12 million americans would be cut off entirely from unappointed assistance. 12 million. if we don't do something those will be in a desperate situation. if congress fails to act that date will be an ominous storm day in our history and the issues facing the state and local governments are at the forefront of combating this kindness has continued to be a priority in their budgets are being hammered by shrinking revenues and without additional aid many will have no choice but to cut important services that manyn rely upon or raise taxes n families already hard to hit. we must take action to protect our state ander local government workers and the firefighters, the teachers for the first responders and in the coming weeks 30 million americans are facing the risk of eviction without additional help. merry christmas, you've been evicted. >> we leave these marks from earlier and take you back live now to the u.s. senate.

a couple votes coming up including one for president trump's nominee for the national credit union administration board. you are watching live senate coverage here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. a senator: madam president? the presidin officer: senator from kentucky. paul palm i ask that the folling be granted floor privileges, calem case, lucy, carlin gupta, and gab brie ella mastra. thpresiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? hearing none, the yeas are 58, the nays are 35. the notion nomination is confirmed. under the prious order, the motion to reconsid be considered made and laid upon the table and the predent will be immediately notified of the senate's action. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invok cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: , the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisns of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, dhereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination o kyl hauptmann of maine to be a member of the national credit union administrati board, signed by 17enators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of kyl hauptmann of maine to be a member of the national credit union administration board should be brought it the a close. -- to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. te: s

vote:

are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote?

seeing none, the yeas are 56, the nays are 37. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, nional credit union administration, kyle hauptman of maine to be a member. mr. tton: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: the senate has just voted to conclude debate on the nomination of kyle hauptman to be on the board of the national credit union administration. we will soon confirm him. this is a happy moment for kyle and his family and the country but for me i have to confess it's a bittersweet moment. that's because kyle isn't only a nominee to a federal board, in my view, he is my trusted economic advisor, he is a staff director for me on the economic policy subcommittee of the

senate banking committee and he is a good friend. so i voted to confirm kyle with enthusiasm. my enthusiasm is mixed with addness to see a -- sadness to see a close and trusted aide go. it is america's gain. the ncua and millions of people who rely on credit unions will be well served by kyle who brings a collegial spirit and rare knowledge of financial markets. his expertise comes from years of work from wall street where he focused on the same money markets where credit unions obtain their financing. unless anyone think that kyle doesn't understand what struggling american families can face, as an analyst on the asia desk at lehman brothers, kyle lost his job and savings during the financial crisis. which means he has a deep and

gut-level understanding about how decisions made by bankers and bureaucrats has serious consequences for everyone else. he has put this knowledge of the banking system and its implications to good use. he has shepherded legislation through congress on topics as wide ranging as consumer fraud and block changing. a money laundering bill that kyle and i worked on for months that it will pass in this congress before the year's through. that is not all aisle accomplished. as the top committee aide, he has worked diligently to hold hearings and work compromises with other staff members. he is a friendly, if fast-talking guy, always ready a joke and smile and his congeniality helped to smooth over many partisan spats so the

business of the american people can move forward. as important, kyle has served as a valuable liaison between me and credit unions in arkansas and surrounding states. most credit unions in arkansas are very small with maybe millions of dollars under management, not billions of dollars. but what our credit unions lack in size they make up for in their mission. they exist by keeping their money safe, providing credit at rental rates of return. so while our credit union may not always manage vast fortunes, they do manage vast dreams. they safeguard the savings and extend opportunity to a customer base in arkansas that looks an awful lot like the rest of america. disets have used -- senior citizens have used it for many years. he is well acquainted with credit unions, but you don't

have to take my word for it. listen to the arkansas credit union association which submitted a letter in support of kyle's nomination. i will quote at length. this is from the group's executive director. on behalf of the arkansas credit union association, i'll say that we probably feel the same way you do. that he'll be difficult to replace but the ncua is lucky to have him. i've gone to washington for a couple of decades on behalf of arkansas credit unions which are mostly small. our largest credit union has just over $100 billion in assets which is considered small even by community bank standards. the rest are much smaller where you can count on the one hand the number of a.t.m.'s they have. i encountered a lot of congressional staffers. kyle is the best i have dealt with. international financial firms, you might think he may not

understand the needs of our members who are mostly low or moderate income families, yet it's quite the opposite. he has gone above and beyond to listen and respond quickly and empathize with our concerns. his knowledge of financial markets is an asset, not a liability. i'm aware that ncua board homes are not like senate staffers, i'll no longer be a constituent but rather someone working for the institutions kyle will be regulating. i think you will agree he'll continue to be fair, professional and serious about his work. madam president, i can tell you i very much do agree with every word of that letter and similar letters we have received about kyle and his work on behalf of arkansans. washington can sometimes be a confusing place so kyle's insistence on keeping our arkansans in the loop has been a great blessing to many of the people we serve. i remember the countless e-mails from small business owners praising kyle for his help in

understanding and receiving assistance through the cares act in march in april and may at the height of the danger and the uncertainty about the coronavirus pandemic. that was all of kyle and i'm confident he will bring the same customer mentality to his work at the ncua. that is because kyle is driven by a sense of mission, to help his fellow americans achieve their financial goals and the american dream. that dream is based on freedom. alongside his hero, the great apostle of opportunity, jack kemp, kyle know there are no limits to what free men and women and free enterprise and free society can accomplish where men and women are free to follow their dreams. credit unions allow millions of measures to follow their dreams. so while i'm sad to say farewell to kyle as a trusted aide, i'll take constellation in the fact that he's going to serve our

fellow americans in the cause of freedom and i know that he'll serve them well. thank you, kyle. godspeed. i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a orum. the presiding officer: the clerk will calthe roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. toomey: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. toomey: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. toomey: thank you, madam president. madam president, i ask unanimous consent that brett doyle, a member of my staff and the congressional oversight

commission, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the congress. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. toomey: thank you very much, madam president. madam president, i rise this afternoon because while we were away for our thanksgiving break, there were some very important developments on an important piece of legislation that we passed earlier this year, the cares act, and specifically what i am referring to is the decision that was made by the treasury secretary, secretary mnuchin, to not extend the 13 free lending facilities that we dramatically expanded in the cares act. by way of reminder, let me just summarize these facilities. when the economy first began to close down back in march and april, one of the things that started to happen was a collapse of our credit markets. i'll get into that in a little

bit. in response to that, we in congress passed the cares act which, among other things, appropriated just under half a trillion dollars, $500 billion, for the fed -- i'm sorry. for the treasury to use to capitalize special-purpose vehicles which would be set up as entities from which the federal reserve would lend money. buy securities, provide liquidity to the marketplace. those were scheduled to end, those facilities by the end of the year, and in keeping with the written statute and certainly the intent of congress, secretary mnuchin announced that these programs will, in fact, end as they are supposed to. i commend him for making the right decision, and i commend chairman powell for agreeing to a subsequent request from the

treasury secretary to return the unused money. as it happened, the program, the concept worked so well that the mere announcement and the mere creation of the capability of the -- on the part of the fed to provide this liquidity was enough to restore functioning capital markets. so it was an extraordinary amount of trust that we put in both treasury secretary mnuchin and chairman powell, giving them extremely powerful, unprecedented emergency and temporary tools, and i commend them both for working together with those tools for achieving the intended purpose, and for putting them away once the purpose had been achieved. now, some of our democratic colleagues have been extremely critical of this decision on the part of secretary mnuchin not to extend these programs, and so i want to address some of the

arguments and why secretary mnuchin, in fact, did exactly the right thing. and let's go back and take a hard look at what we were facing in march of 2000. unprecedented turmoil in the credit markets that were threatening the ability of virtually every business, state, and municipality in america to obtain credit. a real threat to the financial plumbing, so to speak, of our entire economy. credit markets were on the verge of shutting down. there was a mass flight of investors out of any kind of financial instrument and into cash. people were trying to sell everything they had. prices were dropping like in a freefall. in many instances, there was no buyer. there was no price at which one could sell an investment. of course, that meant that a borrower couldn't sell a bond, couldn't issue commercial paper. this was the freezeup in our

financial markets that we were right on the verge of. and very desperately afraid that if this happened, if our financial markets came to a grinding halt and you could neither borrow nor lend, either in the capital markets or in the private lending markets of banks, then that would almost assuredly accelerate the downward spiral of our economy and could lead to even a severe depression that could last potentially a very long time. you don't have to take my word for it. a very well-stated summary of what was happening was from the financial stability director. so a senior executive at the federal reserve who in his testimony before the congressional oversight committee, here's what he had to say and i quote. the conditions that prevail during march were unprecedented, far worse than during the onset

of the financial crisis in late 2008 or even in the days after 9/11 when the municipal bond market was briefly closed. interest rates soared, mutual fund investors pooled over $41 billion of assets out of the markets in less than three weeks and market functioning deteriorated to the point that buyers and sellers had difficulty determining prices. ultimately this meant that state and local governments were effectively unable to borrow with most new issues canceled for lack of investor demand. madam president, that was the problem that congress was seeking to address. a complete freezing up of our capital markets, the inability to borrow or lend. that is the lifeblood of business, which is the source of employment in this country. if we hadn't done anything at that moment, who knows how many millions more americans would

have lost their jobs, how many more millions of businesses would have gone under. the economic devastation is very, very hard to imagine had we not done anything. fortunately we did do something. congress decided that that problem could be fixed by providing enough liquidity until the crisis passed. we'd make sure that operations of this liquidity exercise would extend no later than the end of 2020 and that's what we did in the cares act. and just last week every republican member of the senate banking committee sent a letter to secretary mnuchin and secretary powell reaffirming that that was congress's intent, a short-term temporary facility to restore functioning private markets. well, i am pleased to be able to report that these emergency facilities absolutely achieve the intended purpose, again, the

purpose to stabilize our credit markets, restore the normal flow of credit to borrowers and allow private capital to resume funding our economy. it worked better than we hoped. markets didn't just improve. we didn't just see liquidity return, we saw record volumes of new debt issuance, municipal bonds, high-yield corporate bonds, volumes were off the chart in response to these facilities, credit spreads at which these instruments were issued were very tight, interest rates are near record low. on the banking side, regional banks are reporting that their commercial borrowers drew down lines of credit so they would have the cash they need to get through a very difficult period. in fact, many of them have been able to start paying that cash back. and according to various surveys

of businesses across america, unmet demand for credit among creditworthy borrowers is almost nonexistent. in other words, creditworthy corporate borrowingers, if -- borrowers, if their credit is strong, they are able to access the facilities they need, the credit they need. that's exactly what we hoped would happen by virtue of setting up these facilities. despite that, some have said that we can't end these facilities, they are called the 13-3 facilities because that is a section of existing law under which the fed is authorized to conduct activities. they suggest you can't end these because the markets depend on them for their normal smooth functioning, the markets now depend on these facilities. that is what we were told, madam president, as a reason why the

treasury had to extend these, presumably indefinitely, but in fact what we saw proved that the naysayers were completely wrong. in fact, it was on november 19 that secretary mnuchin announced he would not extend these programs and how did these financial markets respond? with a yawn. there was no adverse developments whatsoever. they continued their smooth liquid functioning because by november 19, in fact many months prior to november 19, the markets had recovered on their own. they were functioning on their own. they were no longer in need of this fallback facility that we created because we did need it back in march. equity markets hit all-time record highs, municipal debt and corporate debt, volumes very high, yields low, the markets functioning very, very smoothly. so clearly -- clearly those of us who when advocating that we

actually follow the law and end these programs were right that the markets were not actually depending on them anymore. other people said, well, you shouldn't end the 13-3 facilities for other reasons, i one of which was who knows what risks may be out there, what bad things might be on the horizon for our economy which would cause us to want to have these facilities. madam president, that's a very bad reason for giving indefinite lending authority to the fed to make direct loans to businesses in america. first of all, there's never been a day in the history of the republic that you couldn't imagine some bad things -- thing that could possibly happen on the who are lieson. -- horizon. that shno reason to create a financial backstop for all financial activity. none whatsoever. sure, a bad thing could happen,

nobody knows. if it does, there's an answer. if such a disaster were to occur in the future that our financial markets were in danger once again of freezing up, then the fed and treasury should come back to congress and ask for whatever authority they think is appropriate for those circumstances and based on what we did in march, congress is quite likely to respond by granting the tools necessary to deal with whatever hypothetical crisis may emerge down the road. others of our friends say, well, you can't get rid of these facilities, you can't terminate these facilities because there are industries that are failing in america. well, let me be clear, it's true. there are industries that are in a world of hurt. we know who they are. the travel industry, much of the tourism, hospitality, generally hotels, restaurants, a lot of the entertainment venues, devastated like we've never seen it before. that is a true fact. and i think you can make a

strong argument that congress ought to do something to respond to the circumstances that these folks find themselves in through no fault of their own. they are in the situation they are in because in many cases their governors closed their states and in others it's because people are just prudently concerned about being in a crowded setting. so there's a problem there. there's a challenge and we may very well decide we want to address it, but having the federal reserve lending money to insolvent companies, that's not the role of these facilities. it never was. it's not contemplated in the underlying 13-3 statute and it's not in the cares act. that's not what this program, what these facilities were meant to address. so let's be clear about what the advocates for continuing these 13-3 facilities are really all about, what's going on there is they want these programs, this

massive, mass if amount of money -- massive amount of money that's at the discretion of the fed and treasury to lend, they want to use political pressure on the fed and the treasury to lend these facilities to favored political constituencies at terms that they find appealing or attractive depending on their circumstances. this is exactly the opposite of what a central bank should be doing, capitulating to political pressure to lend to preferred constituents at whatever terms the politics dictate. that couldn't be anything further from the role that the central bank ought to be playing. and so to my colleagues who are advocating that we do exactly that with these 13-3 facilities, i couldn't disagree more. if we want to be in the business of picking industries or sectors and subsidizing them or giving

them money or treating them in some unusual way, we can have that discussion, but that's fiscal policy. that's a decision that ultimately needs to be made by the politically accountable branches of government, the docand the president -- the congress and the president, not the central bank that is supposed to be independent and apolitical. the fact is, madam president, i think we deserve a congratulations, even more so i think the treasury secretary and the chairman of the fed deserve a congratulations for setting up the facilities that made it possible for our economy to begin a record recovery from a very, very deep trough that we hit in the late spring of last year. we all know that we're not at the end goal. we are not back to full employment yet. we have, as i said before, many companies that are in deep

trouble, many that have gone out of business all together. we've got a lot of problems and we need to deal with them. but we do know that this recovery has been occurring at a faster pace than anyone projected. most economists, including at the fed, thought we'd be lucky if the fed would -- if it would dip below 6%. it was 6.9%. we have a lot to go before we get to the 3.9% unemployment rate before the pandemic hit and by all means we need to stay at it before we get there. but we won't do it by turning the fed into the allocator of credit based on political demands. that would be a very, very bad idea. it would lead to worse economic outcomes, all kinds of distortions and it would erode the independence of the fed. so, madam president, as i said, i want to congratulate and

commend the treasury secretary for making the right decision, the chairman of the federal reserve for returning the unspent money. these programs were remarkably successful. they served their purpose. their purpose is now behind us and we need it on the policies that -- to continue the policies to allow us to have the economic recovery we need withouthese programs continuing. mr. cornyn: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: thank you, madam president. madam president, just as i came to the floor i saw an announcement by the attorney general of the united states that he was appointing u.s. attorney durham as a special counsel under the same

provisions under which robert mueller was appointed as a special counsel. while ordinarily i'm no fan of special counsel appointments, i think this one is important for a very simple reason. with the election of a new administration and the transfer -- peaceful transfer of power anticipated on january 20, it is important to the country that the did durham investigati, wherever it may lead, be concluded in a nonpolitical and nonpartisan fashion and that whatever is disclosed about the efforts made at the f.b.i. under the direction of mr. comey, under his leadership, the actions of his subordinates at the f.b.i., it's important to the country and to the ongoing representation of the department of justice and the federal

burrow of investigation -- federal bureau of investigation that the facts be known and not swept under the rug. and so i congratulate the attorney general for making that appointment which ensures the public, the american people, will finally learn what the facts are and not filtered through the media which, unfortunately, has taken on some of the partisan polarization that's reflective of our larger society in a way that i think will prevent -- has prevented the facts from being fully known. inspector general horowitz at the department of justice has done a great service in his investigation, but the durham investigation is perhaps the single most important investigation being conducted and one that i hope when it's concluded will once again help restore public confidence in

those great american institutions known as the department of justice and the f.b.i. madam -- madam president, the majority leader shared some good news in our effort to deliver a coronavirus relief package before we adjourn for the christmas holidays. following discussions with secretary mnuchin and the white house staff, there now seems to be a path forward to could gain bipartisan support in congress and earn the signature of the president. people sometimes forget we are an important part of the process, but the person who signs legislation or would choose to visa to it -- veto it is an important part of the process as well. so the fact that president trump has indicated that he would sign such a bill isen couraging. the majority leader is in the process of drafting this new

language, which could finally break the gridlock which has put us in such a precarious position in terms of delivering the relief to the american people that they need, both from a public health and an economic standpoint. this may finally put us on a path to passing another relief bill before the end of the year. we know we're going to have to do it, but we should not make the american people endure additional pain and anxiety and hardship as a result of political dysfunction by kicking it over into the new administration. for months on end, my constituents in texas and the american people have waited as political dysfunction has stood in the way of progress on covid-19 relief. with case counts climbing in texas and across the country, the need for action cannot be overstated. it's clear that republicans, both in the congress and the

white house, are prepared to make a deal. and i hope our colleagues across the aisle can bring themselves to stop blocking relief and to to do the same. as i see the presiding officer take his seat, i am reminded there is an additional bipartisan bill introduced that i think provides some other shape and contours to what a potential bipartisan relief package will look like. so here in the waning days of this congress as we approach the christmas holidays, i think the best christmas present we could confer on the american people is to work together in a bipartisan way to provide both the public health relief and the financial support that they need during this challenging time. mr. president, with the work of one congress drawing to a close and the start of a new one just around the bend, this time of

year is typically as busy as it is productive. we still have a lot to do, including funding of the government with the current continuing resolution expiring on december the 11th. we need to get the next and final version of the national defense authorization act to the president's desk and, as i said, hopefully agree on another coronavirus relief bill. these priorities seem to dominate the headlines but represent only a fraction of what i hope we can accomplish in the waning days of this congress. before the pandemic turned the work of congress on its head, we were making serious progress on countless bills to help improve the lives of the american people in a bipartisan focus on prescription drug pricing, for example. a poll last fall found that the number of one health care item people wanted was for the congress to address prescription drug costs. prescription drug prices have

surged by 33%, more than any other medical product or service. i'm honored to sit both on the senate finance and judiciary committees, where we've been looking at these high costs and some of the behavior behind them and, yes, some of this is caused by bad behavior. there are pharmacy benefit managers who negotiate backdoor rebates, kickbacks basically, which drive up out-of-pocket costs for consumers. what i find seriously concerning, there is anticompetitive behavior by some drug manufacturers to try to manipulate higher prices and to maintain their patent, even though under order circumstances the time for that patent would have expired and it would have gone to generic or biosimilar competition. some companies have figured out how to game the system to

prevent those lower-cost competitors from ever reaching the market. i think the most popular prescription drug in america is humira, which is a -- by all accounts, nearly a miracle drug used to treat article be righties, and it's been -- to treat arthritis and it's been on the market for years. you typically think of drugs that come to the market that are patented to preserve the investment that's been made through the research, that's produced a lifesaving drug but not one that's been around for nearly two decades. why is it that that hasn't gone from branded drug protected by patent, exclusive rights to sell it, to a generic or biosimilar competition?

well, abvi, the company that makes humira has demonstrated how to manipulate the system so no other company can bring the drug prices down. they remain the sole provider of this ubiquitous drug. what they've figured out, through i'm sure a lot of smart lawyers and others, is how to weave an intricate maze that make it nearly impossible for a competitor to come to market. today there are five competitors to humira available in europe but all are blocked from being sold here in the united states until 2023. how is that possible? they've effectively found loopholes that allow them to create a monopoly and without any action from congress, patients will continue to pay higher prices for drugs like

humira that should cost a fraction of the current sticker provides. to be clear, patents themselves are not the enemy. it's important that we protect the intellectual property of people who create new lifesaving or life-extending drugs like humira. but patents and exclusivity periods are designed to allow drug manufacturers to recover their costs and maybe, just maybe, make a of the pro. the problem is not the patent. the problem is the abuse of some of those patents by some of the pharmaceutical companies. this is driven by a desire to increase they are bottom line, which is understandable, but it is no excuse for manipulating or gaming the patent system. as a result, it's becoming more difficult for patients to continue to afford the drugs theyed into and for those folks who have lost their jobs during the pandemic, it's made many of

these drugs simply unaffordable. last year i introduced bipartisan legislation with our colleague from connecticut, senator richard blumenthal, to take aim at these corrupt practices. our bill is called the affordable prescription drugs prescriptions for patients act. it streamlines the process by limiting the number of patents these companies can claim. so companies are spending less time in the courtroom and hopefully encouraging the transition from branded, patented drugs to the lower-cost generic or biosimilar competition. our bill would allow competitors to bring their drugs to market sooner and of course more competition means lower prices for patients. this legislation was specifically designed not to stifle innovation. it doesn't limit patent rights and it doesn't cost taxpayers a

dime. in fact, the congressional budget office estimates it would actually lower federal spending by more than a half billion dollars over ten years, and that's just for the government reduction costs, not the cost savings to consumers or private health plans. we know there would be significant savings for consumers with private health insurance as well. so what happened to this bill we introduced last year? well, it passed unanimously in the judiciary committee last june. not a single senator on a famously contentious committee like the judiciary committee, where we have a lot of very talented democrats and republicans -- not a single senator opposed it in the judiciary committee because it made so much sense. with no concerns with the policies laid out in the bill, i came to the senate floor last fall to ask unanimous consent that it be passed. but in the run-up to the

november 3 election, the democratic leader blocked the legislation. he single-handedly stopped this commonsense, bipartisan legislation from advancing to the house. to make matters worse, he didn't just do it once; he did it twice. the democratic leader went so far as to call my attempt to pass this commonsense bill a manipulative charade and a little game. but, mr. president, this is far from a game. it's a downright shakedown of patients who are struggling to afford the drugs they need to improve their quality of life or to survive. i continue to hear from my constituents back home in texas who feel burdened, confused and downright frustrated by rising out-of-pocket costs at the pharmacy. medications they've been take for years just keep getting more and more expensive, with no

explanation behind the increase. another famous example is the cost of insulin, a drug that's been around -- i don't know; the presiding officer would know bettertained -- maybe a 50 years or longer. but you would think low-cost alternatives would be available. but the cost of insulin just keeps going up and up and up as manufacturers learn how to game the system to maintain the maximum price and in the meantime result in less affordability by the consumers who need it, that may ration their insulin or, as we heard from one witness on the finance committee, as the presiding officer will remember, a woman -- i believe she was from indiana -- she talked about her son continuing to live at home, putting off life-changing experiences like perhapsest going married or -- like perhaps getting married or buying a house because he was worried about his ability to continue to pay the deductible and the

co-pay for the insulin that was important for him to survive. as covid-19 continues to create new stresses for the american people regarding their health, this is a bill whose time has clearly come. it's clear that the problem won't go away without action by congress, so i would hope that now that the election is over, the democratic leader would stop blocking this bipartisan bill that senator blumenthal and i have introduced and that passed unanimously out of the judiciary committee. mr. president, on one final matter, every other december we have the difficult task of saying farewell to some of our colleagues and today i want to say a few words about our friend from arizona, senator mcsally, whose suck successor i believe will be sworn into office tomorrow. before she was senator mcsally

or congresswoman mcsally, she was known as colonel mcsally, a dedicated, courage you and extremely talented air force pilot. during her 26-year career in the air force, she made a habit out of breaking barriers and became the first woman in u.s. history to fly a fighter jet in combat. but those of us who know senator mcsally can say -- and certainly her incredible staff can attest to this -- that she's not one to rest on her laurels. she was always pushing herself and those around her to aim higher, to do better, to work harder. so it's no surprise she became the first woman ever to command a fighter squadron in the air force. her arrival in the senate brought with it a wealth of knowledge and experience on many issues that were important to our work here, particularly those surrounding the military

and veterans. and senator mcsally has been a fierce and unyielding vote for all of our service members and veterans and their families. as a member of the armed armed services committee, she played a critical role in developing major legislation to support them, such as the national defense authorization act, which i mentioned earlier. but she's also been a champion for our service members through lesser-known but still very important legislation. last month president trump signed a bill she introduced to improve mental health delivering delivery for veterans to receive the treatment that they need. over the last two years, i have enjoyed working with senator mcsally on a number of shared priorities, both of our home states were devastated by mass shootings and we introduced legislation to reduce that sort of horrific violence and to prevent more communities from

experiencing these tragedies. and of course we're both senators from border states, so you can imagine that we've worked together to improve border security along our southern border and ensure that trade and the good parts of having a common border with our southern neighbor remain effective and efficient. and once covid-19 hit, we teamed up on legislation to protect the health care workers who lost their jobs during the pandemic. senator mcsally has continuously fought for change, both big and small, to improve the lives of her constituents in arizona and to strengthen our national security. we will miss this dedicated friend and colleague, but i know her work is far from finished. i have no doubt that senator mcsally will remain a strong voice for arizonans and an unshakable advocate for our service members and veterans.

we're grateful for her lifelong service to our country, and i'm eager to see the ways that senator mcsally will continue to make her home state proud and make the american people's lives just a little bit better each day. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding offir: the clerk shall call theoll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quum call:

quorum call:

mr. portman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: mr. president, ask unanimous consent that the quorum cl being vitiated. officer without objection, so ordered. mr. portman: i ask ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding therovisions of rule 22, the postcloture time on the hauptman nomination expire at 11:45 a.m. tomorrow and the senate vote on confirmation of the nomination. further, if cloture is up voked on the one hand the davis nomination, the senate vet on the motion up to voke cloture on the waller nomination. i further ask that the postcloture time with rpect to -- understand that the confirmation vote with respect to the waller nomination occ at a time to be determined by

the majority leader on thursday, december 3. if any of the nominations can confirmed, the motions to and laid upon the table, and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: thank you, mr. president. i'm here on the floor today to once again talk about the need for this senate and this congress to pass legislation to deal with the covid-19 crisis. i think we have to do this now before the end of the year, certainly before we leave the congress to go back home for the holiday recess. we just got back from a week-long recess for thanksgiving, and all the members of this body, all of them had to have seen what i saw, which is an up-close look at the crisis that's upon us.

in ohio, our daily new cases are four times what they were just one month ago. four times. i see the numbers every single day, and they are discouraging. and it's not just new cases. it's more people hospitalized. it's more people in the i.c.u. units. it's more people tragically who are counted among the fatalities. this morning, i tried to call a friend of mine who is in the hospital in columbus, ohio. he is there because of covid. i'm just thinking probably of the people watching tonight, most have either had covid themselves or have a friend or a family member who have had covid. this friend was unable to talk to me because he had taken a turn for the worse. his organs were starting to

malfunction. he had slipped into unconsciousness. i was able to speak to his wife. i told her, of course, that he's in our prayers, but i also told her that he's in my thoughts as we look at whether we should do something more here at the federal level to help on the coronavirus pandemic. of course we should. it's been a long time since we took action. you have really got to go back several months. the last big package was passed in march, about nine months ago. it's time for us to act again. and there is some good news out there. with all of the negative must about the cases and hospitalizations, i.c.u.'s and tragically the fatalities increasing, the good news is that there is hope on the

horizon, and that is the vaccines. i have been a big supporter of providing the federal funding for the vaccines, and i applaud the administration for the work they have done on this operation warp speed because i believe that while masks are critical -- and i wear mine, and i hope you're wearing yours -- the social distancing is very helpful, the work that people are doing on the therapies is really important. we need more testing, and that's good to know where we stand, but nothing can take the place of these vaccines. think about the other diseases we've tackled with vaccines. measles and smallpox and polio. my dad had polio as a kid. it was fairly common. today we don't even think about it. these vaccinations, if they work well, can be amazing. and guess what we learned over the past several weeks. we learned that the early results from some of these vaccines, including the early data we have from the moderna and the pfizer candidates are

incredibly effective. we're talking over 90% efficacy or effectiveness. i'm participating in one of the trials. it's the janssen johnson & johnson trial. that vaccine shows promise also. i joined the trial, by the way, for a few reasons. one, because i really want to understand better how this system is working. i had received a briefing from a company that manages trials around the world, and they indicated to me that they were having trouble getting people to sign up. so another reason i entered was i asked them, i said if i sign up, will that help? they said if you're willing to go public, yes, so i did and i am. i also joined the trial because i'm concerned about the numbers i see about people's concerns about the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines, because i know through operation warp speed that the science is calling the shots, that these scientists, the best in the

world here in america, are working around the clock to get these vaccines out as quickly as possible, and we've got to be sure people actually use them, that people are willing to get vaccinated. when i joined the trial only a few weeks ago, several weeks ago, maybe four or five weeks ago, this was before the election, gallup had recently come out with a survey which said that only 50% of americans were willing to be vaccinated. that's not good. again, this is a vaccine that is very effective. the flu vaccine probably is about 30% effective, and i have friends who say i'm not going to take the flu vaccine. i took one last year, and i got the flu anyway. well, that's because it's about 30% effective on average. that's not true with these vaccines from the early indications. again, 90%, 95%, 94% effectiveness or efficacy. so i urge people to do their own

research, to look at what the scientists are saying, look what dr. fauci is saying, look what those who are the professionals are saying. they are saying that corners are not being cut here. in fact, it's going quickly, but they are being more careful than ever to get this emergency use authorization, which is what the pfizer and the moderna vaccine candidates are trying to get right now. they actually have to go through more hoops than normal. so my hope is that this willingness to be vaccinated changes. by the way, there was another gallup poll two weeks ago, and it didn't show 50%. it showed 58% are willing to be vaccinated. that's good. that's progress. i think that's because we are beyond the election, and the irresponsible people who were saying publicly, gosh, i don't know if i trust this because it was during the trump administration, if they were democrats, perhaps, have stopped saying it. i hope they have. because this is not something that's political.

we should never politicize this. this is about saving lives. it's about getting our economy back on track. it's about dealing with a virus that has caused so much devastation and dislocation in our families, in our communities, in our businesses. so my hope is that everyone will be encouraged to again look at it yourself, do your own research, but get yourself and your families vaccinated because it's going to help you, protect you, and also protect the community. it's the only way we are going to get to the kind of community immunity rather than community spread that all of us hope for. leader mcconnell spoke on the floor here yesterday, the republican leader, the majority leader. he said that we need a new covid-19 bill to continue investing in the distribution system for these vaccines so we can get them in circulation as soon as possible. i couldn't agree with him more. that's part of why we need

another covid-19 bill, because we actually need more money for insuring that we're going to have these vaccines broadly available with a distribution system that makes sense, that's fair, but also gets this out as quickly as possible. you know, this operation warp speed did something extraordinary. it's a public-private partnership. i think it's very innovative. they said the government's going to subsidize your production of these vaccines, and while you are going through the approval process, which takes several months, you can go ahead and start producing what you think is the right vaccine that you're testing, and then if you get the approval, boom, the vaccine's ready to go, as compared to getting the approval and then waiting several more months for the vaccine to be produced. that means we're going to probably end up discarding some vaccines that don't work, that don't get the approval. that's okay. because the benefit is that much sooner we're going to have a vaccine out there now in record time. unprecedented. it's never happened in the history of the world that one has been created so quickly and

that we have distributed it so quickly. i expect we're going to have vaccines circulating in our communities within a few weeks. and i suspect that they will go first to -- as the c.d.c. will determine in nightmare meeting next week to talk about it, as i understand it, will go first to the health care providers, will go to the workers who are on the front lines. it will probably go first to people who work in nursing homes because so much of that problem in our long-term care facilities comes from people going in and out of the facility, those people should be vaccinated. the residents of those long-term care facilities. and i believe our first responders need help as quickly as possible because we are putting them in impossible situations. and then the most vulnerable among us, those who are compromised or have other health care problems that are preexisting condition, those who

are older and out in concentric circles to the point that by march and april, we would hope that everybody would have the opportunity to step up and become vaccinated. that is something all of us want to see, republican and democrat alike, a covid-19 bill passed now would help make that happen. it will also help us to get over the valley. the valley to me is between now where we have this surge in the virus that is not abating. in ohio, i'm told by the experts, including talking to our public health officials and our governor, we do not believe that we are beat. i don't know about your state, but i believe your state it's probably true. so there is a valley between now and the march-april time frame. during those four months, we have to have a bridge, in my view. it's not forever.

it's a bridge between now and march-april when the vaccinations are broadly available, and we can have the kind of community immunity we talked about earlier. that bridge is going to be extremely important to the people i represent and the people that every member on this floor represents. we had some early successes coming together to pass legislation around here. when the coronavirus first hit, we were all together. in fact, the cares act that passed in march nine months ago passed unanimously. not a single negative vote. we got together actually for four or five different bills that were bipartisan, and we were all together. and then something happened. we started to sort of split apart. but when we were together, we did some great things. was every penny spent exactly right? probably not, because it was a lot of money, but we saved so many small businesses. i know of them because they are

all over ohio, and i talked to them. the p.p.p. program was a great success. again, did some get it who shouldn't have? of course. but overly, it was extremely successful in keeping the doors open in these small businesses that otherwise would have closed and keeping these employees working and connected to work rather than on the unemployment lines. that was very important. cares act funds also were critical to those who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. you remember we had a lot of shutdowns in the march-april time frame. people were just out of work for the first time in their lives. i have friends who lost their jobs for the first time in their lives. they had to go to unemployment insurance. they had never done that before, but it saved them. they could make their car payments or make their rent or pay their mortgage. there were other important steps that were taken at that time to be sure that we didn't have a more devastating impact. i'm proud of the way we came

together. but again, that was eight or nine months ago. and i have been frustrated that that sense of urgency and that willingness to sort of set aside the partisanship or whatever our specific concerns were, to come together for the good of the country, it seems to have dissipated. it particularly seemed to disappear as we got closer and closer to the election. there seemed to be more and more politics finding its way into the discussion. well, the election's over. republicans here in the senate have offered a responsible, targeted bill focused on funding our health care response, supporting our small businesses, making our schools safe for students to return to class, helping those unemployed through no fault of their own. we have actually twice had a majority of this senate in the last month and a half stand up and vote for such a bill. targeted, focused bill on covid-19 response.

52 senators. unfortunately, here in the senate, that wasn't enough because you need 60, a supermajority, in order to pass it. so although we had 52 out of 100, we didn't get the 60. democrats opposed it. but didn't offer an alternative here in the senate. didn't even allow us to get on the bill to be able to debate it to come up with an alternative. instead, they supported the house-passed bill, which is called the heroes act. which not only is a lot more expensive -- the original version was probably $3.5 trillion, according to the congressional budget office, the most expensive legislation ever passed by any body of congress -- but also it included a number of provisions that had nothing to do with the coronavirus, and that wasn't something that a lot of us could support. immigration law changes, tax breaks for wealthier individuals, other provisions unrelated to covid-19. my hope is that now with the election behind us, the crisis

upon us, the year end looming, the vaccines coming online, now we can provide that bridge on a bipartisan basis. and i'm not just hopeful, i'm encouraged. we've made some recent progress towards what i think could be a good covid-19 treefl package. -- relief package. this morning there was a bipartisan problem solvers caucus with four members from the democrat side and four members from the republican side. their proposal, we've all had a chance to look at throughout the day and i think it's a basis to get something done before the end of the year. i've been in discussion with those eight members as recently as this afternoon. i've been in discussion over the past several weeks with many colleagues on both sides of the aisle on how do we come together? and i think the problem solvers

caucus is a good start. i have some ideas that i think are really good that aren't in there and there are some things in there i wouldn't support. it's probably not what any individual senator would write. in fact, i'm confident in that. but, again, it's a good starting point. it has about $300 billion to help bolster the p.p.p. program to keep it going and help small businesses that are struggling. $16 billion for the vaccine distribution we talked about, also for more testifying, $180 billion to help americans who have lost their jobs during this downturn in the economy. in addition to a lot of other important provisions for our schools and health care providers. it doesn't do everything republicans want. it doesn't do everything democrats want, but it does what the american people need.

i hope this starting point will result in us getting the same kind of bipartisan support that we've had for previous bills that have been offered here on the senate floor. again, i'd like to add some things to it that i think make a lot of sense. specifically, there's some tax incentives to boost our economic recovery like the healthy workplaces tax credit to help businesses reopen and stay open with the current safety and distance guidelines. i would like to repurpose the work tax credit in the cares act into something more encompassing for people who don't qualify for p.p.p., again, to keep them connected to work because it is so important. we need to act soon. i am concerned about some of the reports coming out on how this

pandemic particularly on lower and middle-income americans. after the initial economic shutdown created the record unemployment numbers we saw, unemployment claims began to fall, the paycheck protection program helped small businesses stay open and keep employees on payroll, as businesses found ways to reopen safety, as of october, national unemployment was moving in the right direction. not near where it was prepandemic, but still in the right direction. but then we've seen more troubling signs as the pandemic health care crisis of the pandemic has increased. one problem is that the partial economic recovery we were seeing was not evenly distributed across the economy. if you're a manufacturer in ohio that closed your factory floor this spring, you were able to

figure it out, allow for social distancing and demands started to go back up and most manufacturers are in good shape. but, boy, if you're in the hospitality business, personal care business, you've been hit really hard. our restaurants, our bowling alleys, music venues and coach companies have had a much tougher path to reopening their doors in a safe way. i had a sobering call with members of the ohio restaurant association last week. it's troubling to me that more than half of all ohio restaurants unlikely that they will be in business six months from now. without p.p.p. and more help, half of them said they will close their doors. i'm in the restaurant business. it's a tough business. people are hanging on. we've got to do something to help the economically disadvantaged also.

at start of 2020, thanks to consecutive years of strong growth in the pre-covid economy, under the trump administration, republican proposals, tax cuts, tax reform, regulatory relief, allowing our energy resources to be used in this country, things were going pretty darn well. the national poverty rate before covid started in february of this year, the national poverty rate had fallen since the government started tracking it. the poverty rate had fallen to its lowest level since it was recorded, 10.5%. the economy was good, not just low unemployment, but also higher wages. we actually had in february the 19th straight month of wage increases of 3% or more, that was compounding. people were saying if i work hard and play by the rules, i can get ahead. ethics were good particularly

because the wage increase was focused on moderate and low-income americans. that has all changed as we hit covid. the early economic stimulus actually helped drive the poverty rate lower that i talked about, the march-april time frame. since then, a lack of federal action and the sluggish economic recovery we've seen has reversed that progress with nearly seven million americans falling into poverty since may. that means the poverty rate has risen two percentage points to 11%. people say, what has the coronavirus done to the economy? there it is. among other things it's driven the poverty rate back up after so much success. the longer those individuals stay in poverty, the harder it is to get out of poverty. that's one of my concerns. long-term unemployed.

long-term problems with regard to the poverty rate. those most vulnerable are sliding into poverty. these low-income americans we're concerned about have been the hardest hit by the waves of layoffs. it started in the spring and nearly half of all low-income adults report that either they or someone in their house lost a job as a result of the economic slowdown. half. in comparison only about one-third of higher income americans report being affected in this way. maybe that's obvious to you. but a woman who works in the kitchen for that restaurant that lost her job maybe making $16 an hour compared to somebody working in a factory making $35 an hour, the restaurant workers have been more affected. that's been played out through so many different industries, low-income individuals can't work mobile, can't virtually work unlike someone in the

financial services industry have been the hardest hit. another slowdown would only exacerbate those hardships. do we have a magic wand? no. we can't solve all the problems, but we can help. with so many challenges to contend with, it is concerning that the senate will be in session for 11 more days before we adjourn for the holidays. we have to act and have a short window to do so. by the way, we should not leaf washington without acting. we should not leave washington for the holidays without passing a covid-19 response bill. if we do, we'll be risking even more devastation from the virus and even more economic impacts where millions of americans could lose their jobs, their homes, their cars, and more. we can help avoid this if we provide the necessary resources to continue to combat the ongoing pandemic as well as

drefg a -- addressing a lot of the provisions under the cares act that were set to expire at the end of the year. of the provisions one of the most concerning is the cliff we face for those with unemployment benefits for those who lost their jobs due to covid-19. the pandemic unemployment and the unemployment compensation program will expire at the end of the month. these are supplement ri federal programs designed to help the self-employed and those who need extra support while on unemployment during the pandemic. again, i know some of these people. i talk to them. they are nervous, they are looking at this year end and thinking, my gosh, i'm on unemployment now, even though i'm self-employed, and i wouldn't have been on it under the state system and now the feds are going to pull out and i'm left with nothing. even with the economic rebound in spring, we are down 10 million jobs.

again, the economy was going great, the policies were working but we're still down 10 million jobs. a further slowdown of the economy is going to be tough for those long-term unemployed and my concern is some of them may never reenter the workforce so we need to act and act quickly to get them back in the mix. with the latest round of strictest social distancing measures and closures in some states in order to counter the spread of the virus, more jobs will vanish. we're seeing that already. look at the states doing shutdowns. higher unemployment, more people without a job. losing that unemployment insurance lifeline will be devastating for lots of those americans. let's not let that happen. the end of 2020 also means the end of other important covid-19 response programs, many individuals who have had -- had their incomes affected by the pandemic are also renters and the national moratorium on evictions has allowed these people to keep a roof over their head while they look for work

but the moratorium expires at the end of the year so a lot more people will lose their apartment or losing their home and ending up without any place to go. we need to act here if congress is to make sure that doesn't happen. the same goes for the millions of individuals who are currently relying on student loan deferrals to free up money during the family -- pandemic. come next year, the student loan payments will be due if we don't act. it's not that they won't have to pay but it has been deferred. that ends year end. my hope is that laying out everything we stand to lose in just a few weeks at year end will encourage congress to act on targeted coronavirus legislation to serve as that bridge just as a temporary bridge between now and when we have widespread vaccine availability next spring. failure to act could mean further economic suffering that puts millions more americans in a tough spot in the face of a

virus that seems to be getting more and more out of hand every day, it seems like common sense that we should act and expand and extend these important programs. again, i agree with leader mcconnell. we spoke on the floor here yesterday talking about the importance of providing support for as an example, our hardest hit small businesses by having a second round of paycheck protection program targeted at those companies that are actually losing money year to year showing this month as compared to a year ago or this quarter as compared to a year ago that they are seeing a significant drop in their revenue. these are the ones who need the help the most. in addition we should consider other important provisions again to provide funding and keep our kids safe in school. we want them in school. as it good thing for them. but we've got to be sure they can be safe. fa sill fate vaccine -- facilitate vaccine distribution and funding state and local governments that show they need it it they have to show they

need it. american lives are at stake and we're in danger of losing whatever ground we gained in the coronavirus as the third wave affects so many states like my state of ohio. let's not wait any longer. let's come together and get something done that's good for the american people before the end of the year and let's stand here. i'm committed to staying here. let's stay here until we do that. i yield back my time.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? thpresiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session, be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the

senate. they have it the approval of the majority leader and minority leader. the presiding officer:, would. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the committee on help be discharged from consideration of' 1153 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1153, a bill too plicitly make unauthorized education information technology systemand the misuse of identification devices issued by the department of education a criminal act. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 780 which was submitted he recall letter today. the presiding officer: the clerk will rept. the clerk. 780, dignating december 2020 as national lung

cancer month. the presiding officer: without objection, the? will the precede to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask the chair to lay before the senate the message to accompany s. 1982. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate a message it from the house. the clerk: the bill are from the senate marine dough brie and otherurposes do pass with an amendment. mr. mcconnell: i move to concur in the house amendment and ask that the motion be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, december 2. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in

the day, and morning business be closed. further, following leader remarks, the senate proceed to execive session and resume consideration of the hauptman knocks under the previous order. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask is it sta adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until and of the senate gobbling out. they worked on judicial nominations today and present trump's nominee for the national administration board. tomorrow arizona democrat and former mark kelly will be sworn into the senate. he defeated senator mar that mcsally in november but we could seeork on federal spending package this week live senate coverage here on cspan2. >> a senate armed service

subcommittee looks at marine readiness with a hearing on wednesday. our live coverage but separate 915 eastern on c-span three, online at c-span.org or listen live with the free c-span radio app. earlier today senate republican and democratic leaders held news conferences to discuss the current state of covid-19 negotiations. first move from senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. and senate republicans. cnet