John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged and that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3607.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Grassley- Booker amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, and that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 2746 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. CORNYN. I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration and that the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 560.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, both at home and around the world, the fight to defeat the coronavirus seems all consuming. It has changed virtually every part of our lives, from the way we work to how we grocery shop. It dominates our conversations, our news cycles, and social media feeds. It is easy to feel like this is the only threat that the world is facing right now, but even a pandemic isn't enough to stop those who want to bring harm to our country or to the American people. As our fight against the coronavirus wages on, our dedicated counterterrorism and counterintelligence experts continue their critical work to identify potential threats against our country and to prevent them from being successful. One of the most powerful tools in their toolbox is the ability to covertly gather information about bad actors. That is absolutely critical to national security. Yet our commitment to public safety can be at odds with privacy and individual liberty. So we, as a country, must have sincere trust in both the people and the processes that govern that activity. That is why I fear that recent events have put our trust of both in grave jeopardy. Last December, the inspector general for the Department of Justice released his report on the FBI's counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign and its purported contacts with Russia. This 480- page report outlined a pattern of concerning behavior by those who were charged with protecting and defending the United States and upholding our laws. The inspector general has detailed a number of truly disturbing and alarming facts about how the Russia investigation was conducted, specifically when it has come down to the abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He has identified 7 mistakes--I think he was being generous in calling them mistakes--in the initial Carter Page FISA application and an additional 10 mistakes, or errors, in 3 renewals. Now, these were not typos or misspelled words. These were significant and material errors that misled and affected the independent judgment of the FISA Court, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. In other words, they presented erroneous information--sometimes by omission, sometimes by commission--which may have affected the decision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. To make matters worse, even as new and exculpatory information came to light, this information was not provided to the FISA Court. In a nutshell, this report raised a big red flag and led to the inspector general's conducting a subsequent audit on unrelated cases to see how widespread the problems were, but that audit revealed even more problems. The inspector general recently released an interim report based on a sample of 29 FISA applications. For four of these, the FBI could not even locate the Woods files, which were meant to include supporting documents for the claims made in the sworn applications. For the remaining 25 applications, an average of 20 ``issues'' were found in each, with 1 application having 65 ``issues.'' You might as well use the word ``errors.'' This is alarming and absolutely unacceptable. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has been amended several times over the more than 30 years that it has been law, particularly since 9/11. In light of these developments, it is time to, once again, strengthen the oversight of our Nation's intelligence activities and restore trust in our critical institutions. FISA reform is part of the congressional ``to do'' list. It has been for some time, and it still is. Before key provisions could expire last year, Congress extended these authorities through mid-March to provide time for a debate over future reforms. Of course, back then, no one suspected that we would be working on a pandemic response when that deadline arrived. With the coronavirus spreading across the country, it was hardly the time to debate the long-term changes that should be made to this program. So the Senate passed a short-term extension. Had our colleagues in the House passed that bill, those authorities would have still been intact through the end of the month. Unfortunately, as we know, that is not what happened. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's authorities expired nearly 2 months ago, and now our national security experts are without the tools they need to keep the American people safe. That must change. The bipartisan bill that we are considering today would reauthorize certain FISA provisions that are important to our national security while it would make significant reforms to prevent future abuses like we saw in 2016. At a time when it is clearly needed, this bill would strengthen the congressional oversight of the FISA process. It would also take steps to prevent future abuse of the FISA Court by requiring transcripts of court proceedings and increasing penalties for those who knowingly abuse the process for inappropriate reasons. One of the most significant changes we would see as a result is an end to the call detail record, or CDR, program. This program was created in 2015 to replace bulk collection with a more targeted approach, but the program has been riddled with issues from the start. Two years ago, the National Security Agency said that ``technical irregularities'' made it difficult to actually implement the program. The National Security Agency received a jumbled mess of call detail records from phone companies, and it was not able to separate the data records it should have received from the ones it should not have received. As a result, it ended up deleting all of the records dating back to 2015 when the CDR program was established. Clearly, this program was not delivering the targeted approach it was intended to provide. In fact, it just created more work--all to end up empty handed This legislation will put an end to the CDR program. The National Security Agency has said the cost simply outweighs the benefit, but we want to make sure we are also not wasting valuable human resources on a program that is failing to achieve its intended purpose. Above all, this legislation will restore authorities our counterintelligence and counterterrorism experts need to protect the American people. In order for these authorities to protect the American people and serve their intended purpose, we need trust--trust in the FISA Court, trust in our congressional committees, and trust in the professionals who actually work with these authorities. The USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act will go a long way to restoring that trust while we continue to work on longer term reforms and empower our intelligence officials to carry out their sworn duties. This bill received broad, bipartisan support in the House, and I hope it will enjoy similar support in the Senate. This legislation will ensure that these critical national security tools remain intact while it takes serious quality control measures to prevent abuse. We can't have a repeat of the disastrous FISA abuse in 2016, and we cannot allow these critical surveillance authorities to disappear. The best of tools can be misused by people who are intent on abusing their power. That is what happened when the inspector general revealed the FISA warrants that were issued against the Trump campaign and Trump's associates in an effort to try to come up with some evidence of collusion and obstruction. In the end, not even the special counsel was able to find enough evidence to be able to make those cases. We shouldn't confuse the tools with the people who abuse those tools. We know that the Attorney General, William Barr; Chris Wray, the FBI Director; and Mr. Durham, the U.S. attorney who has been deputized by the Attorney General, are currently conducting investigations that will, perhaps, even lead to criminal charges, indictments, and potential convictions of those who abused these authorities in the past. That should not change our attitude toward providing these necessary tools--things like business record collection, roving wiretaps, and lone wolf authority. By and large, these are tools that are used by law enforcement on a daily basis for domestic critical cases. Yet we are going to deny those tools to our counterintelligence officials? It makes no sense whatsoever. Our counterintelligence and counterterrorism experts rely on those authorities to keep us safe, and it is time we return this critical tool to their toolbox. I look forward to supporting this legislation and to restoring these lapsed authorities, which are critical to our national security. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, my home State of Texas is a great place to do business. We keep taxes, government spending, and regulations at a rational minimum in order to give people and businesses the freedom to pursue their dreams and prosper. Texas is consistently ranked on the list of the ``Best States for Business,'' the ``Best States to Start a Business,'' and the ``Best States for Female Entrepreneurs.'' According to the Small Business Administration, there are more than 2.6 million small businesses throughout the State, accounting for 99.8 percent of all Texas businesses. Those businesses employ nearly half of our State's workforce and account for the massive portion of our Texas economy. To say that the small businesses are an economic force in Texas would only paint half the picture. In big cities and in small towns alike, these businesses play a critical role in our communities--the locally owned restaurants and bars we visit, the gyms that are part of our regular routine, the dry cleaners, the pharmacies and the hardware stores we stop at when we run errands. But our small businesses aren't just employers or generators of sales tax. They are owned by our friends and our neighbors and are part of the very fabric of our community. Right now, they are under severe stress and in real jeopardy. The coronavirus has kept Texans at home and put our small businesses into serious financial trouble. When stay-at-home orders were put in place, many were forced to close their doors outright. Over the last several weeks, like many of my colleagues, I have held innumerable video conferences with chambers of commerce, small business owners, and others who have told me about the difficult decisions they have been forced to make in the wake of this virus. Without any demand, without an opportunity to sell their services or the food or other material they provide, they had to lay off employees or reduce their pay, and some were more concerned that they couldn't survive more than a few weeks because they still had to pay the rent and their overhead. Those struggles are familiar for businesses across the country, and that is why we, together--literally, unanimously, in the Senate-- created the Paycheck Protection Program. This new loan program was designed to help America's small businesses and their employees manage these uncharted waters by providing 8 weeks of cash flow assistance to cover payroll and other business-related expenses. As we now know, it was so popular and so needed that the initial $350 billion we funded ran out in less than 2 weeks. From that batch of funding bill, Texas received more loans than any other State. Nearly 135,000 small businesses benefited from the Paycheck Protection Program--a sum total of 28.5 billion. That is just from the first $350 billion we appropriated. It became obvious that there was more demand than supply, and so we had to then replenish the program with an initial $320 billion. So far, $670 billion has gone into the Paycheck Protection Program. These are astronomical numbers, but, obviously, the need was serious, and this appears to be meeting a very real need to keep these businesses afloat, along with their employees. Since our small businesses have gotten these funds, there is no shortage of stories about the positive impact they have had in my State, and I am sure each of us can tell similar stories. One of the recipients of a PPP loan is Sevy's Grill, which has been a favorite in Dallas for more than two decades. Like other restaurants throughout Texas, the stay-at-home order put them in a very tough financial spot, and the restaurant closed in March without an end in sight. Then a lifeline came in the form of the Paycheck Protection Program. A Facebook post from the restaurant read: ``We are blessed to be a part of the Paycheck Protection Program to help fund our comeback.'' They reopened at the end of April with a ``Valet-to-Go'' program, just in time to celebrate their 23rd anniversary last Friday and Mother's Day over the weekend. There is also another company called JuiceLand, an Austin-based company with locations in Dallas and Houston as well. Matt Shook is the founder and CEO. He says they were preparing for a busy spring, but instead of having their nearly three dozen locations full of customers, he had to close 25 stores and lay off 300 employees. He said: ``Every day it's like being at a poker table and getting bad hands every hand.'' But Matt was then dealt with a few good cards. JuiceLand received its Paycheck Protection Program loan. He began to reopen the stores and to hire back his employees. He said that this loan is going to be the difference in keeping his company afloat. The businesses that have received these loans were in danger of drowning until Congress, working together in a bipartisan way, threw them a lifeline. But now they are facing another risk that could bring a second wave of devastation and danger. Across the country, we are starting to see coronavirus-related litigation filed by the hundreds of cases--patients or their families suing doctors, students suing universities, employees and customers suing businesses--and this is just the beginning. As more States begin to restart their economies, we can expect a tidal wave of lawsuits to follow. And while there is and should absolutely be legal recourse for those with legitimate claims, there are serious concerns about the number of frivolous claims and nuisance lawsuits we are expecting to see. Imagine you are the owner of a small restaurant. Once stay-at-home orders were put in place, you did it the way you were asked, and you tried to keep your business going and your employees on payroll. You received a PPP loan, which helped you and your workforce survive until you could reopen your doors. And once that happened, you took every precaution and followed every guideline to protect your employees and your customers. You did your best to follow all government guidelines and regulations to a T. You stayed in close communication with your employees about their health and required anyone who was not feeling well to stay home. Your employees wore masks and gloves and had their temperatures checked at the start of each shift. You did your best to clean high-touch surfaces, maintained social distancing in the restaurant, and had hand sanitizer available for customers and employees. But then you find out you are being sued because someone claims that they contracted the virus at your place of business and they claimed that it happened because of your negligence and either you knew or you should have known. The legal nightmare you are about to enter could have your business filing for bankruptcy by the end of the year, even if the claim proved to be without merit. The expense and the time and the effort that we want people putting back into the business to help rebuild our economy--they are going to have to use that to defend a nuisance lawsuit and perhaps pay money just so they don't have to continue to pay a lawyer to defend them in court. Without action in this Congress, this is going to be a familiar story for small business owners, doctors, nurses, first responders--anyone and everyone who could potentially be blamed for another person contracting the virus. We are all familiar with those who are ready to jump at the opportunity to file a suit over this and similar matters, whether or not their case has legs. You can imagine the TV ads and the highway billboards we will see encouraging you to call some 1-800 number if you have been impacted by the coronavirus, only to be connected with a lawyer to file a lawsuit--again, regardless of merit. Let me be clear. As a recovering lawyer myself, I don't think all lawyers are bad, but we do know there are venal people who will take advantage of the opportunity. Again, let me just say I have no doubt there have been and will be legitimate lawsuits targeting bad actors. If there is willful or reckless disregard for the person affected, they should have every right to sue and be made whole. But we need to take action against these frivolous lawsuits tying up our courts, bankrupting our businesses, and discouraging our economy from reopening. This is not without some precedent. In the past, Congress has provided similar protections for businesses and workers who followed guidelines and acted in good faith. For example, there was the Volunteer Protection Act of 1997, which provided legal protection for volunteers who worked at nonprofits. There was the Y2K Act of 1999, which gave protections to businesses if they followed government guidelines in good faith with regard to Y2K computer glitches. There was the Coverdell Teacher Protection Act of 2001, which gave protection to teachers and educators. It is simply time for Congress to once again exercise our constitutional authority to provide reasonable liability protections for employers and workers who are operating in good faith and following government and public health guidelines. There is no effort to allow bad behavior or protect those who are grossly negligent, period. In fact, if you think about it, providing a safe harbor for those businesses that follow public health and government guidelines will actually encourage them to do so, which will actually further protect the public and their employees. The types of liability limitations my colleagues and I are interested in providing would simply prevent frivolous and nuisance lawsuits from harassing our frontline healthcare workers and small businesses which were acting reasonably and complying in good faith with health guidelines. If you are a business owner debating whether to reopen once you are able, this lawsuit frenzy could be the deciding factor. You may just decide to throw in the towel, and we all would be losers, not the least of whom would be the employees who get their jobs from that employer. Would you risk a potential lawsuit that would tie you up in courts for months, if not years, on end and bankrupt your business even though you are prepared to follow health guidance? Well, I think many will not be inclined to open up under those circumstances. Without limiting liability for our small business owners and workers, our economic recovery will be stunted as a result of the fear of the negative impact of these frivolous lawsuits. That is the situation we need to address and prevent. Congress has taken unprecedented steps to strengthen our Nation's response to the coronavirus and minimize the economic fallout, and we have done that together. The tidal wave of lawsuits that could come and will come unless we act to limit that liability will undo every bit of progress we tried to make. We can't allow our doctors and nurses and first responders and small businesses to survive the pandemic, only to find themselves battling a second crisis in the courtroom, an existential crisis. In order to strengthen our response to this pandemic, we must protect those who are doing everything in their power to keep us safe while following the guidelines their government provides them, and we need to keep them from having to suffer and perhaps not survive this second pandemic that will be caused by opportunistic litigation. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, as our Nation's war against the coronavirus has waged on, the Senate has taken decisive action to provide the resources we need to win the fight. We sent critical equipment to our frontline healthcare workers, and we have expanded testing resources nationwide. We provided loans to small businesses in order to protect jobs, and we sent direct financial assistance to the Americans who are struggling the hardest to make ends meet. These four bills--now law--passed by Congress have addressed both the public health crisis at the heart of the pandemic and the ensuing economic fallout. Now, with the States beginning to gradually reopen their economies, we are staring down the barrel of a second epidemic, one generated by opportunistic lawsuits, crushing legal fees, and drawn-out court battles. According to a database compiled by law firm Hunton Andrews Kurth, more than 950 such lawsuits have already been filed in the United States. We have seen suits against healthcare workers, nursing homes, colleges, governments, retailers--you name it. As our economy begins to reopen, unfortunately, so will the legal floodgates. The litigation epidemic is shaping up to be a big one. Now, don't get me wrong, lawyers aren't all bad. I confess to being one myself. And there will no doubt be some meritorious claims. But many suits potentially serve as the cash cow--a chance to shake down a business for a nuisance settlement due to the cost alone of defending a lawsuit, even if you win. With a pandemic that has affected more than 1 million Americans, you better believe there are some preparing for a gold rush. You can hear the TV commercials now asking if you or a loved one was impacted by the coronavirus, encouraging you to call a 1-800 number to see if you could be entitled to some money. Imagine you are a nurse who is being sued by the family of a patient who tragically passed away at your hospital. Even though you acted in good faith and you took every precaution to save the life of the patient, you could get pulled into a nightmarish legal fight over a case that ends up having no merit in the first place. Let's say you are a small business owner who closed your doors at the start of the pandemic, but then you applied for the loans, and you have done everything in your power to stay afloat until you could reopen. When that time comes, you take every precaution. Your employees wear masks, you reduce the number of customers so as to provide for social distancing, you regularly clean your store, and you have hand sanitizer available for all employees and customers. But then somebody says that they contracted the virus in your store and that they are going to sue you. Well, I have no doubt that, unless we provide for some limitations, there will be businesses that will say: Why bother? Why take on the risk? It is just not worth it We know small businesses provide the lion's share of the jobs in our economy, and they can get roped into spending all their savings--what is left--to defend or settle a nuisance lawsuit. And the fear of these consequences could worsen the toll this crisis has already taken on our economy. We simply cannot allow a flood of frivolous lawsuits to harm our incredible healthcare workers or stunt our economic recovery. As we speak, I am working with colleagues on legislation to address the anticipated lawsuit bonanza. Let me be clear. Not all lawsuits are created equal. Without a doubt, there will be legitimate claims as a result of reckless wrongdoing in the wake of this pandemic. Those are the types of cases we want to make sure are heard. Last week, the Utah Daily Herald reported that one business required staff who tested positive for the COVID-19 to report to work anyway. Almost half of the business's employees tested positive. You don't have to be Perry Mason or Matlock--I realize I am dating myself here--to see that this is an egregious violation of Federal guidelines. There is no desire to impede the effort to hold bad actors accountable, period. That is my guiding principle. The problem is with the expected onslaught of frivolous claims, which will do nothing more than harm the very people already hurt by this virus. Just because a lawsuit is baseless doesn't mean it will be quick, easy, or cheap to resolve, and we can't put our healthcare workers in a situation where, after battling this virus for months on end, they then have to battle a false claim in court. Future legislation should include liability protections for our frontline workers and small businesses that are complying with the very government regulations designed to protect against the spread of the virus. More than a dozen Governors have already provided liability protections to healthcare workers, but we can't just depend on the States to uphold these protections. We can't wait for the dam to break. Congress must act to provide the shield for the healthcare workers who have done everything in their power to save lives during this unprecedented crisis. Again, to state the obvious, this would not interfere with liability for intentional or grossly negligent conduct. As I said before, no one wants to put a stop to meritorious lawsuits. We want to prevent baseless claims from tying up our courts, destroying jobs, and holding our economy hostage. There are several ways to accomplish this, but we need to focus on a solution that provides clarity for our businesses and prevents gamesmanship in the courts. Michael Krauss is a law professor at George Mason University who specializes in tort law. He has pointed out that employees can get workers' compensation benefits if they become sick or disabled on the job. In other words, employees will be covered by existing workers' compensation laws. We are talking about third-party claims, not employees. Defending lawsuits, no matter how far-fetched, is expensive, and litigation costs alone can make the difference between the destruction and survival of a business. Professor Krauss said that in his opinion, the ideal statute would say: ``If you do the following, you may not be sued.'' He said that could include a list of requirements, like wearing masks. There could be specific regulations for restaurants, meatpackers, or other industries. Any liability limitations will only protect the individuals and companies that comply with Federal guidelines and seek to keep their workers and the public safe. My colleagues and I have been in discussions about the best way to do this, and we are actively developing a proposal that I hope will gain bipartisan support. There are fair and reasonable ways to deal with this. We have seen this before. This is not a novel concept. Whether it is the response to the Y2K paranoia around the turn of the century or the attacks of 9/11, there are many more examples where Congress has, on a bipartisan basis, responded to a national emergency and provided these sorts of commonsense legal protections. As we continue to work to support the American people during the crisis we are facing today, we can't ignore the onslaught of lawsuits that could soon bankrupt small businesses and strangle our recovering economy. Congress must act to ensure America doesn't wake up from this pandemic only to find itself in a legal nightmare that we could have and should have prevented I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the coronavirus has challenged our country--indeed, the entire planet--like few crises before, certainly in my lifetime. I was part of the post World War II generation. No doubt, world war presented the preeminent crisis within memory. It was, I think, 1917 and 1918 when the Great Influenza hit the planet and tens of millions of people died in that. When this virus began spreading, it became clear it would place a severe strain on our hospitals and healthcare providers. As businesses closed their doors and employees lost their jobs, it was obvious it would take a toll on the incredible economy we had in this country. It is like it fell off a cliff. The combination of new stresses brought on by this virus have led to a range of lesser-known but no less severe consequences. Earlier this week, I spoke about the impact the coronavirus is having on our country's mental health. As our lives have been flipped upside down, many Americans are facing financial struggles, isolation, and anxiety. For those who have children at home, the challenges are compounded even further. A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation disclosed that nearly half of Americans polled reported that the coronavirus was having a negative impact on their mental health. That is up from one- third in March, and it is not surprising. When we talk about the resources that we need to overcome this crisis, the relationship between the coronavirus and America's mental health cannot be ignored. Beyond the silent impact these stresses are having on individuals, they can quickly lead to violence in relationships. We have learned that, in a time of crisis, the frequency and severity of domestic violence incidents are likely to increase. Texas experienced the heartbreaking reality of that trend in post Hurricane Harvey, and we are seeing it again now Last month, I participated in a virtual roundtable with representatives from the Texas Council on Family Violence, the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, and more than a dozen other organizations across my State that support survivors of domestic violence. We discussed these stresses and how they are impacting victims and the barriers that are being created that make it harder for these organizations and people of good will to provide support. One of these representatives was the CEO of the Houston Area Women's Center, Emily Whitehurst. Houston is the hardest hit area in our State, with about 7,000 cases in Harris County alone. Emily said that, in the early stages of the virus spreading, they weren't sure whether they would see an increase in calls, given that stay-at-home orders meant people would be isolated with their abusers, but they soon found out the answer. In early April, the Houston Area Women's Center saw a 40-percent increase in the daily calls to their hotline. Compared to the same time last year, there was nearly a 50-percent increase in requests for shelter. Many of these organizations are already operating on a tight budget and working to make sure every dollar goes as far as possible. As the need goes up, the advocates and organizations who support survivors are trying to do more and more with less and less. I was able to discuss the provisions of the CARES Act that we passed on March 25, I believe it was, and that was signed into law shortly thereafter with the provisions we made to try to offer some assistance. For example, it provided $45 million for programs funded by the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. These support a range of services, such as emergency housing for domestic violence survivors and their children. At a time when victims are isolated with their abuser and cut off from support that they may otherwise have, these services are essential. Our legislation also sent more funding to the National Domestic Hotline, which is based in Austin, TX, so it can continue to provide support and resources to victims as the need expands. As good as this funding was, it was nothing but a start, and our efforts cannot end there. One of the big needs that I discussed on my virtual meeting with various organizations was the need for flexibility for funding. Organizations are required to match Federal funds they receive with State or privately raised dollars, but during this time of increased need, that administrative barrier turned into a major roadblock. In order to provide immediate relief so these groups can continue their lifesaving work, last month, Governor Greg Abbott, the Governor of Texas, waived this match requirement. This gives organizations the ability to use the funding that they have for other purposes to fulfill their greatest needs. Right now, one of the most urgent needs is access to safe housing. If you think about it, if you are stuck in an apartment with somebody who has abused you in the past, perhaps the danger is greater because there is no money coming in the front door and maybe increased alcohol abuse. It is easy to see how the biggest need would be a safe place to go. Victims can't move on from their abusers without a safe alternative to turn to, so it is important that we make access to shelters and housing as easy as possible. Even before the coronavirus outbreak, I introduced a bipartisan bill called the HEALS Act to help improve victims' access to housing and the services they need. It prioritizes funding for transitional housing and increases the ability to stay in that housing for victims to get back on their feet. It also directs the Department of Housing and Urban Development to further plan on how best to support victims of domestic violence. As the Senate considers additional legislation in response to the coronavirus, we cannot lose sight of these lesser-known consequences of the pandemic. We need to continue to support and prioritize resources for survivors, and one of the most critical ways we can do that is by taking action on another piece of legislation called the Violence Against Women Act. For more than 25 years, VAWA, as it is known, has been at the forefront of our ability to support victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, and until recently, it remained high above the political fray. The first three times the program came up for reauthorization, there were certainly some disagreements. That is normal, but we were able to finally pull together and reach a compromise. Unfortunately, that did not prove to be the case this time. When the time came to once again reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act last year, our friends across the aisle attempted to use this must-pass piece of legislation to score some political points. Amid the gamesmanship, VAWA expired. As someone who has been long interested in victims' rights, I am an ardent supporter of our efforts to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, and I have constantly fought not only to continue but to strengthen this program. That is why I am proud to have cosponsored the reauthorization bill introduced by our friend and colleague, Senator Ernst from Iowa, which would provide greater funding and stability for this program at a time when both are desperately needed. The Violence Against Women Act has guided our Nation's effort to confront domestic violence and sexual assault for more than a quarter of a century. The current crisis has highlighted the serious need for additional support. I am proud of the fact that, despite some of the normal dust-ups and squabbles and disagreements here, we have largely been able to act as one with passing legislation unanimously here in the Senate--the CARES Act--and to pass other legislation to provide aid to small businesses by unanimous consent. I would hope the spirit that moved us to act in unison before in response to this coronavirus would cause us to do the same when it comes to reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. There is a time for politics. There is a time for policy debates and differences, but when it comes to reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, this is not that time. I can only hope that all of our colleagues will respond to the better angels of our nature, particularly this time of crisis when there are so many people in danger of domestic violence that we could pass the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization as soon as possible. I think there is more we can do and should be doing to support victims of domestic violence. I know our colleagues across the aisle feel the same way. This should be a nonpartisan endeavor. In our efforts to strengthen our Nation's response to the coronavirus and support those harmed in its wake, as we are doing that, we cannot allow victims of domestic violence and sexual assault to be left behind. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, like other Senators, around this time of the year, I am used to being with folks from home who are traveling to Washington, DC. Between spring break trips and industry fly-ins, spring is normally a very busy season here at the Capitol. I always look forward to seeing both new and familiar faces and spending time with my constituents and talking about the challenges they are facing and the changes they would like to see coming out of Congress. Yet, as we all know, this is not a typical springtime in Washington. Normally busy sidewalks and hallways are largely empty, as our constituents hunker down at home while we continue working to get them the help they need. Just as Texans have adopted new routines to meet social distancing requirements, so have I, as have all of us. I know I am not alone among my colleagues when I say that over the last few weeks, I have logged some serious hours on phone calls and video conferences with folks across Texas. Actually, I have been a little bit surprised at how efficient it is in terms of reaching large numbers of people, and I think it will probably change some of the ways we work here and some of the ways we act with our constituents here in the future. I spoke with those in the medical field about the ongoing challenges to our frontline healthcare workers, the progress toward developing a vaccine, antibody tests, and the like. I have talked with the Texas Farm Bureau, our farmers and ranchers, our grocery store workers, and our food bank employees about the need to make sure that all Texans can access the food they need, especially during a time like this. I have talked with mayors, county judges, and other leaders in our communities about the work they are doing. I was listening to our friend and colleague from Connecticut who believes that the response needs to be coming out of Washington and that we all need to simply fall in line according to the dictates of the national government. Well, it raises interesting questions about the Constitutional Convention and the agreement to have a Federal system, not a national system. We have sovereign States that have their own sphere of responsibility. Our cities and counties are best able, in my view, to respond to local conditions. Rather than a command and control response, what we have had in Texas and I dare say in most other places has been a collaborative approach. Working with the national government to provide the resources and some of the guidance is very important. But our Governors, who control the National Guard, which has come out to help do testing, help stock food banks, and help build temporary hospital facilities, and our mayors and county judges and local officials have really done an outstanding job. I am very proud of the work they have done. We haven't just taken orders on high from the Federal Government; we worked together, hand in glove, with the Federal Government. Of course, I talked to countless small business owners across our big cities and small towns and everywhere in between about the financial strain caused by the pandemic, and it is significant, to say the least. Many, of course, were forced to close their doors or dramatically scale back their operations, and many have had to make hard decisions to stay afloat. I was just emailing with a friend of mine in Dallas who has ownership in a company that just declared chapter 11 bankruptcy. Our small businesses are the heart and soul of our communities. They are our favorite locally owned restaurants; the florists we call upon on anniversaries, birthdays, and other holidays; the drycleaners, the barbershops, the gyms, the pharmacies--all the places we have been going for years. They feel like an extended part of our family. They are part of what make our communities unique, and they are a huge driver of our economy. In Texas and across the country, small businesses employ nearly 50 percent of the local workforce. For many of these workers, the closures and cancellations brought on by the coronavirus have put their livelihoods in jeopardy, with many losing some or all of their income and many, their jobs entirely. As the Senate was working on our third response package back in March, we knew that without a serious investment in our small businesses, the result would be catastrophic. That is why we created the Paycheck Protection Program through the CARES Act to provide cash flow assistance for our small businesses. As we know, those low- interest loans can be used to cover everything from payroll, to supply chain disruptions, to rent or mortgage. And if the employers are able-- I underline the word ``able''--if they are able to keep their employees on the payroll until June, then much of those loans can be turned into grants. During my calls and video conferences with chambers of commerce and small business owners throughout Texas, I have been able to talk about the benefits of these loans and how to access them. Small Business Administration staff have joined me on dozens of these calls to answer technical questions about the loan program and other types of assistance offered by the SBA, which has been really valuable and appreciated by everyone. Small businesses in my State have jumped at the opportunity to take advantage of the PPP loans and start talking with their banks and gathering up paperwork and going through the formal application process. As we know now, it became quickly obvious how popular the PPP program was and that it would exceed the funding levels after 2 weeks. That indicates the kind of demand and the kind of need and that our response was actually hitting the target. But after 2 weeks, the first $350 billion was exhausted and depleted. From that first $350 billion, 135,000 small businesses in Texas received loans--more than any other State. That program brought approximately $28.5 billion to Texas small businesses and protected thousands of jobs. Well, we know, after a little bit of jockeying back and forth with the House, Congress finally replenished the Paycheck Protection Program with an additional $320 billion, and that money is flying out the door as we speak. You don't have to look far to see why this program is so popular. Valerie Gonzalez-Handly owns Delicious Tamales in my hometown of San Antonio. Like other restaurants across the country, her business struggled as the stay-at-home orders were put in place. Delicious Tamales closed for 2 weeks last month but was able to reopen because of the $232,000 loan they received through the Paycheck Protection Program. All 38 employees returned to work. Valerie called the Paycheck Protection Program a ``life saver.'' For patients at a clinic in Tyler, TX--another PPP loan recipient-- these loans could be a literal life saver. Bethesda Health Clinic provides healthcare services to low-income and uninsured Texans in the Tyler area. The clinic doesn't receive State or Federal funding, and one-third of their budget comes from the Hangers of Hope thrift stores they operate, which were forced to close. The clinic had to furlough their employees in order to survive the financial squeeze but was able to take advantage of the Paycheck Protection Program. Krysti McWha is the chief financial and operations officer, and she said this has erased a lot of worry for the clinic and allowed the furloughed employees to return to work. It has also enabled them to continue to serve the public during a time of heightened healthcare concerns. The Paycheck Protection Program has been vital to Texas small businesses and I dare say to the Nation's small businesses. I am glad Congress, working together as we should during a time of national emergency, was able to provide this lifeline and replenish these funds when they ran dry. That is not to say, though, that this program has been implemented without a hitch. When you do something this big and this fast, there are bound to be some hiccups. We expected there would be these small holes and gaps in what was needed, and over the last few weeks, those have become pretty clear. One of those issues is the tax deductible expenses for the businesses that take advantage of these loans. Businesses are normally able to deduct wages and other business expenses from their taxable income, but the notice issued by the IRS said small businesses cannot deduct these expenses, which is exactly the opposite of what we intended to do. Just to give an idea of how harmful this could be, if a small business's payroll during the 8-week period covered by a loan were $100,000, that amount could not be deducted as a business expense when they file their taxes. Our goal with this legislation was to help--not hurt--to help small businesses remain solvent and keep their employees on the payroll so they can recover from this pandemic as soon as possible and be ready for what I hope is a v-shaped bounceback in our economy once we defeat this virus. We certainly didn't intend to make next year's tax season a nightmare or to add to the burdens of these small businesses. Yet, based on the IRS's guidance, that is the path we are headed down. We have to right this wrong. Yesterday, I introduced the bipartisan Small Business Expense Protection Act with the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee, Senator Grassley and Senator Wyden, along with Senator Rubio, who chairs the Small Business Committee, and Senator Carper, who serves, as I do, on the Finance Committee. This legislation will clarify that small businesses can still deduct expenses that were paid for with a forgiven paycheck protection loan from their taxes. Without this clarification, small businesses will be up the creek without a paddle when they file their taxes next year. This program was created to reduce the financial barriers our small businesses are trying to overcome, not to add more. This bipartisan bill has already received support of the American Institute of CPAs-- certified public accountants--and is critical to ensuring America's small businesses receive the full benefits intended by Congress in the Paycheck Protection Program. As we continue to provide relief for America's workers and small businesses, it is critical that this fix be included. Texas small businesses saw the Paycheck Protection Program as a lifeline during this incredibly challenging time. Let's not make them regret grabbing ahold of it.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I have 5 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They, have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 06, 2020, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, May 05, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 06, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 06, 2020, at 2 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 06, 2020, at 2 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the nomination of Justin R. Walker, to be United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, let me join our friend and my friend, the Senator from South Dakota, and say that I am glad to be back in this Chamber doing the work of 29 million Texans. I see the Presiding Officer and my partner, my fellow Senator from Texas, joining us as well. I was listening closely to the Senator from South Dakota's recitation of all the things we have to do. There is no shortage of work for us to do, and there is no reason for us to continue to curl up in a fetal position in some undisclosed location and be afraid to go outdoors. The fact is, the experts at the Centers for Disease Control, people like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, whom we have seen on TV on a nightly basis, tell us what we need to do in order to function safely. It is the same thing that our grocery clerks and our doctors and nurses and, frankly, our law enforcement personnel are doing. We know how to do this and how to do it safely. At the same time, we simply cannot hide out and not show up for work. What kind of message does that send to the American people? We know this is an extraordinary crisis, an unprecedented crisis, and we have done some things we would never consider doing under normal times--appropriating more than $3 trillion at warp speed. I, frankly, think it is a good time for us to tap the brakes and to consider what it is we have already done and where we need to make some corrections. Anytime you do anything this big and this fast, you are going to make some mistakes. We have seen that, and there have been corrections both in terms of the way the Treasury is administering the program, but also we have heard about gaps. For example, I have done a number of video conferences with our chambers of commerce around the country, and they ask me: Why did you leave the chambers out of the support under the Paycheck Protection Program for nonprofits? I, frankly, don't have a good answer for that. I said that is something we need to go back and fix. If we can't do it by Treasury guidance, then we need to do it by future legislation. I have no doubt we will continue to legislate, but we need to do it smartly. We need to be here in person so we can have the interaction and deliberation and debates that are so important to coming up with a good product. We have done some pretty extraordinary work in the last 6 weeks or so. Both Chambers have come together and quickly passed four separate pieces of legislation to strengthen our response to the coronavirus. We sent vital funding to our hospitals. Ironically, at a time when our hospitals were the frontline of defense dealing with people with COVID-19, many of them were laying off employees because we had asked them to forgo elective surgery, which is one of the ways that they end up paying the bills. Then we learned, in the global competition for personal protective equipment, literally every mayor, every Governor, every President, every leader of every country around the world was in a global rush to try to come up with personal protective equipment. One of the things I have told my constituents and friends that I think we have learned is we can't depend on China and on these uncertain supply chains for things as important as personal protective equipment--or pharmaceuticals, for that matter. So these are some of the lessons and some of the feedback we have gotten as we have interacted with our constituents. We know that testing has gotten much more widespread, and we have made tremendous advances in terms of treatment with all the clinical trials that are underway--well over 70 of them--and now the hope of a vaccine, hopefully sooner rather than later. Once we get a vaccine, then hopefully this will be relegated to the same status as the seasonal flu, for which we typically do have a vaccine, so the particularly vulnerable individuals--the elderly, people with underlying chronic disease--can be protected first and foremost. We also sent funding to our State and local Governors: $150 billion. Now, we have all talked to our mayors and our county judges--in Texas, that is what we call our county leaders--and Governors. Obviously, the sales tax revenue has fallen off a cliff because there is not much business going on in our retail stores, to be sure, although there is a lot going on online with deliveries and those sorts of orders. But we know our State and local governments provide for law enforcement and other essential services, so we felt it was important to throw them a lifeline, too, to help them meet their budgets and maintain those vital services. Perhaps the most ambitious and the most popular thing we did is to try to help our small businesses stay afloat through the Paycheck Protection Program. Obviously, this was successful--or it is certainly popular in that $350 billion was spent in 2 weeks. Then we had to come back and replenish that with another $320 billion. But we know that money is flying out of our local community banks and credit unions, helping small businesses keep their employees on the payroll. And, if they do that, then this low-interest loan will turn into a grant. The goal, of course, is, once we defeat this virus--as we will--we will then be in a position for those businesses to bring their employees back, if they have furloughed them, to help us build out of this recession in which we are currently involved. We also provided critical funding for our farmers and ranchers and other producers so they can keep our country fed. We have taken unprecedented steps to minimize the impact of this virus on the American people and our economy and tried to provide some modicum of certainty amid so much uncertainty. I don't think there is a single event in my lifetime that rivals the breadth and depth of the crisis that we have reached. Certainly, 9/11 was a different type of crisis. The 2008 great recession--with the meltdown of the banks on Wall Street and the great recession, those were significant events to be sure, but nothing quite has rivaled what the coronavirus has done to our public health and to our economy. The cascading consequences of this virus have reached every community, every sector of our economy, and every corner of the globe. Every single American has experienced some sort of shift in their daily routine as a result of the virus. Maybe ``shift'' is too tentative a word. Actually, many of us have had our lives turned on their head. For some, the changes were very significant. Think about those who contracted the virus, the loved ones who couldn't be at their side, the healthcare workers who were there and are helping them, those who are sick. Then there are billions of Americans who have lost their jobs, small business owners wondering whether they are going to cease to exist and whether they can survive this current crisis, and then the farmers seeing a glut of supply and reduced demand. Now, many people have been able to safely work from home, and that is wonderful, but often they end up pulling double duty as teachers for their children with the schools having been closed, and others have continued heading out to work every day to keep the cogs of our society running--so-called essential workers. By the way, I really don't like the designation between essential and nonessential. I think, really, what we ought to call it is safe and unsafe because all workers are, I believe, essential. In ways big and small, this virus has affected everybody in this country. While we must continue working to slow the spread and reduce the economic impact, we cannot ignore the profound human impact it has had. Many people have been isolated under very difficult circumstances, not knowing whether they will still have a job to go back to. Many are living with the uncertainty of this pandemic, perhaps in a crowded house or apartment with children, maybe elderly parents and others, cut off from the rest of society. It is no secret that this pandemic is taking a toll on America's mental health. Last weekend, the family of a New York City emergency room doctor released some devastating news. Dr. Lorna Breen had been in the trenches battling this virus for weeks. She was working long hours, as many of our healthcare providers are, and told her family about the devastation that she was seeing every day. She contracted COVID-19 and took a week and a half off to recover, but then she went back to work, eager to help where she could. Shortly after, Dr. Breen's family intervened and brought her home to Charlottesville, VA, to rest and to spend a little time with her family and for R&R. Sadly, tragically, the struggles Dr. Breen was facing felt untenable. After overcoming COVID-19, she ultimately took her own life by suicide. Dr. Breen was a hero who devoted her entire life to caring for others, to putting others before herself. While her tragic death cannot be reversed, it should serve as a warning signal about the broader impact of this virus. In a recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly half of Americans reported that coronavirus is having a negative impact on their mental health--one-half. That is up from one-third in March. The number of texts to the Federal Disaster Distress Helpline skyrocketed in April--more than a 1,000-percent increase. As we continue to discuss what future coronavirus legislation could look like, we cannot ignore the mental health impact. Nationwide, we rely on the community mental health centers and community behavioral health organizations to support those battling mental health and substance abuse disorders. As the need for these services has increased, resources have actually decreased. More than 90 percent of the community behavioral health organizations nationwide have been forced to reduce their operations--reduce their operations at a time of increased need and demand--and more than 60 percent of behavioral health organizations project they can't survive financially for more than 3 months under the current COVID-19 conditions. Congress tried to do something to help. We provided $175 billion for the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund to support healthcare providers on the frontlines of this crisis. As this funding is being distributed, mental health providers cannot be forgotten. Along with 24 of our colleagues, Senator Stabenow and I have sent a letter to Secretary Azar and Administrator Verma, urging them to quickly allocate this funding and ensure that these mental health organizations are included. Not only do they provide vital care and support for individuals struggling with mental health issues; they also are key to fighting addiction and substance abuse Those struggling to overcome addiction are often living in a fragile state, fighting each day to stay the course, but the current circumstances have made those daily battles much more difficult. They are isolated from their friends and loved ones, and they are dealing with the anxiety caused by the virus and possibly--probably--facing financial struggles. The new stressors brought on by this virus are compounded by reduced capacity for treatment. In-person support meetings are canceled, treatment clinics and counselors are curtailing appointments, and the barriers to overcoming addiction loom even larger. For those individuals, treatment cannot simply be delayed. Our country has made serious inroads in our battle against the opioid epidemic. In 2018, overdose deaths were down 4 percent from the previous year, the first decrease in nearly three decades. We can't let the coronavirus derail the progress we have fought so hard to make. The CARES Act--I am glad to say--does expand access to telehealth. I think many Americans are experiencing the benefits of telehealth, and I predict at some point this will change a lot of the ways that we receive consultation by healthcare providers: not having to drive our car and make appointments, pay for parking, spend a lot of time out of our day. We can simply do it through video conference, conveniently and effectively. But more must be done to support those battling addiction and mental health challenges. For those who are transitioning from the criminal justice system, the need for additional resources and support is especially dire. Earlier this year, Senator Blumenthal and I introduced the Crisis Stabilization and Community Reentry Act to support those who have been a part of the criminal justice system and to provide stable treatment for those with mental illness. Most prisoners who are receiving treatment for a mental health or a substance use disorder are released without a plan to keep them on their regimen. This often leads to higher recidivism rates, unsurprisingly, which could be avoided. It also means that law enforcement is, all too often, left to be the first responders for those suffering a mental health crisis, which can escalate those confrontations and put both the officer and the individual in that crisis at risk. This bill creates grants to connect law enforcement, State and local, and community resources to help individuals who are either engaged in the criminal justice system or have been released from prison and makes it possible for them to access the resources they need to have a successful reentry into civilized society. These grants connect those services to make sure that people suffering from an acute episode can access treatment without the risk of being reincarcerated. We are facing a battle unlike any we have seen in my lifetime, and the stress and the anxiety that come with it are taking a tremendous toll on the American people. It is not just the virus and the threat of catching the virus that are taking the toll. We need to look at this holistically and realize, if you are a victim of domestic violence and you are forced to be confined with your abuser and have nowhere else to go and maybe have no money coming in the front door, only to have your abuser abusing alcohol and perhaps becoming even more violent--there are a whole catalog of problems associated with this virus and the virus itself, the risk of infection being just one, and we need to look at this holistically. As our discussions continue this week on how to support the American people during this unprecedented time, resources for mental health and substance abuse treatment providers cannot fall by the wayside. (Mr. CRUZ assumed the Chair.)

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. today. Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:18 p.m., recessed until 2:17 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mrs. Capito).

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, the Senate was gaveled out about 6 weeks ago now. We passed the $2.2 trillion CARES Act on March 25, and here it is May 4. Since that time, the global battle to defeat the coronavirus has only intensified. There have been some who questioned the wisdom of the Senate coming back to Washington and convening, but I think we need to be here, and we need to do our jobs. We know how to do this safely. We know how to social distance. We know how to wash our hands and not touch our face. Those are the responsibilities each of us bear to one another not to spread this virus. But if there is such a thing as essential and nonessential workers-- and I don't think that distinction is one we should discuss because 26 million Americans are not nonessential workers; they are absolutely essential to our economy and to our way of life. But, make no mistake, self-government is essential under any construction, under any definition of that word. Our system was not made to run on autopilot, so it is appropriate that we show up and that we do our job and we protect the American people and do everything we can to defeat this virus from a public health standpoint but also to do what is necessary to maintain a lifeline to the economy and the workers who are an essential component of it so that, when we defeat this virus, we will be prepared for people to go back to work in full and keep our economy and jobs growing again. We know that about 3.5 million cases have been confirmed worldwide, and roughly a third of these cases are here in the United States. Tragically, we have lost 65,000 Americans to this cruel virus, but, heroically, our healthcare workers have been on the job each and every day--like law enforcement and grocery clerks--doing their part to help provide us the healthcare, the law enforcement, and the food that is feeding our families. We know, for weeks on end, our doctors and nurses and first responders have put themselves in harm's way to save the lives of those who have been affected by COVID-19. They are offering more than lifesaving care. These men and women are a hand to hold, a friendly voice, and a source of comfort to patients isolated from friends and family because of this cruel disease. Our heroic healthcare workers are physically and mentally exhausted from this fight. Yet they continue to serve, day in and day out. I want to express my gratitude, and I know I speak for others when I say thank you for the heart that you have put into your job and for the sacrifices you have made, spending time away from your families so that you can help ours. At the same time, we are seeing tremendous progress in a race to develop both treatments and a vaccine. While there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about how this story ends, I know a lot of work remains to be done. In addition to the physical toll this virus has taken on the American people, it has wreaked economic havoc In order to slow the spread of the coronavirus, stores and restaurants have closed their doors, travel plans have been abandoned, events have been canceled, and millions of Americans were suddenly without a way to earn a living. In the past 6 weeks, 30 million Americans have filed for unemployment--an absolutely staggering figure. So far, Congress has passed four separate bills to address this crisis from a public health standpoint as well as to ease its economic impact. We have provided billions of dollars in funding to support our hospitals, increase testing capacity, and ramp up the production and acquisition of the personal protective equipment our medical workers rely upon as well as the ventilators that many of the COVID-19 patients will need. We have provided unprecedented assistance for America's small businesses, which employ about half of America's workers. The Paycheck Protection Program has enabled small businesses to keep their employees on the payroll and cover expenses until the smoke clears. We have also sent vital funding to our State and local governments-- about $150 billion. We provided relief to student loan borrowers and sent financial assistance to the American people in the form of direct payments from the IRS. Members of Congress came together to act quickly and decisively to address this pandemic, and I am very proud of the work that we have done together so far. Over the past several weeks, like every Senator, I have had the privilege of speaking with my constituents all across the State of Texas about the impact of this virus as well as Congress's response. I have spoken to doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators about the strain on the personnel and the need for personal protective equipment. I have talked to small business owners across the State about their growing list of expenses and the lifeline that the PPE provided. I have listened to our mayors and county judges, from our biggest cities and smallest towns, who have talked about the mounting financial burdens they are facing. I have talked with our farmers and ranchers about the impact on everything from cattle to cotton and the need to protect our food supply chain. I am grateful for the men and women I have spoken with who have shared their perspective and feedback about Congress's response to the coronavirus. Anytime a piece of legislation moves this quickly, as these bills did, and are this big, there are bound to be gaps that need to be filled, mistakes that need to be corrected, tweaks that need to be applied. The Texans to whom I have spoken over these past several weeks have pointed out some of those gaps and provided ideas for the discussions we are now having about what comes next. A few weeks ago, I spoke with representatives from the Texas Council on Family Violence, the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, and more than a dozen organizations across the State that support survivors of domestic violence. When you think about the impact of the pandemic or any other major crisis, for that matter, domestic violence isn't typically one of the first issues that comes to mind, but the circumstances we are facing today make these cases all too common. People are spending more time isolated at home. They are dealing with a new range of stresses brought on by this virus--more time with their partner, financial struggles, teaching their children at home--and it is taking a devastating toll. When Texas's stay-at-home order was first announced, many organizations saw a spike in their hotline calls. What is more frightening, once these orders were in place, the number of calls took a sharp decline. In Tarrant County, which is where Fort Worth is located, call numbers dropped by almost half. With so much time isolated at home with an abuser, it may be more difficult to reach out to friends or family or contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline for assistance. When deciding whether to leave, to go to a shelter, there is also the risk of the virus itself, and many are faced with a lose-lose scenario: Do you continue living under the same roof as your abuser or do you go to a shelter where you or your children may come in contact with the virus? These are not the only silent victims of this crisis. The fear and anxiety brought on by this pandemic has taken a toll on America's mental health. Most of us have never gone through something like this. Maybe none of us has gone through something quite like this. Our daily routines have been turned on their head. Isolated from friends and family and between social media and a 24-hour news cycle, it can be difficult to find a way to escape the constant barrage of bad news and anxiety. Compounding the problem even further is the financial strain on many of the providers who support these individuals. A recent survey of providers by the National Council for Behavioral Health showed that more than 60 percent of mental health providers have already been forced to close one or more programs--60 percent--and 62 percent of providers cannot survive more than 3 months without emergency financial assistance. As we continue working to help the American people through this difficult time, we cannot forget those who are suffering in silence. We have a big job ahead of us. That is why it is so important that we are here doing our job on behalf of the 330 million people in this country. I returned back to the Senate with a long list of ideas and feedback from the Texans who have been generous enough to spend time talking with me over the past few weeks. I know all 100 Members of the Senate are in a similar position, and I hope we can retain the same sense of bipartisanship that has guided us through the legislation we have passed so far. If we are going to win this fight--and we will--it will not be because of a Republican idea or a Democratic one; it will be because every single person in this Chamber checked their political priorities at the door and responded together--united--to confront and defeat this virus and to help restore our economy and the jobs that go along with it. We have done it before. Let's do it again. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, during times of disaster, crisis, or hardship, I never fail to be inspired by the generosity of Americans, including the folks in my home State of Texas. I think about how we came together in the wake of Hurricane Harvey to lead search and rescue operations, clear debris, and rebuild communities and lives. We saw strangers forming human chains to rescue a driver who was trapped in a car; restaurants offering free meals to first responders; and a Houston legend, known affectionately as Mattress Mack, opening his furniture stores for those who needed shelter. One volunteer said: I have met more of my neighbors in the last 24 hours than I have in the last 20 years. While these heartwarming stories of Texans' lending a hand to one another are a source of comfort even during the toughest of times, right now, when extending a physical hand is one of the worst things you can do because it violates social distancing rules, there are still plenty of neighbors who are helping their neighbors. Folks in Texas, like around the country, are staying home to keep themselves and their neighbors safe, and we are seeing new and creative means of supporting one another. For example, a number of distilleries across the State have switched their productions from making vodka or whiskey to making hand sanitizer. With demand surging and hand sanitizer in short supply, more and more hospitals are struggling to keep it in stock, and these distilleries are stepping up to fill the void. Jonathan Likarish is the head distiller and cofounder of the Ironroot Republic Distillery in Denison, TX. He said they received a call from the Texoma Medical Center and was asked if he could help. Of course, he said yes. Businesses like his aren't alone. Beloved Texas grocery chain H-E-B has taken steps to make shopping easier for seniors who are the most at risk if they contract the coronavirus. H-E-B has partnered with Favor Delivery to take grocery delivery--a service many Americans already utilize--and has made it more accessible to seniors. They can pick up the phone, place their orders, and have everything they need delivered to their front doors within a few hours--all without having to leave home. We have also seen other organizations working to adapt to these challenging circumstances. The Boys & Girls Club of Greater Houston has partnered with the Houston Food Bank to open a drive-through pantry. Families can get a whole week's worth of healthy meals without ever having to step out of their cars. Of course, it is not just the businesses and organizations that are helping out. People are helping other people. People are donating blood to alleviate the critical shortages that hospitals are facing. All of us, if we can, should consider donating blood. People are leaving notes in neighbors' mailboxes, offering to run errands and pick up supplies. On social media, schoolteachers who are at home are offering to help parents with their children's math, science, or other subjects they may be struggling to teach their kids while the kids are at home and not at school. There are neighbors helping neighbors, friends helping strangers, and Texans helping Texans. That is one thing I love about this great country. Our communities always jump into action to help in any way they can. They do what it takes to survive a crisis and to keep one another safe and healthy until we emerge on the other side. It is time for the Senate to do its part. There has been no event in my lifetime that has had this big of an impact on the physical and economic health of our country. Every day, we learn about more new cases, rising unemployment, and unprecedented market volatility. We have a responsibility to act and to act quickly in response to these dueling crises. Already we were able to work and send two bills to the President's desk for signature. The first sent vital support to healthcare professionals and first responders, who are doing everything they can to treat patients and prepare for more cases. We also provided initial funding for development of a vaccine, clinical trials, and more diagnostic tests. The second bill we passed focused more on the small businesses and the individual workers who are impacted economically. It included changes in unemployment insurance so that those who find themselves out of a job can promptly take advantage of these benefits, and it made paid sick and family leave available for workers impacted by the virus. That is what we did in these first two bills. Were they perfect? Well, no. The second bill, in particular, fell short in a number of areas. It was largely negotiated by Secretary of the Treasury Mnuchin and Speaker Pelosi, but we decided that, in the interest of the greater good and the country and the people who were hurting during this crisis, we in the Senate would pass it expeditiously. As the saying goes, you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We acted quickly to get both bills to the President's desk because the circumstances demanded it. Sadly, over the last few days, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been oblivious to the sense of urgency that every other American seems to understand. After the original, intense, bipartisan negotiations, we were finalizing a third relief bill, which included, by definition, ideas from both Republicans and Democrats. We were optimistic that we would be able to take up and pass the bill on Sunday or at least get it started and pass the bill on Monday, but, clearly, that didn't happen. Our Democratic colleagues blocked us from even debating the bill, not once but twice. The minority leader said the bill, which his Members had helped write, wasn't good enough. He spent the next 3 days trying to change the bill to include provisions that he thought were more important priorities during a national emergency--things like tax credits for solar panels and tighter emission standards for airlines, proposals that have absolutely nothing to do with this crisis. After a few incredulous days, America woke up to the news today that our Democratic colleagues are finally ready to stop this posturing and this obstruction and get this job done. After blocking this bill twice and holding up this emergency lifeline, here is what the minority leader claims as a victory: He says that Democrats expanded unemployment insurance to help laid-off workers and those who are self-employed. But as we all know, that was already part of the bill that had been negotiated between Democrats and Republicans. Then the minority leader said that Americans will get direct aid, but we have been talking about that for weeks. That was part of the bill that Democrats blocked twice. Let's be clear about this. Here we are, Members of the U.S. Congress, getting a paycheck, and they have the temerity to block, two times, emergency aid to people who have no income at all through no fault of their own? It is outrageous. Then the minority leader said that he secured unprecedented aid for America's hospitals, but as it turns out, that was part of the bill Democrats blocked twice. It was the subject of bipartisan negotiations and, we thought, consensus. Well, the bill that Democrats blocked twice was a bipartisan bill to begin with. Democrats and Republicans worked together and agreed to each of these points before the first votes were cast. The minority leader's Members had spent countless hours negotiating with Republicans--that is how you get things done--but then he singlehandedly tries to take credit for the work that they have done For days Democrats needlessly blocked a bill that would have bolstered our fight to defeat this virus and protected our economy in the process. I am absolutely angry that they chose to waste so much valuable time when there are so many different people in need. But I am also relieved that they finally agreed to quit playing their partisan games so that we could vote on this legislation today. This bill sends desperately needed funding to hospitals that are struggling to manage an influx of patients and helps fight the shortage of masks and other personal protective equipment--one of the priorities my Governor had mentioned to me. It provides the direct financial assistance that was already in the two bills that our Democratic colleagues blocked. A family of four will receive up to $3,400 under this legislation, which will go a long way in throwing that lifeline to them and cover their rent, groceries, electric bills, and other expenses until they can make other arrangements, like apply for unemployment insurance under our beefed-up provisions. This legislation will also provide relief for small businesses that are struggling to stay afloat. Many of these businesses have had to shut down because they have been ordered by the government to do so, and now they need some help to make sure that the jobs they currently provide will still be available when we get to the other side of this crisis, and particularly we need to make sure that the employees they depend on and will depend on in the future will still be there when they reopen their doors. With both the physical and economic health of our country in crisis, this bold legislation is our best path forward. I appreciate the work that has been done by so many around the clock for the better part of the past week to get this bill finally to the floor, and I look forward to supporting it so that my constituents--the 29 million people who call Texas home--will get help as soon as possible. As we prepare to pass this legislation and send it to the House, I urge them to act quickly. But you may recall it was Speaker Pelosi who flew back into town after a weeklong recess, dropped an 1,100-page bill, and made all these outrageous new demands, clearing out their partisan or ideological out-box or wish list. Well, incredibly, now that there has been an agreement here in the Senate with the administration, Speaker Pelosi hasn't even called the House back into session. As a matter of fact, they gaveled in session and out of session today, and they won't be back in session until tomorrow. Speaker Pelosi has a huge challenge. Unless she can get unanimous consent to pass a $2 trillion bill through the House, she may well have to call back into session the entire House of Representatives. With restricted flights because of a lack of demand and the cost cutting that airlines are going through with the concerns about people sheltering in place, maintaining social distance and good hygiene to stop the spread of this virus, Speaker Pelosi has created a terrible problem for herself. But, more importantly, she has created even more of a problem for the rest of the country because we need to get this passed out of the Senate today and out of the House and to the President as soon as possible. The American people are depending on us to respond responsibly in a bipartisan way during an emergency like this, and we cannot let them down.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, with every day that passes, the number of COVID-19, or coronavirus, cases continues to tick up, up, and up. A report by the World Health Organization last week noted that while it took more than 3 months to reach 100,000 cases worldwide, it took only 12 days to hit another 100,000. It doubled in 12 days. Now we know it took less than a week to add the next 100,000. Some of this is because of increased access to testing--something we knew we were not ramped up to do. More and more people are getting tested. That is good news. Those who have the virus can be isolated and treated, if necessary. Those who don't have the peace of mind knowing that they do not carry the disease and they can--by virtue of good personal hygiene and social distancing--remain healthy. But if we are going to have any success at slowing the trajectory of this virus and minimizing the economic harm, the time to act is now. The eyes of the Nation are upon us. They want to know if partisanship can be set aside in the face of a pandemic. They want us to know that partisanship is an indulgence we cannot afford. If you are trying to figure out the answer, let me recap what has happened in the Senate recently. For weeks, our Democratic colleagues agreed that this is indeed a crisis, that we need to act promptly and we need to shed our partisanship because our country can't wait. I agree. Our country is in dire need, and this is no time for politics as usual. Indeed, this has always been our custom. This has always been our instinct as Americans during crises like 9/11 and like the great recession of 2008. We would have every reason to expect that in the face of another national crisis, like the coronavirus, Democrats and Republicans would work together, but that has not been the case. We now need Republicans and Democrats to come together as we have in the past to deliver on our shared priorities to support our country during this unprecedented time. There is, in fact, broad bipartisan agreement about the result. We need to get relief directly from Washington to the American people as soon as possible. We need to provide small businesses with help so they can survive this storm and so that once the virus is defeated, they are still around to provide jobs to people they have now had to furlough or lay off. There seems to be broad bipartisan agreement that we need a freeze on student loan payments to provide peace of mind to tens of millions of borrowers. Employees who have been impacted by the virus should get support now, and they should have jobs to come back to later. Over the weekend, it seemed like we were making good progress. There had been negotiating between the parties, compromising. As of Sunday morning, it looked like we were just about there. Then the Speaker of the House and the minority leader of the Senate decided the crisis should not be wasted. They claimed all of a sudden that the deal was not good enough even though they themselves helped to write it. The Speaker in particular played a unique role in blowing this up. After sending the House home for a weeklong vacation, she flew back into town at the eleventh hour and laid waste to countless hours of bipartisan work. When the time came for a routine procedural vote in the Senate that would start the process of considering legislation and would have provided us even more time to debate it, Democrats--on a party line led by the Democratic leader--killed it dead in its tracks. It is hard to think of an appropriate metaphor during a time like this, but when our Nation is on fire, Democrats decided to shoot the tires on the firetruck that was going to put out the fire. In doing so, they fell in lockstep, in spite of the fact that many of them had helped negotiate the bill, and they flushed every ounce of progress we had made over the weekend down the drain. Less than 24 hours later, we held another routine procedural vote. Once again, Democrats, in lockstep, blocked us from even considering this bipartisan legislation, which has their fingerprints all over it. They claim they are still not happy with the text--or weren't at the time, anyway. Yet that claim clearly doesn't hold water. We continue to hear update after update with Senator Schumer saying: A deal is close. A deal is close. But with each hour--let alone day--that passes, the number of corona cases is rising. The number of people dead of this virus is rising. Our public health system is taking a beating. The minority leader's home State of New York is among the hardest hit. They now have 25,000 confirmed cases in New York, and the number of cases doubles every 3 days. You would think the Democratic leader would have a sense of urgency about getting help to his own constituents in New York. If there was any doubt that our friends on the other side of the aisle prioritize politics over the health and safety of their constituents, let me tell you about some of the changes they were after. The minority leader wanted to include in this legislation an expansion of tax credits for wind and solar energy. They wanted to give unprecedented authority to organized labor and to address fuel emission standards for airlines--none of which is relevant to the immediate crisis that is at hand. While these are normal topics that we would debate and vote on during normal times, they are not the sort of things that ought to occupy 1 minute of our time during this crisis. While doctors and nurses have bruises on their faces from wearing masks and goggles for 12-plus hours a day, this sideshow should not be part of the minority leader's priorities. Clearly, his goal was not to make the legislation better for healthcare professionals or the millions of workers who lost their jobs. He is trying to use this national emergency as an opportunity to enact dramatic liberal policy reforms that have nothing to do with this crisis. People are dying. Hospitals are overwhelmed. Small businesses have closed their doors, and workers have lost their jobs. The American people do not have time for his games. This virus is spreading at an exponential rate, and we can't afford to waste time fighting one another over these sorts of irrelevant partisan sideshows. I know under normal circumstances this kind of gamesmanship is part of the process, but now, in the face of this crisis, it is absolutely unconscionable. It is reckless and irresponsible. A pandemic has swept across the country with alarming speed. Our hospitals are in need of personal protective equipment, businesses have shut their doors, employees have been laid off, and people across the country wonder just how long they can survive at this pace. The bill we had last Sunday would have taken major steps to support our country during this crisis. It would have sent desperately needed funding to the hospitals that are struggling to manage a new influx of patients and helped fight the shortage of masks and other personal protective equipment. It would have provided direct financial assistance for middle-class families. A family of four would have received up to $3,400 to help cover rent, groceries, electric bills, and other expenses in the interim between being laid off and being able to qualify for unemployment compensation. We would have provided them a lifeline, and we still need to do it, and we need to do it now. This legislation, which we could have passed 2 days ago, would have delivered relief for small businesses that are struggling to stay afloat and ensured that their employees impacted by this coronavirus would be taken care of. What is more, those small businesses need to be able to continue to exist so that when we defeat this virus, people will actually have jobs to go back to. But our Democratic colleagues said that wasn't good enough. They chose to put their partisan political agenda ahead of the health and safety of the American people. So here we are with no end in sight. We keep reading reports from the minority leader and others saying: Well, the bill is on the 2-yard line. Well, you can have the distance and still never get across the goal. Yesterday, House Democrats released their own coronavirus package, which is really amazing in the face of this bipartisan-negotiated bill. Speaker Pelosi parachutes back into town after a weeklong vacation and drops an 1,100-page piece of a bill which includes a host of proposals that have absolutely nothing to do with solving this crisis. As I mentioned, this includes emissions mandates for airlines, tens of millions of dollars for the John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts, and early-voting and vote-by-mail requirements for every State across the country. This isn't a sincere effort to support our healthcare providers, workers, and small businesses; it is a naked attempt to use a public health emergency as a smoke screen for their radical agenda. Democrats' priority simply isn't solving the healthcare and economic crisis we are dealing with today. It is not. If it were, Senate Democrats would not have voted against a bipartisan relief bill two times already. And now House Democrats are flaunting a bill that does more to advance their agenda and does not solve the crisis at hand. We don't have time for more liberal virtue signaling. We need to act and act now. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I know there are a number of Senators here who wish to speak. So I will not be long. It makes me angry that we are here, talking about a bill that will not only help to defeat this virus but that will also put money in the hands of people who are wondering: How am I going to pay the rent? How am I going to buy groceries? How am I going to buy food for my children? We have our Democratic colleagues, who, on a party-line vote, blocked the very help for the people I am talking about. They are not worried about from where their next rent checks are coming or how they are going to pay their mortgages. They are getting paid. They are not worried about ending up like hourly workers or people who are working for tips, who are scared to death about how they are going to make ends meet. First of all, they are worried about getting sick. Secondly, if you work for a restaurant or a hotel or are in some other service industry--heck, if you work for an airline and have been furloughed and are wondering how you are going to make ends meet--it should make all of us angry that our Democratic colleagues are using this national emergency in order to leverage their ideological wish list. You have heard it talked about here many times, but let me just make a couple of points. In addition to having the money go to individuals, there is enhanced unemployment compensation because people don't know how long this is going to last, and they will need to be able to sustain themselves. There is the assistance to small businesses so they can maintain their payrolls, perhaps, and keep their businesses alive for the duration of this crisis. People want to know how they are going to make ends meet today. They want to make sure there will be jobs waiting for them after we get on the other side of this coronavirus. That is what our help for the small businesses is designed to do The third part, which really makes me angry, is to hear them talk about this bill as containing a slush fund for Big Business. In my State and in Senator Cruz's State, some of these businesses employ hundreds of thousands of people. I have never understood how you can claim to love the workers but hate the very person or the business that provides them with jobs. You can't separate those two. You need to have workers and those who have invested, who have created something, so they provide jobs. This ideological division is designed for no other purpose than to mislead people into thinking this is some sort of bailout. This isn't a bailout. What we are talking about are businesses that, through no fault of their own, are going to have to lay off workers and try to make sure that, when we get on the other side of this virus--when we beat this virus--there will be jobs still available so our economy can come roaring back, as it will do, unless we mishandle our work here. So I am angry, and I am frustrated. I am not the only one. I think about the mom and dad who are thinking: Hey, I work at a restaurant. The government shut the restaurant down. I don't have a paycheck. How am I going to provide for my family? It is our Democratic colleagues, by their complete and unequivocal devotion to their ideological agenda, who are basically turning their backs on them, our fellow citizens. This is not a time for us to engage in partisan division. This is a time for us to give help where help is needed as soon as we possibly can. As I said, I know the other Senators wish to speak. So I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, we are here on a Saturday, which is not typical for the U.S. Senate, but these are not typical times. More than a month before cases popped up in every State across the country, some of the first coronavirus patients who were evacuated from China arrived in San Antonio, TX. They were quarantined at Lackland Air Force Base and treated by the dedicated health professionals there. At that point, things looked a lot different. Outside of those evacuees, no Texans were known to have acquired the coronavirus, and, for the most part, the virus didn't impact people's daily lives. They would see updates on the news about the growing number of cases in China, read about the people being evacuated from cruise ships and other countries, but there was no evidence the disease was spreading through our communities. Schools were filled with children, restaurants with customers, and arenas with sports fans. But, as we know now, it didn't take long before the situation took a quick turn. Once new cases began popping up, it was clear that our communities were exposed. Over the last few weeks, the virus has spread across the country, and our health officials and community leaders have taken every precaution to keep their people safe. They have canceled in-person classes, emptied office buildings, called off large events, and encouraged folks to stay home and avoid close contact with others. On Thursday, in Texas, Governor Abbott issued an executive order adopting the standards set out by the President and the Centers for Disease Control to further slow the spread across the entire State. Among other measures, this executive order closed schools and required all restaurants, bars, and food courts to put a stop to dine-in options. They have to move to drive-through, carry-out, or delivery service only. Now, I believe these precautions are in the best interest of the public health. Certainly, we hope they don't have to last long, but they are necessary now, and I want to thank the Governor for taking these steps in the interest of public safety. As cities across the State and across the country have taken similar precautions, we have seen the economic consequences that these difficult decisions have brought about. Our local restaurants, hardware stores, and gyms don't have the money to keep paying their employees' wages and expenses without anything coming in the front door. Through no fault of their own, many of these businesses suddenly find themselves without customers to serve, but the bills are still coming in. Expenses continue to pile up--things like rent, utilities, and other things you can't avoid, even if you are not paying payroll. Then, there are the employees wondering how long they are going to have to be off the job and how long it will be before they are able to apply for unemployment compensation or otherwise pay for their expenses. This is different from any crisis since I have been in the Senate. I got here shortly after 9/11. We know what that was like. It was about a trillion-dollar hit to our economy. Obviously, it was a national security incident. Three thousand Americans were killed here in the United States, and that started the war on terror, which we have been fighting ever since. In 2008, we had the great economic meltdown on Wall Street because of all of these exotic mortgage products that the banking and the mortgage industry had created. We remember what happened there. Unfortunately, it became necessary for us to take extraordinary measures to help the very same industry that caused the problem back in 2008. As distasteful as that was, I believe it was in the best interest of the country and our ability to recover from that disaster. This is different. Nobody in this country caused this problem. We are all equal victims of this virus. So I think, as we look at how we should respond to this epidemic--or pandemic, as now it has been called because it is global in nature--we need to look at how we can target the help to the people who need it the most in order to bridge this gap between the lack of a paycheck and unavailability of unemployment insurance, and how do businesses, small and large, burn through their cash or reserves but still stay alive so that they can rehire the same people they have laid off once this crisis passes. What I am hoping happens is that, after this crisis passes, we learn some important lessons, things about the supply chain for our medication, supply chain for medical equipment and the like, and what we need to do to protect ourselves and the rest of the globe against pandemics like this, because there has been, in my lifetime, nothing quite like this in terms of the fear it has engendered and the reaction of both the markets and the economy--as well as the public health concerns. So we need to learn important lessons from that. In the interim, we need to do everything we can to lend a helping hand to those who need our help. The Senate has already passed two bills as part of what we all know will be a long recovery process. The first focused primarily on our public health system by sending vital funding to healthcare providers, investing in the development of vaccines, possible treatments, and more diagnostic tests. Something I hear from my Governor and our local officials, something they need the most and ask me about the most, is testing, so that, for people who develop symptoms, they can figure out whether this is the seasonal flu, allergies, something else, or is this the COVID-19 virus, because, if it is the COVID-19 virus, they need to be isolated, either at home under the watchful eye of their healthcare professional or, in some cases, if they become seriously ill, if their breathing becomes compromised, they need to go to the hospital. So the first bill focused primarily on the healthcare aspects. The second bill that was passed, signed by the President just a few days ago--I think it was on Thursday--focused more on the small businesses and individual workers who have been impacted. Of course, as we all know, we are now working on the third installment. We don't know how many installments will be required, how many chapters are in this book that we are in the process of writing, but we know that this is important, and it is important that we act with effectiveness but speed at the same time. This is the largest of the bills so far. We are talking about amounts of money that stagger my imagination, but I believe this emergency requires bold action to address this pandemic from every angle possible. As I said, once this passes, we need to learn the lessons that this virus is trying to teach us to make sure we never find ourselves in this sort of vulnerable position again. But, in the meantime, we have other work to do. As the leader has previously outlined, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act--the acronym is CARES Act--will take action on four major priorities We will see, for people who, through no fault of their own, don't have any money coming in, direct financial aid--something many of us never would have contemplated under nonemergency circumstances. We will see, of course, relief for the small businesses I mentioned, people like the restaurants, hotels, and others. They have no customers because their business is shut--again, not through any fault of their own but because, by order of their Governor or local government official, for public health purposes they are shut down. So we need to find some way to throw a lifeline to those small businesses. Then, I believe, for those large employers that hire tens or maybe hundreds of thousands and probably millions of Americans, we need to find a way to help them obtain loans that they will pay back, with interest, but that will bridge this period of time while they are burning cash and wondering: Will I still be around? Will I still be viable as a business once this crisis passes? What we need to have happen is, once we defeat this virus, we need to make sure that America goes back to work and our economy, which was incredibly strong until this virus hit, is restored. I am hopeful that some of the projections that we have seen by people like JPMorgan and others, which, unfortunately, show a dramatically negative impact of the virus during the first and second quarter, the second quarter probably being the worst--we need to make sure that this is a V-shaped recovery. In other words, when we hit bottom, we need to make sure our economy bounces back, and that means these businesses need to remain intact, and they need to be prepared to rehire their employees if they had laid them off. And we need to make sure that our economy is restored by a rapid recovery. That is why I think this bill is so important. Of course, the fourth is more support for our healthcare professionals. On the first point, direct aid, we know many workers have lost their jobs or had their hours seriously cut down. As we all know, that is especially true for the service and hospitality industries, which have been the hardest hit. Think about your local waiter, somebody working for tips, somebody working for an hourly wage--bartenders, hairdressers, housekeepers--the ones who, only a few weeks ago, had jobs and steady paychecks and are now without any income with which to sustain themselves or their families. They are wondering how they are going to pay the rent before the first of the month, cover their electric bill, buy groceries to feed their family, and keeps things afloat until life returns to normal. We are working to get that money into the hands of Texans and Americans who need help now, as fast and as efficiently and as effectively as possible--no paperwork to fill out, just direct aid from Washington to middle-class Americans. Again, it is something I never would have contemplated in a nonemergency situation, but I think, under this situation, we need to act quickly and we need to act effectively to get money into the hands of those who, through no fault of their own, don't have any money coming in. This can help cover expenses while their income is short, perhaps provide a little extra stability, and inject a little extra money into our economy when it is desperately needed. On small businesses other than the ones I have mentioned, I have heard from a number of them who are worried they will not be able to weather the storm without significant and immediate financial assistance in some form. Well, this legislation would provide new small business interruption loans through their local financial institutions--the banks, their credit unions. These businesses can turn to those banks and credit unions and whoever their preferred lender might be for a federally backed, Small Business Administration loan. Qualifying businesses can use this money to cover their rent, core expenses, and payroll. In fact, that is what we want them to do. We want them to continue to keep their employees on the payroll if they can so that, as soon as people start showing up again to patronize their business, we can see the economy take off as these people are restored to their former jobs. We are hoping to minimize the disruption that this virus will have for our Main Street businesses and do as much as possible to avoid layoffs. But we also need financial assistance--I would call it economic stabilization--for some of the largest employers in the country, including our airlines, that our economy depends upon. Now, I said ``loans'' because this money will be repaid. As to those people who claim that somehow we are bailing out large American corporations, that is not what we are proposing here. We are not giving companies a free pass for their own bad decisions. Again, nobody here in America contributed to this condition in which we find ourselves. That was the virus that emanated in Wuhan Province in China. But if we are going to have any chance of rebounding in the long term, we have to ensure that these businesses can survive. No American business, from your local sandwich shop to a major airline, asked for or expected this turmoil, and they need our support now. The final pillar of this bill will hit at the cause of this crisis: the virus itself. Supporting our healthcare professionals and first responders and ensuring that they have the resources and equipment they need is priority No. 1. We also need to continue investing in the development of a vaccine--although we know that will take months--in the interim, and possible treatments, including some of the drugs that are already on the market that are now being tested by the Food and Drug Administration to see whether this new application for combating the COVID-19 virus is effective and safe for people to take, and, of course, more testing and diagnostics. That is one of the things that distinguish America from the rest of the world on not only how resilient we are but how quickly we innovate our way out of problems. As the Presiding Officer knows, we were just at a meeting where Senator Alexander, the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, said that soon he anticipated a new, FDA-approved testing kit for the coronavirus that will be widely available. People who now can't get access to a test will be able to use the test based on advice from their medical provider and gain the confidence of knowing ``Hey, I am negative. I don't have anything to worry about personally, and what I need to do is to continue to do what the Centers for Disease Control told us all we need to do, which is to maintain good personal hygiene and social distancing''--a new phrase that we have all become acquainted with. As long as you are negative and you do those things, then you are likely going to be healthy and not be affected directly by this virus. That is one of the things that are happening in real time now-- development of the new tests. The proliferation of this inexpensive and quick testing will allow for people who are positive to be identified so they can be treated either at home or in a healthcare facility. The truth is, most of us--if you are otherwise healthy, if you get the coronavirus, you may experience some minor symptoms. One of the biggest concerns is people who got the virus and are asymptomatic or presymptomatic and whether they are infecting other people. But for most of us, you will be fine after you recover, but you need to be isolated so you don't infect others. And some people--particularly the elderly and people with comorbidities, underlying illnesses, or medical conditions, who are the most vulnerable--will have to be hospitalized, to be sure. This is one of those all-hands-on-deck moments unlike I have ever experienced before in my service in the Senate. I appreciate the response from the administration and the President on down. I appreciate the cooperation among our colleagues who have worked to prepare not only the initial proposal but who are working now on a bipartisan basis to come up with a package we can vote on quickly. I hope negotiations with our Democratic colleagues will move smoothly and meet the majority leader's target of having a package we can vote on on Monday. Will this be the last bill we pass relative to this crisis? I doubt it, but we don't know for sure because that, I think, is what is driving so much of the volatility in the markets and the uncertainty and fear that some people feel--it is the unknown. As we work our way through this, we will be able to adapt additional legislation, if required, to meet with the needs at that time. As I said, this has been a moving target. I appreciate the cooperation we have seen so far. I think, as we all realize, there are some things that transcend politics. Every time we have had a national crisis--this one included--I think it has always called the better angels of our nature and resulted in our ability to work together to produce our best efforts to help address the crisis, to solve the problem, and to help the American people. Each day we waste debating this bill further by talking about other ideological goals that people want to accomplish and take advantage of this emergency to try to pass things that are unrelated to dealing with the virus--every day we waste with those sorts of things is a day that healthcare providers, small businesses, and constituents are spending without the help they need and deserve. The time to act is now. There is no question that this pandemic will have a lasting impact on our country. I believe one of the things we need to do is figure out how we can prevent this sort of thing from happening ever again. But I believe a major investment by our government will now allow us to weather the storm together and to come out with the best possible result on the other side. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.