to support our country through the recovery process, we need to emulate the reforms that made our booming economy a reality in the first place. as i said, i don't expect the road to recovery to be quick, but there are steps that we can take to make it easier. first, we could do our job by supporting the individuals and businesses hit hardest by the pandemic. at the same time appeared time again, our democratic colleagues -- time and time again our

democratic colleagues have objected to us even considering legislation to continuing those important provisions of the cares act. we can take the government's boot off of job creators' necks and fight to bring jobs that were fit overseas because we learned a lot about vulnerable supply chains and manufacturing needs to be returned to the united states. following tax reform, millions of new jobs were created and americans brought home more of their hard-earned money. as a result, we reached 3.5% unemployment, the lowest unemployment rate in a half a century. that progress was possible because of the right policies that increased take-home pay for workers and unleashed the power of the private sector. so i have no doubt, madam president, as we rebuild our economy, we will do so if we continue to embrace the policies that made 2019 a banner year.

madam president, let me just conclude by saying we must pass another covid-19 relief bill. time and time again speaker pelosi has refused to negotiate in good faith to come up with a compromise. in the meantime airlines, which employ tens of thousands of people in my state and across the country, will begin laying off their employees beginning october 1. businesses that were sustained by the p.p.p. program, they've now run out of those funds and they need to be replenished. and i get questions time and time again about the lapsing of the enhanced unemployment benefit that was part of the cares act. we tried to extend that at some reasonable level, but our democratic colleagues objected and blocked it and stopped it. what i fear, as chairman powell of the federal reserve and secretary mnuchin, the treasury

secretary, have suggested, that the massive stimulus that we provided, roughly $3 trillion through four bills that were passed on a bipartisan basis, that has sustained our economy and brought us to where we are today even in the darkest of times through this pandemic. but if we leave here with our democratic colleagues having prevented us from providing another covid-19 relief bill, i think it guarantees nothing but pain for the economy and american workers and american families. and we should not go down that path or tolerate it. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, i ask unanimous consent to be allowed to finish my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: madam president, i rise to speak about three critical matters impacting families in washington state and across the country today. first of all, i'd like to say that even though the wildfires in my state are being contained thanks to the skilled work of

brave and dedicated firefighters, wildfires and health impacts of smoke are still creating hazardous conditions throughout the pacific northwest. and until we begin addressing the drivers of those natural disasters, like climate change, we know these crises and the suffering they bring will only continue getting worse. secondly, i want to talk about three nominees under consideration for the equal employment commission or the eeoc. one of these nominees is jocelyn samuels. she is exactly who workers need right now. as the coronavirus continues to impact workplaces across the country, workers are facing unprecedented challenges. and they need a champion at the eeoc who will work tirelessly to defend their rights. jocelyn samuels is that champion, with almost 20 years of experience in the federal government including at the eeoc itself, she has spent her career working to address discrimination and make sure no one is treated unfairly because of their age, their race, or

their disability. i'm confident she will be an excellent commissioner. i'm proud to vote to confirm her nomination and strongly urge my senate colleagues to join me in supporting her nomination. unfortunately the other two nominees already approved by the senate, andrew r. lucas and keith e. sonderling, will likely have disastrous consequences for workers' rights. these are two people who have spent their careers working to protect corporations, not workers. as a lawyer, andrew r. lucas has never defended workers. her only legal experience is defending corporations when workers tried to fight back against sexual harassment or age discrimination and disability discrimination. that's exactly the opposite type of experience and values we need at the eeoc which is why i voted against her nomination. keith e. sonderling's record is no better. during his time at the trump administration's department of labor, keith sonderling worked to churn out policies that hurt

workers, from his joint employer rule that lets massive corporations off the hook for minimum wage over time and equal pay violations to his initiatives that gives companies a get out of jail card for wage theft, his job made it harder for workers. for those reasons i oppose his nomination. finally, madam president, right now our nation is facing truly trying times. 200,000 lives have been lost to covid. millions are unemployed. and we just lost a treasured american hero, justice ruth bader ginsburg. so much hangs in the balance now, and people are already voting and organizing to make sure their health care and their rights and their futures are protected in this election. for those nationwide who have already cast their blots -- ballots and who will vote in the coming week for the future of our country and help ensure

trust, trust in our democracy, the people must have a voice in this nomination. the next president should choose justice ginsburg's replacement as she wished, to spare our democracy the painful chaos of making such a decision so close to an election. people are speaking out, and the senate must listen. as majority leader mcconnell insisted only a few years ago. but unfortunately it seems, like my colleagues on the other side are content to ignore these crie just like they ignored the cries of our constituents for a covid-19 that meets this moment instead of shortchanging our communities because nothing, nothing is more important than pushing through their ideological agenda to jam as many partisan judges on the bench as possible, especially on the supreme court. and tip the balance of our federal judiciary even further against everyday people. packing our courts to ensure we can't make progress to defend

affordable health care or address climate crisis or do anything on the critical issues people in my home state of washington and around the nation care so deeply about. and have blocked time and time again by the republican party. i will be doing absolutely everything i can to make sure everyone from washington state to washington, d.c. and my republican colleagues here in congress know just how much is at risk if president trump gets to a point another hard-right nominee, an unprecedented 41 days before a presidential election. look, it's truly impossible to understate the consequences for families and communities across the country now and for generations to come. president trump has made it clear he wants a nominee who will gut protections for preexisting conditions, who will take health care away from millions of people nationwide and do everything they can to undermine basic rights and freedoms and protections through the court, including crucial

worker protections that justice ginsburg herself helped secure and the eeoc is tasked with enforcing. so i urge all mile colleagues to join me in voting today to honor an important part of justice ginsburg's legacy and vote for the nomination of jocelyn samuels, and then let's keep fighting for people's health care, for protections for preexisting conditions, for workers' rights and voters' rights and lgbtq rights and for the vision of a just and equal country, a just and equal country justice ginsburg fought so hard to advance. thank you. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? seeing one -- is there a sufficient second?

there appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there any american people wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the nays are 70 -- the yeas are 70, the nays are 27. the nomination is confirmed.

the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on of roderick c. young, of virginia, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of virginia. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is it, sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of rod ri c. young -- roderick c. young, of virginia, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of virginia, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 93, the nays are 3 and the motion is agreed to. the presiding officer: the chamber will come to order. the presiding officer: the chamber will come to order. please remove your conversations. please remove your conversations. the chamber will come to order. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: the judiciary, roderick c. young of virginia to be united states district judge for the eastern district of virginia.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: equal employment opportunity commission, jocelyn samuels of maryland to be a member. the presiding officer: under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the nomination. the yeas and nays -- is there a sufficient second? seeing some -- yes -- the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 54,

the nays are 42, and the nomination is confirmed.

mr. alexander: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: madam president, i come to the floor to talk about covid in two ways. one, the senator from tennessee who is presiding today will appreciate this. she and i have a -- a regular call with governor lee, our governor, and we just finished part of it. her staff was on part of that. but he -- he gave some very interesting information that i think would be important to all senators and to our country. that is the significant learning loss that occurs when children aren't in school.

in tennessee, governor lee and some national researchers have completed a study of the learning loss in the third grade for reading and math proficiency from children who were not in school from march through the summer. now, you always have a learning loss in the summer, but march through summer -- and this is what they found -- preliminary data shows an estimated 50% decrease in proficiency rates in third grade reading and a projected 65% decrease in proficiency in math. that in the governor's words is a dramatic decrease. it shows that the vast majority of students learn in person, the governor said, with their teacher, and he is working to get a safe environment so that they can get back to school. the good news on that is according to the governor, 1,80e open, in person, and only seven of those schools have any sort of closure incident today. in other words, one class or one

school closed because of covid. so this problem we are just discussing hopefully won't be as pronounced this semester in tennessee because except in memphis and except in nashville, almost all of our schools are open in person to some degree. the governor went on to say that the march through the summer school closings produced a learning deficiency that's expected to be 2.5 times that of a normal summer rate. he also said the learning loss impacts early grades greater than later grades, placing those students further behind in the learning trajectory. students with lower proficiency rates are also disproportionately impacted by learning loss. in other words, students who are already behind fell behind even further as a result of leaving school in march. it shows that -- then it shows that the research from the

organization for economic cooperation and development, which worked with the governor on these, shows that each additional year's schooling increases life income by an average of 7.5% to 10%. and the loss of one-third of a year in effective learning, which is what we just heard about, for just the students affected by the closures, that organization estimates would lower a country's gross domestic product by an average of 1.5% for the remainder of the century. i don't know whether those numbers are exactly accurate or not, but the message is clear, that children, especially young children, especially young children who are further behind already, need to be in school so they can be taught in person or their learning loss is dramatic. now, as -- and i ask unanimous consent, madam president, to

place in the record the press release that governor lee of tennessee released detailing this dramatic learning loss. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: thank you, madam president. now, today, the -- our committee, the health, education, labor, and pensions committee, had its last hearing of the -- of the year, and it was my last hearing as chairman of the committee. and while we're on the theme of education, one of the interesting -- and i'm here today to give a little report oe an unprecedented sprint toward success in three areas. vaccines, treatments, and diagnostic testing. but i asked dr. fauci this question. i said dr. fauci -- who was one of the witnesses -- there are a lot of outbreaks on college campuses around the country as students in thousands of colleges, millions of students go back to thousands of colleges.

is the right thing to do to send the students home? and he said absolutely not. that's the wrong thing to do. segregate the students from the other students in the college until they are well and the people they have exposed until they are well, and then go on. don't send them home to infect their parents and their grandparents and the community from which they came. and i think that's important advice for the college administrators all over america who are dealing with this issue very bravely. i know at the university of tennessee, they had big outbreaks, some poor judgment on behalf of a number of students who had just come back to school. can you imagine 18, 19, 20 years old. they all want to get together. well, they got together and they infected one another and they had a big outbreak, maybe 750, the governor said, but it's now down to 150. so dr. fauci's advice to the school administrators is isolate them, segregate them, track them, don't send them home.

the hearing today included dr. fauci, dr. redfield from the centers for disease control. it included abner giwa who is in charge of testing. and it included dr. hahn, who is the head of the food and drug administration. here was the first question i asked dr. hahn. dr. hahn, who is the only person who knows when the vaccines that are being developed will be distributed? and he doesn't really know because he doesn't know the date, nor do any of the career scientists at the f.d.a. know the date, when the data will show that the vaccine is safe and effective, and it won't be distributed until it is. so i said to dr. hahn, who makes the decisions at f.d.a.? do you make the decisions? do the career scientists make the decisions, or does the white house make the decisions about safety and effectiveness of a

vaccine? he said the career scientists make the decisions. the white house does not. and i will not make a decision about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines unless the career scientists and i agree that it's safe and effective, according to neantd transparent data. i ask dr. faus question. i said, dr. fauci, you've been around for a awhile, came in the reagan days, been in your job as head of inl if he can shus diseases -- infectious diseases since 19 4. -- 1984. is this administration cutting corners on safety? he said not. i asked all the witnesses if the vaccine is approved by the f.d.a. would you take it and would you recommend your family take it? they said yes, they have great confidence in the f.d.a. here's a summary of what they told us today. let's start with vaccines. according to the